HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2001-12-05
1
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. December 5, 2001
PRESENT:
Mayor Cohen
Alderpersons (10) Pryor, Sams, Blumenthal, Manos, Mack,
Farrell, Vaughan, Taylor, Spielholz, Hershey
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk – Conley Holcomb
City Attorney - Schwab
City Controller – Cafferillo
Deputy Controller – Thayer
Planning and Development Director – Van Cort
Deputy Director of Planning and Development – Cornish
Economic Development Director - McDonald
Superintendent of Public Works – Gray
Human Resources Director – Michell-Nunn
Community Development Director - Bohn
Fire Chief – Wilbur
Acting Building Commissioner – Radke
Acting Youth Bureau Director – Green
Bridge Systems Engineer – Gil
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Cohen led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
American flag.
YOUTH AWARD:
Alderpersons Farrell and Sams presented the December 2001
Distinguished Youth Award to members of the Turning Point Student
Council of TST BOCES. The Turning Point Program provides
educational programming for students with emotional difficulties.
It serves students throughout the BOCES service area and has
approximately 30 high school students enrolled. Following the
incidents of September 11th, students organized and participated
in a number of events, including a car wash at the school that
raised $450 that was donated to the American Red Cross in
Tompkins County to support disaster relief activities related to
the World Trade Center.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Approval of Minutes of the June 6, 2001, September 5, 2001,
October 18, 2001, November 8, 2001 Common Council Meetings
Alderperson Blumenthal requested that approval of the minutes be
voted on separately.
Approval of Minutes of the June 6, 2001 Common Council Meeting
By Alderperson Pryor: Seconded by Alderperson Sams
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the June 6, 2001 Common Council
meeting be approved as published.
Alderperson Blumenthal stated that she will vote in opposition to
approving the minutes of the June 6, 2001 Common Council meeting
as she does not believe they are an accurate reflection of what
occurred that evening before Ms. Gougakis was arrested. She did
not offer any corrections to the minutes.
December 5, 2001
22
A vote on the approval of the minutes resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) Pryor, Farrell, Vaughan, Taylor
Nays (2) Blumenthal, Sams
Abstentions (1) Manos
Failed
The Minutes of the June 6, 2001 Common Council meeting shall be
placed into the official minute book as unapproved minutes.
Approval of Minutes of the September 5, 2001 Common Council
Meeting
By Alderperson Pryor: Seconded by Alderperson Taylor
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the September 5, 2001 Common
Council meeting be approved as published.
Alderperson Sams questioned whether a discussion relating to the
appointment of Leslyn McBean to the vacancy on the Tompkins
County Board of Representatives was missing from the minutes.
City Clerk Holcomb stated that Ms. McBean addressed Council under
Petitions and Hearings before Council.
Alderperson Sams stated that she remembered further discussion
regarding postponing the appointment of Ms. McBean.
City Clerk Holcomb stated that she did not attend that meeting,
so she will look into this matter further, and bring the minutes
back for approval in January.
Alderpersons Pryor and Taylor withdrew their motion.
Approval of Minutes of the October 18, 2001 Common Council
Meeting
By Alderperson Pryor: Seconded by Alderperson Manos
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 18, 2001 Common Council
meeting be approved as published.
Carried Unanimously
Approval of Minutes of the November 8, 2001 Common Council
Meeting
By Alderperson Pryor: Seconded by Alderperson Vaughan
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the November 8, 2001 Common Council
meeting be approved as published.
Carried Unanimously
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Presentation of Pride of Ownership Awards
Alderperson Blumenthal presented the following Pride of Ownership
Awards on behalf of the City of Ithaca and the Rotary Club:
Residential Owner Occupied
1) David Elliot, 213 Cleveland Avenue
2) Frank & Teresa Ferrara, 408 S. Albany St.
Residential Rental
1) Ed & Caroline Cope and Jan Klotz, 501 N. Tioga St.
2) Mutual Housing Association of Tompkins County, First Street
and Alice Miller Way
December 5, 2001
33
Commercial
1) Arche LLC (John & Lynne Abel, Woody & Sherry Kelly) – T.G.
Miller Warehouse, 531 Esty Street
2) Carolyn Grigorov – Contemporary Trends Addition, 119-23 N.
Aurora Street
Special Recognition
1) Tompkins County Board of Representatives – Tompkins County
Public Library, Green and Cayuga Streets
2) St. Luke Lutheran Church, 109 Oak Avenue
3) City of Ithaca Dept. of Public Works – Linn Street Bridge
Replacement and Plaza
4) Cornell University – North Campus Residential Initiative
5) Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services – Scattered Site Rental
Housing Program
6) William Downing – DeWitt Building 30th Anniversary Celebration
A Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of the Six Point Traffic
Plan
Resolution to Open Public Hearing
By Alderperson Pryor: Seconded by Alderperson Manos
RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of the
Six Point Traffic Plan be declared open.
Carried Unanimously
The following people addressed Council regarding the Six Point
Traffic Plan:
Joel Harlan, Town of Dryden
Tim Faulkner, Syracuse, NY
Sally VanOrman, City of Ithaca
Fay Gougakis, City of Ithaca
Laurie Dahl, City of Ithaca
Larry Beck, Property Manager for Rental Units on W. Spencer St.
David Gallahan, City of Ithaca
Jennifer, Dotson, City of Ithaca
Catherine Robertson, City of Ithaca
Ann Cedarholm, City of Ithaca
Dan Hoffman, City of Ithaca
Steve Ehrhardt, City of Ithaca
Stanton Loh, City of Ithaca
Lydia Werbizky – City of Ithaca
David Nutter – City of Ithaca
Sue Perlgut- City of Ithaca, INHS
Neil Oolie, City of Ithaca
Katherine Lockwood, City of Ithaca
John Beach, City of Ithaca
Carolyn Peterson, City of Ithaca
Kris DeLuca –Beach, City of Ithaca
City Clerk Conley Holcomb read correspondence submitted by Paul
Soper, City of Ithaca.
Resolution to Close Public Hearing
By Alderperson Sams: Seconded by Alderperson Pryor
RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of the
Six Point Traffic Plan be declared closed.
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Spielholz arrived at the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
COMMUNICATIONS:
December 5, 2001
44
City Clerk Holcomb noted for the record that the Bicycle
Pedestrian Advisory Council presented her with eight pages of
comments on the Six Point Traffic Plan that have been distributed
to Common Council members.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Joel Harlan, Town of Dryden, addressed Council regarding
Economic Development issues.
Neil Oolie, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding the
capital project for the Six Point Traffic Plan and street and
road Construction improvements.
Fay Gougakis, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding the
clean-up of Ithaca Falls.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMON COUNCIL:
Alderperson Pryor introduced Travis Lockheart, who is completing
an internship with her on local government through the Learning
Web.
Alderperson Sams noted that Alderperson Farrell would not be
present at the January 1, 2002 Common Council meeting and took
the opportunity to thank her for all of the hard work, time and
energy she dedicated to many important issues during her years of
service.
Alderperson Vaughan reported that the Budget and Administration
Committee meeting is scheduled for Thursday, December 20, 2001.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
Mayor Cohen thanked Alderperson Farrell for her service to the
community and stated that it has been a pleasure working with
her. He further stated that he would like the opportunity to
more fully recognize Alderperson Farrell’s contributions at a
future meeting.
16. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
16.1 Youth Bureau - Request to Amend Personnel Roster
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
RESOLVED, that Common Council hereby amends the 2001 Ithaca Youth
Bureau personnel roster as follows:
Delete: One (1) Principal Account Clerk Grade 9
Add: One (1) Administrative Assistant/FM Grade 10
and, be it further
RESOLVED, that the additional cost of $265 be derived from the
Youth Bureau’s existing budget.
Carried Unanimously
16.2 Resolution to Amend Personnel Roster-Water & Sewer
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2001 Department
of Public Works Water and Sewer personnel roster as follows:
Delete: One (1) Full-time Laborer 40 hrs
Add: One (1) Full-time Truck Driver 40 hrs
and, be it further
December 5, 2001
55
RESOLVED, That the additional funds required be derived from the
existing budget.
Carried Unanimously
16.3 Resolution to Amend Personnel Roster – Building Department:
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the Building
Department personnel roster as follows:
Delete: One (1) Full-time Clerk 40 hrs
Add: One (1) Full-time Typist 35 hrs
Carried Unanimously
16.4 DPW – Water & Sewer – Request to Amend 2002 Authorized
Equipment List – Resolution
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
WHEREAS, the Water and Sewer Division’s 1982 Sewer Jet Truck has
been experiencing severe leakage problems over the last three
months, and
WHEREAS, the division relies heavily on the sewer jet truck to
correct daily stoppage problems, and
WHEREAS, several repair attempts to the vehicle have been tried
without success, and
WHEREAS, the cost of a new machine has been estimated at $102,000,
and
WHEREAS, City Water and Sewer staff are recommending replacement
of the sewer jet truck early in 2002, by deferring acquisition of
other equipment; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2002 Authorized
Water and Sewer Department equipment list as follows:
Delete: One (1) ¾ Ton Pickup $27,000
One (1) 5 yd. Heavy Duty Dump Truck 65,000
$92,000
Add: One (1) Sewer Jet Truck Chassis and
Flusher Unit $102,000
and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby directs the total
encumbrance of $10,000 from 2001 Water and Sewer Equipment
accounts F8316-5215 $4,000, and G8116-5215 $6,000 for the
purposes of partially funding the said Sewer Truck acquisition
for 2002.
Carried Unanimously
16.5 DPW – Water & Sewer – Approve Extension of Professional
Services Contract – Resolution
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
WHEREAS, Common Council approved at its regular meeting January 3,
2001, an extension of an on-site AutoCAD training service contract
at Water and Sewer and other City departments for Michael O’Cello
for the year 2001, and
WHEREAS, the Water and Sewer Division requests an extension of
that contract to December 31, 2002 at a $21.42 hourly rate, and
December 5, 2001
66
WHEREAS, the current heavy workload in the Water and Sewer
Division related to regional water and sewer engineering efforts,
and overall City development have increased the need for
specialized and experienced manpower to maintain the overall
operations of the division; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the
Superintendent of Public Works to extend the independent contract
for on-site AutoCAD training with Michael O’Cello for the period
from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002, to be reimbursed at
the rate of $21.42 per hour, for a total contract extension not
to exceed $22,500, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the funds for said contract shall be derived from
Water and Sewer operating accounts and Capital Project #506.
Carried Unanimously
RECESS:
Common Council Recessed at 8:50 p.m.
Alderperson Hershey arrived at the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Alderperson Mack arrived at the meeting at 9:00 p.m.
RECONVENE:
Common Council reconvened into Regular Session at 9:05 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Motion to Enter into Executive Session to Seek Advice of Legal
Counsel
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by Alderperson Sams
RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to
seek advice from Legal Counsel.
Carried Unanimously
RECONVENE:
Common Council reconvened into Regular Session at 9:30 p.m. with
no action taken.
Mayor Cohen requested that Items 21.2 (a), (b), (c) be moved
forward on the agenda in deference to members of the public who
are in attendance specifically for the discussion and possible
vote on the Six Point Traffic plan.
21.2 Six Point Traffic Plan
Alderperson Farrell stated that the three resolutions related to
the Six Point Traffic Plan have been brought to Council for
discussion without a recommendation from the Planning Committee.
a.) Declaration of Lead Agency Status
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by Alderperson Hershey
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176.6 of the City Code require
that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental
review of projects in accordance with local and state
environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local
environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency
which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or
carrying out the action, and
December 5, 2001
77
WHEREAS, the proposed adoption of the Six Point Traffic Plan is a
"Type I" Action pursuant to CEQR which requires review under the
City's Environmental Quality Review Ordinance; now, therefore, be
it
RESOLVED, That Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby
declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the
proposed adoption of the Six Point Traffic Plan.
Carried Unanimously
21.2b Declaration of No Significant Environmental Impact
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by: Alderperson
WHEREAS, the Findings Statement for the Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for the Southwest Area Land Use Plan directed
the City of Ithaca to conduct an evaluation of the Six Point
Traffic Plan, also known as the M&M Traffic Plan, and
WHEREAS, the Six Point Traffic Plan has been duly evaluated and
is being considered for adoption, and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the Plan is conceptual in nature; as
specific projects move towards implementation, they will be
subject to environmental review in accordance with SEQR, CEQR,
and site plan review, in accordance with the City of Ithaca Site
Development Plan Review Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, concerns have been raised as to whether the project
contains impermissible segmentation, and
WHEREAS, environmental review has been performed on the multi-
phased plan as a whole to the extent possible, the six points of
the Six Point Traffic Plan are functionally separate; that is,
any one of them could be built on its own and would still
function to contribute to the management or mitigation of traffic
in the Southwest Area of the City, and
WHEREAS, individual project reviews will be no less protective of
the environment than this review of them considered together as a
comprehensive plan, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review for this proposed
action has been conducted, and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is an "Type 1" action under the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, and is an "Type 1" action
under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council, as Lead Agency,
hereby does determine that the proposed action at issue will not
have a significant effect on the environment, and that further
environmental review of this action is unnecessary under the
circumstances, and, be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution shall constitute notice of this
negative declaration, and the City Clerk be, and hereby is,
directed to file a copy of the same, together with the
attachment, in the City Clerk's Office and forward the same to
any other parties as required by law.
Carried Unanimously
December 5, 2001
88
21.2c Adoption of Six Point Traffic Plan as a Component of the
Comprehensive Plan
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by Alderperson Hershey
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council, in its August 2000
Findings Statement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for the Southwest Area Land Use Plan, committed to studying and
implementing a set of traffic mitigation measures, referred to as
the M&M Plan, but later renamed the Six Point Plan, and
WHEREAS, the goals of the Six Point Plan, as identified in the
Findings Statement, are "to protect the Southside and South-of-
the-Creek neighborhoods from the negative impacts of increased
traffic, to improve the accessibility of the project area for
people who live east and south of downtown Ithaca, and to provide
a direct route which strongly links the Southwest Area to the
downtown and to the West End/Inlet Island corridor", and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca contracted with the professional
traffic planning firm Wilbur Smith Associates of New Haven,
Connecticut to complete an evaluation of the following six
mitigation measures referred to in the Findings Statement,
"converting Spencer Street to two-way traffic, constructing a new
road behind Ithaca Plaza entering the new southwest development
area, rebuilding the Plain Street pedestrian bridge over Six Mile
Creek as a traffic bridge, widening Route 13 to five lanes,
constructing the new Taughannock Road extension, and developing
and implementing a City-wide traffic plan which promotes an open
traffic grid in all areas of the City, including the possible
removal of the diverters on Wood and South Streets", and
WHEREAS, Wilbur Smith Associates has completed the Evaluation of
the Six Point Traffic Plan in conjunction with a client committee
of residents and local stakeholders, the consulting firm of
Fisher Associates, and City of Ithaca Planning and Development
Department staff, and
WHEREAS, Wilbur Smith Associates has recommended all six
mitigation measures as an effective means of achieving the goals
set forth by the Findings Statement, and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council have reviewed the proposed
final draft of the Evaluation of the Six Point Plan, dated
October 2001 and prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates, and
WHEREAS, as Lead Agency, Common Council has declared that the
adoption of the Six Point Plan will have no significant
environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council recognize that the Plan is
conceptual in nature and that as specific projects move towards
implementation, they will be subject to environmental review in
accordance with SEQR, CEQR, and site plan review, in accordance
with the City of Ithaca Site Development Plan Review Ordinance,
and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council have raised some issues that
are not addressed in the Wilbur Smith report and
WHEREAS, it is important that these issues get addressed and be
added to the plan as public record and
December 5, 2001
99
WHEREAS, the Wilbur Smith report offers three different scenarios
for the widening of West Spencer Street and
WHEREAS, it is important to the residents of West Spencer Street
to know as soon as possible how wide the street will need to be
and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council are in favor of the six
projects listed in the October 2001 Evaluation of the Six Point
Traffic Plan; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby adopts
the October 2001 Six Point Traffic Plan, as outlined in
alternative two of the Wilbur Smith Evaluation of the Six Point
Plan as the traffic component of a broader Southwest
Transportation Plan, to the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan
and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council intends to assemble its concerns
into a document that is subject to council approval would become
an addendum to the Six Point Traffic Plan and be it further
RESOLVED, That it is the intent of Common Council to make a
decision as soon as possible as to the width of a two-way West
Spencer Street.
Alderperson Farrell stated that one of her concerns regarding the
Six Point Traffic Plan is that there are several items, and some
of them appear to have more of an impact than others. The ones
that appear to have the most impact also seem as if they would be
the most difficult to implement. She stated that she would like
an assurance that if Council begins the implementation process,
that progress doesn’t stop when the easy items have been
addressed.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by Alderperson Manos
RESOLVED, That the following language be added after the fifth
Whereas clause:
“WHEREAS, full benefits to be derived from implementation of the
Six Point Traffic Plan as recommended by Wilbur Smith depend on
all six points being implemented, and”, and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the following language be substituted for the
ninth Whereas clause:
“WHEREAS, the members of Common Council have raised some issues
that are not addressed in the Wilbur Smith report, including the
possible need to prioritize points of the plan, and”, and, be it
further
RESOLVED, That the following language be added after the twelfth
Whereas clause:
“WHEREAS, certain points of the plan that are expected to have
the greatest impact, including building the Taughannock Boulevard
extension and converting Spencer Street to two-way traffic, are
likely to be the most difficult to accomplish, and”, and, be it
further
December 5, 2001
1010
RESOLVED, That the following language be added as a fourth
Resolved clause:
“RESOLVED, That no points of the plan will be implemented until
it is clear that all points of the plan, including extending
Taughannock Boulevard and converting Spencer Street to two-way
traffic, can be implemented.”
Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the
intention of the proposed language and its effect on the Main
Motion.
Alderperson Sams questioned whether this new language would
commit the City to implement all six points of the Plan.
City Attorney Schwab answered that the amendment states that
Wilbur Smith’s report has concluded that full benefits would be
derived by implementing all of the items, but it does not
obligate the City to implement all of them.
Mayor Cohen stated that the City does not become committed to
specific projects until a capital project is established and the
project is bonded for.
Alderperson Farrell clarified that the intention of the proposed
language is to state that the City of Ithaca Common Council
hereby adopts the October 2001 Six Point Traffic Plan as outlined
in Alternative 2, but will not start implementing parts of the
plan until there is an assurance that all parts of the plan are
feasible.
Extensive discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (2) Sams, Farrell
Nays (8) Manos, Pryor, Vaughan, Blumenthal,
Spielholz, Mack, Hershey, Taylor
Failed
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Spielholz: Seconded by Alderperson Hershey
RESOLVED, That the ninth and tenth Whereas clauses, and the
second Resolved clause be removed from the Main Motion, and, be
it further
RESOLVED, That the following language be inserted after the fifth
Whereas clause:
“WHEREAS, full benefits to be derived from implementation of the
Six Point Traffic Plan as recommended by Wilbur Smith depend on
all six points being implemented, and”
Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the creation
of a separate Resolution addressing the issues and concerns
raised by Council, City boards and committees, and the public
that were not resolved in the Wilbur Smith Report, and how they
will become part of the public record.
December 5, 2001
1111
A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) Manos, Pryor, Vaughan, Blumenthal,
Spielholz, Mack, Hershey, Taylor
Nays (1) Farrell
Abstentions (1) Sams
Carried
Alderperson Blumenthal voiced concern that the neighborhood
measures will be completed first, and they will bear the impacts
of the improvements resulting in additional traffic, and the
Taughannock Blvd extension will not be completed.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blumenthal: Seconded by Alderperson Manos
RESOLVED, That the following language be added to the Main
Motion:
“RESOLVED, That Taughannock Boulevard Extension and Meadow Street
improvements are priorities for implementation.”
Alderperson Spielholz noted that she thinks that it is premature
to include this language in the body of the Resolution. She
stated that this language should be included when Council decides
to prioritize the items.
Alderperson Pryor stated that she believes there is not enough
information at this point to make informed decisions regarding
prioritization of the items.
A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (3) Farrell, Blumenthal, Sams
Nays (7) Manos, Pryor, Vaughan, Mack, Spielholz,
Taylor, Hershey
Failed
Extensive discussion followed on the floor with Planning and
Development Director Van Cort and Superintendent of Public Works
Gray answering questions regarding when information will be
available to discuss the three alternatives for widening Spencer
Street.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blumenthal: Seconded by Alderperson Pryor
RESOLVED, That the last Resolved clause be amended to read as
follows:
“RESOLVED, That it is the intent of the Common Council to make a
decision by June 5, 2002, as to the width of a two-way West
Spencer Street and if the Common Council does not make a decision
by that date, the narrowest version will be implemented.
Carried Unanimously
Alderpersons Hershey and Pryor voiced their concern regarding the
residents of Spencer Street that will be affected by the widening
of the road. They voiced their commitment to finding creative
solutions to compensate the affected property owners.
Alderperson Blumenthal noted that in the 11th Whereas clause, it
says the Wilbur Smith report offers three different scenarios,
however five variations are included in the diagram. She
recommended a friendly amendment to change the word “three” to
“several”. No Council member objected.
December 5, 2001
1212
Discussion followed on the floor with City Planner Logue and
Planning and Development Director Van Cort showing Council a
diagram of West Spencer Street with the Loh and Dahl properties
identified.
Alderperson Hershey stated that his intent is to give Ms. Dahl
the option of either selling her property for fair market value
or to save it.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blumenthal: Seconded by Alderperson Hershey
RESOLVED, That the following language be added to the Main
Motion:
“RESOLVED, That Common Council intends to work with the Dahl
family to work out an equitable solution including a possible
offer of full market value for the property.”
Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the
definition of “equitable solution”.
City Attorney Schwab stated that she did not feel it was prudent
for Council to commit to a particular action as the impacts to
the property owners will be different depending what widening
alternative Council selects.
City Attorney Schwab explained the principles of a governmental
body acquiring property for the common good. She stated that
there are reasoning lines that have to be followed, as the City
cannot make gifts of public funds to private individuals. City
Attorney Schwab stated that she recommends that this resolution
not address the specific needs of an individual family.
A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (2) Blumenthal, Hershey
Nays (7) Manos, Pryor, Farrell, Vaughan, Mack,
Spielholz, Taylor
Alderperson Sams was absent from the vote
Failed
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Hershey: Seconded by Alderperson Pryor
RESOLVED, That the first Resolved clause be amended to read as
follows:
“RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby adopts
the October 2001 Six Point Traffic Plan, as outlined in
alternative two of the Wilbur Smith Evaluation of the Six Point
Plan, as an amendment to the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan,
and, be it further”
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Sams absent from vote
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blumenthal: Seconded by Alderperson Farrell
RESOLVED, That an additional Resolved clause be added to the end
of the Resolution to read as follows:
December 5, 2001
1313
“RESOLVED, That Common Council will explore additional measures
such as traffic-calming, transportation demand management and
bicycle-pedestrian issues as part of the planning process to
implement the 6 Point Plan.”
Ayes (1) Blumenthal
Nays (8) Manos, Pryor, Sams, Farrell, Vaughan,
Mack, Spielholz, Taylor, Hershey
Failed
Alderperson Sams absent from vote
Alderperson Blumenthal stated that she is going to vote against
the resolution. She stated that the neighborhood is in disarray
about the actions that have been taken, and it is unfortunate
that Council is considering this legislation this evening. She
suggested that a neighborhood meeting be held next week with a
Council vote on the plan to take place the following week. She
further stated that she is fully committed to traffic mitigation,
but doesn’t think that the differences between alternative two
and alternative three have been fully explored. She believes
that there is a difference between levels of understanding and
buy-in to this process, and thinks that the legislation deserves
more time for further discussion and input from the neighborhood.
Alderperson Farrell stated that she would not support this
resolution because of the lack of prioritization of the items in
the Plan.
Alderperson Pryor stated that a client committee was formed to
work with the consultants on this plan that included at least two
people from the Wood Street and Plain Street neighborhoods. Over
the course of nine months, there were twelve meetings of the
client committee. Many hours were spent working together on this
legislation. She stated that she wished the neighborhood
representatives had come forward before the end of the process to
identify the potential controversy and need for additional
neighborhood input regarding the Plain Street bridge issue. The
Client Committee would have been respectful of that request, and
would have implemented a different schedule that included more
neighborhood meetings. It was not until after the process had
ended and the recommendation and report was presented, that the
question of additional neighborhood input arose. She stated that
the Client Committee tried very hard to make sure that
neighborhood concerns were heard as part of the process.
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (7) Vaughan, Spielholz, Mack, Hershey, Taylor,
Pryor, Manos
Nays (3) Farrell, Sams, Blumenthal
Carried
The resolution as amended reads as follows:
21.2 (c) Six Point Traffic Plan – Adoption as a Component of the
Comprehensive Plan
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council, in its August 2000
Findings Statement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for the Southwest Area Land Use Plan, committed to studying and
implementing a set of traffic mitigation measures, referred to as
the M&M Plan, but later renamed the Six Point Plan, and
December 5, 2001
1414
WHEREAS, the goals of the Six Point Plan, as identified in the
Findings Statement, are “to protect the Southside and South-of-
the-Creek neighborhoods from the negative impacts of increased
traffic, to improve the accessibility of the project area for
people who live east and south of downtown Ithaca, and to provide
a direct route which strongly links the Southwest Area to the
downtown and to the West End/Inlet Island corridor”, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca contracted with the professional
traffic planning firm Wilbur Smith Associates of New Haven,
Connecticut to complete an evaluation of the following six
mitigation measures referred to in the Findings Statement,
“converting Spencer Street to two-way traffic, constructing a new
road behind Ithaca Plaza entering the new southwest development
area, rebuilding the Plain Street pedestrian bridge over Six Mile
Creek as a traffic bridge, widening Route 13 to five lanes,
constructing the new Taughannock Road extension, and developing
and implementing a City-wide traffic plan which promotes an open
traffic grid in all areas of the City, including the possible
removal of the diverters on Wood and South Streets”, and
WHEREAS, Wilbur Smith Associates has completed the Evaluation of
the Six Point Traffic Plan in conjunction with a client committee
of residents and local stakeholders, the consulting firm of
Fisher Associates, and City of Ithaca Planning and Development
Department staff, and
WHEREAS, Wilbur Smith Associates has recommended all six
mitigation measures as an effective means of achieving the goals
set forth by the Findings Statement, and
WHEREAS, full benefits to be derived from implementation of the
Six Point Traffic Plan as recommended by Wilbur Smith depend on
all six points being implemented, and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council have reviewed the proposed
final draft of the Evaluation of the Six Point Plan, dated
October 2001 and prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates, and
WHEREAS, as Lead Agency, Common Council has declared that the
adoption of the Six Point Plan will have no significant
environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council recognize that the Plan is
conceptual in nature and that as specific projects move towards
implementation, they will be subject to environmental review in
accordance with SEQR, CEQR, and site plan review, in accordance
with the City of Ithaca Site Development Plan Review Ordinance,
and
WHEREAS, the Wilbur Smith Report offers several different
scenarios for the widening of West Spencer Street, and
WHEREAS, it is important to the residents of West Spencer Street
to know as soon as possible how wide the street will need to be,
and
WHEREAS, members of Common Council are in favor of the six
projects listed in the October 2001 Evaluation of the Six Point
Traffic Plan; now, therefore, be it
December 5, 2001
1515
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby adopts
the October 2001 Six Point Traffic Plan, as outlined in
alternative two of the Wilbur Smith Evaluation of the Six Point
Plan, as an amendment to the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan,
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That it is the intent of the Common Council to make a
decision by June 5, 2002, as to the width of a two-way West
Spencer Street and if the Common Council does not make a decision
by that date, the narrowest version will be implemented.
MOTION TO ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
By Alderperson Sams: Seconded by Alderperson Hershey
RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to
discuss the employment history of two individual employees.
Carried Unanimously
RECONVE:
Common Council reconvened into Regular Session. Mayor Cohen
stated that Common Council met in Executive Session and took the
following action:
Resolution
By Alderperson Farrell: Seconded by Alderperson Pryor
RESOLVED, That Phyllis Radke is appointed Building Commissioner
for the City of Ithaca.
Carried Unanimously
Resolution
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by Alderperson Vaughan
RESOLVED, That effective May 10, 2002, Steven Thayer is appointed
Controller of the City of Ithaca.
Carried Unanimously
Alderperson Sams left the meeting at 1:00 am.
19. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE:
19.1 Resolution To Accept Recommendation of City Administration
Subcommittee
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by: Alderperson Vaughan
WHEREAS, In April 2000 the Ithaca Common Council Human Resources
Committee formed a subcommittee on restructuring the city
administration. The sub committee was comprised of
representatives from council, senior management and the
community, and
WHEREAS, The subcommittee was charged with studying whether the
City is administered as effectively and efficiently as possible
and whether there might be ways of improving administrative
coordination and communication, and
WHEREAS, After extensive research, including 23 comprehensive
interviews with City senior staff, residents and former
employees, a survey of other localities in New York and
elsewhere, and a two-day site visit by the current Executive
Director of State chapter of the International City/County
Management Association, the subcommittee has submitted a report
recommending creation of the position of City Administrator
effective January 2003, and
December 5, 2001
1616
WHEREAS, This report provides for a conceptual outline that would
require additional work for Common Council, the Human Resources
Director, and the City Attorney to reach a specific
recommendation; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council accepts this recommendation
submitted by the subcommittee, and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes the Human Resources
Chairperson to appoint two common council members to work with
the Mayor and Human Resources Director to develop a job
description, salary recommendation and to work with the City
Attorney to determine the implications and appropriate procedures
for transferring powers if necessary.
Mayor Cohen explained that this Resolution does not commit the
City to establish or fund the position, it just accepts the
recommendation of the sub-committee and gives the Human Resources
Director the authorization to develop a job description and
salary recommendation.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blumenthal: Seconded by Alderperson Spielholz
RESOLVED, That an additional Resolved clause be added to the end
of the Resolution to read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That this Resolution does not commit Common Council to
filling or funding this position without further review.”
Carried Unanimously
Main Motion As Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
19.5 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 90 Entitled “Personnel” of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code Regarding Residency Requirements
By Alderperson Manos: Seconded by: Alderperson Hershey
WHEREAS, since the promulgation of the Residency Requirements
currently contained in Article X, Sections 90-67 and 90-68, of
the Code of the City of Ithaca, new City departments have been
created and new department heads and deputies have been hired,
and
WHEREAS, Common Council desires to clarify the residency
requirements for department heads and deputies, and
WHEREAS, Common Council further desires to create time lines and
procedures for newly hired or promoted department heads and
deputies to become City of Ithaca residents, now, therefore, be
it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby adopts the following
Ordinance:
ORDINANCE 01-
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca as follows:
December 5, 2001
1717
Section 1. Article X of the Code of the City of Ithaca,
entitled “Residency Requirements” shall be deleted in
its entirety and replaced with a new Article X, as
follows:
Section 2. There shall be a new section 90-67 as follows:
90-67. Purpose and Intent; Definition of Residency.
A) Purpose and Intent. The City of Ithaca Common Council
recognizes that a residency requirement as a condition
of employment as a department head or deputy would
result in the following: enhancement of the quality of
employee performance by greater personal knowledge of
the City's conditions and a feeling of greater personal
stake in the City's progress, an increase in tax
revenue to the City, enhanced response in ready
situations, and a general economic benefit to the City
and its citizens and businesses flowing from local
expenditure of employee salaries. Therefore the Common
Council determines that the public need is sufficient
to require that all City department heads and deputies
hired or promoted by the City on or after the effective
date of this resolution be residents of the City of
Ithaca.
B) Definition. Residency shall be defined, for the
purpose of this ordinance, as the place of residence
where a person primarily lives, eats, sleeps, and
maintains usual personal and household effects, and
where the person returns to whenever temporarily
absent. To be a city resident, and to fulfill the
residency requirement, a person shall not have a
domicile outside the City of Ithaca.
Section 3. There shall be a new Section 90-68, as follows:
90-68. Residency Requirement; Investigation; Notice and
Waiver.
1. Residency Requirement.
(A) Except as otherwise provided by law, the City of
Ithaca hereby establishes a residency requirement
for all department heads and deputies, with the
exception of Fire Department personnel and those
who serve at the pleasure of the Mayor, hired or
promoted by the City on or after the effective
date of this Ordinance. Any such employee shall be
a resident of the City within one year of that
individual's hiring or promotion and shall
continue to maintain residency within the City at
all times during such continued employment.
(B) A nonresident may be hired or promoted to
department head or deputy by the City on the
condition that the individual shall agree in
writing to establish residency in the City within
one year of that individual's hiring or promotion
and continue to maintain residency within the City
at all times during continued employment after
such period. A prospective nonresident employee or
promotee shall additionally provide to the
December 5, 2001
1818
appointing authority a written timetable for
attaining residency, which shall be updated every
ninety days following the individual's hiring or
promotion, concluding with a final status report
thirty days prior to the expiration of the one
year anniversary of that individual's hiring or
promotion.
(C) Failure by any department head or deputy to
maintain City residency during the period of
employment or to establish residency within the
City within one year after being hired or promoted
shall constitute a breach of the employee's
condition of employment and may result in the
termination of the employee subject to an
investigation of residency.
2. Investigation of Residency.
a. Should it be alleged that an employee is not in
compliance with section three of this ordinance,
the appointing authority shall initiate a hearing
by:
(1) Providing the employee with written notice of
the alleged violation allowing the employee
seven calendar days in which to respond;
(2) If there is a failure to respond or, if in
the judgment of the appointing authority the
response is not sufficient to satisfy the
requirements of this Ordinance, the
appointing authority shall set a date to hear
the charge of nonresidence;
(3) The employee shall be sent a written notice
of the hearing date at least fifteen calendar
days prior to the hearing;
(4) The appointing authority shall appoint an
individual with no personal or professional
stake in the outcome of the hearing to
conduct the hearing. The appointing
authority shall in writing designate an
individual who for the purpose of the hearing
shall be vested with all the powers of the
appointing authority and who shall refer the
hearing record and his or her recommendations
to the appointing authority for review and
decision;
(5) The hearing shall be held within thirty (30)
days after the employee's seven calendar day
response period set forth in number 1 of this
sub-section expires; (6) formal rules of
evidence shall not apply;
(6) The employee who is the subject of the
hearing shall have a right to be represented
by counsel or other representatives of
his/her choice;
(7) A record of the hearing shall be made;
December 5, 2001
1919
b. Should an employee establish residency to the
satisfaction of the appointing authority prior to
the hearing date, it shall result in a
cancellation of the hearing authorized by this
section;
c. Should the appointing authority determine that an
employee is a nonresident in violation of this
ordinance, the employee shall be notified in
writing that the individual has been deemed to
have voluntarily resigned from employment as of
the date of the determination.
d. Upon re-establishing residency, an individual
having so resigned may apply for reinstatement to
his or her former position.
3. Notice and Posting.
A copy of this ordinance shall be provided to each
employee upon his or her initial appointment or
promotion. However, a failure to do so shall not
affect the application of this ordinance to any
employee appointed or promoted after its effective
date. A copy of this ordinance shall also be posted on
all notice boards normally used for employee
communications.
4. Waiver of Requirement.
In the event that a majority of Common Council, upon
conferral with the Director of Human Resources and
review by the appropriate standing committee of Common
Council, determines that there is a lack of applicants
which results in difficulty hiring or promoting a
qualified person because of its residency requirement,
the provisions of sub-sections 90-68(1) and 90-68(2)
may be waived with respect to an incumbent of, or
applicant to, a particular title.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect
immediately in accordance with law upon publication of a notice
as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Alderperson Manos reviewed the proposed Ordinance and identified
changes from the current legislation. She explained that
members of the Human Resources Committee had concerns regarding
how this legislation affects promotional opportunities for
existing staff.
Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the merits
of residency requirements for senior management staff.
Alderperson Spielholz stated that she would not support this
legislation as she believes it is difficult to enforce, it is
unpopular with City staff, it hampers promotional opportunities
within the workforce, and she has witnessed the extreme
dedication to the City of employees who live outside City
boundaries.
Alderperson Hershey stated that the legislation was purposefully
drafted to be very strict regarding residency waivers. He stated
that he believes the employees affected by the residency
December 5, 2001
2020
requirement are running the City and they should be subject to
the rules and administration that they are making and carrying
out. He added that he believes that management salaries, paid by
the taxpayers should be re-invested in the community through
mortgages and property taxes.
Mayor Cohen stated that he believes the legislation should be
amended to take into consideration promotions from within the
City workforce. He stated that there are employees who have been
with the organization a long time, and were never informed that
they would have to move into the City if they advanced into
management. He stated that he is not against this legislation
pertaining to future hires as long as the statement is made to
all new hires, that this is a clear expectation if you aspire to
a management position.
Alderperson Vaughan stated that residency legislation has been in
the City Code for a decade, and although it has not been
enforced, it is not a new concept.
Alderperson Manos noted that employees who serve at the pleasure
of the Mayor are exempted from the residency requirement. She
further noted that the legislation provides a one-year time frame
for employees hired or promoted to move into the City.
Alderperson Manos further stated that this legislation does not
apply to people who are currently appointed to their positions,
it begins with new hires or newly appointed positions.
Further Discussion followed on the floor regarding the one-year
time period to move into the City and possible hardships that
could present to employees.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Hershey: Seconded by Alderperson Pryor
RESOLVED, That Section 90-68 (1)(C) be amended to read as
follows:
“(C) Failure by any department head or deputy to
maintain City residency during the period of
employment or to establish residency within the
City within one year, subject to a six month
extension by Common Council for reasons of
hardship, after being hired or promoted shall
constitute a breach of the employee's condition of
employment and may result in the termination of
the employee subject to an investigation of
residency.”
Ayes (7) Manos, Pryor, Farrell, Vaughan,
Blumenthal, Taylor, Hershey
Nays (0)
Abstentions (2) Mack, Spielholz
Carried Unanimously
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) Vaughan, Hershey, Farrell, Manos, Pryor,
Taylor
Nays (2) Blumenthal, Spielholz
Abstention (1) Mack
Carried
December 5, 2001
2121
Alderperson Manos noted for the record her thanks to Jana Taylor,
Norma Schwab, Schelley Michell-Nunn, Josh Glasstetter, and Steve
Thayer for their work on this sub-committee.
RECESS:
On a motion the meeting was recessed at 1:10 a.m, to be continued
on December 12, 2001 at 8:00 p.m.
________________________ _______________________
Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Alan J. Cohen,
City Clerk Mayor