Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-17-14 City Administration Committee Meeting AgendaCA Meeting City Administration Committee DATE: September 17, 2014 TIME: 6:00 pm LOCATION: 3rd Floor, City Hall, Council Chambers AGENDA ITEMS Item Voting Item? Presenter(s) Time Allotted Chair, Deb Mohlenhoff 1.Call To Order *Note: We will review the number of 15 Min* 1.1 Agenda Review No cards received at the beginning of each 1.2 Review and Approval of Minutes Yes meeting and adjust time if needed. Approval of July 2014 Minutes 1.3 Statements from the Public No 1.4 Statements from Employees No 1.5 Council Response No (6:15 p.m.) 2.Standing Sub-Committee and Staff Reports 3.Finance, Budget, and Appropriations 3.1 P, B & ED – Request to Amend the 2014 Yes Gino Leonardi, Housing and Land 10 Min Department Budget Use Supervisor 3.2 P, B & ED – Request to Amend the 2014 Yes Gino Leonardi, Housing and Land 10 Min Department Budget Use Supervisor (6:35 p.m.) 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.1 IURA – Declaration of Lead Agency – 320-324 YesNels Bohn, IURA Director 5 Min E. State/E. MLK St 120 Room Hotel 4.2 IURA – Environmental Review of Hotel Yes Nels Bohn, IURA Director 5 Min 4.3 IURA – Transfer of Title Yes Nels Bohn, IURA Director 5 Min 4.4 Discussion - An Ordinance Implementing a No Svante Myrick, Mayor 60 Min City Residence Requirement for New Police Officers 4.5 Proposed Policy to Increase the Use of Bicycle Yes 10 Min and Foot Patrols by the Police Department (8:00 p.m.) 5.Performance Measures No Kevin Sutherland, Chief of Staff 6.2015 Budget Process 6.1 Budget Process Preparation No All 20 Min (8:20 p.m.) 7.Meeting Wrap-up All 5 Min 7.1 Announcements No 7.2 Review Agenda Items for next meeting No 7.3 Adjourn Yes (8:25 p.m.) Committee Charge: The CA committee will: Review financial and administrative issues pertaining to the City, along with items relating to the City of Ithaca workforce environment, intergovernmental relations and human resources. If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Controller’s Office at 607-274-6576 at least 48 hours before the meeting. 3.Finance, Budget, and Appropriations 3.1 Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development Department - Request Funds for Computer Software Development WHEREAS, the Planning, Building, and Economic Development Department proposes to develop a computer software program to computerize workflow processes for the Planning, Building, Zoning, and Landmarks Preservation approval procedures, and WHEREAS, the current approval process for developers, contractors, and homeowners is lengthy, intricate, and requires multiple actions from department and the applicant. The need for approval is dependent on a review process that refers the applicant from one division to another. The process leads to multiple applications, submittals, and pertinent information necessary to acquire the approval required to permit the construction of a project, and WHEREAS, the Department has contacted a computer software developer to program the existing Building Division’s database to include a web-based Master Application and the computerization of the associated workflow processes for the Planning, Building, Zoning, and Landmarks Preservation approval procedures, and WHEREAS, the cost to implement the developed solution is $30,000 for the custom programming and integration to the existing database, and WHEREAS, part of the 2014 authorized budget, $30,000 was placed in Restricted Contingency for computer software development related to Planning, Building and Economic Development workflow processes; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That City staff have reviewed the current Planning, Building and Economic Development database software applications and have determined that additional custom programming and applications are necessary to improve the current application workflow process, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the Controller to transfer an amount not to exceed $30,000 from account A1990 Restricted Contingency to Account A8020-5435 Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Department for the purpose of funding the said computer development. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 MEMORANDUM Date: August 26, 2014 To: Steve Thayer, Comptroller From: Gino Leonardi, Housing and Land Use Supervisor Subject: Resolution to release money in restricted contingencies Background In 2007, the Building Division received monies to develop a computer program to automate the Housing Inspection process. Subsequent software upgrades to the database were implemented that streamlined many processes within the Building Division. The upgrades enhanced the existing database to include building management, inspections, permits, contacts, and invoicing to creating a complete property management database. Throughout this development; cost effectiveness, streamlining processes, and developing managerial tools have been implemented to take advantage of the information contained within the database. The database has become an extremely effective tool that is moving toward integration with other City and County programs to provide data to the user with a click of a button. Problem Developers, contractors, or homeowners wishing to perform work within the City, can seek information from the Planning, Building, Zoning, or the Economic Development Division. Each division provides the benefit of a walk-in service that can provide information to the public. These avenues of contact are and have always been a good way to provide customer service. The draw back with this process is it can be confusing and time consuming for staff, the developer, contractors, or homeowners. To understand the issue, we must look at the path that an applicant can take. The applicant can seek information from the Planning, Building, Zoning, or the Economic Development Division. Each avenue requires the applicant to submit pertinent information to the Division where they are seeking information. If it is found that other approvals are required, the applicant is referred to the appropriate division where they receive another list of requirements. In addition, the City Code requires that all projects have a “Building Permit” prior to commencing review for any approvals. Therefore, before a division can review an application, they must send the applicant to the Building Division for a permit. This step results in a minimum $35.00 fee and a potentially long list of additional requirements. Each path of entry requires an application, plans, and a detailed description of the project for each application. The difficulty starts when determining the need for other approvals in a timely fashion. Site plan review, zoning variances, and ILPC’s certificates of compliance have scheduled submission deadlines. The time line for these schedules must be met or it could result in delays adding months to grant an approval. These steps are compounded by the need for multiple forms, submittals, notifications, meeting schedules, and legal requirements for the applicant. This is a long and tedious process that must be managed by the applicant and City staff. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 CA Item #3.1 MEMORANDUM August 26, 2014 Re: Resolution to release money in restricted contingences In the past, the Building Division took the lead in determining compliance with city ordinances and would follow the project to completion. Today, due to the complexity of the codes, it is no longer possible for any one division to manage a project through all of the approval processes. The intricate knowledge necessary to facilitate approval through another division’s specialty is becoming too difficult, both for staff as well as the applicant. Cross-learning of other division’s procedures, especially in the ever changing world of City and State Codes, is causing errors and omissions that often cost the applicant time and money and does not reflect well on the City. Solution Implement a computer program that will host an on-line application. This on-line “Wizard” application is a smart application that will accept data, process data, and retrieve data from the database, all in real time. The Wizard will be used as a “Master Application” that will determine the need for division approval via an information path, prompted by select questions that will be answered by the applicant. The work flow process will be initiated by the Wizard which will process specific information and use it as “triggers” to determine the workflow. Divisions will be included or excluded in the workflow path, depending on the approval needed. This will allow each division to simultaneously process reviews and approvals and focus on their specialty. The Wizard will be programmed to recognize projects that require no “other” approval and will forward those projects directly to the Building Division in a “Building Permit” form. For projects that require additional approvals, the submitted application will be reviewed and the client will be personally contacted (by phone or email) with questions and/or directions by a qualified individual within the applicable division. This process will streamline efforts and provide an efficient method for development within the City of Ithaca. This proposal includes computerizing the applicable processes of the Planning and Zoning Divisions, including computerizing the application process for historic properties that require review by the ILPC, The proposed computerization will include; automating initial applications, able to edit application forms, scheduling project review and approval meetings, creating automated email notifications and agendas, auto-populate numerous forms, and automate the document management system. This new system will be integrated into the current database, utilizing existing data and will be accessible from the City Web site. Zhe FM Solutions, our software developer, has reported that our current software developed in FileMaker can be programmed to support these critical functions. For a maximum of $30,000.00 (estimating approximately 311-316 hours of labor at $95 per hour) Page | 2 CA Item #3.1 3.Finance, Budget, and Appropriations 3.2 Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development Department Request Funds for Computer Software Development WHEREAS, the Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Department (the Department) proposes to develop a computer software program to computerize workflow processes for the Exterior Property Maintenance process, and WHEREAS, the current process for Exterior Property Maintenance enforcement is performed primarily by hand and delays in notifying owners of EPM violations is causing issues between the landowners and the enforcement personnel. Ongoing complaints necessitate the need to streamline the process, improve document routing procedures, notify property owners, and minimize repeated offences, and WHEREAS, the Department has contacted a computer software developer to program the existing Building Division’s database to include a web-based process for Exterior Property Maintenance computerization of the associated workflow process, and WHEREAS, the cost to implement the developed solution is $6,954 for the custom programming, web access and integration to the existing database, and WHEREAS, these funds were not anticipated as part of the 2014 authorized budget, but could be used from the Unrestricted Contingency Account, which has a current balance of $177,628; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the Controller to transfer an amount not to exceed $6,954 from account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to Account A8020-5435 Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Department for the purpose of funding the said computer development. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 MEMORANDUM Date: September 9, 2014 To: Steve Thayer, Comptroller From: Gino Leonardi, Housing and Land Use Supervisor Subject: Resolution to fund Exterior Property Maintenance Computer Program Background The Exterior Property Maintenance Ordinance (EPM) was adopted on June 13, 2001. The purpose of the ordinance was to provide a minimum standard for the maintenance of exterior grounds and visible facades within the City of Ithaca. These standards provided a means of enforcement to insure that the property’s visible condition is maintained. As part of the ordinance, an inspector is charged with the responsibility of issuing tickets for violations. The ordinance has had a positive effect on the maintenance of properties but there has been an increase in the number of complaints concerning the EPM process and the subsequent issuance of tickets for violations. The current process is a three tiered process that involves the EPM Inspector, City Court, and the City Prosecutor. To further understand the issue, we must look at the process managed by each branch of government. Problem First, the inspector routinely patrols the City for EPM violations. He travels a selected area each day and revisits the properties that have been issued a violation the following day. If the violation still exists, a second ticket is issued. Tickets can be issued for a violation for every 24 hours a violation exists. This process is repeated until the violation is removed. Violations for EPM incur a civil penalty of $25 for the first violation at a property within a six-month period, $50 for a second violation at the same property within a six-month period, $200 for a third violation at the same property within a six-month period, and $300 for a fourth or subsequent violation at the same property within a six-month period. Within the six-month period numerous violation can be sited and incur a fourth violation fee for an existing or a new violation. As part of the process, the inspector has to complete the accusatory instrument form. The inspector must provide a ticket number, owners name, code section and description of violation, and attach pictures of the offence. He also must review records and determine if the violation is a first, second, third, or forth offence before saving the document for record retention. A copy of the completed record is then sent to the City Court and to the City Prosecutor. This workflow is performed for each ticket and for each day a ticket is issued by the inspector. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 CA Item #3.2 Re: Resolution to fund Exterior Property Maintenance Computer Program Page 2 Once City Court receives the accusatory instrument, it is entered into a log and a limited amount of information is transposed into a summons. The summons is filed and a copy is mailed to the property owner. A summons is required to be served by mail to the property owner in order to notify them of the offence. The owner can receive the notification (ticket) within 4-7 days after the ticket has been issued. In the interim, a ticket can be issued every 24 hours for the same violation or a new violation on the property. The final step of the process involves the City Prosecutor, who is responsible for prosecuting EPM offences. This is the most difficult aspect of the process. In most cases the property owner has received multiple tickets prior to receiving a notice of violation by City Court. The time lapse between the ticket being issued and the time the owner is notified has to be taken into account when determining the fine for the violation. In some cases the fine is reduced to compensate for the delays in the process. The City Prosecutor also has to resolve other property owner issues; the circumstances regarding the issuance of a ticket, the time frame when the owner received the ticket, the number of tickets, can a reasonable settlement be procured or whether the case goes to court. All of this means an enormous amount of work for the City Prosecutor pursuing the EPM violations. Solution The Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Department proposes to computerize the Exterior Property Maintenance process in order to streamline the work performed primarily by hand. The proposal includes the use of an iOS device that will be used in the field to process the accusatory and route the information automatically to each branch of government. A picture of the violation and the completed accusatory form will be sent to the recipients and stored in Laserfiche. The process will include instant notification to the owner via an email system that will generate a letter notifying the owner that they have received an EPM ticket. The letter will inform the owner that they have 24 hours to remedy the violation or another ticket will be issued. The computer will generate property lists that need re-inspections for tickets that were issued the previous day and maintain the number of offences for the property. This new process should alleviate most of the current issues that we are experiencing with delays in notifying the owner. The notification process will also help with imposing fines for consecutive violations when violations are not removed. The new process will create an efficient workflow for initial inspections, re-inspections, accusatory processing, document routing, document storage, prosecuting offences, and increase the ratio of offences verses fines collected. This solution will allow property owners to acknowledge that a violation exists and give them an opportunity to remedy the violation prior to the issuance of a second or third offence. Zhe FM Solutions, our software developer, has reported that our current software developed in FileMaker can be programmed to support these critical functions, for a maximum of $4,420.00 (estimating approximately 52 hours of labor) Purchase of, iOS hardware device, for a maximum of $650.00 Web hosting services and cellular service, for an annual cost of $1,884.00. (Future increases are possible.) Total Project Cost: $6,954.00 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CA Item #3.2 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.1 Transfer of Property at 320-324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street to the IURA to Undertake an Urban Renewal Project for Development of a 120-Room Hotel – Lead Agency WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to transfer ownership of property located at 320-324 E. MLK/E. State Street to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to facilitate a urban renewal project to construct a 120-room hotel at the 300 block of E. MLK/E. State Street, and WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for the purpose of 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 WHEREAS, the proposed transfer of less than 2.5 acres of land is an “Unlisted” action pursuant to the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQR”), which requires environmental review under CEQR; 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 transfer of property located at 320-324 E. MLK/E. State Street (tax parcel #69.-1-6.2) to the IURA for the purpose of structuring a proposed purchase and sale agreement to undertake an urban renewal project to construct a 120-room hotel, which agreement shall be subject to approval by Common Council. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 CA Item #4.1 1 Adopted Resolution   Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency  June 26, 2014  Property Disposition ― 320‐324 E. M.L.K., Jr./E. State St. ― Designate Lighthouse Hotels, LLC  as Qualified & Eligible Sponsor for Urban Renewal Project  1.WHEREAS, Lighthouse Hotels, LLC (Lighthouse) submitted a revised application on June 3, 2014 to be designated a “qualified and eligible sponsor” (Sponsor) to acquire two parcels located at  320‐324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, currently utilized as a 32‐space public parking lot (Municipal  Parking Lot), and   2.WHEREAS, a 2012 application was recommended for conditional approval by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) subject to satisfactory resolution of the following issues during  negotiations:   •Price (fair market value), including non‐refundable deposit •urban design, especially ground level streetscape on E. MLK Jr./E. State Street •exploration to retain the Carey building to be incorporated into the project rather than demolished •potential responses to mitigate loss of public parking to adjacent enterprises •potential responses to mitigate any business dislocation caused by the project •translating wage and job creation projections to wage and job commitments •transfer of property contingent upon site plan approval and issuance of a building permit, and 3.WHEREAS, the 2012 application failed to gain Common Council support due in part to the proposed demolition of the Carey Building and concerns about urban design of the building and  dislocation of businesses, and  4.WHEREAS, Lighthouse has revised their project and now propose to develop a $19 million, downtown, six‐story, 120‐room Hampton Inn & Suites on a modified project site located adjacent to the Carey Building, and 5.WHEREAS, the approximately 22,500 square feet (SF) proposed project site includes the following three parcels:  (1) 3,267 SF ‐ tax map #69.‐1‐3, 324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, IURA  (2) 8,320 SF ‐ tax map #69.‐1‐6.2 at 320‐24 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, City of Ithaca  (3) 10,950 SF – p/o tax map #69.‐1‐8 at 310‐312 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, Daley  Enterprises, and  6.WHEREAS, an executed purchase agreement for 310‐312 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street has been submitted, and  7.WHEREAS, the entire revised project site is currently used for surface parking and does not include the Carey building parcel, and   8.WHEREAS, the revised project will not result in any business dislocation and will include a new ground level restaurant lease space fronting on Seneca Way, and  CA Item #4.1 2 9.WHEREAS, the project site includes one parcel owned by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) and one parcel owned by the City of Ithaca for which the developer has agreed in  concept to purchase at fair market value, and  10.WHEREAS, the project is projected to create approximately 33 full‐time equivalent employment opportunities, and 11.WHEREAS, Lighthouse proposes wages to employees above the pay ranges paid at other hotels they operate, with the lowest wages set at $9.75/hour (2.5% CPI increase since 2012 proposal), which is equal to 122% of minimum wage ($8.00/hr.), or about 75% of the local living wage ($12.62/hr. with employer paid health insurance), and 12.WHEREAS, at least eleven (11) full‐time employees will be paid at least a living wage, and 13.WHEREAS, the project is projected to be assessed at over $8,000,000 (assumed $68K/room), a net taxable increase of $7,760,000, thereby generating the following estimated annual stream of local municipal revenues (52% occupancy rate assumed): $102,000 City property taxes ($13.12/$1,000)  $54,000 County property taxes ($6.90/$1,000)  $133,000 School property taxes ($17.185/$1,000)  $20,000 Business Improvement District ($2.624/$1,000)  $159,000 County hotel room occupancy tax (5% @ $72.80 RevPAR x 120 rms.)  $64,000 City sales tax (2%)  $532,000  14.WHEREAS, the project will result in elimination of parking revenue generated from the municipal surface parking lot, but create new parking demand in nearby municipal parking garages for hotel guest parking, and 15.WHEREAS, the proposed exterior façade materials of the hotel include stone veneer, brick veneer, metal, glass, metal panel and cementious (stucco‐like) siding, also known as Exterior Insulation Finishing System (EIFS), and 16.WHEREAS, the project site is located within the Urban Renewal Project Boundary area and is an appropriate location for a hotel, and 17.WHEREAS, the IURA is only authorized to sell property to a specific buyer if such buyer is designated as an eligible and qualified sponsor (Sponsor) per section 508 of General Municipal Law and the sale is approved by Common Council, and 18.WHEREAS, a proposed Sponsor is evaluated in accordance with adopted IURA land disposition procedures that seek to determine if the proposed Sponsor is qualified and capable of fulfilling the objectives of the project for property disposition, and 19.WHEREAS, IURA evaluation criteria for Sponsors include: •Financial status and stability •Legal qualification to operate in the State of New York and to enter into contracts with regard to the disposition, use, and development of land in questions •Previous experience in the financing, use, development and operation of projects of a similar nature •Reputation and proof of fair, reputable and ethical business practices and a record devoid of convictions CA Item #4.1 3 20.WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) is to improve the economic, social and physical characteristics of the project neighborhood, and 21.WHEREAS, one objective of the Plan is “expansion and diversification of the economic base of the community to provide the employment opportunities needed by its residents and to strengthen the tax base”, and 22.WHEREAS, Hitesh T. Patel, President, and Neil H. Patel, CEO, are the principal members of Lighthouse and report that Lighthouse, or its affiliates, owns and operates the Hampton Inn located at 337 Elmira Rd., Ithaca, NY as well as Hampton Inn hotels in Clay, Seneca Falls and Buffalo, and 23.WHEREAS, a 6/10/14 inspection of City records show that Lighthouse’s Ithaca Hampton Inn is operating in full compliance with all applicable permits and regulations, and is current on all tax obligations, and 24.WHEREAS, Lighthouse’s successful record of developing and operating four similar hotels in New York state, including the Ithaca Hampton Inn, demonstrates they possess the skills, resources and capacity to complete the proposed project, and 25.WHEREAS, the proposed project has potential to improve the economic, social and physical and characteristics of the project neighborhood, and 26.WHEREAS, designation of a Sponsor allows the IURA to negotiate terms for a proposed property disposition that must then be approved by the City of Ithaca Common Council following a public hearing on the proposed terms of the disposition, and 27.WHEREAS, the IURA Economic Development Committee considered this matter at their June 10, 2014 meeting and recommended the following; now, therefore, be it 1.RESOLVED, the IURA hereby finds that Lighthouse Hotels LLC satisfies IURA sponsor criteria ‐ including qualifications, capacity and experience ‐ to be designated a “qualified and eligible sponsor” to undertake an urban renewal project to undertake an in‐fill urban hotel project on the 300 block of E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, and be it further 2.RESOLVED, the IURA hereby finds that to ensure the proposed Hampton Inn & Suites project will satisfy IURA criteria that an urban renewal project improve the economic, social and physical characteristics of the project area, the IURA requires the following: A. Urban Design – exterior building façade materials are a key component of exterior  building design and the choice of appropriate materials is integral to the creation of new  buildings that positively influence the surrounding neighborhood that includes two  historic districts.  Therefore, the following exterior building façade materials shall be  prohibited on facades visible from public streets unless the Planning Board finds such  materials enhance the design of the building:  •EIFS (Exterior Insulation & Finishing System), such as “dryvit” or other cementitious, stucco‐like finishes •Concrete masonry units; B. Job Creation – commit to create at least 33 full‐time equivalent jobs and provide proof of  job creation to the IURA;   C. Wages – commit to pay all employees in the housekeeping department at least  $9.75/hour and further commit to pay a minimum of 11 full‐time hotels employees at  CA Item #4.1 4 least a living wage (currently $12.62 w/employer sponsored health insurance benefits or  $13.94 w/o health benefits);   D. Site Control – the executed purchase agreement for 310‐312 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street be  submitted no later than June 25, 2014, and be it further  3.RESOLVED, subject to satisfaction of the above conditions, the IURA hereby designates Lighthouse Hotels LLC as a “qualified and eligible sponsor” (Sponsor) eligible to acquire tax parcels #69‐1‐3 and #69.‐1‐6.2 through negotiations for the purpose of undertaking an urban renewal project to develop an in‐fill urban hotel project located at the 300 block of E. MLK Jr./E. State Street; and be it further, 4.RESOLVED, the IURA identifies the following issues to be included in negotiations with the Sponsor to acquire the project site: •Accommodations to mitigate loss of public parking to adjacent enterprises; •Participation in IURA‐sponsored job training and job placement programs, such as the Hospitality Employment Training Program; •The appropriate mechanism to ensure that the enhanced wages to be paid to all employees in the housekeeping department is maintained at a dynamic level  in the future (e.g., indexed to 120% of the state minimum wage); •Purchase price (fair market value), including non‐refundable deposit; •Transfer of property contingent upon site plan approval and issuance of a building permit; and be it further 5.RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby recommends that the Common Council and Board of Public Works make the City‐owned portion of the parking lot (tax parcel #69.‐1‐6.2) available for redevelopment and approve transfer of the parcel to the IURA for the purpose of structuring a proposed sale for consideration by the Common Council, and be it further 6.RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby authorizes acceptance of tax parcel #69.‐1‐6.2 upon Common Council authorization of transfer of the parcel, and be it further 7.RESOLVED, that the IURA Chairperson, subject to review by IURA legal counsel, is authorized to execute a 90‐day exclusive negotiating agreement with the Sponsor for the purpose of structuring a proposed purchase and sale agreement to convey tax parcels #69.‐1‐3 and #69.‐1‐ 6.2 to the Sponsor to undertake an urban renewal project, and be it further 8.RESOLVED, any proposed purchase and sale agreement shall be subject to approval by both the IURA and the Common Council. Carried Unanimously 5‐0  j:\community development\dispositions\324 east state street\reso iura lighhouse hotels - adopted 6-26-14.doc CA Item #4.1 CA I t e m # 4 . 1 CA I t e m # 4 . 1 CA I t e m # 4 . 1 CA Item #4.1 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.2 Transfer of Property at 320-324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street to the IURA to Undertake an Urban Renewal Project for Development of a 120-Room Hotel – Environmental Review WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to transfer ownership of property located at 320-324 E. MLK/E. State Street (tax parcel #69.-1-6.2) to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) for the purpose of structuring a proposed purchase and sale agreement to undertake an urban renewal project to construct a 120-room hotel, and WHEREAS, the proposed hotel project will undergo separate environmental review as part of the site plan review process, and WHEREAS, the proposed hotel project is not physically feasible without acquisition of City- owned land, and WHEREAS, it is not reasonable or practicable to expect the Preferred Developer to develop detailed project plans and analyses of potentially significant adverse impacts of the proposed hotel project prior to knowledge that the City-owned portion of the project site will potentially be made available for the hotel project through the IURA, and WHEREAS, as part of the site plan review process, the Planning Board regularly conducts rigorous and thorough environmental review of all aspects of the proposed development project that comes before it, and Whereas, pursuant to §176-6(F)(1)(b) of the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, the reestablishment of a Lead Agency may occur “upon failure of the Lead Agency’s basis of jurisdiction,” so that the Planning Board may subsequently assume the role of Lead Agency for the environmental review for the site plan review of the proposed hotel project, and WHEREAS, the proposed action for transfer of city-owned property of less than 2.5 acres is an “Unlisted Action” under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as Lead Agency, has reviewed the SEAF prepared by staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that circumstances warrant a segmented review of this property transfer from other stages of the proposed hotel project and that subsequent environmental review of the proposed hotel project during the required site plan review process will be no less protective of the environment, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council, as Lead Agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own, the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form, and be it further J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as Lead Agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.3 Transfer of Property at 320-324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street to the IURA to Undertake an Urban Renewal Project for Development of a 120-room Hotel - Action WHEREAS, Lighthouse Hotels LLC proposes construction of a $19 million, six-story, 120-room Hampton Inn & Suites hotel behind the Carey Building on parcels currently used for public and private surface parking at the 300 block of E. MLK Jr./E. State Street (Urban Renewal Project), and WHEREAS, the project site includes the 32-space municipal parking lot at 320-324 E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, which is partially owned by the City and partially owned by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA), and WHEREAS, §507 of General Municipal Law authorizes the IURA to negotiate sale of public land with a Qualified and Eligible Sponsor (“Preferred Developer”) to undertake an urban renewal project, which proposed sale and development agreement is subject to public hearing and approval by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Urban Renewal Plan is to improve the economic, social and physical characteristics of the project neighborhood, and WHEREAS, City policy requires the Board of Public Works to declare City-owned property surplus for public works purposes prior to any transfer of City-owned property, and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2014, the IURA designated Lighthouse Hotels LLC as the Preferred Developer to undertake the Urban Renewal Project, and authorizing potential acquisition of IURA and City-owned parcels of the project site through negotiations, subject to Common Council approval, and WHEREAS, on August 18, 2014 The Board of Public Works determined that the City-owned portion of the municipal parking lot located at 320-324 E. MLK/E. State Street (tax parcel #69.- 1-6.2) is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and WHEREAS, upon Common Council authorization to transfer the approximately 8,300 square foot City-owned portion of the municipal parking lot to the IURA, the IURA intends to enter into a 90-day exclusive negotiating agreement with the Preferred Developer to structure a proposed purchase and sale agreement to convey tax parcels #69.-1-3 and #69.-1-6.2 to the Preferred Developer at no less than estimated fair market value and establish post-closing requirements on the Urban Renewal Project including but not limited to urban design, job creation and housekeeping department employee wage levels, and WHEREAS, the IURA has established the following minimum standards for the project: A. Urban Design: prohibition of the following exterior building façade materials unless the Planning Board finds such materials enhance the design of the building: •EIFS (Exterior Insulation & Finishing System), such as “Dryvit” or other stucco- like finishes •Concrete masonry units, including split-face cement block; J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 B. Job Creation: creation of at least 33 full-time equivalent jobs; C. Wages/Salaries: •Living Wage Positions - Creation of a minimum of 11 full-time employment positions paid at least a “living wage (currently $12.62/hour with employer health insurance benefits) •Housekeeping Staff - each employee in the housekeeping department to be paid at least $9.75/hour (equivalent to 120% of state minimum wage); and WHEREAS, the IURA has identified the following additional issues to be included in negotiations with the Preferred Developer: •Accommodations to mitigate loss of public parking to adjacent enterprises; •Participation in IURA-sponsored job training and job placement programs, such as the Hospitality Employment Training Program; •The appropriate mechanism to ensure that the enhanced wages to be paid to all employees in the housekeeping department is maintained at a dynamic level in the future (e.g., indexed to 120% of the state minimum wage); •Purchase price (fair market value), including non-refundable deposit; •Transfer of property contingent upon site plan approval and issuance of a building permit; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council does hereby authorize transfer of real property located at 320-324 E. MLK/E. State Street (tax parcel #69.-1-6.2) to the IURA for the purpose of structuring a proposed purchase and sale agreement to undertake the in-fill downtown hotel urban renewal project at the 300 Block of E. MLK Jr./E. State Street, which agreement shall be subject to approval by Common Council following a public hearing, and be it further RESOLVED, That net proceeds from sale of City-owned land to the Preferred Developer shall be paid to the City, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor, upon review by the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to implement this resolution, including execution of any and all instruments necessary to transfer title to the IURA and/or execute a leaseback agreement to allow continued City control of the municipal parking lot until conveyance of the project site to the Preferred Developer. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.4 Discussion - An Ordinance Implementing a City Residence Requirement for New Police Officers ORDINANCE An Ordinance Implementing a City Residence Requirement for New Police Officers WHEREAS, the Common Council deeply respects and appreciates the service of the members of the Ithaca Police Department, and recognizes the difficult and demanding nature of the duties with which they are tasked, and WHEREAS, recent events have reinforced the value of community-oriented policing to both police officers and the communities they serve, and WHEREAS, the Mayor has outlined a multi-faceted plan to improve certain elements of the services provided by the police department, including increasing staffing and requiring newly hired police officers to establish and maintain residence within the City within one year of their appointment, and WHEREAS, Public Officers Law Section 30(4)(3) empowers the local legislative body of a city having a police force with fewer than two hundred full-time members to pass legislation of general applicability requiring new members of the police force to reside in such city as a qualification of employment; now, therefore BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Findings of Fact. The Common Council makes the following findings of fact: A. While the members of the Ithaca Police Department do an exceptional job of providing an essential public service under difficult circumstances, improvement in the delivery of public services is always possible and desirable. B. Police officers who live in the City will be maximally invested in our community, more familiar with and to the citizens they have chosen to serve and protect, and best able to respond quickly in emergency situations. C. The Ithaca Police Department has fewer than two hundred full-time members. Section 2. Establishment of City Residence Requirement. Chapter 95 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 95-1. City Residence. A. Qualification of Employment. Any person appointed to the position of Police Officer on or after December 1, 2014 shall (i) be a resident of the City on the date that he or she is so appointed or shall establish residence in the City within one year after such date, and (ii) maintain residence in the City for the duration of his or her employment as Police Officer as a condition of employment. Any Police J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 Officer who fails to establish or maintain residence in the City as required by this section shall be deemed to have forfeited employment; provided, however, that prior to dismissal for failure to establish or maintain residence in the City, an officer shall be given notice of the issue of his or her place of residence, and an opportunity to submit documentation regarding his or her place of residence, including federal or state tax returns, deeds or leases for real property, utility bills, driver’s license and vehicle registration, and voter registration cards. B. Notice and Acknowledgement of Qualification. (1) A copy of this Section shall be provided to each individual subject to it prior to his or her appointment as a Police Officer. However, a failure to do so shall not affect the application of this Section to any Police Officer appointed on or after December 1, 2014. (2) Prior to being appointed as a Police Officer, each person subject to this Section shall submit a signed acknowledgement, in a form established by the Director of Human Resources or his or her designee, affirming that the individual: (i) is or expects to be a resident of the City no later than one year after he or she is appointed as a Police Officer; and (ii) is aware that a failure to maintain his or her residence in the City during his or her employment as a Police Officer shall constitute a forfeiture of employment. C. Residence Defined. For the purposes of this Section, residence shall mean 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 residence requirement, a person shall not have a domicile outside the City. Section 3. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this Ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 M E M O R A N D U M To: City Administration Committee From: Ari Lavine, City Attorney Date: September 5, 2014 Subject: Proposed City Residence Requirement for Future Police Officers _________________________________________________________________ As you know, on August 25, the Mayor proposed an eight-point Plan for Excellence in Policing. The plan was generally focused on improving certain elements of police services, while recognizing the high quality of service that IPD already provides and the appreciation and respect that the Mayor has for IPD officers. Some elements of the plan will not require Council action in order to take effect, while others—such as increasing staffing—will soon be presented for Council approval. One element of the plan that requires Council action is the proposed City residence requirement for future police officers. Council is empowered by state law to require that new police officers reside in the City as a continuing qualification of employment as a police officer. Specifically, this ordinance would require police officers hired on or after December 1, 2014 to establish and maintain residence in the City within one year of appointment. An officer failing to do so would forfeit his or her employment, but would be allowed notice of any proposed finding of failure to maintain such residence, and would have an opportunity to submit evidence establishing that he or she has maintained residence in the City before any action is taken. The goal of this requirement is to employ a police force that is maximally invested in the community, more familiar with and to the citizens that it serves and protects, and able to respond quickly when needed in emergency situations. This requirement would not apply to any police officers currently employed by the City or appointed prior to December 1, 2014. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850-6590 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Aaron O. Lavine, City Attorney Telephone: 607/274-6504 Robert A. Sarachan, Assistant City Attorney Fax: 607/274-6507 Krin Flaherty, Assistant City Attorney Jared Pittman, Assistant City Attorney Jody Andrew, Executive Assistant CA Item #4.4 4.City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy 4.5 Proposed Policy to Increase the Use of Bicycle and Foot Patrols by the Police Department. WHEREAS, the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council passed a resolution to encourage the continuation and increased use of bicycle and foot patrols by the Ithaca Police Department, and WHEREAS, the Police Department officers who choose to complete training and work on bike patrol are an additional asset to the community; and WHEREAS, these officers on bicycles are much more visible and accessible to the public including general communication and establishing rapport with the community, a method which may b e useful in improving community-police relations; and WHEREAS, compared to motor vehicle patrols, bicycle or foot patrols reduce the amount of fossil fuels burned and save the department money; and WHEREAS, the officers on bicycles are making an additional commitment to their physical condition and strength through this choice; and WHEREAS, bicycle officers are able to patrol areas that are less accessible or are inaccessible to motor vehicles while simultaneously able to move more quickly than officers on foot patrol; and WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes the importance of encouraging officers to work the bicycle and foot patrol shifts; so RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves the policy to continue and to increase the use of bicycle and foot patrols by the Police Department. J:\DRedsicker\AGENDAS \City Admin Comm\2014\9/17/14 CA Agenda.docx 9/17/14 Whereas the Ithaca Police Department officers who choose to complete training and work on bike patrol are an additional asset to the community; and Whereas these officers on bicycles are much more visible and accessible to the public including general communication and establishing rapport with the community, a method which may be useful in improving community-police relations; and Whereas compared to motor vehicle patrols, bicycle or foot patrols reduce the amount of fossil fuels burned and save the department money; and Whereas the officers on bicycles are making an additional commitment to their physical condition and strength through this choice; and Whereas, bicycle officers are able to patrol areas that are less accessible or are inaccessible to motor vehicles while simultaneously able to move more quickly than officers on foot patrol; and Whereas the City of Ithaca Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council recognizes the importance of encouraging officers to work the bicycle patrol shifts; so Be it resolved that the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council expresses its appreciation to Chief Barber and to every Ithaca Police Officer working bicycle or foot patrol; and further Be it resolved that BPAC encourages continuing and increased use of bicycle and foot patrols by the Ithaca Police Department. CA Item #4.5 To: Cit From: Kev CC: Sva Date: Sep Re: bu In a follow proposed t on Octobe Appendix by admini one narrat pages. Appendix many of th presented vehicle is c The Mayor would crea council the Upon appr in their de in the deve CITY OF 108 East MAYOR’S SVANTE L. Telephone: Email: may Fax: 607- ty Administr vin Sutherla ante Myrick, ptember 11, dget proces w up to last m to be given t r 1st. A is the bud stration) and tive docume B is the Req hese as need last month, costing more r’s budget d ate two Requ eir need for roval at City evelopment a elopment of F ITHACA Green Stre OFFICE . MYRICK, MA : 607-274-650 yor@cityofitha -274-6526 ration Comm and, Chief of , Mayor, Ste 2014 s document month’s City to departme dget narrativ d the four qu nt back to C quest above t ded to show t department e in repairs t delivered to c uests Above these reques y Administra after the Ma f these forms eet Ithaca, N AYOR 01 aca.org MEMO mittee f Staff even Thayer, ts for departments y Administra ents upon the ve documen uestions disc Council and w the Mayor’s their need ab t X had to lo then it worth council coul e the Mayor’ sts in a unifo ation, I will yor releases s.I look forw New York 1 ORAND , City Contro ation meetin e Mayors bu nt and would cussed last m we would re Budget doc bove what w se a staff per h keeping – d not suppo ’s Budget Fo orm and con send these f his propose ward to an e 14850-5690 DUM oller ng, the attach udget presen d include the month. Eac equest that t cument. Eac was presente rson due to so they wou ort either of t orms to prior nsistent man forms out to ed budget. T engaging and hed appendi ntation to Co e fiscal infor ch departme the response ch departme ed in the 201 the 1% cut. uld want to b these reques ritize each an nner. department Thank you fo d productive ices are the f ommon Cou mation (pro ent would su e be limited t ent may subm 15 budget. A In addition, buy a new o sts. Departm nd explain t ts and assist or your assis e budget sea forms uncil ovided ubmit to 2 mit as As , their one. ment X to them stance ason. CA Item #6.1 2015 Budget Budget Review Narrative (please limit to 2 pages only) Attorney's Office 2014 Modified 2013 Actual 2015 Mayor ' s Budget $ Change % Change Expenditures Salary and Wages 298,162319,343323,4554,112 %0.01 Fringe Benefits 160,006169,593169,593 0 %0.00 Travel and Training 4,2463,7503,750 0 %0.00 Maintenance and Parts 0 200 200 0 %0.00 Utilities and Fuel 1,1731,5001,500 0 %0.00 Other 47,13728,92028,920 0 %0.00 Contracts 12,91218,50013,931-4,569 %-0.25 Fees 01,0001,000 0 %0.00 Debt Service 4,5524,4044,404 0 %0.00 528,187 547,210 546,753Total Expenditures -457 %0.00 Revenues Local Revenues -314,926-436,525-436,50025 %0.00 -314,926 -436,525 -436,500Total Revenues 25 %0.00 213,261110,685110,253-432%0.00 1 CA Item #6.1 Purp Tota Prior Is th Reas Effec Whe pose/Short D al Amount: _ rity: _______ his request M son for Requ ct if not fund ere to budge Funct Req Description: ____________ ___ Maintenance uest: ded: t: ional Unit quests A ___________ _________ of Effort or a Accoun Above ____________ a New Initia nt Pr Mayor ___________ ative? ______ oject Code r’s Bud ____________ ___________ Amo dget ___________ ___________ ount Ty ___________ ____________ ype of Reque ______ ______ est Appendix B CA Item #6.1 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 2015 Budget Schedule Wednesday, October 1st October Council Meeting 6:00 p.m. Mayor - presentation Council Q&A Review of Process Thursday, October 9th General staff input session 7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. Council discussion of budget priorities vs. Mayor’s proposal and discussion of potential amendments Discussion: Government Services Includes: Attorney’s Office, Public Information and Technology, Finance (Chamberlain/Controller), Traffic Violations, Mayor, Council Wednesday, October 15th Public Hearing 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Discussion: Public Safety Includes: Human Resources, Fire and Police Departments Thursday, October 16th Discussion: Youth Bureau, GIAC, Community Services 7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. (Southside Community Center, HSC, TCAD, CSI) Planning, Building and Economic Development Monday, October 20th Discussion: DPW, Infrastructure and Transit 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Includes: Engineering, Streets & Facilities, Water and Sewer, Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility, Solid Waste, Sidewalks, Stormwater Wednesday, October 29th Public Hearing 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Discussion: Capital Budget Council discussion and vote on proposed amendments Council motion to move budget to 11/13 Wednesday, November 5th Public Hearing 6:00 p.m. Common Council Meeting Thursday, November 13th Final Vote 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.Special Council Meeting Additional budget discussion, if needed SPT/dr 9/11/14 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CA Item #6.1