Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3-30-11 City Administration Committee Meeting AgendaCITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Wednesday, March 30, 2011 7:00 PM COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA 1. Chairperson Greeting & Opening Statement 2. Announcements 3. Agenda Review and Amendments 4. Approval of Minutes 5. Statements from the Public 6. Employee Comments 7. Common Council Response 8. Workforce Diversity Committee 9. Safety Committee 10. Diversity Report Controller’s Office - March Chamberlain’s Office - April Attorney’s Office - May Information Technology - June Clerk’s Office - July Police Department - August 11. Planning and Development 12.1 Approval of Application for a Preserve New York Grant - Resolution 12. Information Technology 12.1 Request to Amend 2011 Information Technology Roster – Resolution 13. Chamberlain’s Office 13.1 Refund of Tax Bill Penalties - Resolution 13.2 Acceptance of Credit Card Payments - Resolution 14. Attorney’s Office 14.1 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 146 (“Building Code Enforcement”), Section 146-50 (“Penalties for Offenses”) 14.2 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 210 (“Housing Standards”), Section 210-86 (“Penalties for Offenses”) 14.3 Authorization to Purchase a Parcel of Land for Addition to the Six Mile Creek Natural Area - Resolution 14.4 Use of City Park Land (Boat Slips at Cass Park) - Resolution 14.5 Update on Sweatshop-free Legislation 15. Common Council 15.1 Request that New York State Maintain Funding Streams for Youth Bureaus and Further Urge Elimination of Competitive Bid Funding - Resolution J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Wednesday, March 30, 2011 Agenda Continued 16. Human Resources 16.1 Director’s Report 17. Finance/Controller’s Office 17.1 Controller’s Report 18. Reports 18.1 Mayor’s Report 18.2 Sub-Committee Updates 18.3 Council Members’ Announcements 18.4 Next Month’s Meeting: April 27, 2011 J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 City of Ithaca Controller’s Office 2011 Diversity Report Department Mission: The Controller’s Office mission is to provide accurate, timely financial data and strong, secure internal control systems to the Common Council, Mayor, City employees and the community. Departmental Demographics: Total Staff Members: 5 Women Employees: 3 Men Employees: 2 Staff of Color Employees: 0 Employees with Disabilities: 1 Caucasian Employees: 5 The Controller’s Office has not had any vacancies in the last twelve months. Attrition (next two to five years): Over the next two to five years, we will have one employee eligible for retirement. We do not anticipate retirements during this period as no one has indicated they will retire at this time. Selected Diversity Attribute: Our selected diversity attribute is attribute #3: Holistic View of the City of Ithaca Community Members. The City of Ithaca desires that all employees and volunteers are viewed and respected as whole persons with identities and lives that extend beyond employment. Departments shall be flexible within the organizational culture and address work/life issues. We originally selected two attributes, but found that working and making progress on one diversity attribute is proving difficult enough. The Holistic view of the City of Ithaca community members attribute was selected because the Controller’s Office deals with all city departments and various community members and agencies within any given work week. Our department’s interaction with all City departments includes payroll and financial activity. It is vitally important to have effective communication and treat all City employees, City vendors and community members with respect. Also it is necessary to develop a collective understanding that all of us come from different backgrounds and history. These issues help mold us in the individuals we are. In addition, I believe it’s very important to give employees flexibility to develop a balance between our work life and our family life that extends beyond our city employment. It’s also critical that J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 the necessary work gets completed if the flexibility is allowed. It’s important to develop a culture that allows each and everyone of us to find and understand this balance. Measurement/Progress: The measurement of this attribute is difficult and on-going. I am measuring success through the understanding of our staff’s development of a whole person and the interaction with all other city staff and community members. As mentioned, the Controller’s Office communicates with all departments and many city staff as we; develop budgets; assist departments with budget issues; report and account for financial activity; perform weekly payroll and make weekly payments. We also have regular business with many different vendors and local agencies as a result of our contract, purchasing and bid activity. It is important that these dealings are respectful. Progress in achieving our attribute is slow. The slow progress is mostly related to our concentrated efforts in catching up on our financial reporting activity. I know we are making some progress in achieving our attribute based on our overall department interaction with many city groups, but there is always room for improvement. Most of our conflicts occur within city operations. The Controller’s Office welcomes equal opportunity for all and inclusion of all, no matter what the background of the individual or agency. As a staff, we have, and are attending various diversity training opportunities. To date, two of the five members of our staff have attended the undoing racism series. This series has been very informative and valuable to staff that has participated. I am hoping the remaining staff members will be able to partake in the series in the future. Staff members have also attended various other internal diversity training sessions, including Talking Circles. Our restricted view points have been opened up as a result of our involvement in the various training sessions. The Controller’s Office will continue to strive to improve our diversity knowledge and awareness through additional diversity workshops, meetings, and educational opportunities. We expect to increase our department’s exposure to local diverse agencies through future attendance to functions with such groups as the Latino Civic Association, the Asian American Association, Finger Lakes Independence Center and the Work Force Diversity Committee. In addition, our future departmental staff meetings, held twice a month, will include diversity exercises to increase our understanding of diversity in the work place. We are developing a department environment that can accommodate all issues and concerns. It will take time to do this. The work environment will celebrate, recognize and honor good work. It will accept and embrace all cultural backgrounds. Each of us in the Controller’s Office are separate individuals, but together we make a team that, to operate effectively, must know and understand each others strengths and weaknesses. We are stronger as a team and moving forward, if we work together, can make slow, steady, positive changes in developing a diverse work and home life environment. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 11. Planning and Development .1 Approval of Application for a Preserve New York Grant WHEREAS, the area informally known as the “Henry Saint John survey area” contains an important collection of architecturally significant properties reflecting many aspects of the city’s historical development from early rural village life, to the 19th century emergence of industrialism, to municipal incorporation in 1888 and on into the first decades of the 20th century, and WHEREAS, the Department of Planning & Development proposes to re- apply to the Preserve New York grant program of the Preservation League of New York State for funds to engage a consultant for survey and documentation pursuant to the preparation of New York State and National Register nominations of the “Henry Saint John survey area”, which information could also serve as the basis for designation of a local historic district, and WHEREAS, the Henry St. John survey area is within a qualifying federal census tract and residents would be eligible under new legislation entitled the New York State Historic Residential Properties Tax Credit Program for a tax credit of 20% of rehabilitation costs for investment in properties listed on the New York State and National registers, and WHEREAS, the estimated project cost is $10,924 and, to be competitive for a Preserve New York grant, the City’s application should include a local match which in this case would include in-kind services and a cash contribution of $3,000, and WHEREAS, the $3,000 cash match authorized and allocated for the 2010 grant application remains available through the contingency account; now therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City Administration Committee recommends authorization of the application for a Preserve New York grant with a cash match not to exceed $3,000 should the City be the recipient of a grant award from the Preserve New York grant program. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 TO: Members of the City Administration Committee FROM: Leslie Chatterton, Historic Preservation Planner RE: Henry Saint John Historic Resource Survey Grant DATE: March 11, 2011 The Department of Planning & Development proposes to resubmit an application to the Preserve New York Grant Program of the Preservation League of New York State to engage a consultant for the documentation of historic resources in the Henry Saint John survey area and to prepare a National Register nomination. The research will also serve as a basis for consideration of local designation by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission. Staff of the Preservation League responsible for administering this grant stated that last year’s application ranked highly, and was not funded because of extreme competition for a limited amount of funding. The project cost is estimated at $10,924. Based on this cost we are requested $3,000 to provide a cash match in addition to in-kind services. I have checked with the City Controller and the $3,000 match authorized for last year’s application is included in this year’s budget and remains available as a match for the resubmitted application. Project Description The proposed Henry Saint John Historic District includes seventy-seven contributing properties roughly bounded on the north by the south side of West Green Street from 115 to the southeast corner of Green and Fayette Streets; on the east by the east side of South Geneva Street between West Green Street and North Titus Avenue; on the south from 110 North Titus to the northwest corner of South Albany Street and North Titus Avenue; and on the west by the west side of South Albany Street, excluding the Beechtree Center. The McGraw House and its associated buildings on South Geneva Street are included in the district as non-contributing buildings. (See attached map.) The district is primarily residential with buildings that display a range of architectural styles and modes dating from the 1830s through the 1920s, including Greek Revival, Italianate, Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, and bungalow. The majority of the buildings were constructed in the 1870s and 1880s, including the prominent Sprague House on the corner of South Albany Street and North Titus Avenue. There is also a cluster of buildings constructed prior to 1850. In general, the buildings retain their architectural integrity and create a cohesive residential streetscape. The development of the neighborhood was related to important social and economic events locally and nationally, and many prominent Ithaca businessmen and civic leaders lived or owned property in the neighborhood. The district's initial period of growth occurred during the real estate boom of 1835-36, following strong speculation about the development of railroads and water transportation in Ithaca. The next phase of growth began after the Civil War, when the  The project description is a repeat of the project description in the 2010 memorandum to the City Administration Committee. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 city's population grew rapidly and reclamation of marshland along Six Mile Creek added additional building lots to the neighborhood. The final phase of development occurred during the 1910s and 1920s. A 1987 survey of the neighborhood by students of Cornell's Historic Preservation Planning program resulted in an inventory of fifty-nine buildings and some research on the history of the neighborhood. While somewhat useful to the proposed survey, this work is incomplete and uneven in quality. As a result of preliminary discussion with the state historic preservation office (SHPO) regarding the proposed survey boundaries, eighteen properties were added to the initial survey area. Many long-term residents have recognized the historic and architectural significance of the neighborhood and in the past some have contacted the City for historical information and/or to inquire about measures to protect and highlight these resources. Such interest galvanized two years ago with the announcement of preliminary plans for expansion of McGraw House. In addition to the overall benefit of neighborhood preservation, listing of the Henry Saint John survey area on the New York State and National Registers will provide a potential economic incentive to these residents under the New York State Historic Residential Properties Tax Credit Program. To qualify for this new tax credit properties must be listed either individually or as a contributing building in a historic district and be: a) located in a federal census tract that is at 100% or below the state family median income level b) located in an area identified as a qualified census tract c) located in a designated area of chronic economic distress The Henry St John survey area is within a qualified census tract. The tax credit is a substantial incentive for the rehabilitation of historic residential properties, providing homeowners a credit of 20% of qualified rehabilitation costs up to a value of $50,000. (A separate New York State Tax Credit for income producing properties is also in place for qualifying rental.) Projects located in areas that qualify owners for the Residential and/or Commercial Properties Tax Credit Programs are also a funding priority of this year’s Preserve New York grant program J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 12. Information Technology .1 Amendment to Personnel Roster for Position Reclassification in Conjunction with the 2011 Budget WHEREAS, Common Council approved the creation of the Public Information Division in the City Clerk’s Office as part of the 2011 budget process with the recognition that such a position will require the services of specialized technical support including, but not limited to the development of web, television and video streaming resources, and WHEREAS, the demand for the use of web, television and video streaming resources both for public information and for internal communications is growing and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, the Information Technology Department currently has on staff someone professionally trained to provide the necessary support for the aforementioned resources and Public Information Division; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That effective April 11, 2011 the Personnel Roster of the Information Technology Department be amended as follows: Delete: (1) Senior Network Integration Specialist – 40 hours Add: (1) Manager of Electronic Communications and Customer Services - 40 hours and, be it further RESOLVED, That the position of Manager of Electronic Communications and Customer Services be assigned to the City Executive Association at Grade B of the compensation plan, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby establishes an eight (8) hour standard workday for the position of Manager of Electronic Communications and Customer Services for the sole purpose of determining days worked reportable to the New York State and Local Employees’ Retirement System, and be it further RESOLVED, That funding for the reclassification will be derived from the Information Technology Department’s 2011 budget. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 13. Chamberlain’s Office .1 Refund of Tax Bill Penalties WHEREAS, in order to produce the City of Ithaca’s real-estate tax bills the City relies on billing information from the Tompkins County Assessment Department, and WHEREAS, the tax billing information from Tompkins County includes a designation of a “bank code” on those properties with mortgage escrow accounts so that those bills can be sent to the appropriate bank or realty tax service, in accordance with New York State Real Property Tax Law, and WHEREAS, in addition, the City Chamberlain uses information received on lists and electronic files provided by various banks and realty tax services to confirm the accuracy of the information and to update the City’s records, and WHEREAS, the City Chamberlain received a list of additions and deletions from CoreLogic Realty Tax Service in December, 2010 that was used to update records for the 2011 tax billing cycle as part of this process, and WHEREAS, it has been determined that at least thirty property owners did not receive tax bills because the bill for the property was erroneously coded to be sent to CoreLogic, and CoreLogic did not notify the City that the tax payments were no longer its responsibility, and WHEREAS, those property owners have been directed to pay the taxes due with penalty, and WHEREAS, the failure to receive a tax bill was clearly not caused by any action or inaction on the part of the property owner, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain is authorized to refund penalties paid on taxes by the owners of properties affected by the failure to remove the bank code directing the bills to CoreLogic, as long as the taxes were paid before March 31, 2011 J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 To: City Administration Committee From: Debra Parsons, City Chamberlain Re: Request to waive penalty on certain taxes Date: March 18, 2011 The City receives its tax billing information from Tompkins County Assessment on an annual basis. This information includes “bank codes,” a numeric designation associated with the various banks and realty tax services that pay escrowed taxes. The code is used to create tax billing addresses for the affected properties. Before we print tax bills, we compare the codes with lists provided by the banks, to ensure accuracy. For the largest realty tax service, CoreLogic, that process is accomplished by exchanging electronic files. CoreLogic sends us a file of additions and deletions. The file from CoreLogic was received on December 21st for 2011 City and County taxes. The file was used to update our records before we printed tax bills on December 27th. We mailed notices of unpaid taxes on March 4, 2011. It soon became clear that we had an issue with the update file from CoreLogic. At least thirty properties were not removed from their list of requested bills. (I show twenty-five properties coded to be sent to CoreLogic, with taxes either currently unpaid or paid after January 31st with penalty. In addition, each individual in my office received requests for tax bills during January from owners who had not received their bills, where the bills had been sent to CoreLogic in error.) In many cases, the taxpayer indicated their mortgage has been paid off for over a year. I am proposing a refund of penalty on these taxes, as long as the taxes are paid in March. It is my intent, in the future, to delete all of the bank codes for CoreLogic, and require that they ask for the bills they need, rather than relying on them to tell us when they no longer hold or service an escrow for a property. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 13. Chamberlain’s Office .2 Acceptance of Credit Card Payments WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca acknowledges that the use of debit and credit cards has become the method of choice for the payment of bills and services, and WHEREAS, acknowledging the convenience of credit cards, debit cards and other electronic forms of payments the City would like to offer this option of payment to City residents, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau, the Newman Golf Course, Cass Park and the City parking garages currently accept credit and debit cards for the payment of fees and charges, and WHEREAS, the City Chamberlain’s office recently accepted proposals for credit card processing for payment of taxes, water and sewer bills, and other miscellaneous bills and fees, and WHEREAS, Govolution, LLC has been chosen as the preferred vendor and is prepared to begin processing credit card payments accepted by the City Chamberlain’s office for the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Office of the City Chamberlain, the Ithaca Youth Bureau, Newman Golf Course and the City Parking Garages are authorized to accept credit cards or other electronic forms of payment for fines, taxes, rent, rates, fees, charges and other revenues. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 14. Attorney’s Office .1 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 146 (“Building Code Enforcement”), Section 146-50 (“Penalties for Offenses”) Ordinance #2011 - ___ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Section 146-50 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to read as follows: § 146-50 Penalties for Offenses. In accordance with § 383 of Article 18 of the Executive Law of the State of New York: A. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to construct, alter, repair, move, equip, use or occupy any building or structure or portion thereof in violation of any provision of law or ordinance as well as any regulation or rule promulgated by the Building Commissioner in accordance with applicable laws, or to fail in any manner to comply with a notice, directive or order of the Building Commissioner or to construct, alter, use or occupy any building or structure or part thereof in a manner not permitted by an approved building permit or certificate of occupancy. No person shall commence any work for which a building permit is required without first having obtained a building permit issued by the Building Department. B. If a property is in violation of any provision of this chapter, the owner of the property shall be guilty of an offense. In addition, any other person who shall violate any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of an offense. Each day’s continued violation constitutes a separate offense unless otherwise provided herein. Each offense shall be punishable by a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $250, unless otherwise provided herein. [B] C. Any person who shall fail to comply with a written order of the Building Commissioner within the time fixed for compliance therewith and any owner, builder, architect, tenant, contractor, subcontractor, construction superintendent or their agents or any other person taking part or assisting in the construction or use of any building or any property who shall knowingly violate any of the applicable provisions of law or any lawful order, notice, directive, permit or certificate of the Building Commissioner made thereunder shall be punishable by fine of not less than $250 nor more than $500. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense. [C] D. Except as provided otherwise by law, such violation shall not be a crime, and the penalty or J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 punishment imposed therefore shall not be deemed for any purpose a penal or criminal penalty or punishment and shall not impose any disability upon or affect or impair the credibility as a witness, or otherwise, of any person found guilty of such offense. Section 2. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon publication of notices as provided for in the Ithaca City Charter. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 TO: Maria Coles, Chairperson, City Administration Committee FROM: Daniel L. Hoffman, City Attorney DATE: February 15, 2011 RE: Proposals to Amend Chapter 146 of City Code (“Building Code Enforcement”) and Chapter 210 (“Housing Standards”), so as to Eliminate Possible Jail Term from Penalties Assistant City Prosecutor Robert Sarachan is responsible for prosecuting alleged violations of the City’s Housing Standards (Chapter 210) and the City’s ordinance regarding compliance with the New York State Building Code (Chapter 146). He notes that because Chapter 146 (Building Code Enforcement) does not specifically set forth a penalty for the failure to secure a building permit (when required), and Chapter 210 does not set forth its own, particular penalties for any part of that ordinance, the general penalties described in Section 1-1 of the Code presumably apply. That section is essentially the “default” penalty for most provisions in the Code. The general penalties are: “a fine of not more than $250 [per day the violation continues] or imprisonment for a term of not more than 15 days, and not less than $100 or 25 hours of community service.” Over the past several years, our office has recommended that the penalties for certain violations of the Code be tailored to the nature and seriousness of the offense, rather than be treated in a “one-size-fits-all” fashion. For example, the possibility of jail time has been removed from violations such as having an unleashed dog or riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, and was not made applicable to the new ordinance prohibiting outdoor smoking on certain public property. Now, it is our recommendation to apply a specific (monetary) penalty for the failure to obtain a building permit when required, and to remove the possibility of jail time for violations of the Building Code or Housing Standards. We note that alleged violators who fail to correct problems for a longer period of time can be charged with a separate offense for each day the violation exists, which can amount to a significant monetary deterrent. Furthermore, there is a separate penalty for “aggravated violation” of the Building Code (Section 146-52), which is defined as failure to comply with an order of the Building Commissioner or knowing violation of the law or any such order, either of which results in injury to a person or property. This is a misdemeanor (rather than a violation), with higher possible fines and imprisonment for up to one year. The suggested ordinances are attached, for your consideration. Cc: Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner Common Council Enc. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 14. Attorney’s Office .2 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 210 (“Housing Standards”), Section 210-86 (“Penalties for Offenses”) Ordinance #2011 - ___ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Section 210-86 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to read as follows: § 210-86 Penalties for offenses. A. If a property is in violation of any provision of this chapter, the owner of the property shall be guilty of an offense. In addition, any other person who shall violate any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of an offense. Each day’s continued violation constitutes a separate offense unless otherwise provided herein. Each offense shall be punishable by a fine not less than $100 nor more than $250 unless otherwise provided herein. B. Every person who shall fail to comply with a violation order issued by the Building Commissioner within the time limit stated shall be guilty of an offense and, upon conviction, shall be punished as provided in Chapter 1, General Provisions, Article 1, Penalties 146, Article VII, § 146-50. Each day that a violation continues shall be a separate offense. Section 2. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon publication of notices as provided for in the Ithaca City Charter. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 14. Attorney’s Office .3 Authorization to Purchase a Parcel of Land for Addition to the Six Mile Creek Natural Area WHEREAS, for at least 20 years, the City of Ithaca has maintained a capital project account (no. 292) intended to support the acquisition of lands to expand and buffer the City’s Six Mile Creek Natural Area (SMCNA), and WHEREAS, this account now contains approximately $100,000, and WHEREAS, last year, the City became aware of the availability of a parcel of vacant land off Slaterville Road (Town of Ithaca tax map parcel no. 58-1-14.22), consisting of 8.33 acres and bordered on two sides by the SMCNA, and WHEREAS, the property includes open fields and some wooded portions, and access from Slaterville Road (in two locations), and WHEREAS, the property is zoned to allow residential development, and its back acreage could be accessed for this purpose by way of a future extension of the Penny Lane roadway in the Commonland project, which type of development would be likely to have negative impacts on the recreational and environmental value of the SMCNA, and WHEREAS, appraisals of the property by the City and by the current owner (the Ithaca Monthly Meeting of Religious Society of Friends) estimate its fair market value to be between $79,000 and $105,000 (respectively), and WHEREAS, counsel for the City and for the owner have reached informal agreement on a sale/ purchase price of $95,000, contingent upon approval of the purchase by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, discussions with a representative of the New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation have indicated that it may be possible to secure reimbursement from the State for up to 50% of the cost of such acquisition, and WHEREAS, the State has also indicated that it may be possible for part or all of the property to serve as “substitute parkland” for land on Inlet Island which the City sought to alienate in the 1990s, using land to be acquired in the vicinity of Ithaca Falls as substitute parkland (and which alienation lacks final State approval, due to the possibility of unremediated contamination on a portion of the Ithaca Falls lands, thus potentially blocking development of City land on Inlet Island until the issue is resolved); now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council approve the acquisition of the above-described parcel, for addition to the Six Mile Creek Natural Area, for a purchase price not to exceed $95,000, with the understanding that a portion of the street frontage (only) of the parcel may be sold by the City in the future, in order to supplement Capital Project Account No. 292 (Land Acquisition); and be it further J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 RESOLVED, That the Mayor, upon the advice of the City Attorney, be and hereby is authorized to execute a purchase/sale agreement for the acquisition of said parcel, upon such conditions, together with any and all other documents required to complete the transaction; and be it further RESOLVED, That the monies for said purchase, including closing costs, shall be drawn from Capital Project Account No. 292, and any reimbursement from New York State for said purchase shall be placed in said account. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 14. Attorney’s Office .4 Use of City Parkland (Boat Slips at Cass Park) – Resolution WHEREAS, in 2010, the City of Ithaca installed two fixed docks extending from Cass Park into a shallow cove of the Cayuga Inlet, to serve human powered craft, and WHEREAS, the new docks supplemented an existing, floating dock at the same location, intended for the same purpose, and WHEREAS, the City subsequently received a request from the Ithaca Asian American Association’s Dragon Boat Club to use both faces of one of the new docks to store two, long “dragon boats” which the Club owns and operates for the use of its members and, on occasion, other members of the public, and to maintain a shed it provided (approximately 10 feet by 12 feet) for boating supplies, on Cass Park land adjacent to the dock, and WHEREAS, according to Chapter 170 of the City Code, the exclusive (or semi-exclusive), non- transient use of City parkland must be authorized by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2010, the Common Council authorized the issuance of a revocable license, to the IAAA/Dragon Boat Club, for reserved use of one dock (i.e., two long slips) and the shed site, for the 2010 boating season, provided that such use for the dragon boats did not prevent other members of the public from walking on or fishing from the dock, except during the launching or return of a dragon boat, and WHEREAS, at that time, the City had not established a fair-market rental fee for such use of its property (wherever located), and the Common Council decided essentially to waive any fee for the IAAA’s initial (2010) use of the docks and space for its shed, and WHEREAS, since then, an independent appraiser retained by the City has completed its report, and recommended a seasonal use fee of $350 per slip for docks associated with City-owned land (which are made available to the general public at commercial rates, by the licensees), which rate was adopted by the Board as part of its 2011-12 schedule of fees for use of City real property, and WHEREAS, taking an alternate approach to value calculation, staff has estimated the annual capital cost for the new docks as follows: • Construction Cost: $70,000 • Useful Life: 20 years • Salvage at 20 years: $20,000 (pile foundation) • Capital Maintenance: $5,000 @ years 8 & 16 • Cost of 2 docks (capital only): $70,000 -$20,000 +2 @ $5,000 = $60,000 ($3000/yr) • Cost per dock face: $3,000/4 = $750/year; and WHEREAS, when it approved this use for 2010, the Council also requested evaluation of the demand for use of the Cass Park docks, by the general public, “so as to determine whether reserved use of one dock [for the dragons boats] substantially interfered with the level of use and availability desired by other members of the public,” and J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 WHEREAS, regular observation of the docks throughout the 2010 boating season (during the Monday-Friday work week), by a member of the City Youth Bureau staff, indicated relatively light use of the non-reserved docks, with no indication that access by the general public was hampered by having one dock reserved for dragon boats, and WHEREAS, the Dragon Boat Club has requested similar permission to use one of the Cass Park docks (and associated shed site) for the 2011 boating season, and WHEREAS, it is possible that other, similar users (e.g., groups or associations that own larger, human-powered craft that members of the public may regularly use or enjoy through a membership or other such arrangement) may have an interest in storing their craft at the Cass Park docks, and WHEREAS, parkland is held in trust for the public and must be treated in a manner that is consistent with that doctrine, i.e., for recreational purposes and such that the general public is not deprived of its benefit and that any semi-exclusive, recreational use is made available to similarly-situated, potential users on an equal basis, and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2011, the Board of Public Works recommended that Common Council, through a lottery system, make one of the new docks at Cass Park (and associated storage shed site) available for storage of one or more long, multi-passenger, human-powered craft (such as dragon boats or outrigger canoes), for a fee of $400/dock face, provided such craft are owned and operated by a non-profit group that makes them readily and reasonably available for use by members of the public; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council make one of the new docks at Cass Park (i.e., two dock faces), and space for an associated storage shed, available for seasonal licensing, through a lottery system to be implemented by the Superintendent of Public Works, starting with the 2011 season, on the following terms (together with other, standard license requirements, for insurance, indemnification, etc): 1. Period of license: May 1-October 31 (with each season subject to new lottery); 2. License application fee: $50 (due after lottery drawing); 3. Annual use fee: $400 per dock face for 2011 (a rate between the appraiser’s figure and staff’s estimated, annual, capital cost), to be increased in subsequent years by any increase in consumer price index (rate includes the right to maintain a shed with a footprint no greater than 120 square feet, on land adjacent to the dock, for storage of materials associated with use of the boats); 4. Use must be for long, multi-passenger, human-powered boat(s), owned and operated by a non-profit group that makes its craft available for regular use and enjoyment by members of the general public, without discrimination, and at a rate (or per a fee structure) that is not economically exclusionary; 5. License to provide exclusive right to tie up to dock face(s) in question, but not exclusive use of dock surface (except when boat is being launched or docked); and 6. If first-drawn lottery participant wants only one dock face, then additional names shall be drawn, and, in order, shall be offered the other dock face (and a separate shed site); if first-drawn participant wants both dock faces, only one shed site shall be offered; and be it further J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 RESOLVED, That the Mayor, upon the advice of the Superintendent and the City Attorney, be and hereby is authorized to execute a revocable license agreement (or agreements, as the case may be) for such use. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 15. Common Council .1 Request that New York State Maintain Funding Streams for Youth Bureaus and Further Urge Elimination of Competitive Bid Funding WHEREAS, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo has submitted his proposed 2011-2012 Executive Budget recommending the development of a Primary Prevention Incentive Program (PPIP), and   WHEREAS, this proposal actually slashes the current allocation of funding for Youth Development and Delinquency Prevention (YDDP), Special Delinquency Prevention Program (SDPP), and Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA), by 50%, and   WHEREAS, this proposal eliminates these funding streams and offers the distribution of funds on a competitive basis to counties and cities of over a million people, resulting in the elimination of funding to many local municipalities, thereby promoting inequities in prevention and positive youth development services across New York State, and   WHEREAS, the proposed competitive bidding process will result in a loss of local planning and control, and WHEREAS, the proposed competitive bidding process also will focus on communities with high delinquency rates, resulting in a disincentive for communities like Ithaca, and   WHEREAS, the aforementioned proposal will dismantle the current youth bureau system, structure, and funding streams, and will be especially detrimental to all municipal youth bureaus, and WHEREAS, current youth development and prevention services are provided through a fair and equitable formula-driven allocation through the New York State Office of Children and Family Services, and   WHEREAS, the current funding through youth bureaus structures ensures appropriate local monitoring, evaluation, and accountability, and   WHEREAS, youth development, prevention, and intervention are essential for critical services to children and youth, and   WHEREAS, if adopted, this portion of the Executive Budget would result, at a minimum, in the loss of over $47,000 of youth services funding for the City of Ithaca, and   WHEREAS, if adopted, New York State will be abandoning its long-time national leadership and partnership in youth prevention, intervention, and development services, as articulated in Article 19-A of the Executive Law, and   WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council believes that providing services and programs for children and youth is an investment not only in delinquency prevention, but also in the development of all our young people in all ways, thus enriching our society and nation as a whole; now therefore, be it   J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS\City Admin Comm\2011\3-30 CA Agenda.doc 3/30/11 RESOLVED, On recommendation of the City Administration Committee, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby requests Governor Cuomo and the New York State Legislature to maintain the current youth bureau funding streams and eliminate the concept of competitive bid funding; and be it further RESOLVED, That Governor Cuomo and the New York State Legislature be urged to uphold Article 19-A of the Executive Law and to maintain the current youth bureau system and structure, which is in the best interest of the over 11,000 children and youth of the City of Ithaca, and their two million peers across New York State; and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is hereby directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to Governor Cuomo, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, Sen. Diane Savino, chairwoman of the Senate Children and Families Committee; Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, chairwoman of the Assembly Children and Families Committee; Senator Tom O'Mara and Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton.