HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-E&NQ-2007-11-26 Environment and Neighborhood Quality Committee
Monday,November 26, 2007
Common Council Chambers
Committee members present: Robin Holtham Korherr, Chair; Michelle Berry; Dan Cogan;
Mary Tomlan; Gayraud Townsend;Joel Zumoff;Mayor Carolyn Peterson
Staff present: Megan Gilbert,Planner;Dan Hoffman, City Attorney
1) Call Meeting to Order
Chair Korherr called the meeting to order at 7:31 pm.
2) Approval of Minutes -None
3) Agenda Review/Introductions —Chair Korherr stated that agenda item #6 would be
moved up to next on the agenda as Assistant City Attorney Robert Sarachan needed
to leave at 8:OOpm. Public comment and the remainder of the agenda would follow
as published.
4) City of Ithaca City Court—Discussion with Assistant City Attorney Robert Sarachan
on enforcement and negotiations for reduced fines and appropriateness of fees and
fine structure Public Comment
Chair Korherr stated that after a discussion at the previous meeting, there was a
concern that citations were not being enforced and people were negotiating their way
out of fines.
Robert Sarachan explained that once a building maintenance ticket is issued, the
ticket goes to the Ithaca City Court. Exterior maintenance cases are non-jury trials,
and many plead guilty by mail. As of two weeks ago (early November 2007), 190
cases have started and ended, and 164 ended with a guilty fee and a payment of a
fine. The remaining 26 did not plead guilty and did not pay a fine. In many of these
cases, Mr. Sarachan plays a role in excusing the case (mistaken property location,
wrong property owner, etc.). At other times, prosecutorial discretion is used to
weigh the type of offense with the fine (ex. A $300 fine for an askew lid to a trash
can) or the potential legal outcome if the case would go to court. Tickets are not
dismissed by either of the City's judges. Less than 15% of tickets are dismissed for
any reason.
*Alderperson Townsend arrived.
Alderperson Zumoff questioned whether tickets are dismissed because the fines are
too high. Mr. Sarachan responded that he avoids this as it rewards bad behaviors,
but there are exceptions. The City's code prevents the City from rendering services
such as issuing building permits or certificates of occupancy if tickets are
outstanding, and this induces many property owners to pay the fines.
1
f +
Alderperson Townsend stated that the student schedule does not follow the typical
resident's yearly schedule. Thus a third offense on a property may be a fall tenant's
first offense with a$300 fine. Mr. Sarachan stated that he does take this into account
to reduce fines. As for out of town landlords, the ticket goes to the property owner
regardless of their place of residence.
Alderperson Townsend also asked about the noise ordinance and how it was
functioning. Mr. Sarachan stated that he was not the best person to ask. From a
prosecutor's perspective, it is doing just fine, but neighborhood residents are the
people who should be asked. This fall, there have only been three addresses that are
repeat offenders.
Alderperson Cogan followed up on a comment that Common Council could codify
that it is a landlord's responsibility to inform new tenants of tickets that have been
issued on the property and that fines will not be reduced simply because the tenants
are new residents. Mr. Sarachan stated that changing the code would be the clearest
way to indicate that landlords should have this responsibility and new tenants cannot
be shown leniency.
5) Off Leash Dog Area Update
Chair R. Korherr reported that there will be a special Common Council meeting
prior to the City Administration Committee meeting on Wednesday, November 28th,
6:00-7:OOpm. She then read excerpts of the proposed resolution for a short three-
month extension of the current off-leash dog area. Common Council will vote on
the resolution at Wednesday's special meeting.
6) Public Comment
Frances Weissman: exterior maintenance of skirting in residential neighborhoods
Seth Sicroff: Enforcement in dog park
Bren Piller: Dog park (written comment)
Linda Russo: Advocating no extension of off-leash area
Scott Lawhead: Support of off-leash area
Mary White: Support of dog park
Liz Constable: Support of dog park (written material);offered dog park information
Stuart McDougal: Support of dog park
Donn Kemp: Dog park should have fence; owners should carry proof of
vaccinations
Herb Engman: Need complete fence in dog park
Lynn Metrulis: Support of dog park
Matthew James Peterson: Opposition to Smoke Free Ithaca (written comment
provided)
Leon Kochian: Support of dog park;impact on birds
Cyndy Scheibe: Support of dog park
Katy Noonan: Support of dog park
Sydney Morris: Opposition to off-leash area
David Nutter: Need complete fence around the dog park
Brian Carlich: Opposition to off-leash area
Susan Titus: Fuel emissions,global warming
2
1
Stephen Engleman: Support of dog park
Brian Zapf: Support of dog park
Ken Friedman: Support of dog park
Joyce Merritt: Opposition to dog park
Jonathan Bernstein: Support extension of off-leash area
7) Response to the Public/Privilege of the Floor
Chair Korherr stated that members of the public should not be upset about reducing
the time for public comment. There have been nine meetings with several public
hearings and plenty of opportunity to comment. The public should look at the
committee's track record as a whole.
Alderperson Zumoff noted that at the last meeting, the Acting Building
Commissioner noted that skirting maintenance is included in the new building code.
Also, Alderperson Zumoff stated that it was not appropriate to say that citizens
come before Common Council to intimidate members.
Alderperson Berry noted that she does not like the fact that the dog owners have
been singled out as "those people". She thanked everyone for their comments,
including those who spoke against the dog park. She also noted her support for the
Chair's decision to limit public comment as it pertained to the dog park.
Alderperson Cogan thanked everyone for coming out and sharing their thoughts.
While he appreciates the opposing viewpoints, he did take offense to the way some
of these comments were worded and does not like the attempts to polarize the
public on this issue. Many people strongly support the dog park, and they should
not be relegated to some area off the beaten path. In response to Susan Titus, he
responded that chlorine is used in the sewage treatment plant but a process is used to
remove the chlorine before the water is released into the lake.
Alderperson Berry added that she would like to see eliminating smoke from
cigarettes as a stepping-stone toward reducing other emissions.
8) Carbon Tax vs. Emissions Trading
Sylvester Johnson came forward to represent Climate Change Action Group of
Central New York to request that the Common Counsil support a carbon tax. He
provided an explanation of the current cap and trade system where companies that
exceed their emissions cap must buy emissions credits from companies who do not
meet their own emissions cap. He also explained the effects of carbon emissions on
the environment. He passed out a resolution that he wrote supporting a carbon tax.
The Mayor reported that she has a meeting with Mr. Johnson in a week and
suggested that after their meeting, the issue will return to the committee with a
refined resolution. This is a complicated issue and more information is needed
before any decisions can be made.
9) Smoke Free Ithaca
3
Ted Sheeley came forward for this discussion. City Attorney Dan Hoffman and his
staff have done research on the topic. Hoffman reported that in response to the
committee's request, he has made a preliminary finding that the State of New York
has not pre-empted the field of regulating smoking in outdoor areas. State
regulations apply almost exclusively to smoking in indoor areas (Clean Indoor Air
Act). This is not a final opinion,but a final opinion can be ready for the committee's
December meeting. Hoffman did caution that the courts have not ruled on this type
of regulation, and the City's regulation of outdoor smoking would be open to a legal
challenge. The City can only regulate outdoor smoking on land that it owns or
controls. If the City intends to do so, it must have a convincing public health
rationale to do so. A situation where children are exposed to smoking is also a
defensible case.
Alderperson Korherr asked if there is any data showing that people are affecting by
second-hand smoke within a certain distance. Mr. Sheeley stated that the only data
that exists is that the Surgeon General has said there is no safe level of exposure to
second-hand smoke. He will look for additional data.
Alderperson Townsend questioned whether the committee must seek out where it
would like to regulate outdoor smoking. Hoffman stated that this is his advice. In
other smoking cases, the courts have looked for strong public health rationales, and
in outdoor areas, it may be harder to prove this nexus. He urged a cautious
approach, as this would be a test case. Once the committee provides the Attorney's
Office with a sense of where it would like to go, they will begin drafting defensible
legal language.
Alderperson Zumoff asked if outdoor smoking cannot be prohibited, would it be
possible to prohibit it on the Commons during events like the Ithaca Festival or the
Apple Harvest Festival. Hoffman reiterated his point about a public health
connection.
The Mayor noted that Chicago has prohibited smoking on beaches due to both
public health and litter. She also asked if someone could have the Clerk's Office do
a search through NYCOM to find additional information. She then asked if there
were specific protections for smokers. Hoffman is unaware of any special
protections for smokers.
Mr. Sheeley added that his goal for the community is making tobacco use less of a
common adult activity. It costs a lot of money to treat smokers, and children
emulate this behavior of adults.
Chair Korherr stated that if the Surgeon General says there is no acceptable level of
second-hand smoke, then why shouldn't smoking be prohibited in all public spaces
globally.
Alderperson Berry asked if this would be something that can be enforced or would it
be a symbolic gesture that shows support.
4
Alderperson Cogan agreed with Mr. Sheeley's concerns about health, but noted that
he was concerned about the impact this would have on business such as bars. While
people do look forward to going places without smoking, many businesses draw a
large number of smokers, and these business could be put out of business.
Alderperson Townsend said that this was a concern when smoking was prohibited
inside businesses,but this was not the case.
Chair Korherr asked the committee how members would like to proceed.
Alderperson Townsend suggested creating a list of where the City should regulate.
To structure the discussion, Hoffman offered to brainstorm a list with his staff. He
also suggested that the committee consider enforcement and notice issues as well.
Mr. Sheeley had created a list over the summer (part of the original documents) and
reviewed it for the committee.
Alderperson Berry stated that she would like feedback from restaurant and bar
owners to hear what they think about the idea and how it would impact their
business. The Ithaca Downtown Partnership (IDP) and the Commons Advisory
Committee were mentioned as other resources. Alderpersons Berry and Zumoff will
make contact with IDP.
Alderperson Tomlan suggested that it would be appropriate to think about situations
as well as spaces to regulate. She noted people waiting in line at a theater or for a
concert in a park as examples of situations where outdoor smoking has an impact.
The next meeting on this topic should be a working session to go over the list
created by the Attorney's Office.
10) Dog Park Discussion
Alderperson Cogan reviewed the Trowbridge and Wolf report and noted a concern
that the boundaries of the OLA were possibly mis-marked at the time when the
study was conducted. He will suggest modifying language to the City Attorney's
Office.
He also noted that the fence estimate includes $1400 for labor which actually reflects
the time that the Department of Public Works will be taken away from other tasks to
complete this project. The real out-of-pocket expense for the proposed fence is
more like $1200.
In terms of broader negotiations with State Parks, the Mayor reported that only one
phone conference has occurred since the last meeting. The Mayor has considered a
mayor's forum of panel discussion to hear the view points of the different
stakeholders involved in this issue.
Alderperson Tomlan stated that she would not support a partially fenced area.
Several members of the public spoke in favor of a full fence, and Alderperson
Tomlan believes this is a better alternative.
5
Alderperson Zumoff asked why the extension was reduced to three months when
the committee had discussed an extension of between four and six months at the
previous meeting. The Mayor stated that she had selected the three-month time
frame because spring is a time of environmental change and the extension of the
OLA into the spring would have a greater impact on the environment. In addition,
State Parks had indicated that a short seasonal extension would not interfere with
ongoing negotiations. Alderperson Korherr noted that she would like to see a six-
month extension. Alderperson Cogan noted that an extension to April 2"d or 3`d
would be ideal as the Common Council will be meeting on April 2"d
The committee discussed the many different ways to manage a dog park and noted
that looking at other dog parks is helpful in determining the best solution to this
temporary situation. The committee expressed its appreciation to Liz Constable for
her research on dog parks.
11) Old Business/Updates
12) Adjournment
Chair Korherr adjourned the meeting at 10:36pm.
6