Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1990-05-024.5 3 COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. May 2, 1990 PRESENT: Mayor Nichols Alderpersons (10) Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Hoffman, Peterson, Schroeder, Golder, Daley, Romanowski, Blanchard OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Guttman City Clerk - Paolangeli City Controller - Cafferillo Planning and Development Director - Van Cort Police Chief - McEwen Personnel Administrator - Walker Building Commissioner - Datz Fire Chief - Olmstead Superintendent of Public Works - Thadani �} City Engineer - Gray Community Development Administrator - Evans _y Board of Public Works Commissioners - Reeves, Berg PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Nichols led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. MINUTES• Approval of Minutes of the March 28, 1990 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the March 28, 1990 Special Common (Woel Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the April 2, 1990 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the April 2, 1990 Special Common Council be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the April 4, 1990 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Schroeder: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the April 4, 1990 Common Council meeting be approved with the following corrections: Alderperson Schroeder asked that in the Hydropower Resolution the words "facilities-support-related-11 be hyphenated wherever it appears in the resolution. Alderperson Booth asked that on page 11 in the amending resolution in the paragraph that begins "Margaret Fabrizio, etc. the words 'south boundary' be changed to east boundary. Alderperson Romanowski requested that on page 12 in the paragraph that beings, "Alderperson Romanowski asked, etc." the word discussion be substituted for the word 'decision'. Alderperson Schroeder noted that on page 10, the last line of the Resolved paragraph should read: "otherwise be permitted but for the Recreation River designation." Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: New Business Alderperson Booth requested an item be added under New Business to discuss the meeting date for Council in July. No Council member objected. 4511 2 May 2, 1990 Appointments Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of appointments to the Local Assessment Board of Review. No Council member objected. Report of City Boards, Commissions and Committees Alderperson Cummings requested the addition of a Liaison report on the Central Processing Facility, Citizens Review Group. No Council member objected. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing - An Ordinance to Amend Footnote 1 to the "Parking Space Requirement Chart" of Section 30.37 (A) (4) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider an ordinance to amend Footnote 1 to the "Parking Space Requirement Chart" of Section 30.37 (A)(4) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be declared open. Alderperson Peterson explained the amendment that is being proposed to the Parking Space Requirement Chart. No one appeared to address the Public Hearing. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider an ordinance to amend Footnote 1 to the "Parking Space Requirement Chart" of Section 30.37 (A)(4) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be declared closed. Carried Unanimously Public Hearing - Reprogramming of Community Development Funds from 1987 Grant from Rehabilitation to New Construction Resolution to Open Public Hearinq By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider reprogramming of Community Development Funds from 1987 Grant from Rehabilitation to New Construction be declared open. Carried Unanimously Community Development Administrator Evans gave background information on the reprogramming of 10th year Small Cities funds from two lines in that grant. One was loans for rental property and the second was loans for rehabilitation for owner - occupied properties. These are to be re- programmed into use for construction of a rooming house for low and moderate income, individual, single adults. The amount available is $170,000 from those two previous lines. The boarding house will be constructed at 322 North Meadow Street. She referred to a packet of information that had been sent to all Alderpersons that further explained the project. Tracy Farrell, 429 West Buffalo Street, read the following statement to the Council: "Issues of fairness. Does this proposal result in an equitable distribution of special needs housing? Already Red Cross Homeless Shelter is in immediate vicinity. Also, a group home is located within 1 block, and another is within 2 blocks. My neighborhood has not been a "NIMBY" neighborhood. There was no opposition to the Group Homes and little to the Homeless Shelter. I was a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals when there was a request for a zoning change for the second Group Home. Neighbors were a little concerned; they 455 3 May 2, 1990 talked it over and decided that people need a place to live, we can manage and we knew that it was going to be very well supervised. This facility tonight is somewhat different. But I feel that we have certainly accepted the responsibility of housing special needs groups. Now it is time for others to share the responsibilities. I sincerely ask that the City prepare a map showing where the (4WO.", special needs and low income housing are located now so that we can make sure that responsibilities are shared among neighborhoods in the future. So if you decide that it is fair to transfer funds to build the proposed facility in the proposed location, then I think it is extremely important to ensure that it be the best neighbor possible. I therefore ask that you: 1. Require a written contract that specifies the type of tenant that will be welcome to live there and how the tenants will be selected. I know that Kathe has assured us that it is not for serious needs people. I would like that in legal written form to assure that. I feel that is really iss important because there is minimal supervision for this facility. There is a Resident Manager but that isn't really very much if the population is very needy. 2. Add two neighborhood representatives to the proposed tenant selection /placement committee that will include two representatives from DSS, one from the Ithaca Housing Authority, and one from Mental Health. The neighborhood residents should be regular voting members of the selection committee. It is desirable for one of the neighborhood representatives to be from a business in the area and I feel that the neighborhood should select the two representatives. In the past, I don't think DSS has had a very good track record on visible commitment to housing people in well - maintained and appropriate buildings. I think that with neighborhood representation we can help make sure that it really works. Also the CD funds were originally for Neighborhood Housing and Neighborhood Housing has always included neighborhood representation in any project. 3. I would also require that the developer modify the present plans for the building to include at least one bathroom on the second floor, and central air conditioning. I feel the proposed facility and location are not that desirable for people. I would like to improve it so it is more comfortable and that tenants do want to live there. Also, I feel that a lack of bathrooms may create a serious hardship =or the whole neighborhood. iclusion, I respectfully request that you incorporate these ju -Its into any agreement for transfer of funds. I feel that -h hanges will help ensure that the project succeeds without r = +- burdening the neighborhood." Schwartzbach, 107 Park Place, addressed the Council -c_ng the project and the need for equitable distribution of i,_ies. He stated that even though most of the facilities in it✓ at present are in his neighborhood, he is not opposed to roject. However, he would like some assurances that the -t will be monitored and he would like the City to make a .rent to a master plan that applies to private agencies, agencies and the private sector that will assure et tc distribution of facilities throughout the City. Mai Smith, 525 West Buffalo Street, stated that she feels ver ongly about group homes and about mainstreaming and what it to this country, not just to the City of Ithaca. She stat _fiat she is fully in support of this project. However, 45(► 4 May 2, 1990 she feels the 1st Ward is saturated with these kinds of facilities and she does not feel a rooming house boardering on Route 13 is the best site for a facility of this kind. She believes a better use for land in this area would be an emergency care facility so that people in this area would not need to make that trip through the Octopus to the hospital. She further suggested that the V.I.P. Motel could be renovated for this kind of single adult living arrangement. Mary Pat Dolan, Commissioner of Social Services, addressed Council on the continuing need for single room occupancy housing and the Social Services Department's involvement in this project. Jane Hartz, Coordinator of the County Mental Health Department's Case Management Program, encouraged Council to consider development of this project. Lucy Brown, Chairperson of the Ithaca Neighborhood Housing, addressed Council in favor of the Chartwell project. Mary Shelley, 109 Park Place, stated that she supports the recommendations for having community representation on the management committee for the Chartwell project and she supports Mr. Schwartzbach's comments on this project. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That the public hearing to consider reprogramming of Community Development Funds from 1987 Grant from rehabilitation to new construction be declared closed. Carried Unanimously PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Hudson Street Reconstruction Project Denise Rusoff, 209 Hudson Street, representing the liaison committee acting in concert with the Department of Public Works and the South Hill Civic Association, stated that the South Hill Civic Association would like to thank the Shade Tree Commission and the City Forester for the very wonderful presentation that they gave to the neighborhood. She said that they are currently at an impasse in the redesign of the upper portion of Hudson Street. She believes that two of the problems were ironed out today at the Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole meeting; there is one problem remaining which is the Therm curve. Hopefully, that problem will be taken care of at the Tuesday morning meeting with the Civic Association and staff from the Department of Public Works. She also thanked the Alderpersons involved, Common Council, the Mayor and the Board of Public Works for being supportive of them. Sally Grubb, Vice -Chair of the Interim Parks Commission, read the following statement to Council: "I am speaking on behalf of the Interim Parks Commission concerning Agenda Item 18.3 - the Planning and Development Committee resolution to alienate three parcels of land on Inlet Island. My first concern is that three separate parcels of land are being dealt with at the same time - the land around the Station Restaurant - the alienation required for Route 89 - and a parcel to the north currently used by Peter de Graff for boat storage. These are three different situations and should be dealt with separately. We all understand the need for park land alienation for the realignment of Route 89. We do not understand the need for the alienation of the other parcels of land and do not accept the argument that the alienation of land for Route 89 makes the rest of the land less useful to the City, and that it should be therefore be alienated now purely, we understand, for the benefit of individual businesses without thought for the rest of the .J 5 May 2, 1990 community. The northern parcel of land is still highly desirable waterfront land and its future use should only be decided after full evaluation and environmental impact study. And this is where I come to my second concern. The alienation of park land is a serious issue; and each proposal should receive complete evaluation by all parties concerned. You have a Parks Commission, albeit an Interim one. Why wasn't it asked for input on this subject? The Interim Parks Commission was set up to (600,11 provide oversight and advice on issues such as this while we decide on the full Commission's future role. As a member of the Interim Parks Commission, I find it incomprehensible that the Common Council has not requested the input of our advisory group; after all, while you are not bound by our decision, alienation of park land should be within the purview of an established Parks Commission. If we are not involved now how can we properly carry out our mandate? For now, the Interim Parks Commission urges Common Council to (\J amend this resolution to approve alienation of only that park land necessary for realignment of Route 89, and to refer ti alienation of the other parcels of land back to Planning and Development for further review, I would also like to take this opportunity to make comments on behalf of the Interim Parks Commission on three other resolution before you tonight. These are: (1) Agenda Item 15.18 - the Resolution to purchase the Pogo parcel of land - we are fully in support of this and the potential development of a Northside park; (2) Agenda Item 18.2 - The Resolution that Common Council affirms that it has not made a prior commitment to transfer the Festival Lands to the State of New York - we fully support this Resolution and plan to make our recommendations on the Festival Lands in the near future; and (3) Agenda Item 18.5 - The Resolution to approve in concept the idea of having a skateboard facility - we also fully support this Resolution. I am also pleased to be able to say that this is the first instance when a City Department has approached the Commission and asked for our input - Matthys Van Cort asked for an opportunity to talk to the Commission about Planning Department plans for this facility. I hope this is the way things will be in the future and that the Interim Commission won't have to rely solely on our own detective work to find out when our input is required." Doria Higgins, representing Citizens to Save Our Parks, read the following statement to Council: "We are opposed to parts of the Inlet Island alienation for a number of reasons. 1. We do not think that parcel 4, the most northerly parcel of Inlet Island Park, should be alienated. It is a uniquely sited (4000, and beautiful piece of waterfront land and should certainly be retained by the City for waterfront park purposes. 2. We do not think City park land should be alienated to accommodate a single businessman at the expense of the community as a whole, which will be the case if parcel 4 is alienated to accommodate Mr. DeGraff owner of Ithaca Boating Center. 3. We most strongly object to the vague wording of this resolution -- wording so ambiguous that it conveys the meaning that the only land being proposed for alienation is the land connected to the construction of alternate Route 89. If I had not attended the committee meetings at which this resolution, written by Mr. Van Cort, was first discussed, there is no way J 6 May 2, 1990 that I could know that the land being alienated was not just the acreage necessary for the construction of alternate 89 but included parcel 4 to accommodate Mr. DeGraff and also land adjacent to the Station Restaurant to accommodate Mr. Ciaschi. Maps identifying the land to be alienated were attached to the agendas given to Common Council but not to the agendas given the public - -not even to the agenda given the chair of the Planning and Development Board and as you have just heard, the newly appointed Interim Parks Commission knew nothing at all about this matter. The alienation of City park land is a matter of concern for the community and should be done publicly so that the community is aware of what is happening. Alienation of City park land should not be slipped unidentified into a resolution so vaguely worded that the proposed alienation is not made apparent. Citizens to Save Our Parks is not opposed to the alienation of the slips of land contiguous to the Station Restaurant if a fair trade is involved. For every square foot of City park land acquired by Mr. Ciaschi we think he should give the City a square foot of his more northerly Inlet Island land which is contiguous to City park land not included in the alienation proposal. That seems fair to us and a good deal for both sides. But we do not think parcel 4 should be alienated by the City to be sold to Mr. DeGraff. This is uniquely sited City land and will undoubtedly grow in value. You should not think of it as something useless to be discarded as at least one of you has referred to it in speaking to me. Another member of Common Council, Barbara Blanchard, has said to us that the alienation of parcel 4 will help one of her constituents -- she intends to fight for him. We think she should remember that he is only one of her constituents and she should not sacrifice the interests of her others just to support him. Certainly the City of Ithaca will attract more business and tourists if its waterfront is beautiful park land available to all instead of a storage space for plastic covered boats. Mr. DeGraff has been there five years now and we truly wish him well, but we do not think the City should underwrite his business at the expense of the community. And one last word on the current assessed value of parcel 4 which you are planning to alienate to sell to Mr. DeGraff. As you know from the chart we gave you March 19 it has been given a 1990 assessed value significantly below that of nearby parcels -- so low in fact that one person at the tax assessors office thought it might be typographical error. If you do go ahead with this unfortunate proposal to alienate parcel 4 at least make sure you get fair value and that we do not have a repetition of the 1985 City appraisal of $77,000 for Inlet Island Park when its true value was closer to $770,000." Susan Titus, 208 The Commons, read the following statement to Council: "I am a member of Citizens to Save Our Parks and a local artist. I have a gallery and a studio here in Town and I spend a lot in City parks and outlying areas painting and drawing. I am also a member of the Farmers' Market and when it was held at Inlet Island Park I had a good opportunity to appreciate to the beauty of that site. It seemed to me a shame that this beautiful waterfront site wasn't more properly developed as a park, but I and others of us assumed that in time this would happen. 459 7 May 2, 1990 Now we learn that the northern parcel of Inlet Island Park which has been used to store boats for quite some time is included in resolution 18.3 as some of the City park land to be alienated. This northern parcel, as you know, is not being alienated for the siting of alternate Route 89. It is completely separate from the plans for alternate 89 and considerably north of those plans. We had accepted the inappropriate use of some of the City's most beautiful waterfront property for boat storage because we thought it was only temporary. In recent years other cities throughout the country have been spending millions of dollars to reclaim waterfront land for public park purposes. We think it is wasteful and wrong for this city to alienate public park land which could be a marvelous asset to the entire community just so that it can be used to store boats. Why should you accommodate one individual businessman in an inappropriate use of City park land at the expense of the entire community? This uniquely beautiful land should be kept as a park land for the greater public good." t1 RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: Hudson Street Reconstruction Proiect Alderperson Cummings asked if any action is needed at this Council meeting in regard to the Hudson Street Reconstruction project and the discussion that took place today at the Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole Meeting. Mayor Nichols stated that he does not think so. He said that it is possible that it may come back to Council but he thinks the Council should let the process work its way through first. Inlet Island Alienation Alderperson Hoffman wished to make it known that as of now, the decision that Common Council has made is to alienate all the park land on Inlet Island. He said that resolution was passed years ago and sent to the State Legislature and he believes passed by the State Legislature but it has not yet been enacted. A resolution such as the one the Planning Committee recommended be adopted would reduce the amount of land to be alienated. REPORT OF CITY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES Citizens Advisory Committee for the Sitina of the Central Processing Facility Alderperson Cummings stated that the advisory committee has been meeting on the third Thursday of each month and she thought she should bring Council up to date because it is a process that is moving quite rapidly. She reported that the County has indicated that they intend to apply for their permit to start building this facility by September 1. Alderperson Cummings expressed her concern about the Citizens Advisory Group. At this point there has not been representation by the Elmira Road merchants for which there is two slots. There is supposed to be two slots for residents; one of ,those is a Spencer Road resident who has attended public meetings. The other is one of the few Elmira Road business owners who actually (400e supports the Central Processing Facility at that site and does live there. The at -large representative is the Chair of the Dryden Landfill Citizens Advisory Group. She stated that they do not exactly have a majority who are real concerned about putting the facility at that location. She stated that they do not have a representative from the City of Ithaca serving as a liaison, although they do have a representative from the northern part of the county. 460 g May 2, 1990 Alderperson Cummings stressed that they need someone on this committee who can ask the hard questions and be aggressive. She said that the Council should know that this site is the County selected site for their hazardous waste collection as well. The County is now in the process of designating this site and designing it as such. The matter of "privitization" is also being discussed. Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves reported on the following: Lutheran Church Request - The Board of Public Works reconsidered the free parking on Sundays at the Dryden Road Parking Garage and at the meeting April 25, a resolution was passed to have free parking at the Dryden Road Garage between the hours of 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. on Sundays. Half -tags Garbage Tags - A resolution was passed on the 25th of April regarding half -tags. The cost is $5.00 for a sheet of 12 to be used on garbage bags weighing 17 1/2 pounds or less. Thurston Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation Bid - The bid was awarded by resolution passed on April 25th. The rehab is scheduled to begin June 11th and the bridge is scheduled to be closed until mid - September. Stewart Avenue Re- bricking Proiect - Due to the closing of the Thurston Avenue Bridge we will not be working on the Stewart Avenue re- bricking project until early Fall. Update on Costs Involved with the Delay of the Hudson Street Project - Commissioner Reeves read the following from a letter from the contractor: "The redesign of the project from 30 feet to 27 feet now being contemplated will increase the cost of the project by a minimum of between 30 and 35 percent and most likely the increase will exceed that margin." Commissioner Reeves stated that the initial two week delay is an estimated $41,000 and there are several other items that are listed in the letter that are estimates. The total cost at this time is $155,000. over budget and it could double with what we are doing now. She said that not only is this project costing the City a great deal of money to the contractor but we are also losing many staff hours with this project and the Board of Public Works is getting badly behind on work it has to do. Alderperson Johnson asked about the decision to grant free parking at the Dryden Road Parking Garage for the Lutheran Church. Alderperson Booth asked the Board to reconsider that decision for free parking at the Dryden Road Parking Garage. Commissioner Reeves pointed out that this is on a temporary, experimental basis until the end of May at which time it will be re- evaluated. Alderperson Hoffman asked what our options are at this point for the Hudson Street Reconstruction project in regard to the contractors additional costs. City Attorney Guttman stated that the way the contract is written, the contractor has the obligation periodically to notify the City of changes in the contract that he feels are resulting from our change orders. Every time the City revises the project, which is a change order, he has the obligation to give us his opinion as to what it is going to cost the City. City Attorney Guttman stated that realistically what happens is that these get 461 9 May 2, 1990 held until the project is completed. At that point there will be negotiation as to whether or not we can agree on reasonable values and the contractor has the obligation of justifying that what he's claiming are reasonable values. At that time if it is agreed upon between the contractor and the City, then it is fine. Otherwise it then goes to arbitration. Alderperson Booth asked Commissioner Reeves what is being done (twow, with respect to the closing of the Thurston Avenue Bridge, if it continues in the Fall. Are plans to move people back and forth across that gorge? Supt. Thadani answered that there is a meeting scheduled with Police Chief McEwen and the Traffic Engineer to discuss the re- routing possibilities. Discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Schroeder stated that Cornell will have two shuttle buses available when the tY� bridge cannot be used. Board of Fire Commissioners _ David Cornelius, Chair of the Board of Fire Commissioners, reported that the Board had a special meeting last week which 3 Cil of the commissioners attended. He read to the Council the <f following resolution that was passed unanimously by the 3 Fire Commissioners present at that meeting: "WHEREAS, the Fire Department's efforts to deal with the future use of Fire Station #6 have been conducted pursuant to the City Charter and the budget practices of the City, and WHEREAS, the Board of Fire Commissioners and the members of the Fire Department have acted in good faith to try to protect the City's interest and investments; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Fire Commissioners will declare Fire Station #6 to be surplus when use by the Fire Department as an active Fire Station is no longer necessary and that it is understood that even after the fire apparatus is relocated to the new station, the Fire Department will need a couple of months to completely move out of the building, including the securing of temporary storage space, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Fire Commissioners will cooperate fully with the City in attempting to sell the building, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution is contingent on the following: a. No attempt will be made by the City of Ithaca to diminish the powers of the Board of Fire Commissioners with respect to the Board's control of real and personal property held by the Fire Department; b. An amount not to exceed $5,000. will be approved for a space needs study for the Fire Department that will include office, storage, program and training needs. Funding for this study will come from a transfer of unused salary monies in the A3410 -105 account to the A3410 -435 account of the 1990 budget; C. The Mayor and Common Council agree to make every effort possible to secure the necessary funds for additional Fire Department space should the study establish the need; and d. No potential sale of the building will interfere with the operational activities of the Fire Department." 10 May 2, 1990 Discussion followed on the floor with Chairperson Cornelius answering questions from Council members. Mr. Cornelius stated that if the Council passes a resolution on this matter, the above language needs to be incorporated into that resolution or the Board of Fire Commissioners will not be able to support it. CITY CLERK'S REPORT: * 12.1 Designation. of Polling Places for 1990 By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the following be and are hereby designated as polling places in the City of Ithaca, New York, for the year 1990: FIRST WARD SECOND WARD 1st District Chestnut Street 2nd District 800 S. Plain St. 3rd District 4th District 300 W. Court St. 5th District Chestnut Street 1st District 2nd District 3rd District 4th District 5th District 300 W. Court St. 310 W. Green St. 310 W. Green St. 300 W. Court St. THIRD WARD 1st District Cornell Campus Central Avenue 2nd District Cornell Street 3rd District Cornell Street FOURTH WARD FIFTH WARD 1st District 635 Stewart Ave. 2nd District 402 E. State St. 3rd District 1st District 2nd District 3rd District 4th District 309 College Avenue Alternative Community School, former West Hill School Titus Towers Housing To be Announced G.I.A.C. Building Alternative Community School, former West Hill School G.I.A.C. Building Central Fire Sta. To be Announced Central Fire Sta. G.I.A.C. Building Willard Straight Hall Belle Sherman Annex Belle Sherman Annex Noyes Center Challenge Industries #9 Fire Station 1012 N. Tioga St. #7 Fire Station Corner King & Fall Creek School Aurora Streets 309 Highland Road 1st Congregational Church Corner King & Fall Creek School Aurora Streets Carried Unanimously CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: Central Processing Facility Litigation City Attorney Guttman stated the litigation has been commenced by the City against the Board of Representatives with regard to the Central Processing Facility. Wild, Scenic and Recreational River Designation - Fall Creek City Attorney Guttman reported that Assemblyman Luster has a preliminary draft of the legislation. Attorney Guttman received a copy of it and sent back to Assemblyman Luster some modifications of that and he understands that this will be presented in the near future in Albany for legislative action. J 4 61: ) 11 Sale of Land on Floral Avenue City Attorney Guttman stated that sell Tax Parcel No. 77 -2 -6, whic parcel on Floral Avenue to Ithaca He stated that the closing was City received $18,000. and those City Controller. May 2, 1990 last April Council resolved to h is approximately a one acre Neighborhood Housing Services. completed on April 23rd. The funds were transferred to the Disciplinary Hearings City Attorney Guttman reported that in the last month there have been three Section 75, "Misconduct Disciplinary Hearings" on Fire Department employees and those have been completed and his office is awaiting a decision on those. City Court Proceedings City Attorney Guttman reported on the cases that the City has pursued. Department Heads Attendance at Council Meetings W Mayor Nichols stated that has been a cable connection installed i� in the Second Floor Conference Room and the Department Heads will be located there during Common Council meetings in case they are needed to answer questions from Council members. � BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: * 15.1 Youth Bureau Request to Amend the Authorized Equipment List By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the authorized equipment list for the Youth Bureau be amended by adding a Computer Registration Software Program for Pool and Rink scheduling purposes in the amount of $1,595. to Account A7310 -210, Office Equipment, and by deleting an Instant Burger Machine (Hamburger Grill) budgeted for $1,595. from Account A7310 -225, Other Equipment. Carried Unanimously * 15.2 Youth Bureau Request to Amend 1990 Budaet to Include a Grant from Cornell University By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, Cornell University has agreed to provide a $12,600. Grant for the establishment of a new summer jobs program targeted toward ten to twelve minority and female students, to be known as the ON TOP Program; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the 1990 Youth Bureau budget be amended as follows: Increase Revenue Account A2070 Contributions for Youth Services $121600 Increase Appropriations Accounts A7310 -120 A7310 -125 A7310 -445 (boo", A7310 -460 A7310 -440 Part -time Seasonal Salaries 11,000 Overtime 500 Travel and Mileage 200 Program Supplies 500 Staff Development 400 Total $12,600 Carried Unanimously * 15.3 Youth Bureau Request to Amend 1990 Budaet By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau has been able to reduce projected cost of acquiring a Fifteen - Passenger Van by $2,837., by utilization of available New York State Contract pricing, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca City School District, the funding agency of the applicable van acquired by contract, has agreed to allow a reallocation of the said $2,837.; now, therefore, be it 4611 12 May 2, 1990 RESOLVED, That the 1990 operating budget of the Youth Bureau be amended as follows: Reduce A7310 -215 Motor Vehicle Equipment $2,837 Increase A7310 -425 Office Expense 150 A7310 -435 Contractual Services 150 A7310 -440 Staff Development 500 A7310 -445 Travel and Mileage 450 A7310 -460 Program Supplies 1587 Total 2,837 Carried Unanimously * 15.4 Request Funding to Pay the State DEC for Unused Monies From the Aquatic Weeds Project By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca received a $33,250 Grant from the State Department of Environmental Conservation to fund an Aquatic Weed Control project in Cayuga Lake, and i WHEREAS, the project was successfully completed for $32,910., leaving an unexpended balance of $340., and WHEREAS, the State requires that all interest earned on Grant funds during the operation of said project be refunded to DEC; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City Controller transmit the unexpended Grant balance of $340. and interest earnings of $1,758. to the State Department of Environmental Conservation as required by the related Grant Agreement. Carried Unanimously * 15.5 Request Funding for Revised Appraisal of City Hall Annex By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Relations Committee of Common Council has determined that a revised appraisal of the City Hall Annex property is required; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Director of Planning and Development be authorized to enter into an agreement with Francis and Company to provide an appraisal of the City Hall Annex property for an amount not to exceed $2,925., and be it further RESOLVED, That the appraisal include two separate sets of assumptions: A. The following conditions for development: 1. That any exterior changes be made subject to review by the Design Review Board and the Landmarks Commission (Facade control) 2. That the first floor be utilized for retail space 3. That the ramps between City Hall and the Annex property be removed at the Buyer's expense B. That the appraised value be based on no conditions, except for applicable law. (Land value only, or utilization of the building without restrictions) and be it further RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $2,925 be transferred from Account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to Account A8020 -435 Planning Department Contractual Services for such purpose. Carried Unanimously 465 13 May 2, 1990 * 15.6 Standardization of Elevator Equipment By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson WHEREAS, this Common Council has been requested by the Department of Public Works to standardize on United Technologies Otis Elevator equipment as the type of elevator equipment to be used in the Seneca Street Parking Garage, and WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best interest of the City for reasons of efficiency, compatibility, and economics to approve such standardization for the following reasons: 1. The City of Ithaca Seneca Street Ramp presently has all Otis Elevator equipment. 2. Replacement after over fifteen years of service is not necessary but overhaul by Otis who has continuously serviced the units is appropriate with the general garage rehabilitation. (0 3. The cost of maintenance, parts and service will be less �g) than if different types of equipment were being used; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 103, Subdivision 5 of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, this Common Council hereby authorizes the standardization of United Technologies Otis Elevator equipment as the type of equipment to be used and purchased by the Department of Public Works for the maintenance and rehabilitation of the Seneca Street Parking Garage Elevator equipment during the year 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.7 Request Authorization to Participate in the State Aid for Local Bridge Program By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 261 of the Laws of 1988 and Article 20 of the Transportation Law, the New York State Legislature has authorized and appropriated funds for a State Aid Local Bridge Program to be administered by the New York State Department of Transportation, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca desires to participate in such Program; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City shall participate in the State Aid Local Bridge Program, pursuant to the terms of the Bond Act, the Program Guidelines and State /Applicant Agreement which the municipality ratifies and affirms, and be it further RESOLVED, That the accomplishment of all State Aid Local Bridge Projects authorized under the State Aid Local Bridge Program shall be by Municipal forces or by competitively let contract with oversight by the City, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City be and is hereby authorized to execute all necessary agreements and documents on behalf of the City of Ithaca required by the New York State Department of Transportation for participation in its State Aid Local Bridge Program. Carried Unanimously * 15.8 Request to Amend Capital Project #234 By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works has received approval from the State Department of Transportation for funding under the State Aid to Local Bridge Program (1988 Bond) S.A.L.B., and �filfl 14 May 2, 1990 WHEREAS, the replacement of the North Cayuga Street Bridge at Cascadilla Creek has been designated for funding under said Program, and WHEREAS, a Capital Project #234 has already been established for such purpose; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Capital Project #234 for the replacement of the North Cayuga Street Bridge at Cascadilla Creek be amended as follows: A. The maximum authorization of such project shall be increased from $380,000 to $525,000. B. The financial plan shall be redefined, to include $420,000 in State funding from the State Aid to Local Bridge Program (1988 Bond), and the balance of $105,000 to be appropriated from New York State Consolidated Highway Improvement Program funds (C.H.I.P.S.) received in 1989. Carried Unanimously * 15.9 Request for Full Time Inspection and Contract Administration During Construction of Rt. 13 Industrial Park By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended that an outside Engineering firm be engaged to provide full -time inspection and contract administration during construction of the Route 13 Industrial Park, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed proposals from prospective engineering firms and has recommended the firm of Novelli and Co. to perform such services, and WHEREAS, the proposed contract not to exceed $50,000 is provided for within the existing capital project authorization; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement for professional Engineering Services to be provided during the construction of the Route 13 Industrial Park Construction Project, for an amount not to exceed $50,000. Discussion followed on the floor with City Engineer Gray responding to questions. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.10 Police Department Request to Amend Authorized Equipment List By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Authorized Equipment List for the Police Department be amended to include one computer room air conditioner at a cost not to exceed $3,500, and be it further RESOLVED, That $1,500 be transferred from Account A3120 -215, Equipment /Motor Vehicles, and $2,000 from Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency to Account A3120 -225, Police Department Other Equipment, for such purpose. Carried Unanimously * 15.11 Equalization Rate By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski WHEREAS, it has been determined that the use of County Equalization Rates for the distribution of Ithaca School District Taxes within Tompkins County would provide a more equitable apportionment thereof, and 19-1 I Ft 15 May 2, 1990 WHEREAS, approximately ninety -nine point nine three percent (99.93 %) of the taxable property which comprises the Ithaca City School District is located within Tompkins County, and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Division of Assessment has recently completed a revaluation of all properties located within Tompkins County to establish current full market value, and (00"" WHEREAS, Real Property Tax Law Section 1315 currently permits a school district an option, whereby County equalization rates may be utilized for apportionment purposes, but only in those instances where each municipality within a given school district completes a revaluation in the same year, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca City School District includes properties in the Towns of Richford and Candor located in Tioga County, which have not completed a revaluation in the same year as the Tompkins County revaluation, thereby negating any opportunity to utilize the existing provisions of Sections 1315; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby `�LL) respectfully requests that State Senator James Seward and State Assemblyman Martin Luster present on behalf of Tompkins County, �.I a special legislative bill amending Section 1315 of the Real Property Tax Law as follows: That current paragraph 3 of Section 1315 shall be renumbered paragraph 3a, and that there shall be a new paragraph 3b which shall read as follows: 3b. With respect to the Ithaca City School District, Alderperson Booth explained the resolution and stated that the City is urging the County Board and the School Board to adopt a similar resolution. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.12 Request to Reduce Length and Number of Photo - copies By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby establishes the following policy, relative to the reduction in the length and number of photo- copies of Council Agenda and Minutes being produced and distributed by the City Clerk: DISTRIBUTION OF COUNCIL AGENDA AND MINUTES -- POLICY Working from a current list the City Clerk's Office distributes approximately 75 copies of the full agenda (with back -up material, resolutions, etc.) which runs between 45 -50 pages for an average month. Of these 75 copies, 15 copies of the full agenda are being mailed and the remainder are distributed through inter - office mail. 75 copies x 50 pages = 3,750 pages wherein in excess of ninety -nine percent of the property within the district has been revalued in the same year, Ithaca City School District authorities may apply to the State Board for Certification as a "Certified School District ", as provided above. Upon receiving certification, the School District shall utilize the Tompkins County Equalization Rate to apportion its tax levy in proportion to the taxable assessed value of real property in each City, Town or part thereof, which has been revalued at full market value and shall use the appropriate State Equalization Rates for those properties which have not been so revalued. Alderperson Booth explained the resolution and stated that the City is urging the County Board and the School Board to adopt a similar resolution. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.12 Request to Reduce Length and Number of Photo - copies By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby establishes the following policy, relative to the reduction in the length and number of photo- copies of Council Agenda and Minutes being produced and distributed by the City Clerk: DISTRIBUTION OF COUNCIL AGENDA AND MINUTES -- POLICY Working from a current list the City Clerk's Office distributes approximately 75 copies of the full agenda (with back -up material, resolutions, etc.) which runs between 45 -50 pages for an average month. Of these 75 copies, 15 copies of the full agenda are being mailed and the remainder are distributed through inter - office mail. 75 copies x 50 pages = 3,750 pages `68 16 May 2, 1990 The City Clerk believes this number could be cut considerably by distributing the full agenda only to Alderpersons, Board of Public Works Commissioners, Department Heads, Deputies, and Chairs of major Boards and Committees. Thus, the number of full agendas would be reduced from 75 to approximately 35. 35 copies x 50 pages = 1,750 pages This results in a saving of 2,000 pages per month. The agenda (without back -up) will be sent to the remaining current mailing list and would inform those people that if there is a certain item on the agenda that is needed, it can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office by request. This policy would not be deemed to prevent an individual who needs a copy of a full Common Council Agenda from,obtaining it from the Clerk's Office. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Golder asked that a full agenda also be sent to the Public Library. * 15.13 Building Department Employee Salary Adjustment By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner has recommended Housing Inspector Michael Dickerson for an Employee Incentive Award pursuant to the terms of the CSEA Administrative Unit contract, and WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner has provided the Budget and Administration Committee with substantial justification for granting the Employee Incentive Award, and WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner's recommendation complies with the procedure and guidelines outlined in the CSEA Administrative Unit contract; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Michael Dickerson's salary be increased by eight (8) percent to an annual salary of $27,226, retroactive to April 13, 1990. Discussion followed on the floor with Alderperson Golder stating his reasons for opposition to the system of merit pay as a means of raising an employee's salary. Alderperson Cummings spoke in favor of incentive awards for employees. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9) - Booth, Romanowski, Blanchard, Schroeder, Daley, Cummings, Johnson, Hoffman, Peterson Nay (1) - Golder Carried * 15.14 Appointment of Acting Assistant Superintendent of Public Works By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That Bernard Carpenter be and hereby is appointed to serve as Acting Assistant Superintendent of Public Works, with a ten (100) percent increase in base salary, from April 5, 1990 until a permanent Assistant Superintendent of Public Works is appointed. Carried Unanimously 17 May 2, 1990 * 15.15 Appointment of Acting Facilities Maintenance Supervisor By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That Richard Ferrel be assigned to serve as Acting Facilities Maintenance Supervisor with a ten (10 %) percent increase in base salary, from April 5, 1990 until a permanent Assistant Superintendent of Public Works is appointed. Carried Unanimously * 15.16 Contract for Pay Equity Study (4we, By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement between the City of Ithaca and the CSEA Administrative Unit, the City of Ithaca and CSEA have agreed to conduct a study to review alleged salary inequities within the bargaining unit, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Pay Equity Committee has reviewed the proposals submitted by potential consultants and recommended that V.E. Orlop and Associates be hired to conduct the study; now, ..� therefore, be it 4 RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca enter into a contract with V.E. -•k, Orlop and Associates, to conduct a Pay Equity Study of CSEA Administrative Unit positions and the Confidential positions not covered by a bargaining unit, at a cost not to exceed $17,000., and be it further RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $17,000 be transferred from A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to A1430 -435 •Personnel Department Contractual Service, to cover the cost of the Pay Equity Study. Carried Unanimously * 15.17 Amendment to Personnel Roster - Wastewater Treatment Plant By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Wastewater Treatment Facility be amended as follows: Delete: One (1) Maintainer - 40 hours /week Add One (1) Custodial Worker - 20 hours /week Carried Unanimously * 15.18 Reauest for Authorization to Purchase Property By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder RESOLVED, That the property known as the "Pogo Parcel" of approximately 2 acres of land located at 515 First Street in the City be purchased at a cost of $297,000 plus closing costs, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Controller is hereby authorized to advance available General Fund moneys to temporarily pay the cost of said acquisition, pending the issuance of Bond Anticipation Notes to be authorized for such purpose. Discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Daley stated that he would like to see a contingency in the purchase contract for that parcel regarding toxic we substance. Alderperson Romanowski stated, for the record, his reasons for opposing this property purchase. He stated that he thinks the public is better served by these lands staying in private hands. To have the City take over this particular parcel, after hearing what is proposed for it, does not seem to be a prudent use for this land. Alderperson Peterson asked about EQBA moneys and if we will still be applying for these funds. 470 HE May 2, 1990 Mayor Nichols stated that we have no assurance but we do have, from the Finger Lakes State Park Commission, a formal waiver which says that if we get the grant to develop a portion of that parcel as a park, that we can use that against the purchase price. Alderperson Cummings asked if we are asking for EQBA money out of the existing funds and do we know how competitive that is? We have applied for EQBA money for a number of projects in the City and been turned down. Mayor Nichols stated that the rating is done by Finger Lakes, particularly Bob Gonet. We discussed the application with him and asked him to compare how this would rate compared to the City's previous applications. Mr. Gonet feels that this would rate far higher. Discussion followed regarding the rating process and how it works. Alderperson Cummings stated that she wants to make sure that we are not paying a fortune out of City dollars for park land that we don't need as park land in this area. We need housing, we need the Senior Citizens Center, we need the Sciencenter at this location. Mayor Nichols stated that this plan has been developed by the Northside Planning Committee and it shows that two - thirds of that parcel is being used for housing. Alderperson Cummings made further comments about the shortage of dollars for housing and stated her concerns regarding this matter. Alderperson Daley stated that as a member of the committee, he felt that not only will we get housing there but we will get a lot better housing. Alderperson Blanchard stated her reason for supporting this resolution. She thinks it is one of the major keys to pulling the whole Northside plan together. She stated that she feels very strongly that this entire site should not be developed as park. She does, however, support the limited park proposal that the Northside plan includes at this time. Alderperson Johnson stated that he supports the idea of the Northside study and the crucial piece for him is that it will include a lot of affordable housing with the park and other agencies included. Alderperson Booth referred to the question of toxic materials on this parcel of land. He stated this is a large piece of land and it has had a varied history. H,,,�((r�co,�menc ee tjo the City Attorney that something be put inthat - if a s�nificant problem is identified, the contract will not go through. City Attorney Guttman stated that his understanding was that if the Council passes this resolution, a closing will happen in the immediate future. He understood from the negotiations with Mr. Paolangeli, that if the closing is delayed to have that study done, his offer to sell the property under these terms, is not going to continue. Further discussion followed on the floor regarding previous uses of this land. Alderperson Booth stated that the way to deal with the problem is to have an environmental audit done. Whether,,'_ ,,__# -_pre- closing or post - closing, he is willing to leave that to ,V(Ithe City Attorney to determine. He does not want the City to have a piece of property on its hands with a major problem. 19 471 19 May 2, 1990 Alderperson Booth further stated th review done of this acquisition. staff completed it and recommended stated that he supposes that if the that and the Council is cognizant meets the requirements of SEQR. at there was an environmental Jon Meigs from the Planning a negative declaration. He Planning Department has done of that fact, that probably City Attorney Guttman stated that he has seen an environmental assessment form which came from the Planning Department. Basically, the essence of it was the purchase of the property itself did not have significant environmental effects. He stated that he has discussed this with both Mr. Van Cort and Mr. Meigs and the understanding with which they prepared that form was when the City got around to deciding what to do with the property a separate SEQR evaluation would have to be done. The environmental effects, which are likely to be significant, is not the purchase of the property but the use of the property. Alderperson Booth stated that he is going to vote against the resolution. He stated that he does not think the City should �7 spend this amount of money, for this piece of land, at this time. Alderperson Booth said that he thinks that it is important to E °r~ note that there is no commitment established by this vote in terms of any particular use of this property; that remains for 4- decision making. G�) Further comments followed by several Alderpersons stating their reasons for supporting this resolution. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Peterson, Hoffman, Daley, Golder, Blanchard, Cummings, Schroeder, Johnson Nays (2) - Booth, Romanowski Carried * 15.19 Bond Resolution for the Acquisition of Property By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $300,000 SERIAL BONDS OF THE CITY OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK, TO PAY THE COST OF THE PURCHASE OF A PARCEL OF LAND OF APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES LOCATED AT 515 FIRST STREET IN AND FOR SAID CITY. WHEREAS, the capital project hereinafter described has been determined to be an Unlisted Action pursuant to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the implementation of which as proposed, the Common Council of the City has determined will not result in any significant environmental effects, and WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize the financing of such capital project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, as follows: Section 1. For the specific object or purpose of paying the cost of the purchase of a parcel of land of approximately 2 acres located at 515 First Street in the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, for general municipal purposes in and for said City, there are hereby authorized to be issued $300,000 serial bonds of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance Law. J79 t. 20 May 2, 1990 Section 2. It is hereby determined that the maximum estimated cost of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is $300,000 and that the plan for the financing thereof is by the issuance of the $300,000 serial bonds of said City authorized to be issued pursuant to this bond resolution. Further details concerning said bonds will be prescribed in a further resolution or resolutions of this Common Council. Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific object or purpose is thirty years, pursuant to subdivision 21 of paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law; provided, however, that the maximum maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized shall not exceed fifteen years, and therefore, pursuant to Section 107.00(d)(4) of the Local Finance Law, no down payment is required in connection herewith. Section 4. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law, the power to authorize the issuance of and to sell bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the serial bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the City Controller, the chief fiscal officer. Such notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and shall be sold in such manner, as may be prescribed by said City Controller, consistent with the provisions of the Local Finance Law. Section 5. The faith and credit of said City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such obligations as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such obligations becoming due and payable in such year. There shall annually be levied on all the taxable real property of said City, a tax sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on such obligations as the same become due and payable. Section 6. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested only if: 1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said City is not authorized to expend money, or 2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the date of such publication, or 3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution. Section 7. This resolution, which take effect immediately, shall be published in full in the Ithaca Journal, the official newspaper, together with a notice of the City Clerk in substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law. J J 473 21 May 2, 1990 The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows: Cummings - Aye Peterson - Aye Johnson - Aye Booth - Aye Blanchard - Aye Daley - Aye Schroeder - Aye Romanowski - Nay Golder - Aye Hoffman - Aye (400", Ayes (9) Nay (1) Carried * 15.20 Audit By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #8/1990, in the total amount of $18,893.60, be approved for payment. �.� Carried Unanimously 15.21 Authorization for Consulting Services to Perform Needs Assessment for Fire Department [I�d By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley <4. RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to enter into an agreement with a professional consulting firm for an amount not to exceed $5,000. to perform a space needs assessment for the Fire Department, and be it further RESOLVED, That the 1990 Operating Budget of the Fire Department be amended, by decreasing Account A3410 -105 Administrative Salaries by $5,000. and by increasing Account A3410 -435 Contractual Services by $5,000., to fund the cost of the study. (awoe Substitute Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder WHEREAS, the City's 1990 operating budget for General Fund purposes includes estimated revenue to be derived from the disposition of Fire Station #6, and WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that once vacated by the Fire Department, this property will no longer be needed for general City purposes, and WHEREAS, the construction of two new fire stations, one to be located on West Hill and the other on South Hill, is nearly complete, and WHEREAS, the Common Council understands that the Board of Fire Commissioners will declare Fire Station #6 to be surplus when its use by the Fire Department as an active fire station is no longer necessary, and WHEREAS, with respect to the future sale of Fire Station #6 this Common Council understands that: a) even after fire apparatus is relocated to the new stations, the Fire Department will need approximately two months to complete its move out of Fire Station #6; b) the Fire Department may have temporary storage needs arising as part of the process of moving out of Fire Station #6 and into the new fire stations, and c) the potential sale of Fire Station #6 must not be allowed to interfere with the Fire Department's operational activities while it still occupies that station, and cry) � WHEREAS, the 1989 request made/,the Board of Fire Commissioners and the Fire Chief to hire a consultant to review and analyze current and future space needs for the Fire Department was not funded, and WHEREAS, this Common Council now desires to have a study completed regarding the Fire Department's current and future 471 22 May 2, 1990 space needs, including office, storage, program, and training needs, and WHEREAS, this Common Council intends to make every reasonable effort to meet the Fire Department's needs for additional space that may be established by the above - mentioned space study; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That in accord with established City practices the Fire Chief be authorized to enter into an agreement with a professional consulting firm for an amount not to exceed $5,000.00 to perform a space needs assessment for the Fire Department, and be it further RESOLVED, That the 1990 operating budget of the Fire Department be amended, by decreasing Account A3410 -105, Administrative Salaries by $5,000.00 and by increasing Account A3410 -435 Contractual Services by $5,000.00 to fund the cost of said study, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare a Notice of Sale, and cause Fire Station #6 and the property associated with that station to be advertised for public sale, with a closing to be scheduled subsequent to the final completion of the new fire stations, the completion of the Fire Department's relocation into those new fire station facilities, and the completion of the steps needed for legal authority for Council to complete the sale. Alderperson Booth stated that the above substitute resolution takes into account what the Human Services Committee had done (Agenda Item 16.5) and also takes into account what the Board of Fire Commissioners has recently adopted. It also takes into account the substance of the original motion and of the item under New Business Agenda (Item 22.4). Discussion followed regarding the different resolutions and which resolutions should be considered in what order. Alderperson Booth explained the differences in the resolutions to be discussed. Alderperson Booth explained that the substitute resolution contains the substance of the original motion with two changes: the account numbers have been corrected; second, the Substitute Resolution would authorize the Fire Chief to sign this contract consistent with established City practices. Alderperson Booth stated that the resolution that is under New Business directing the City Attorney to proceed with the bidding process, is essentially covered by the Substitute Resolution, although the Substitute Resolution includes some qualifying language in terms of making sure the Fire Department completes its relocation before the closing actually occurs. Alderperson Booth further explained that in respect to the Human Services Committee Agenda Item, the Substitute Resolution includes the $5,000.00 study, although the payment mechanism is now entirely out of the Fire Department budget. The Substitute Resolution does not include the establishment of a committee to look at a number of factors. Finally, in regard to the resolution adopted by the Board of Fire Commissioners, the Substitute Resolution does not contain certain Whereas clauses from the Board because those are statements by the Board of Fire Commissioners; they stand on their own merits; and they are not necessary to Council's resolution. Alderperson Booth stated that the Substitute Resolution incorporates the first Resolved from the Board's resolution to the effect that there will be two months needed to completely move out of Fire 47 1) 23 May 2, 1990 Station #6 and that there may be a need to secure temporary storage space during the relocation. The Substitue Resolution does not include the Resolved statement by the Board of Fire Commissioners about their cooperating fully. With regard to the four contingencies that are at the bottom of the Board's resolution, the Substitute Resolution includes contingency (d); it substantially includes contingency (c) although the Substitute Resolution includes somewhat different language; it includes contingency (b) which is the $5,000.00 study being paid out of the Fire Department budget; it does not include contingency (a). Alderperson Booth stated that the reason he did not include contingency (a) in the Substitute Resolution is because he does not think the Council can bind this Council or any future Council regarding amendments to the City Charter. Alderperson Romanowski stated that there is a Town and City contract and he asked how that binds Charter provisions at least �! while the contract is still in force. He stated that there might �� -� very well be a legal status which very much impacts on what we i..ti try to do with the Charter at least for the amount of time this My➢ contract runs. [T] City Attorney Guttman stated that he has looked at the contract that was entered into by the City and the Town and he thinks there are a few important points to note. First, given the way the contract is written, the party of the first part is collectively referred to as the City of Ithaca and the Board of Fire Commissioners. He thinks that a very strong argument can be made that the Town in entering into a contract under those terms was acknowledging the Board of Fire Commissioners as not a separate entity from the City of Ithaca but as a portion of the City of Ithaca�Wthat the Town was not intending to enter into a three party agreement. He felt the contract was clearly designated as a two party agreement. Second, one of the conditions of that contract was that the Ithaca City Council was to revise the Charter with respect to the Board of Fire Commissioners: namely, to increase the Board of Fire Commissioners by two members, which would be Town members. City Attorney Guttman stated that by putting that into the contract, there is an explicit recognition by the Town that the Ithaca City Council has the right, at that time, and obviously in the future, to change the Charter. That is a power that is vested in the City Council and by having that spelled out right in the contract, he thinks it eliminates any argument the Town could make that the City Council does not have the authority to change the Charter. As a matter of fact, in that contract, the Town is saying 'we want you to change the Charter'. City Attorney Guttman said that the final point is that it is clear under the law, historically, and under the authority of the City Council that Council does have the power to amend the City Charter. At this point, the communications we have received from the Town are simply to the effect of 'if you are going to move in that direction, please keep us informed'. He thinks there is an implied understanding in that contract that the City has an obligation to keep an effective Fire Department operating. If (400" the City were to take steps which could be judicially determined to prevent the Fire Department from operating effectively, the Town could say that was a basic underlying assumption of the contract. City Attorney Guttman stated that his position, at this point, is that Council has the authority, the power, to change the Charter and use of that power does not abrogate the contract. Further discussion followed on the floor in regard to the City Charter. 476 24 May 2, 1990 Amendment to Substitute Resolution By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That there be a further Resolved clause added to the resolution that reads: "RESOLVED, That the Common Council is not now considering a change in the City Charter with regards to the powers of the Board of Fire Commissioners." Alderperson Booth asked the City Attorney if it makes any difference whether this recommendation that Alderperson Daley has made is a Resolved clause as opposed to a Whereas clause. City Attorney Guttman stated that as far as he is concerned, he agrees with Alderperson Booth's prior statement, that Council is incapable of binding future Councils. Based on that, he does not think it makes a difference whether it is a Resolved or a Whereas. Alderperson Booth asked Attorney Guttman, if he is clear as the City Attorney, that this statement would not limit the powers of this Common Council. City Attorney Guttman responded that he- does not think the Council has the authority to limit its powers in a future meeting. He thinks it would be unconstitutional to do so. Alderperson Romanowski stated that should be included because of the spirit it would provide to the entire Substitute Resolution. This further Resolved clause would not be binding because circumstances can change and people fully understand that this is a possibility. At this point in time, for this particular resolution, at least this further Resolved clause would provide some reassurance for people who are very concerned about what is going on. Board of Fire Commissioners Chairperson Cornelius, referred to Section 3.8 of the City Charter which describes the power of the Common Council. He said that the Board of Fire Commissioner's interpretation of that section is that the Common Council does not have the power under local law to change the powers of departments or boards. Alderperson Booth clarified this discussion by reading the following from Section 3.8 of the Charter: "It shall also have such powers of legislation by ordinance or resolution as are conferred upon it by this Charter or any other provision of law affecting the City not inconsistent with this Charter except such as are specifically conferred by this Charter upon any separate department or board of the City government." Alderperson Booth stated that he believes what that means is when the Charter assigns some duty to some other board, that board has the responsibility to fulfill that duty, but he does not believe that that language says Council is without the authority to amend the City Charter. City Attorney Guttman stated that you have to read that in connection with the first sentence of that section of the Charter, which says "The legislative power of the City is vested in the Common Council and it has power to enact and enforce any ordinance or resolution not repugnant to the Constitution or laws of this State." He said that if you read those two together, he agrees with Alderperson Booth's reading. He said that while specific power is conferred on a department or a board, that department or board exercises that power; everything not delegated, automatically falls to Council. The Section goes on to say "It shall also have such powers of legislation" and the word "also" there would be in addition to its general legislative power which includes the power to amend the Charter. 4,'#, 7 25 May 2, 1990 City Attorney Guttman further stated that if Council is rewriting the Charter with respect to changing the way in which real property is conveyed, there are permissive referendum provisions in the Municipal Home Rule Law. That is not covered by this. That does not mean that the Council does not have the authority to change the Charter. Mayor Nichols, for clarification, stated that the Council could not simply pass by resolution a change in the powers of the Fire Commissioners. The Council could not adopt a resolution to sell #6 which under present Charter now says "requires the approval of the Fire Commissioners ". We cannot do that because under the current Charter, the Fire Commissioners have that power, but that does not forbid Council from changing the Charter in any form by proper procedures. A vote on Alderperson Daley's amendment to the substitute resolution resulted as follows: (() Ayes (9) - Blanchard, Romanowski, Daley, Johnson, Peterson, Hoffman, Schroeder, Golder, Booth Nay (1) - Cummings Carried Mayor Nichols asked if there was any objection to the substitute resolution being accepted. There was no objection. Therefore, the substitute resolution as amended is the motion on the floor for consideration. Alderperson Booth stated that the Substitute Resolution authorizes the Fire Chief to sign that contract consistent with City policy, which as he understands it, would require the signature of the City Attorney, and the City Controller and himself as Chairperson of the Budget and Administration. Committee. Alderperson Booth further stated that Chief Olmstead has told him that this was an important matter to the Board of Fire Commissioners: i.e., that it was important that the Chief have the authority to sign the contract. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That there be a further Resolved added to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That a selection committee(y) consisting of two (2) commissioners, one of which should be from the Town of Ithaca, two (2) Common Council members, one of which would be the liaison to the Fire Commissioners, the Fire Chief and the Mayor be formed to choose the consultant to perform these services." carried Unanimously Alderperson Schroeder stated that he would like some indication from the Fire Commissioners whether the first language that Alderperson Daley added to the resolution is sufficient to the degree that the Fire Commissioners would still be willing to bless the sale of the fire station. Mayor Nichols clarified that the question basically is, whether the motion in its present form, meets the conditions that the Fire Commissioners have set in their motion and whether they would be prepared to declare Station #6 surplus at the time when it is actually not needed for operations. Further discussion followed on the floor on the amended substitute resolution. Mayor Nichols stated that as he reads the substitute resolution now, the entire authority to decide the professional consulting firm to be hired and the terms of that contract lies with the Fire Chief. He asked Alderperson Booth if that is his intent. Alderperson Booth stated that the Substitute Resolution authorizes the Fire Chief to sign that contract consistent with City policy, which as he understands it, would require the signature of the City Attorney, and the City Controller and himself as Chairperson of the Budget and Administration. Committee. Alderperson Booth further stated that Chief Olmstead has told him that this was an important matter to the Board of Fire Commissioners: i.e., that it was important that the Chief have the authority to sign the contract. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That there be a further Resolved added to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That a selection committee(y) consisting of two (2) commissioners, one of which should be from the Town of Ithaca, two (2) Common Council members, one of which would be the liaison to the Fire Commissioners, the Fire Chief and the Mayor be formed to choose the consultant to perform these services." carried Unanimously Alderperson Schroeder stated that he would like some indication from the Fire Commissioners whether the first language that Alderperson Daley added to the resolution is sufficient to the degree that the Fire Commissioners would still be willing to bless the sale of the fire station. Mayor Nichols clarified that the question basically is, whether the motion in its present form, meets the conditions that the Fire Commissioners have set in their motion and whether they would be prepared to declare Station #6 surplus at the time when it is actually not needed for operations. 26 May 2, 1990 Mayor Nichols stated that since the amending resolution does not assert who the other Council member would be, it would be the Chair of the Human Services Committee (the other member to serve on the selection committee would be Alderperson Daley, as Liaison to the Board of Fire Commissioners). Alderperson Hoffman commented that he assumes other Council members also want it to be understood that if major new investments are considered or recommended for space needs, that the Town should participate. He asked if the eighth Whereas clause implies support from the Town in some way. Alderperson Booth responded that he tried not to address that question and he spoke with Chief Olmstead about this. He stated that his understanding of this commitment is,,�&hat if we adopt this resolution, we would take the study as ^is completed; we would look at it honestlyv 'If it determined that there were needs we would try to meet those needs; but this resolution does not guarantee any set of conclusions about what Council will do. Alderperson Booth stated that he would prefer at this stage not to say what the Town might or might not do. He thinks those decisions are subject to future discussions and negotiations and he thinks those are all possible under this contract. CY) Mayor Nichols asked City Controller Cafferillo to explain the Town's role in this if the Council did decide to go ahead with new space needs. City Controller Cafferillo stated that according to the contract, if the magnitude of the investment for renovation and construction exceeds $100,000 or $200,000 in any one year, the Town Board has to approve that expenditure or they do not participate. The Common Council always has the option of paying the full consideration, but if the Town is going to participate at 27 percent in one of the stations within the City or 70 percent in one of the stations which is located within the Town, then the Town Board would have to approve the expenditure if it exceeds those limits. Alderperson Booth asked Alderperson Hoffman if he is troubled by the language that is here. Alderperson Hoffman said that as long as it is understood that this is not a guarantee that Council is committing itself to approving any investments in fire facilities, he is willing to agree. This is fairly strong language and for himself he would want the Town to agree and to participate in any major new investments that may be necessary. Mr. Cornelius stated that the Fire Commissioners, by a vote of two to one in a caucus that they just held, thought they could go along with this. He stated that the Fire Commissioners have no illusions that the one whereas that states "Common Council intends to make every reasonable effort ", means that Council is saying that they are going to do it. Everything depends on how much money and where things are and what can be done. He said that the Fire Department is not getting an awful lot out of this. They are paying for the study, they are losing a fire station, they are keeping their powers temporarily. They have given in to selling the station and he thinks the general consensus is that rather than create any additional problem, this is the best solution at this time. '179 27 May 2, 1990 Alderperson Romanowski stated that it is a separate question of what happens after the study. It is a matter of establishing priorities and what Council thinks is more important -- whether we give money away to something else or give it to the Fire Department or Police Department or whatever it is. Once a study is made and a needs assessment is made, what has to happen next is a commitment and a priority for doing or not doing what comes out of a study such as this. Substitute Resolution as Amended A vote on the Substitute Resolution as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Recess Common Council recessed at 10:10 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 10:25 p.m. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: (A) * 16.1 Criteria for Funding Human Services Agencies If3 By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard `- WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca will consider appropriating a portion of its 1990 general operating funds for support of local human service agencies, and WHEREAS, the Human Services Coalition is funded in part by the City of Ithaca to provide an objective overview of human service needs and provision, and to evaluate requests for City support; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That all 1991 requests for city agencies seeking to provide non - mandated hu submitted to the Human Services Coalition time deadlines, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Coalition shall report Human Services Committee of Common Council and be it further funding from private man services shall be for review by their its findings to the by August 15, 1990, RESOLVED, That the following criteria shall be used by the Coalition in its review of requests: A -1. The application shall be received by the Human Services Coalition by Friday, May 25, 1990 and the applicant must complete the Human Services Coalition review process in a timely manner. A -2. An application may be reviewed either through the Human Services Coalition review for human services proposals, or through the process review for other types of proposals, but not both. A -5. If the applicant received city funds in 1990, the applicant shall have demonstrated that they performed effectively under the contract. B. The Coalition shall award points for the degree to which the proposal meets the following criteria, on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the most desirable rating, for each criterion; if applicant does not supply sufficient information for Coalition to make a judgment, the proposal receives zero points in each such case. A -3. The applicant must also request funding from the County and /or appropriate town(s) if more than 5% of those served by the proposal are not city residents. A -4 Applicant must submit the following materials: budgets for 1990 and 1991, financial reports for 1988 and 1989, we and enumeration of other funding sources. A -5. If the applicant received city funds in 1990, the applicant shall have demonstrated that they performed effectively under the contract. B. The Coalition shall award points for the degree to which the proposal meets the following criteria, on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the most desirable rating, for each criterion; if applicant does not supply sufficient information for Coalition to make a judgment, the proposal receives zero points in each such case. 4.80 ►: May 2, 1990 B -1. Proposal will serve city residents in proportion to city funding requested compared to total program budget. B -2. The proposal will serve an identified need which does not duplicate another service, with higher points allocated in proportion to the severity of the problem in the city. B -3. Points will be allocated in proportion to the severity of the effect on or demand for services from city departments and /or other human service providers if this proposal is not funded by the city. B -4. The proposal is designed to effectively meet the needs of its clients; proposal includes measurable objectives. B -5. The agency has been effective in securing and managing needed fiscal resources, e.g., developed internal controls, sought other funds, invested reserves..... B -6. Population to be served by proposal can be shown to be a population in financial need (i.e. federal poverty guidelines). B -7. Agency has thoroughly sought other sources of funding. B -8. Agency has demonstrated extreme financial need for itself due to increased case load or loss of funding or extreme financial need on the part of the clients it serves - up to 3 points. din B-9. The request for city funding is less than half of that requested for County funding, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Human Services Coalition shall review all proposals that meet criteria A -1 through A -4, shall recommend whether each request should be fully or partially funded, and shall consider both new and previously funded agencies, and shall inform the applicant of the Coalition's recommendation and make a copy of such report available to the applicant, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Human Services Coalition devise a plan, the goal of which is to reduce by 25% the total time and money agencies must spend on local review by funders for the 1992 funding cycle and by 25% for the 1993 funding cycle. Carried Unanimously * 16.2 Funding Guidelines By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Daley WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes its commitment to supporting human services delivery for its citizens, and WHEREAS, an indication of the financial level of support assists the Human Services Coalition in recommending dollar amounts for each agency; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the city will make every effort to meet, at least, the amount of 1990 human services funding ($104,667). Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Peterson, Johnson, Booth, Daley, Golder, Blanchard, Cummings, Schroeder Nays (2) - Hoffman, Romanowski Carried 181 W May 2, 1990 Committee to Review Other Service Agencies Mayor Nichols appointed Alderpersons Daley, Booth, and Golder to serve on a committee with the City Controller to review other service agency requests. * 16.3 Domestic Partnership By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Golder WHEREAS, Common Council has been requested to consider a domestic partnership ordinance that provides unmarried couples and dependents with the opportunity to enjoy some of the benefits given to married couples and dependents within the areas of health and other insurance benefits, next -of -kin visitation rights, bereavement and parental leave and zoning; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Charter and Ordinance Committee draft an ordinance that would extend such aforementioned benefits, and RI be it further «j RESOLVED, that Common Council delegate to the Budget and Administration Committee the responsibility of exploring the cost of extending the aforementioned benefits under several alternative employee benefit packages, and be it further <' RESOLVED, That both of these committees complete the necessary work and present this information and ordinance to the Human Services Committee. Alderperson Golder stated that he has spoken with the City Attorney regarding this resolution and he needs to make a disclosure. His domestic partner stands to benefit if it is passed, however, that does not mean that he needs to abstain or can't discuss anything about this resolution. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the proper committees to handle this resolution. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Golder: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard RESOLVED, That in the first Resolved Clause, the words "extend such aforementioned benefits" be stricken and the following words be inserted in their place: "create a legal domestic partnership status ". A vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Johnson, Golder, Blanchard, Peterson, Hoffman, Schroeder, Daley Nays (3) - Cummings, Romanowski, Booth Carried Discussion followed on the floor with several of the Alderpersons expressing their opinions for and against this legislation. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard RESOLVED, That the three Resolved Clauses be deleted and the following Resolved clauses be inserted in their place: "RESOLVED, That Common Council refers this matter to the Charter and Ordinance and Budget and Administration Committees to consider the legal and budget implications of this proposal and to prepare such proposals as those committees determine appropriate, and be it further RESOLVED, That both of these committees complete their necessary work and present the information they develop to the Human Services Committee." 4892 30 Discussion followed on the Amending Resolution. Ayes (4) Nays (6) May 2, 1990 - Booth, Blanchard, Romanowski, Cummings - Johnson, Daley, Golder, Schroeder, Hoffman, Peterson Motion Fails Amending Resolution By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Golder RESOLVED, That the last Resolved Clause shall be changed to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That both of these committees complete the necessary work and report their recommendations back to Council. Ayes (6) - Daley, Golder, Cummings, Blanchard, Romanowski, Peterson Nays (4) - Booth, Johnson, Hoffman, Schroeder Carried Amending Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the first Whereas shall read as follows: "WHEREAS, Common Council is considering a domestic partnership ordinance that provides those unmarried couples who do not have leaal access marriage and their dependents with the opportunity... etc." Ayes (2) - Cummings, Johnson Nays (8) - Romanowski, Blanchard, Daley, Golder, Schroeder, Hoffman, Peterson, Booth Motion Fails Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That in the first Whereas Clause, the term "zoning" be deleted. Ayes (6) - Booth, Hoffman, Peterson, Cummings, Romanowski, Blanchard, Nays (4) - Golder, Schroeder, Daley, Johnson Carried Amending Resolution By Alderperson Golder: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That a Whereas Clause be added to read as follows: "WHEREAS, discrimination based on marital status, although outlawed by Federal, State and City legislation, is still practiced" Discussion followed on the floor on whether or not this was a true statement. Alderperson Golder's amending resolution was withdrawn at the suggestion of Mayor Nichols who noted that all we are doing is trying to get Committees to look into this subject and spending all this time getting exact wording for a referral resolution was not necessary. Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Johnson, Daley, Blanchard, Peterson, Hoffman, Schroeder, Golder Nays (3) - Booth, Romanowski, Cummings Carried W� `1 8 3 31 May 2, 1990 The Main Motion as Amended shall read as follows: WHEREAS, Common Council has been requested to consider a domestic partnership ordinance that provides unmarried couples and dependents with the opportunity to enjoy some of the benefits given to married couples and dependents within the areas of health and other insurance benefits, next -of -kin visitation rights, and bereavement and parental leave; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Charter and Ordinance Committee draft an ordinance that would create a legal domestic partnership status, and be it further RESOLVED, that Common Council delegate to the Budget and Administration Committee the responsibility of exploring the cost of extending the aforementioned benefits under several alternative employee benefit packages, and be it further (eta RESOLVED, That both of these committees complete the necessary I.�Vf work and report their recommendations back to Common Council. GIAC Renovations By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Daley WHEREAS, Common Council has authorized the preparation of a schematic design of renovation at GIAC, by an architectural firm to be selected; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes a design of renovations at GIAC that does not include a licensable Day Care Center, and be it further (400", RESOLVED, That subject to guidelines specified by the Budget and Administration Committee, the Planning staff shall solicit interested architects to present their qualifications and proposals to design the renovations, and be it further RESOLVED, That the choice of an architect be reviewed by the committee previously established for review of architects for the GIAC pool, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Budget and Administration Committee is authorized to approve the contract with an architect, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Planning staff, in consultation with the Drop - in Center and Day Care Council prepare a list of Day Care Program alternate licensable sites for a Day Care Center, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Human Services Committee shall, within 60 days, make a viable site recommendation to Common Council. Alderperson Hoffman stated that he has proposed some amendments in a resolution that he passed out to Council that reads as follows: "WHEREAS, Common Council has established a capital project for the purpose of renovating the Greater Activites Center building; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes a design a renovations at GIAC that is based generally on "Scheme 2" as described by Robert Boehlecke, an architect hired by the City, in a report dated 9- 30 -87; said design to include an elevator but not to include expanded, licensable daycare facilities at GIAC, and be it further 491 32 May 2, 1990 RESOLVED, That subject to guidelines specified by the Budget and Administration Committee, the Director of Planning and Development shall solicit interested architects to present their qualifications and proposals to design the renovations, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes the establishment of a GIAC Renovatins Client Commikttee, to review and make a recommendation on the choice of an architect; said committee to include representatives from the staff of the Youth Bureau, GIAC, the Department of Public Works, and the Planning and Development Department, one representative from the GIAC Board of Directors, and two representatives from the Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Budget and Administration Committee is directed to make a recommendation on a contact with an architect to Common Council." Discussion followed on Alderperson Hoffman's "Whereas" Clause. City Controller Cafferillo stated that there was a resolution presented to Council in November of 1989 and in that resolution there was language that would have included a capital project. That resolution was amended by Council appropriating $10,000 to do a schemactic design and not establishing a capital project at that point in time. Alderperson Hoffman withdrew the "Whereas" from his amended resolution. Alderperson Hoffman explained his reasoning for his amended resolution and discussion followed on the floor with comments being made by GIAC staff persons, Alderpersons Booth, Blanchard and Romanowski. Alderperson Hoffman withdrew the first Resolved clause from his amended resolution. Motion to Extend Meeting By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard RESOLVED, That this Common Council meeting be extended one -half hour. Ayes (8) - Golder, Johnson, Schroeder, Booth, Blanchard, Romanowski, Cummings, Hoffman Nays (2) - Daley, Peterson Carried Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Schroeder: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the GIAC renovations Resolution be referred back to the Human Services Committee to determine precise wording and consideration of all the concerns expressed at tonight's meeting. Ayes (3) - Schroeder, Booth, Peterson Nays (6) - Daley, Johnson, Hoffman, Romanowski, Blanchard, Golder t`j Alderperson Cummings was out of the room when vote was taken. Motion Fails Amending Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Daley RESOLVED, That the Fourth and Fifth Resolved Clauses from the original Resolution be deleted and the two Resolved Clauses from Alderperson Hoffman's amended resolution be inserted. No Council member objected. Therefore, the change was made. 485 33 May 2, 1990 Alderperson Peterson suggested that the word "viable" be stricken from the last Resolved. No Council member objected. Therefore, the word was stricken. Further discussion followed on the floor with regards to a daycare site. It was agreed that every possible effort will be made to locate an alternate licensable site. (Woo" Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Romanowski, Daley, Hoffman, Johnson, Peterson, Golder, Schroeder, Blanchard Nay (1) - Booth Alderperson Cummings was out of the room when the vote was taken. Carried The Main Motion as Amended shall read as follows: lg. r' WHEREAS, Common Council has authorized the preparation of a �j schematic design of renovation at GIAC, by an architectural firm to be selected; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes a design of renovations at GIAC that does not include a licensable Day Care Center, and be it further RESOLVED, That subject to guidelines specified by the Budget and Administration Committee, the Director of Planning and Development shall solicit interested architects to present their qualifications and proposals to design the renovations, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes the establishment of a GIAC Renovations Client Committee, to review and make a recommendation on the choice of an architect; said committee to include representatives from the staff of the Youth Bureau, GIAC, the Department of Public Works, and the Planning and Development Department, one representative from the GIAC Board of Directors, and two representatives from the Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Budget and Administration Committee is directed to make a recommendation on a contract with an architect to Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Planning staff, in consultation with the Drop - in Center and Day Care Council prepare a list of Day Care Program alternate licensable sites for a Day Care Center, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Human Services Committee shall, within 60 days, make a site recommendation to Common Council. * 16.5 Fire Department Space Needs Study This item was withdrawn from the Agenda. 44600, * 16.6 Small Cities Housing Fund By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee and the IURA /CDA have discussed utilization of 1987 CDBG Small Cities Grant Funds (10th year S.C.) and the lack of requests from property owners for loans for rental units and owner occupied units, and WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee is in support of replacing lost rooming units for single individuals with fireproof, decent, safe, standard, handicapped accessible rooming units, and 860 34 May 2, 1990 WHEREAS, the private developer, Chartwell Associates is in need of a matching loan at below market rates of $170,000 for this $340,000 newly constructed Group Home for 16 very low income single adults to be located at 322 North Meadow Street, and WHEREAS, INHS and the IURA /CDA has voted affirmatively to make a loan of $170,000 at 05% for 15 years to Chartwell Associates and have completed final loan commitment documents, and WHEREAS, development of his housing facility represents a unique combination of public and private agencies cooperating in support of this project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Human Services Committee supports the reprogramming and recommends the Common Council hold the requisite public hearing and support this reprogramming on May 2, 1990. Alderperson Romanowski, for the record, stated that he has canvassed the neighborhood quite extensively and people have called him. The Council has heard tonight some of the neighborhood concerns. We are talking about the First Ward and our commitment to housing for low - income people, moderate - income people, people with handicaps, etc. Alderperson Romanowski read the following list of housing projects in the First Ward: 143 Chestnut Street, 149 Chestnut Street, 209 Elm Street, 129 Park Place, 320 Washington Street, 502 West Court, Landmark Square, West Village, Chestnut Apartments, the Hancock Street project. We have a group home on Floral Avenue, a group home in the 500 block of West Buffalo Street, the Red Cross Shelter on West Court Street. For single room occupancy we have the V.I.P. Motel, a HOMES, Inc. facility on West Green Street that is going to be coming on line, the Union Hall Tavern which has single room occupancy on West State, J &B Tavern on West Seneca Street, the Farmers and Shippers, etc. He said that he could go on and on. Alderperson Romanowski said that if Council approves this tonight, this is it for the First Ward. He stated to Council that if they have a commitment for people and housing, and all that is associated with it, they should start taking their share. He thinks the First Ward has more than enough. Alderperson Blanchard stated that Alderperson Romanowski, Alderperson Golder and she met with the project developer that represented Chartwell, the County Housing Coordinator and representatives of the Planning staff. She said that they talked about management issues and design considerations. There was an agreement reached with the developer and with the County Housing Coordinator who is responsible for seeing that the management of this project works. They discussed some design recommendations and on the basis of those things they have developed the amendment that was placed on the Alderperson's desks this evening. Alderperson Blanchard stated that as First Ward representatives, Alderperson Romanowski and she have concluded that if the Council can live with these conditions, they can accept this project. Therefore, she is offering the following Resolved with the conditions as an amendment to the Resolution. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder Following the last Whereas: RESOLVED, That the Common Council approves the reprogramming of 1987 CDBG funds to support the above - described project subject to the following conditions: K" 35 May 2, 1990 1. That Chartwell Associates, in cooperation with the County Housing Coordinator, establish a Management Oversight Committee by 1 June .1990 to be comprised of the County Housing Coordinator, one additional representative from the Department of Social Services, one representative from Mental Health Community Support Services, one representative from the Ithaca Housing Authority and two representatives from the neighboring community (preferably one business and one resident representative). 2. That the Management Oversight Committee establish and adopt (1) criteria and a mechanism for the selection of tenants, and (2) rules and regulations for the operation and maintenance of the SRO facility, and that such criteria, rules and regulations be in place by 1 July 1990. 3. That the Management Oversight Committee be expanded to C\j include the Resident Manager of the facility and two tenants at such time as the facility is completed and occupied. �) 4. That Chartwell Associates redesign the facility to include a y) second floor bathroom that includes, at a minimum, a water �f?�l closet and sink, and 5. That Chartwell Associates continue to work cooperatively with the City Planning Department staff on exterior materials and landscaping of the facility. Discussion followed on the floor with Community Development Administrator Evans answering questions from Council members. (400." A vote on the Amendment resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Motion to Extend Meeting By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That this Council meeting be extended five minutes to finish discussion of this item. Carried Unanimously Further discussion followed on the floor on the Main Motion as Amended. Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Motion to Extend Meeting By Alderperson Schroeder: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That this Council meeting be extended for one -half hour. Ayes (7) - Hoffman, Johnson, Schroeder, Booth, Cummings, Romanowski, Blanchard Nays (3) - Peterson, Daley, Golder Carried (600" Arts Coalition - Report Alderperson Johnson withdrew his report on the Arts Coalition. 488 36 May 2, 1990 CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: * 17 1 A Local Law Amending Ithaca City Charter Article II Entitled 'City Officers', Section 2.13 Entitled 'Community Police Board' and Section 2.15 Entitled 'Selection of Members of Police Department; Compensation, Duties of Policemen and Special Policemen' By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman LOCAL LAW OF THE YEAR 1990 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING ITHACA CITY CHARTER, ARTICLE II ENTITLED 'CITY OFFICERS, SECTION 2.13 ENTITLED 'COMMUNITY POLICE BOARD' AND SECTION 2.15 ENTITLED 'SELECTION OF MEMBERS OF POLICE DEPARTMENT; COMPENSATION DUTIES OF POLICEMEN AND SPECIAL POLICEMEN' BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING ARTICLE II, SECTION 2.13 THEREOF Section 2.13 of Article II of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.13 Community Police Board The Mayor shall appoint a Community Police Board, subject to the approval of Common Council. The Community Police Board shall consist of five commissioners, no more than two residing in any one ward of the City. The term of office of each commissioner shall be three years, commencing on the first day of January. No more than two commissioners shall be appointed in any one year. The terms of the three existing commissioners shall continue unchanged. No elected City official shall be a member of the Community Police Board. A commissioner shall hold office until his /her successor shall have been chosen and qualified. A vacancy for an unexpired term may be filled in the manner set forth under this Charter, except that the limitation on the number of appointments per year shall not apply. All commissioners shall be duly qualified electors of the City of Ithaca for at least two years immediately preceding their appointment. All commissioners shall serve without salary. The Community Police Board may recommend rules, by -laws and regulations for the government of the Police Department of the City, not inconsistent with the laws of this State, which may be promulgated through the Chief of Police to the whole force. The Chief of Police shall have the immediate direction and control of the police in the administration of the rules, bylaws and regulations of the Department. The Community Police Board shall act as community liaison to the Police Department, actively fostering positive communication between the police and all segments of the community; it shall make provisions for resolving complaints by the citizenry related to the delivery of police services; using established procedures, it may recommend action against any member of the Police Department; it shall recommend on its own initiative or at the request of the Mayor, Common Council or the Police Chief on any matter affecting the policy or performance of the Police Department, including finances and budget; it shall perform such other related duties as requested by the Mayor or Common Council. 489 37 May 2, 1990 SECTION 2. AMENDING ARTICLE II, SECTION 2.15 THEREOF Section 2.15 of Article II of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.15 Selection of members of Police Department; Compensation, duties of Police Officers 1. The Mayor shall appoint all members of the police department. The mayor may appoint the chief of police, a deputy chief of police, and such captains, lieutenants and sergeants as authorized by the Common Council. The chief of police, staff officers, and police officers shall receive for their services such compensation as shall be fixed by the common council. The chief of police, staff officers, and police officers shall severally possess the powers and authority provided in the Criminal Procedure Law and under all other applicable statutes of this state, other than in civil actions or proceedings. They shall also perform such duties as shall be prescribed by this Charter and the police commissioners for the preservation of the public peace, the care of the city property, and the enforcement of the police regulations and municipal ordinances of the city. 4 It shall be the duty of the chief of police to keep a record of all arrests and of all services performed by the Police Department and keep a record of all articles taken from persons arrested or seized on warrant or otherwise, together with the disposition made thereof. The Chief of Police shall, upon request of the police commissioners, make a report as to the condition of the department, and whether any member of the force is delinquent in the performance of the rules and regulations prescribed for the control and conduct of the police officers, and of the directions given by the mayor or common council in relation thereto. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in the Office of the Secretary of State. Carried Unanimously * 17.2 An Ordinance Amending Section 55.25 Entitled 'Penalties for Violation of Noncompliance with Article' of Chapter 55 Entitled 'Fire Regulations' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Daley ORDINANCE NO. 90 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 55.25 ENTITLED 'PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE' OF CHAPTER 55 ENTITLED 'FIRE REGULATIONS' OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, that an ordinance amending Section 55.25, entitled 'Penalties for violation of noncompliance with Article' (400." of Chapter 55 entitled 'Fire Regulations' be amended to read as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 55.25, PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 4()() 38 May 2, 1990 Section 55.25 Penalties for Violation of Noncompliance with Article A. There shall be three categories of penalties for violations of the Municipal Fire Prevention Code or for violations within the City of Ithaca of those portions of the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code which pertain to fire safety or prevention. The categories shall be: (1) violations with discretionary fines; (2) violations with mandatory fines and sentences; and (3) misdemeanors. 1. VIOLATION WITH DISCRETIONARY FINES: Any person who shall violate any provision of the Municipal Fire Prevention or Safety Codes or those portions of the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code which apply to fire safety or prevention shall be guilty of a violation as that is defined in Article 10 of the Penal Law. The maximum penalty shall be a $250 dollar fine for each section of the Code which is violated and for each day on which the violation exists. Each day on which a person continues to violate said codes is considered a separate violation. 2. VIOLATION WITH MANDATORY FINE: Any person who shall violate or fail to comply with any order of the Fire Chief or the designated Fire Code Enforcement Officer shall be guilty of a violation as that is defined in Article 10 of the Penal Law, punishable by a fine of not less that $250 for each day on which the violation exists and not more than $500 for each day on which the violation exists or a sentence of imprisonment not to exceed 15 days. Each day on which a person continues to violate said orders is considered a separate violation. 3. MISDEMEANORS: If injury occurs to any person or to the property as the result of any violation of any provision of Municipal Fire Prevention or Safety Code or those portions of the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code which apply to fire safety or prevention, the person who violated the provision of the Codes shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not less that $500 and not more than $1000 for each separate violation of the codes and for each day on which the violation exists and further punishable by imprisonment for not more than one year. Each day on which a person continues to violate the Codes is considered a separate violation. B. The imposition of a penalty any violation of the Fire Codes shall not excuse the violation or permit it to continue, nor shall the imposition of a penalty prevent the enforced removal of prohibited conditions. SECTION 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. City Attorney Guttman gave background information on the ordinance and discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Refuse Containers in Front Yards - Report Alderperson Peterson withdrew the report from the agenda. _Provision of Free Parking by Landlords (Footnote 1, Section 30 37, Zoning) - Report Alderperson Peterson stated that although the public hearing was held this evening on this matter, environmental review still needs to be done before it comes to Council for a vote. (Ai f �) 39 May 2, 1990 City Attorney Guttman stated that he has spoken with Jon Meigs and asked him to begin the environmental review. He stated that basically it is not a simple question of environmental review because it entails the whole question of traffic within the City. The question now for Council is to what extent do they want environmental review done and whether they want it done in -house or by outside consultants. Planning and Development Director Van Cort stated that he wanted some direction from the Council regarding the degree of detail they desire in the environmental review. Alderperson Schroeder stated that he does not think a very complicated analysis would be necessary because, in effect, this Footnote has not really been enforced. Ddiscussion followed on the floor. Mr. Van Cort stated that it is worth noting at this point, that the long form works very poorly for zoning changes. Mr. Van Cort was directed to prepare a short and long form with supplementary explanation as appropriate. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 1990 Zoning Ordinance Work Plan - Report Alderperson Hoffman reported that the committee discussed the various zoning projects that are in the Work Plan for 1990. He stated that the Mayor was present at that meeting and suggested that the committee look at the parking requirement for West State Street with regards to the possibility of relaxing it to encourage more commercial development in that area. In reaction to that the committee has asked the Planning Department to expand its consideration of downtown rezoning to include modification of the parking requirement for West State Street, to also look at minimum height and continue to look at possible changes in the maximum height for possibly a different area than what was being considered a couple of months ago. Alderperson Hoffman stated that will add some time to the work plan. The committee suggested that time be taken away from the P -1 rezoning effort and that be deferred until 1991. The committee wants the staff to continue to work on R -2c but to concentrate on areas where significant neighborhood impacts might be occurring if R -3 development took place in those areas. * 18.2 Festival Lands By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson WHEREAS, the question continues to be raised as to whether or not the Common Council has decided to transfer the city -owned Festival Lands to the State of New York; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Common Council affirms that it has not made a prior commitment to transfer the Festival Lands to the State of New York. Carried Unanimously * 18.3 Inlet Island Alienation By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Daley WHEREAS, certain lands located on Inlet Island west of Taughannock Boulevard were acquired by the city using, in part, funds received from the federal government's Land and Water Conservation Trust Fund, and WHEREAS, such lands cannot be alienated, without the approval of the State of New York and the U. S. Department of the Interior, and n� 40 May 2, 1990 WHEREAS, part of these holdings is required for the Route 89 right -of -way under the proposed Route 96 Octopus improvement which have previously been approved by New York State Department of Transportation and the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the construction of the optional 89 alignment will render certain remaining parcels less useful to the city; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Common Council does approve the alienation of park lands on the Inlet Island as described on the attached map, (map attached to Minute Book), and be it further RESOLVED, that the City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare the appropriate instruments for alienation of said parcels, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Director of Planning and Development in cooperation with the City Attorney and other appropriate city staff be directed to identify parcels suitable for substitution for these lands, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Mayor is authorized to sign any and all instruments to effectuate such alienation. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That parcels 2 and 4 on the map be deleted and that in the second Resolved it be noted that it is parcels 1 and 3 that are being alienated and that the fourth Whereas be deleted from the resolution. Discussion followed on the floor with arguments for and against the merits of deleting parcels 2 and 4. A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (5) - Booth, Golder, Hoffman, Peterson, Johnson Nays (5) - Romanowski, Blanchard, Schroeder, Cummings, Daley Mayor Nichols voted Nay, breaking the tie. Motion Fails Discussion followed on the Main Motion. Alderperson Booth stated that the motion should refer to parcels 1 -4 as designated on the map. Therefore, the second Resolved, should read as follows: Amending Resolution "Resolved, that the City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare the appropriate instruments for alienation of parcels 1_.- 4 as designated on the map, and be it further" No Council member objected and the language was therefore added to the resolution. Further discussion followed on the floor with City Attorney Guttman answering questions from Council members. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the last Whereas of the resolution be Unanimously ,'! 3 41 May 2, 1990 Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Booth, Schroeder, Blanchard, Johnson, Cummings, Daley, Romanowski Nays (3) - Golder, Hoffman, Peterson Carried Substitute Park Lands - Report Alderperson Hoffman withdrew the report on the Substitute Park Lands. * 18.5 Skateboard Facility Proposal By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson WHEREAS, there are many young people in the City of Ithaca who enjoy skateboarding, and a�3 WHEREAS, no formal facility exists for such activity, and WHEREAS, an ad hoc group of skateboard enthusiasts and city staff have investigated several alternative skateboarding locations and prepared preliminary cost estimates indicating that such a facility could be financially self - supporting; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the city commends their efforts to date and directs that further research be performed by city staff and a volunteer committee into possible locations, design, and cost of a skateboard facility, and be it further RESOLVED, that Common Council does approve in concept the idea of having a skateboard facility in the City of Ithaca. (MOO." Alderperson Romanowski asked if there is any legislation that restricts skateboarding in any areas of the City. He remarked that if skateboarding is free then who would use a facility where there will be a charge for it. Alderperson Hoffman stated that he thinks there is support for the type of legislation that restricts skateboarding about but right now that is not in the resolution. Alderperson Booth stated that the record should reflect that he thinks that where skateboards are allowable is what the Council has to wrestle with. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Cummings, Peterson, Johnson, Hoffman, Daley, Golder, Schroeder, Booth Nays (2) - Romanowski, Blanchard Carried NEW BUSINESS: * 22.1 Housinq Code Section 27.9 - Referral Resolution By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Booth WHEREAS, application of Section 27.9 Maximum Occupancy of the (awo" City of Ithaca Housing Code, as now written, may be having a deleterious effect on administration of Section 8 Rental Housing Assistance Certificates; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this section of the Code is referred to the Charter and Ordinance Committee and the Planning and Development Committee for review and consideration of its effect upon low moderate income families in the City of Ithaca. Carried Unanimously 42 May 2, 1990 * 22 .2 Amendment of 1990 General Fund Budget By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Daley WHEREAS, the City has received a $11,200.00 grant from the N.Y. State Energy Office to perform a traffic signal optimization study; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the 1990 General Fund Budget be amended as follows: A. Increase Account A3510, State aid for highway safety by $11,200, to reflect the State grant. B. Increase Account A1440 -435 Engineering Contractual Services by $9,407. and Account A1440 -425 Engineering Office Expense by $1,793. for the performance of such study, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Superintendent of Public Works be authorized to execute an agreement with the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for an amount not to exceed $9,407. for preparation of a portion of said study. Carried Unanimously * 22.3 Increase Authorization for the Thurston Avenue Bridge Reconstruction Capital Project By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski WHEREAS, the bids have been received for reconstruction of the Thurston Avenue Bridge over Fall Creek, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has recommended that the contract be awarded to Vector Construction Inc., for $273,448., and WHEREAS, the recommended contract award of $273,448. plus required quality assurance control and contingency funding of $16,552., totaling $290,000., exceeds the available authorization of $265,000. by $25,000.; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Capital Project #222 for the reconstruction of the Thurston Avenue Bridge over Fall Creek be increased by $25,000. to a maximum authorization of $290,000., and be it further RESOLVED, That the financing plan for such project be amended by increasing the required statutory down payment allocated from Capital Reserve #4 for Bridges by $1,250. to $14,500 and by increasing the amount to be derived from the issuance of serial bonds by $23,750. to $253,000. Carried Unanimously *Change of Date for July Council Meeting By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the date for the July 1990 Common Council meeting be July 11, 1990- Carried Unanimously Local Advisor Board of Assessment Review By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderp( RESOLVED, That John Russell and Martha K. to serve on the Local Advisory Board of terms to expire December 31, 1990. - Appointments arson Romanowski Preston be re- appointed Assessment Review with Carried Unanimously Adjournment On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:45 a.m. ���, May M 1 •• Ca -ista F. Paolang i min Nichols City Clerk Mayor \' * - - / / / ' /� / " / / C ' p / / �� , � B �|v