Common Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening.

Welcome to the Ithaca Common Council meeting for September 2nd. I'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. I do want to recognize that Mr. Keel's seat is still vacant. We are accepting applications. I believe we have one. Thank you, Deputy Clerk. So please do get those in before they close. When they close, you might ask, I don't know, ask Mr. Kerrison in the back of the room. September 11th, you have seven more days to apply, nine more days, excuse me, to apply to serve on the Common Council if you are a resident of the Fourth Ward. Especially maybe someone who is from the Fourth Ward and often attends council meetings might want to apply. And then I also want to note that Ms. Matos is excused. She is ill. Before we begin this evening, I would like... to request that the chamber honor a minute of silence for late Mayor Gutenberger, who passed away on August 29th.

Thank you.

With that, we will turn to this evening's agenda. May I first ask my colleagues on the council, are there any additions or deletions to the agenda? Seeing none, we will go ahead and move the minutes. May I please have someone moved by Mr. Trumbull, seconded by Mr. DeFendini, all those in favor of approving the minutes as submitted. That carries unanimously for August 5th. Now we have speakers before council. Is there anyone in the room who anticipates? There we go. Perfect. Anyone else in the room who anticipates speaking before Council who has not submitted a card to the Deputy Clerk at this time? I have to stop accepting them once we begin speaking. Mr. Shapiro has admonished me to remember to say that, and I appreciate the reminder. All right. With that, and Deputy Clerk, do we have any online speakers this evening? Okay, great. All right. Well then, with that, our first speaker will be Theresa Ault. Welcome, you have three minutes once you begin.

I'm Teresa Alt of 206 Eddy Street in College Town. I am very glad to read that housing is hoped to replace parking at the site of the crumbling Seneca Street garage. Downtown housing reduces the need for parking. I suggest one tweak to those plans. We do not need even more market rate housing. We do badly need workforce housing. In response to earlier council comment calling for more attention to Moosewood Restaurant, I must say I'm disappointed that Moosewood has made no attempts to invite arriving passengers to visit the restaurant. I suspect that Moosewood management mistakenly thinks that bus passengers have no discretionary income to spend. Wrong. I intimately know a Professor Emeritus who often gets on and off buses there. Thank you.

Thank you very much. My next speaker is either Monica Roth or Jan Norman. You can both come up, but I do have to limit you to the three minutes. I appreciate that you know that, just for transparency for everybody else, yep. Thanks, thank you very much. Welcome, good to see you both. You have three minutes once you begin.

Okay, good evening, thank you. I'm Monica Roth, I live on Cornell Street.

And I'm Jan Rhodes Norman, and I live on Aurora Street.

So we're both here to talk to you about the Ithaca Farmers Market. And thank you for helping us achieve the milestone of completing our parking lot this last year.

So some of you may not know that the market has been leasing the steamboat landing site from the city since 1988. and that after our lease was signed, Ithaca Farmers Market vendors did the construction ourselves to build the pavilion that houses the market. All of that with two state grants of about $120,000 and lots of volunteer labor. The IFM board realized that they needed to do something about the parking lot as long as 15 years ago. So after several strategic planning sessions and feasibility studies, We finally took the plunge to secure state funds to lay the groundwork for a phased market improvement plan.

In 2019, we received the first New York State local waterfront revitalization grant that helped us prepare plans for future improvements, including the parking lot. And then in 2022, we actually went forward with a grant that we received from the state in the amount of $3.2 million, the largest DOS grant that year to any entity. And that started the process of the parking lot renovation. We hired lots of help. Michelle Palmer, Templeton associate, was our grant administrator with planning and design. helped us facilitate the whole process and moving it through the city site plan process and receiving approval. And then in the summer of 24, we put the project out to bid and selected Bolins Excavating and Hapsoil from Binghamton to work on the project. They started in December 24 and worked throughout the winter. It was kind of rough. And by mid-April, we actually opened the market again and we're operating in 2025. And so since then, we've been doing little tweaks. It's now substantially completed, but we could not have managed a project like this on our own. We're very grateful to the city for supporting the grant applications and to all the other partners. I have a report that gives all of those names who have helped us and who made donations. to make the project possible. So we thank you and appreciate the, we'll come back with future projects.

Thank you very much. My next speaker, it's a new name to me, so forgive me if I mispronounce it, Jessa Doria.

Can I just let the next person go first?

I have had the question once before. I am deeply pulling into the memory to remember. I want to consistently adjudicate and I don't remember what I did previously. Let me... I'm going to request unanimous consent from the council to bump this person to the end. As is practice, I will always go back on Zoom participants if they are not initially on the call. So I'm hoping that is sufficient. Any objections from the council? I have unanimous consent. You can go to the end of the queue. Thank you very much. My next set of speakers, speaking for the group, David Nutter, which is David Nutter, Michael Andrews, Sarah Hess, Susan Terwilliger, Tom Stern, and Reggie Teasley, which is six speakers. So you have five minutes once you begin. I'm sorry, yes, five minutes once you begin. Yes. It's been a while. Welcome. Thank you.

My name is David Nutter. I live in the city of Ithaca at the base of West Hill. I'm here to talk about the Elm Street PUD and one of the ways it would harm the Octopus Cliffs unique natural area and harm Ithaca in general. I will refer to papers that were placed in all your mailboxes, including pages from the PUD proposal and pages about the unique natural area information from the county planning department, which the city planning department did not have. Tompkins County's inventory of 195 unique natural areas was compiled by its Environmental Management Council and their teams of field biologists. A unique natural area designation is not a regulation. It is a recognition of an area worth preserving. The Octopus Cliffs unique natural area extends about 1.3 miles along the base of West Hill where there are rock outcrops. This unique natural area is narrow, but it is not an isolated wall. It includes land and related plant communities above and below the cliffs. The widest part of this unique natural area is above the congested confluence of roads, the octopus for which it is named. The entire Elm Street PUD parcel is within the unique natural area. The wavy western edge of the unique natural area is drawn to include all of the forest, including on adjacent LACS land. Then it extends west with a ravine and gorge of Cliff Park Brook to Chestnut Street, where forest continues. In the UNA report, the site and vegetation description begins, this UNA contains a steep forested slope with many small gorges with cliffs and streams. And later it says, the forest includes mixed oak forest and also nice, fairly old, mesic, meaning moist, forest dominated by sugar maple, red oak, and basswood. The forested slope is an important part of the Octopus Cliffs' unique natural area. The topographic map in the pod proposal shows the parcel is mostly forested slope. unique natural area report says the main threat is from development. The limit of disturbance map in the pod proposal shows that most of the forest is at risk of being killed from outright removal from grading or gouging the soil or from driving over the roots. The owner, arguing against building another sidewalk along Elm Street, quite rightly rejected, quote, grading that would significantly alter the existing topography. Rejected, quote, the removal of numerous mature trees. Rejected, quote, substantial disturbance to the Tompkins County unique natural area, UNA number 137, Octopus Cliffs. Rejected, quote, engineered retaining structures fundamentally altering the natural character of the unique natural area. Applying the owner's specific criteria to the unique natural areas forested slope means they cannot excavate the road they proposed with its 12 foot high retaining wall, a road the size of Elm Street. A road like that would be required for even a single apartment house. I ask the owner to withdraw their proposal for apartment houses on this site. If they do not, I ask the city to reject it. This forest is a fine example for LACS students to study, but it is much more. This living forest is valuable to Ithaca. The forest prevents erosion on the slope by breaking the force of falling rain and by holding the soil. The forest alleviates saturated soil by taking up the water. Forested slopes reduce flood impacts below. The forest stores carbon in its roots and trunks and branches but releases that as CO2 when it is cut down. The forest cools the air by providing shade, by converting the sun's energy into wood and by evaporating water. Our urban forest is vital in protecting us from deadly heat waves such as hit Europe this year. Cutting down a forest in this era of climate change is the opposite of sustainability. How can that be mitigated? It is impossible to replace the many benefits of existing mature trees by planting smaller trees on less of the site. Ithaca's housing market is distorted by the elites of the world. Building market rate housing here does not serve the average Ithacan. It requires more workers to commute from other counties. It won't create open space or prevent sprawl somewhere else. Housing prices won't trickle down. More likely, this project would serve wealthy college students while creating vacancies in some of the most exorbitant apartments closer to Cornell. Ithaca's urban forest would be degraded. All modes of transportation in the West End would become more congested, most particularly the dangerous intersection and crosswalk at Floral Avenue and Elm Street, and the most vulnerable travelers would still be unsafe. That is the very definition of sprawl. Is that my full seven minutes?

You had? Okay. It was five, yeah?

Five? I think I have two more then.

Correct. Yeah, yeah, so it was five minutes.

It was five people.

Yes, which you need six.

I get seven minutes.

Right, yeah, yeah, sorry. Yeah, we're saying, as I intended, I'm just misspeaking, because as I said to the assistant city attorney, I just got back from vacation. So, sorry, well done. You made it under time.

Do I have two minutes?

Yes, right. Yes, you have. Correct.

Okay, two more minutes. Who is behind the Elm Street PUD? The owner's authorization form has an illegible scrawl and although it is notarized, that name is never printed out, which is odd. The address is in Wilmington, Delaware, but the notary was in Ocean County, New Jersey. Again, odd. The PUD application leaves the primary contact name blank and the list of all principal owners blank. Very odd. The address given appears to be a post office box in Howell, New Jersey near Ocean County on the coast away from Delaware, conveniently anonymous. Are they trying to hide? Who gets to apply to City Hall for a zoning variance to build 50 apartments without saying who they are? What is their relation to the people in City Hall who said, oh please, have your 50 apartments and take 25 more? The project intends to force tenants to travel by foot or bicycle or bus instead of using a car, based on a deliberate significant shortage of parking spaces. Is there any evidence the owner or management of Whispering Ithaca LLC have experience, credentials, plans, or ways of documenting whether it would be achieved? In Ithaca, we see they put a fence around the existing apartments blocking more direct path downtown for bike riders or pedestrians. What other apartments have they owned or managed? What is their record accommodating tenants' various needs for parking, bicycling, or otherwise? If a tenant did not have a car but called an Uber to go everywhere and ordered every meal through DoorDash, they would create far more local traffic than a typical car owner. So there would be need to be some way of checking the validity of the premise that limiting parking increases pedestrian and bike travel and reduces car travel. This aspect of the proposal needs explaining and background information. Ithaca has been burned in the past by absentee landlords who were not able to fulfill their responsibilities. Thank you.

Thank you very much. My next speaker is Zach Wynn. And Dave, again, apologies if I said the wrong number at first. And on deck is Emily Thuchau. Zach, welcome. You have three minutes once you begin.

Thank you very much. I have good news. I attended the TCAT meeting at the library last week, and the gentleman who makes the schedule says it may be possible to create an 11 p.m. Route 14 when the schedule is recreated in January. If the bowling alley is not going to be the new police station, can it please be reopened as a bowling alley? This could provide tax revenue and bring back something that every town should have, which is a bowling alley. Having the space occupy would also reduce the likelihood of further break-ins and vandalism. Please consider putting out an RFP for interested parties to manage the site while its long-term future is established. I sent you two emails earlier today. One contains links to conversations on Ithaca's subreddit regarding the deteriorating conditions downtown, people feeling uncomfortable as much as unsafe, and the general uninviting environment that has developed, particularly on the commons and in the area right outside this building, across the street at the library near 7-Eleven. and at the intersection of Green and Cayuga where the condemned building recently had its windows broken. One window. There are people with shopping carts seemingly everywhere you look collecting cans. I know you must be seeing what is happening while coming to and from City Hall. Conditions downtown are not conducive to tourists wanting to hang out and spend money and I don't know what the solution is. I do know that acknowledging the problem is the first step to addressing it. Please take the time to examine the comments and the links I sent you. I have also sent you an email with a complaint about the City of Ithaca's exception zone I submitted a similar complaint to the county legislature yesterday. While I would appreciate a response from the city manager, mayor, and common council, submitting this letter is a formality I must observe for other reasons. There was a recent fire in the exception zone on the 26th that was deemed suspicious. There is no other place in this city where arson is both expected and routine. Regardless of the city intends to continue directing people to live in this area, people will continue to live there until the city prevents them from doing so. The exception zone and the people living there deserve the benefits and protections of lights, a source of electricity, and other basic amenities like security cameras, which you can be found in this building and all over the commons. I recently walked through this area and encountered a woman in desperate circumstances, having been evicted from the estuary and living in a tent with two dogs. Another person asked what was being done to help them. Please do whatever you can to provide immediate relief to the people living there. Bearing in mind that there's going to be snow on the ground in a few months. People are coming from outside this county and even the state to live on the street. Even if that flow of people could be stopped, there are people here now who can't be provided for. What is the plan?

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wynn. My next speaker is Emily Thuja, followed by Ray Carruthers, perhaps? Welcome, Emily. Thank you for your apology in advance. And you have three minutes once you begin.

Hi, everybody. I'm Emily Thuja from Ward 3. I am here to talk about my usual topic, again, of audits. I'll also let you know today that there are plenty of other topics I do think a lot about for Ithaca, how to tackle the cost of housing, what to do to mitigate flood risk, trying to fight for good government when at the federal level they don't seem to believe in that anymore, the upcoming budget season, which you guys are probably mostly thinking about. But I'm also a working parent. And for those who remember Car Talk, Erasmus B. Dragon. And for those who don't remember Car Talk, my to-do list is a mile long. So audits is what was sustainable for me. So audits, while we're waiting for an update on when the 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 audits might be completed, I'd like to ask what the members of council can tell me about a specific number from the 2021 audit that's a liability for other post-employment benefits of $245,768,936. As I understand it, this number is an estimate of how much the city will be liable to pay in non-pension employee benefits over multiple years. Specifically, mostly health insurance benefits, that's my assumption. Assuming 50,000 households in Ithaca, that comes to $4,915 per household, except that was based on the number in 2021. So given what healthcare costs have been doing, the real number is probably at least 30% higher. We don't know what it is now because we fell behind on our audits. What do you all know about this liability? Are we talking an additional 5,000 or more of additional need above what our taxes are currently? Would it be reasonable to assume this amount would be divided over a number of years, 10 years? Is it a number that's so high because the city is just crossing its fingers that New York or the United States, God forbid, would pass universal health care? I'm not against it. I just don't want us to be counting on that as a definite thing that's going to happen. What if they don't do that? Is that a cost that the city can afford? The $245 million number from 2021 was also a 36% increase from just 2019. What consideration has been given to the fact that that is an impossible trajectory? If you don't know answers to the questions like this right now, I hope you'll try to learn more on the topic, especially when considering that long-term liabilities could someday be uncomfortable budgetary requirements. Thanks.

Thank you. My next speaker is Ray Crothers. And then my final speaker will be Jess Doria and friend. Welcome, Mr. Carruthers. Thank you. You have three minutes once you begin.

Yes, thank you very much. I'm a resident at 210 University Avenue. I just heard about this meeting a couple of hours ago, so I'm not quite as prepared maybe as some of the others here. But I'm here because it's an important issue. This past week, we've had a lot of surveyors up and down our street doing work there and investigating what was going on. I understand they're making an improvement on University Avenue from Lynn Street going up towards Cornell campus. The main thing is they were wanting to put in an uphill bike lane, and I applaud that. I think there's lots of needs on University Avenue in that stretch. I'm more concerned though about downhill bikers. They come very fast down that hill and lately with motorized bikes have even gone faster. And it's very difficult as a resident there getting in and out of our driveways and seeing the downhill bikes. So if they do something on the street, it needs to be fairly comprehensive. And I'd like you to take consideration of the other residents on the street and get their ideas as well. It's a very congested street. I've had my car sideswiped a couple of different times a couple of years ago. It cost about $15,000 to get it fixed. It's because the street is very narrow. It's a very large artery, and it has a bus line that runs up that really crowds the street. Squeezing in a bike lane without actually making adequate space, I think is actually a bigger danger for everybody. The other thing is there's much needed improvements on the sidewalks themselves. We have a lot of people walking. jogging, students from Cornell coming to town back and forth 12 months out of the year. The bike lane itself is very rarely going to be used, I think, compared to the pedestrian traffic. So I think those needs need to be taken into consideration at the same time that you think about the bikes, widening the street, what's gonna happen with the parking spaces there, how it's gonna affect the residents. So all those things are kind of critical. And as you do this, I hope that you have plans to get further resident input on the issue. So that's all I really have to say in an organized fashion today. I'd be happy to come back with more detailed discussions about other aspects of the situation. and bring in some of the thoughts of my neighbors, if that would be helpful. I also think it might be a good idea to try to look for alternative routes for bikes going up the street to Cornell, maybe even through the cemetery space that's there now. That's the space that's not really used very effectively. It might be a nice place to actually have a bike path, both for people going uphill and coming down. So those are my thoughts. kind of off the cuff since I just heard about the meeting a few hours ago. I'm not really overly prepared, but as you can see, I'm concerned about the issue. Highly applaud the city doing something down that street because it's very severely needed. Thank you.

That was a tight three. You said you weren't prepared. There's nothing I love more than being prompt. Thank you, sir. And then our final speakers this evening are Jess Adoria. And if I would just ask your associate to introduce themselves for the record, you both will have three minutes collectively once you begin.

Yeah, I'm Jess Adoria. I'm Dr. Anne Costello. I'm a nurse practitioner, and we both work in Dr. Anne's office that she started with her husband, what, 40 years ago? I don't know, about, on Aurora Street at the corner of Buffalo, right next to Patterson's. You wouldn't know we were there, but we've been serving... At this point over 1700 patients for 40 years primary care adult primary care, and so we have of those 1700 patients about 70% or so are over the age of 65 and A lot of them have mobility issues and were relying on the Seneca Street parking garage, basically, until that was condemned. We are looking at winter coming, and we're just hearing from our patients that it's harder and harder to get parking and to get into the appointments. And we only have, you know, two handicapped spots out front. And we have four providers in that office. So it's just, I don't know what, if there's a plan, it would be great to hear a plan for what to do about parking. Did you want to add?

So a lot of our patients are coming in on walkers. Often the two handicapped spots are taken. So we would like to have some consideration for our patients to be able to park. so that they could come to our office. We're one of only two medical offices downtown, and we think it benefits the community to have a medical office downtown. So we're just hoping that there'll be some consideration for our office, because if we can't have parking, then we can't be there. And we've really tried to stay in that location, and we've been there in that location since 1985. Yeah.

In the Crescent Building.

Yeah.

And in the winter when there's a lot of snow and there's no street parking, and even our staff have trouble parking and would park in that parking garage. So I don't know.

So we just are hoping that either we can get some parking in that location, if there is some, or that some area of that street could be dedicated for our office hours during the day for our office to have patients to park. It's been tough. Thanks. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you very much. That concludes public comments. We will now turn to privilege of the floor, where I know most of us know this, but just in case, where now we will respond to those comments. We can't engage in a back and forth, but we can address them. I'll recognize myself first, and I'll keep a list. In no particular order, congrats to our friends at the Ithaca Farmers Market and friends at the Ithaca Farmers Market. That's a tremendous series of coups that you have all engaged in over the years to secure funding for that. and we're glad to see that it's moving forward and look forward to seeing how things develop in the near future. With respect to Mr. Wynn's comments, I know I said this to him before the meeting started, before the record, I'll just also reiterate that I did share your comments and your inquiry with staff. The appropriate equities are gonna get back to me and I'll be able to provide you a more detailed response. um to mr carruthers uh i used to have to i used to live in cornell heights when i first moved here so i'm i'm intimately familiar with trying to make my way up university avenue it is it is not pleasant i do think that there will be ample opportunity to engage in conversation with the city engineers around what might happen in the future i personally i know we can't always afford it I personally think that a great solution to this tends to be sheltered bike lanes in a way that makes sure that they are adequately posted and protected, both for the pedestrians that use the street and, of course, for vehicles of the two and four wheeled variety. to the individuals from West Hill on the Elm Street concern. I would just say to Mr. Nutter speaking on behalf of that group, I certainly acknowledge and share some of your concerns about some of the environmental implications My position will continue to be that I think it is the appropriate adjudicating agency is the planning board who has the technical expertise to weigh those decisions. But as a layperson, I think what you're raising is worthy of concern, and I think it needs answers. And so it'll move through that process. I will say, as a firmer point, Whether or not this is the right project, I do really support increased density in the city. I think we have reams of academic data that show us that the sort of single family zoning is like one of the worst environmental housing choices that we can make. and while there might be technical elements of a project that might might suit or not be suited for a particular locale we do we do want to increase density we are in a city and we need to uh both for the environmental benefits uh the affordability benefits i mean even in your even in your remarks you noted that it might pull residents from college town units. I don't necessarily agree with that argument, but if that were to be the case, that would create depressing impacts on the cost of rents in college town, which is ultimately, at least I'll speak only for myself, one of my goals through what we've done with good cause eviction, rent stabilization, our ADU legislation, our short-term rental legislation, is all to try to get the affordability element under control. This will also have a smoothing impact as we densify the city on our tax base, right? So these are all things we have to weigh in consideration, but on the environmental piece in particular, again, the planning board, we have the technical review and I am not, I'm going to reserve judgment until I have an opportunity to really see what those findings are. To Ms. Thuja, I want to thank you for your comments. I do appreciate and share the concern. And while I will not either put words in the controller's mouth or speculate about the content of the audits, I just wrote down a couple of data points that I do want to share in semi-response to your query. I can tell you, again, one of the main drivers, as you noted, of city operating expenses over the years has been escalating benefit costs. Health insurance is getting more expensive, not just for Ithacans, not just for Ithaca employees, but all municipal employees, really everyone in the country. And so this is one of the reasons that in the last couple of years We have worked through our union negotiations and our new collective bargaining agreements to moderate the caliber of our health insurance plans. We had what we used to refer to as the Cadillac plan that was available to all municipal employees. We had to make sacrifices at the bargaining table, both sides, but we took it a step down because we need to make sure that our benefits are compelling and we appropriately reward our employees. But we also recognize that that post-employment liability issue is a serious concern, and we want to make sure that we're being responsible stewards of taxpayer funding. I will also say we are not, and I can speak for at least myself and the administration, we are not hoping for a Hail Mary solution from the state or the federal government. I do not think that Ms. Hrabowski would have taken the job if we told her that our long-term financial strategy was hopes and vibes. Um, uh, but I will also say, you know, as I think you and mothers may know, right, I serve on the finance committee for the New York state conference of mayors and municipal finance reform in general is a very large project that we are working on because it isn't tenable, right? It isn't tenable financially. for any upstate municipality including the big four uh to be financially viable into the future with the limited fiscal tools that are available to us and i think double digit year-over-year increases in health insurance is another really big challenge that is yes acutely felt here in our pocketbooks and our tax bills but it's it's it's something that's happening around the state And there is a coalition that is really trying to push on that issue because, again, we have to, if we want upstate New York in general to be successful, we really have to come up with a solution to it. So it doesn't address your question in specificity, but as we get those audits completed, it will hopefully provide you a better picture. But I also just want to kind of reassure you and the public that this is something that we are painfully aware of every time we go into budget season. I have rambled long. Oh, I do have one more. I'm sorry. And the Seneca Street Garage. I think especially with respect to the need for possible handicap spaces, I think that is something we can absolutely encourage you to reach out to, which you're kind of doing right now, reach out to the administration in a formal sense. We can take a look at what options exist. What I will say, just as an anecdote, is we are going to be talking about how we're going to dispose of that site into the future. The one thing I can say from my perspective, until council makes a determination, but from my position, the one thing that will not happen at that site is a municipally owned garage. The South Cayuga Street garage in 2007 cost $30 million to build. we're almost done paying that debt off. It pays off next year. Just looking at inflation, which is not informed by the sagacious wisdom of the federal government and their trade policy, Just looking at inflation, we'd be looking at a $59 million garage, which my math is always less reliable than the controller's office. But I believe that amount in and of itself would put us over our debt load. So I think we are going to recruit the best possible developer who will As incorporate as many Community needs as possible, and I do really think that providing adequate ample and reliable parking for for folks who who have disabilities or otherwise any handicap parking is really important. But I do just want to be very transparent that again from my perspective. We'll see how council decides this evening. I do not think a municipal garage is an appropriate utilization of taxpayer funding, just given our fiscal constraints. But I do thank you both for sharing those concerns and the concerns of your patients. Mr. Shapiro.

Oh, geez, I don't speak nearly as eloquently as you. That's tough to follow. But... I did want to talk about parking briefly. I do think that, and I forget his name, there's a gentleman who used to work for the city of Ithaca and now he works for a transportation company with like 12 letters in their acronym, ICTC. Thank you, Tom Knight. good detective skills. Just three letters. I do think his company or his organization, when they presented to us, spoke about being able to support like a parking analysis. And I'm not suggesting we need to build a new parking lot, but I do think that there is an analysis that should take place because I do think it is real that there are It's not just perception. There is real for some folks that the parking limitations now downtown are very challenging. And I know that we've had a lot of businesses grow on Route 13. But I think it was a plan at some point to have a thriving downtown. And I think not having parking is going to deter some people. Anyway, I more so would encourage just doing an analysis so we get a fuller picture of what the actual needs are for a city our size. I also want to talk about parking tickets because we were talking about revenue in a finance meeting recently or just this past week and just like the need to like be evaluating our fees. And I shouldn't out my son, but he was like irresponsible driving today and he parked with the car backwards down a one-way street. So he got a ticket, $15. I think that is not a big deterrent. And I think it'll be deterrent because of how I am talking to my son. But I don't think a $15 fine is a big deterrent. And I think we should re-look at those kinds of fines.

You received them all this year.

Yeah. And I just think just to add to that, I think now that kids are back in, now that students are back in town, college town is a disaster. People are double parking everywhere. They could probably also get a $15 ticket and then not be deterred. So they'll come back and double park again. So I really think we should just kind of look at those kinds of things. And then more seriously, I just want to say I very much agree that if we're directing folks who are homeless to be sleeping outdoors in a specific area, we should be giving them some sort of basic utility and function that provides safety. And I agree that security cameras can provide safety. Others don't. But I think we should find where we agree and provide some more utility and more safety to an area that we're telling people who are very vulnerable, we're telling them to go there and sleep. And right now it's not very safe for them. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Shapiro. Mr. Defendini, you're next.

I'll start off by thanking everyone who came to speak today. I'll stand in solidarity with my colleague and out myself as a proud victim of our city's parking enforcement. I really, jokes aside, I really appreciate the work Thursday has done on trying to really ensure that our laws are not suggestions, but laws. And I would co-sign his sentiments around wanting to revisit all of our fines, starting with parking, to see what we could do to make sure that it's more... The next thing I'll do is surprise probably a lot of folks by saying I agree with Mr. Wynn on the bowling alley having been returned to an actual bowling alley. But I trust our city administrations to come up with the best assessment of what our needs are and will look to be a part of that discussion with myself and hopefully the rest of the Northside community when more information is available. The next thing I will do is speak to the West End comments. So myself and older person Matos are in discussion with LACS and the school district and we've had promising developments around trying to get the facilities open for a public hearing to take place at LACS as opposed to just downtown. The ball is in ICSD's court. So if you're watching this, ICSD, hello, please get back to us. We'd like to schedule this public hearing sooner rather than later. And we are willing to work with you on that. So that's what I have to say regarding the PUD development. And then lastly, regarding Ms. Fuja's comments, always good to see you. And I would just say, if you have not already, speak to your assembly members and senators about getting on board with the New York Health Act. Although both of our representatives are, I encourage us to continue doing advocacy for that because I would like single-payer health care. That's all I got.

Mr. Trumbull, you're next. And then I have Ms. Schvetz, unless there's other hands.

Um, yeah, thank you everyone for coming out today. Um, first off, Teresa, totally agree with you. Um, public transportation should not be looked down as like, uh, some type of, you know, income based thing. Uh, everyone in Ithaca as a part of our commitment to the Ithaca Green New Deal should be relying on TCAP more. Um, and I use it all the time. Um, to Zach's points, uh, I totally agree that the state of downtown, especially for business owners, um, has, you know, gotten kind of crazy recently. I've reached out to Dominic. I think that the city is trying to do all they can, but it does suck that, Business owners are often responsible for dealing with piles of rubbish now outside of their businesses, and I hope that is fixed soon. To David Nutter, I think the UNA, the Octopus Cliffs is obviously important, but every unit that we build that we don't build near transit is going to end up getting built somewhere else in a green field. it's displacement, right? You know, it's not preservation at all. It's just moving the impact somewhere else. I think that this is a project that we're seeing a lot of back and forth with the developers on. And I think the notion that trees are more important than humans, as Teresa again said at the last meeting, is something that we really have to lean on. I think this can be done cognizantly, but I think that the idea that like, it's more important somehow to keep 80 trees as opposed to building houses for like 115 people. It's just, you know, kind of silly to me. But I do still want to lean on what I said before that we needed conservation easement there. I don't think it should be a suggestion by the developers. I think it should be something that's mandated because it is an important natural area. But I think these two things can be done in conjunction. And then finally, I just wanted to shout out the loss of a local community member, David Kornreich, who's a professor at at Cornell, but was also a very passionate referee for the Ithaca Roller Derby. His work was amazing for them, as well as other cities across the country. And the city is deeply saddened to lose him. So, yeah. Thank you, Mr. Trumbull. Mishvets.

First, I'd like to second the bowling alley, if not a bowling alley, then some sort of other recreational facility. Growing up in Ithaca, I went to the bowling alley regularly, and I feel like there's a real lack of recreational activities for young people, especially during the winter. So I support that. I think we should definitely explore that. I also wanted to say thank you for coming to speak about University of the cemetery bike idea is interesting and i'm not sure if that's been explored yet but i'll be speaking with staff. And as soon as I have some more information about the survey results in the plan, I will communicate that with you and the rest of the word. I think that street does have very serious safety concerns for pedestrians bikers and vehicles, so we should be making sure that whatever we do there makes the streets safer and not less safe, so thank you for your advocacy.

With that, we'll conclude privilege of the floor. So again, thank you to our community members for coming out and speaking with us this evening. Our next item, or next is just consent agenda. May I have someone please move the consent agenda? Mr. DeFendini, seconded by Ms. Schvetz. All those in favor? That carries unanimously. First, we're just declaring ourselves lead agency. May I have someone please move lead agency for the Seneca Street garage redevelopment? Mr. DeFendini, seconded by... Mr. Shapiro, all those in favor? Those opposed? So Ms. Fabrizio, you're on the record as you do not want council to be the agency that makes a decision on this. Undershood. right so that is uh that that carries uh gosh we're down to eight to one um again just the vote on the neg deck now we have a resolution determining there will be no adverse significant adverse environmental impact for the transfer mr deviantini moves mr shapiro seconds all those in favor that carries eight to one Uh, now, uh, uh, look for a mover, ideally one of the two committee members, uh, to summarize and move item 6.3, Seneca street garage redevelopment for the property transfer, the IRA, Mr. When you were recognized.

This resolution transfers the Seneca Street parking garage to IRA for dispensation and seeking a developer, or more specifically setting a disposition and development agreement with the objectives of, just summarizing here, housing, reestablishing a TCAT bus shelter along Seneca, following the climate action plan and ground floor activation. That's it.

Thank you, Mr. Wynn. Seconded by Mr. DeFendini. Mr. Wynn, I assume you also meant to mention that we are putting priority in for the ownership opportunities that a developer may include?

Absolutely.

Worth noting.

Residential condominiums.

Discussion. Ms. Fabrizio.

Thanks. First, I was just going to add that also in this is that public parking is not required as part of the redevelopment. So I just want to make sure that's in there and that we're saying that to the public. And I do have some comments.

You have the floor.

This is the time. OK. Thank you so much. So I brought some notes. These are my notes. I'm going to read them so I can be concise. I'm sure you've all heard the old expression, you can't fight city hall, and I think it's a pretty defeatist attitude, so I don't really subscribe to it, but it is what my tenure on council is starting to feel like, being the one dissenting vote, and tonight is no exception. But I still want to lay out my concerns about the Seneca Street garage resolutions, and try to get you to join me in postponing putting the RFP immediately into motion. In my mind, we're at step two of this process and I'd love to see us not repeat what we did with step one. From the very beginning, the decision to prematurely close the, to permanently, sorry, close the parking garage was made without enough data and without stakeholder input or public discussion. The emergency closure became a permanent closure even without a public vote. And I'm not saying that I necessarily disagree with the ultimate conclusion that the garage should be permanently closed or that this site should eventually be redeveloped. What I'm saying is that we didn't have a sufficiently informed, inclusive, and transparent process for reaching that conclusion. And I think that's germane, if I can borrow the mayor's word, to what we are doing tonight because we risk doing it again. We're now being asked to approve redevelopment objectives crafted by a very well-intentioned but a very small mayoral working group that consisted of the mayor, two elder persons, and the IURA director. And this is a major city asset in the center of our downtown, inviting more people and expertise into the re-envisioning of this site would be smart and responsible. We haven't adequately engaged the public, which we have proof of tonight with Dr. Costello's office, local experts, other professionals, or current market data, which is shifting very quickly as we put more and more new units on the market. We have already been hearing that the vacancy rate is quite a bit higher than it was not very long ago. So what I'm trying to say is that we should be hearing from downtown businesses and the DIA, which was not consulted, from the city manager and the controller. The proposed redevelopment objectives include, as I said, no requirement for public parking, and that may ultimately be the right answer, but it should be the result of a thorough analysis. And right now, there's still very different opinions about how much parking we have and what's needed. I think we also need guidance on whether the city should take on the added burden of preparing the site for development. The objectives that we just referenced, I don't think that Duxton mentioned this, but they also say that the city will take on the cost of demolishing and clearing the structure before conveyance, but we haven't been given the cost of what that would be. or the additional cost for making the site an acceptable downtown space while it's being put there. So before we put the RFP into motion, I think we should do more work on what is actually possible for this property. This is really super consequential. we need to broaden the voices involved in the visioning. I also have concerns about the environmental review, and this might just be confusion on my part, but the lead agency resolution and the FEAF define the action essentially as a property transfer, and the FEAF says there's no physical change to the site, but The redevelopment objectives that we're being asked to approve explicitly say that the city will demolish, clear the parking structure, et cetera. So a lot of boxes are checked with no impact, things like transportation, noise, aesthetic resources, et cetera. But we're talking about demolishing a large concrete structure in the middle of downtown affecting three streets, post office, town hall, bus shelter, businesses and pedestrians, eliminating a significant parking facility and potentially replacing it with a building up to 100 feet tall adjacent to the DeWitt Historic District. So I think these are precisely the kinds of impacts that an environmental review should help us understand. And I don't know if the plan was to segment this or exactly what we're doing, but I want to make sure that this gets the proper review. In conclusion, I just want to say that I'm not asking council to reject redevelopment. I'm not suggesting that we decide tonight what this property will ultimately be, but I would like to see us postpone the vote to set the RFP into motion and instead take the time that this deserves to do more work so that we understand what's really possible for this site. I think we should... better decide what we want to ask the market before we ask the market to respond to us. And so I am hoping that we could move to just table the 6.3 because I think that's the one that sets it all into motion and that would give the IURA, you know, the green light to start putting it out there. I don't think that we're ready yet to do that. And I think we could do better. And I think we should be more inclusive and open. And that's the kind of government that I think people are expecting from us. It's a huge project. It will have a huge impact for a long, long, long time. We want to get it right. That's what I would encourage us to do. Thank you.

Appreciate that, all the person. I'll quickly respond with a couple of things that might allay some of those concerns, but also kind of acknowledge, I think one of the big challenges is that this garage costs money every day that it remains in place. It costs money to the city directly. It is, as chunks of it, what they're not right now. But if trunks of it fall off, it could become a financial liability to the city. And as we've heard, I've heard several members of this council express how disruptive the inaccessibility of that particular block is given its current non-operation. And I think those members of council probably would support permanently rectifying that situation. And, you know, again, I think that the demolishment of the parcel, as we discussed in committee, which, you know, the director of community renewal is here, if there are any specific questions for him, and my colleagues on the committee, which, again, just for the public edification, these are the two members that represent the geographic area that the garage is in. I think we concluded that demolishing this, especially with the possibility, which is not finalized yet, so we're not going to loosely speculate about, but the possibility of receiving possible outside funding to support the demolishment of the garage. the demolition, excuse me, would really lubricate a possible transaction. And it would also provide an opportunity for the city to do something that was referenced in an email from the president of the DIA today, which is, as an interim basis, potentially use it as a service parking lot until such time as development is able to happen. Also, there was some concern about including stakeholders, and I want to just let you know, despite what I have heard, I checked my calendar. July 22nd, Wednesday at 1 p.m., I met with the president of the DIA specifically about this, and I also met with several restaurateurs downtown to talk about the redevelopment of the garage on August 4th at 10 a.m., So those conversations have happened, as is often the case with the body. We don't all participate in every conversation that occurs. But those stakeholders were engaged. I also know that there has been some, perhaps, opinion changing about some of the stakeholders involved. But that does not mean that those conversations didn't happen in the first instance. I know that some folks would prefer that the city build another parking garage. Again, I think we all agree, including yourself, we don't have $60 million to do that and we can't do that to the taxpayer. So I appreciate the desire for more information, but I think that we are ultimately facing a significant expense that will only get more expensive the longer we wait. And we have a couple of things that we know for certain. We know that the city based on the opinions of the individuals at this table, is not going to build a municipal structure there. We know, again, that the construction and demo will get more expensive as time goes on. And we also know that this parcel being put back on the tax rolls would have a positive impact on the pocketbooks of everybody who does live downtown. Now, I share the desire of Ms. Ault and some others who came to speak today that it should be housing or largely included housing. But I think the keyest thing here is, to Mr. Shapiro's point in a previous meeting, we don't want to be like some other governmental institutions that exist in this country. part of the state and just sit on properties and then not do anything with them. And I think that divesting of a property that we have no intention of redeveloping ourselves and no intention of holding permanently, the appropriate thing to do here is to move that process as responsibly, quickly as possible. Mr. Trumbull and Mr. Wynne.

Um, yeah, I strongly agree with the mayor's comments, um, to all the person for retail as concerns. I think they come from a good place, but I think, um, as one of my favorite colleagues who preach financial austerity, you know, at important times, I think this is a move that we kind of have to do. Like it feels like our hands are forced here as far as, you know, the longterm, I get your idea of trying to take our time, but I think the longer that we put it off, the more of a hindrance it'll be done on town. Um, The one question I did have, and this is not me saying that I don't like the idea of a retailer there, but what is the purely affordable housing project is discouraged for this site exactly mean? Is that just kind of like, that's not an actually like saying that we can't explore that. It's just saying discouraged. I just didn't exactly understand that phrasing and wanted to, you know. ask on behalf of my constituent here?

Yeah, so a couple of things. One, of course, if my answer is insufficient, as I mentioned, Mr. Bond is here to answer any technical questions. But I think given a recognition of some of the challenges that have obtained to a particular capital A, which has a legal distinction, capital A affordable housing in the immediate vicinity of that project, that this site was encouraged as could be workforce, could be market, alternative housing, could have a component of it. But I think, and I'm now speaking for myself, I think philosophically, the most appropriate way to handle mixed income in general is to really marble affordable workforce market throughout every neighborhood of the city. You don't want to over concentrate one thing in a particular neighborhood because it creates negative externalities elsewhere or in that particular neighborhood. So I think the intent of the committee, and they can speak for themselves, was to say, A purely capital A, as defined by HUD, a housing project here would be discouraged, but other types of affordable or lowercase affordable, meaning regular folks can just afford it, would not be included in that definition, would not be excluded or discouraged. Awesome. Great clarification. Thank you. Mr. Wynn.

Yeah, I think you articulate that perfectly. I think the objectives are sufficiently broad that people can still be, interested parties can still be quite creative. And so if they brought before us a fully affordable, capital affordable housing project that some other components that are worthwhile, we would absolutely consider it. You know, we've already Leveraged city property in the past for a purely affordable housing. And so we're looking for something a little different on this site I did want to thank Nan from the DIA for sending us that that email and I actually do want the one thing that she suggested that is pertinent to this resolution and the objectives in it is Maybe be relaxing the building height. So it's CBD 100 currently and I think at the time we were just like, okay, that should be sufficient. Nan says that 120 might be more, provide more of that flexibility. So I guess I would ask Nels if he sees a downside of either eliminating objective two or adjusting it to say like general compliance, but 120 feet.

And while he comes up, this also might be a good opportunity. I think the committee also discussed that we would make it very clear publicly that this site would be a welcome perspective target for a PUD, given that we're in the middle of a zoning rewrite. But Mr. Bond.

That was what I was going to say is we don't want to give messages to prospective developers and then have them run into a zoning ordinance that says they can't do it. So we can. you know, can suggest what the city's objectives are and make sure there is a sense that there's flexibility on the height, but I don't think we want to say something that's contradictory to the zoning. So offering the PUD as an option would be one way to weave that in there, I think. And I think the zoning right now is a little bit more complicated than 100 foot. It's 100 foot for the portion of the lot closest to Ioga. The other half is 85 foot height. So it's even a little bit more complicated.

Yeah, that sounds good. What is the thing, forgive me, the name for the thing that publicizes, invites?

There's a request for expression of interest. There is a request for qualifications is another option or a request for proposals are the three major categories. And I'm suggesting that if the council goes forward with this, have the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency figure out which one they think is the best one to pursue.

So, yeah, I think including or citing the potential for a put in whatever request form would be sufficient. Thank you.

Mr. Kirby's next.

So I want to echo a lot of what the mayor and my colleagues on colleague on the committee have already said. I do want to just reiterate that these are just. Not recommendation objectives, they are not set in stone, so you know these are the things we're looking for like I would like to see the buses moved back there, so that moose would can get back to regularly scheduled programming I know it's going to be a ways out but. that's going to at least relieve some of that and certainly I think one of my bigger concerns was around parking but I don't see parking as something that we wanted to make. one of the objectives because it's particularly difficult to do. I'm going to ask Nels because I ask Nels every time because it rocks my brain every time, but how much does an individual parking space cost to build?

It's $70,000 per space if you do it as a parking garage and a structure.

Right. And so I think that would be a particular deterrence to potential offers coming in, driving down the value to the city, and I think having ramifications onto the tax rules that we get there. But certainly, if somebody comes along and says, we're gonna put it up, this is what we're looking at, I would view a proposal with parking included as more favorable, I think, at least on a ground floor level, I don't mean like the parking on the ground floor, I mean on like a, various proposals ground floor level any further first-time hands mr sewell

PB John Gerstle PB, David Ensign he or him, Yeah, thank you. Just a couple questions. One, PB John Gerstle PB, David Ensign he or him, I think I like this because it's still allows flexibility as you're saying it has objectives. PB John Gerstle PB, David Ensign he or him, That the city will consider non residential project that attracts a major employer, it's possible, though it's not anticipated. So I appreciate that. About the parking, I see that it says parking may be included, but the city is not planning to subsidize or operate a public parking structure, which I am fully in agreement with. In terms of subsidizing, what does that mean? If a developer comes back and says, you know, we'll build this, but we want to put park, you know, and we'll put parking in the bottom, but we want some sort of trade-off for that. Would that be a subsidy?

I would, as also an agency board member, I would say yes.

Okay. So that would be off the table then?

For me.

I mean, if we were to move forward with the proposal, are we then locking ourselves into that? No.

So these are, as my colleagues have stated, and Nell's jumping in at any time, but as my colleagues have stated, these are objectives that the council is setting for the state agency that is chartered as the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, which is a... Still looking for a fifth board member, by the way. Emily, you like to come to meetings. is five members, right? And in addition to our technical staff experts, the agency members make a determination. Just in the way that you all approve the HUD action plan every year, nothing that is done tonight is immutable.

So yeah, I'd just like to say I think I would be willing to subsidize, certainly not operate, but I think I would be willing to subsidize parking potentially, depending on, you know, we're doing an analysis and all that and how that turns out. So otherwise, yeah, this is great. Totally support it. Thank you.

Nels, anything to add on what I maybe said incompletely? Nope. Okay. All right. Seeing no other first-time hands, Ms. Fabrizio?

Right, so let me just start with your last comment, Mayor, if you could just clarify. You said nothing done tonight is immutable. So does that mean that before the RFP goes out, it comes back to council?

No, but I don't see the advertisement. So immutable, not... The objectives. Immutable meaning that, you know, nothing is... We're not crossing sort of a line of no return line

But we are setting objectives, which then will go to NELS, right? Sorry.

Well, they will go to the IURA, right? The agency, the five members of that agency, as well as the IURA staff.

Right. So it is, in a sense, it's very set.

Just to be clear about what I said, right? Not immutable, right?

So what I wanted to get at is the parking survey. And since we haven't really, I think we still don't have a really good idea of our parking needs, I'm concerned about this saying that public parking is not required as part of the redevelopment. And I don't think, with all respect to you, Mr. Kirby, I don't think that we're in a position to really determine if that's a deterrent for a developer to tell you the truth. These are the kinds of things that I hope we would get like a little more voice in on. So I'm concerned about that language. I'm also, I wanted to go back to what Robin brought up about the first objective of saying a purely affordable housing product is discouraged for this site. I would hope that we might be more definitive about that and that it would not be considered for this site. I also wanted to ask if you have an idea of how much the demolition would be and the reconstruction of the surface area so that it would be usable because it could be years potentially before this is redeveloped. So how much would that cost and where are you thinking there might be money

So the way we've structuring this under this resolution is that it would transfer an option to acquire the property from the city to the IRA, but only upon your approval of a disposition and development agreement. So the developer would have to present a proposal to the IRA, the IRA would negotiate with that, and they would have to bring a proposal back to you for your approval. At that point, the property would convey. Up to that point in time, the city will retain ownership maintenance responsibility and options for use of the property. So it really will remain with the city how to decide the demolition and the interim use.

Right, so is there a deconstruction cost that you've been able to determine? I mean, this is a very-

It really won't be the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency overseeing the demolition. That'll be the city's...

Right, so that's what I'm asking. Before we...

So I think you want to direct your comment to the city manager.

Okay, so yeah, before we set this in stone, so to speak, right, saying that the city is going to take on the burden of this demolition, I guess I'd like to know how much you're anticipating that would be and where you think we would get that money from.

You will have a cost estimate for the demolition of the garage site as soon as the contract that we have with the estimator is inked. We're working on that contract right now to get that information. I anticipate it to be several million dollars to take down the garage. It's not inexpensive, but we're trying to make the most cost-effective garage takedown as possible. One of the reasons that I believe taking down the garage at this point, I have two reasons, that taking down the garage is is, in my opinion, of interest to the city. One is safety. We have addressed short-term safety quite well. You can walk across the street or drive by and see the blue netting that is over the concrete panels. That's to reduce any impact from the spalling. But I still think that safety of an empty structure, it's important to sort of demolish it as soon as we're able to for pedestrian safety. And otherwise, the second piece is the site is more DESIRABLE TO A DEVELOPER IF IT IS A PREPARED LOT. AND I SEE THAT FOR US PARTICULARLY AS JUST A CASH CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF SALE PRICE OF THAT SITE. I'M VERY INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THAT THE CITY GETS WHATEVER RESOURCES WE CAN FROM THE SALE OF A VERY VALUABLE PROPERTY. I THINK THAT'S GOOD FOR US TO HAVE THAT FINANCIALLY BENEFIT THE CITY.

I'M GOING TO JUST JUMP IN ON THAT POINT AS WELL BECAUSE TO THIS POINT SPECIFICALLY, I THINK IMPLICIT IN YOUR ANSWER, MR. RECCHIO, Um, some of the restaurant tours that I met with, uh, not only urged the need for the garage situation to be resolved as quickly as possible, that like the absolute worst outcome is what is happening right now, which is uncertainty. Um, but that they would, they explicitly requested, and we had that request reiterated tonight in an email to the common council that that site be used as a surface parking lot in the interim. And neither of those things can happen unless until the council moves forward.

Right, which also I think underscores our need to really better understand what our parking requirement is. And I think as long as this language is in here, I would not be able to vote for this, because this says public parking is not required as part of the redevelopment. I don't think we've established what our needs are in a definitive enough way to be able to say that. And I do, like, I hear all of those arguments, and I think a lot of them make sense. I do think that, you know, there are lots of projects that are done without the ground being prepared. So that's, you know, one way or the other, how that goes. But I also wanted to say, Mayor, that there is still going to be a huge amount of uncertainty about this, and this could still be an empty conversation. surface lot for years and years and years and you know hopefully that's not the case but that is definitely a possibility so I don't you know you said you spoke with restauranteurs and they want this taken care of as quickly as possible yeah but the reality is this is not the great the best time to be doing projects and Ithaca has a mega amount of new housing and I don't know you know how attractive this is going to be to people

Just since I was directly queried, right? I hear your points all the person I think one of the sort of confounding things for me here is that I have colleagues at this table who often bemoan the state of vacant properties that are downtown and how underutilized they are and that that one of those colleagues would be suggesting that we Defer on an issue to leave a vacant unsafe structure in place It's it's very it's very challenging to try to square those things. And so I hear you. I disagree with you. It needs to come down. And while it will cost several million dollars, that cost will also be offset by the sale of the parcel. And I would also just note, while I have the floor, and Mr. Sewell is next, and then Mr. Trumbull, and then I can go back. But to respond to one of Mr. Sewell's sort of suggestions earlier um my personal view on the statement around public parking not being subsidized uh is is that i think from a negotiations perspective you set a very different posture if you say we'd be willing to do this If the agency receives a proposal that says, yeah, I know you really didn't say you wanted this, but here's what we could make work. I think considering that sort of counteroffer, so to speak, is a very different, just to abuse metaphors, kettle of fish. And so... I hear you, I wouldn't categorically rule something out, but I do think that it is not in the city's best interest given the exorbitant cost of per unit parking in a structured facility. It's not in our interest to get the best property, the best price for this property, which I'm also often reminded by members of this council that we wanna do when we dispose of property for us to kind of make that concession upfront.

I just want to clarify something that you said when I still had the floor.

You don't, actually. I was responding to you. You were finished.

No, I wasn't. You responded to me. But I just want to clarify. I'm not suggesting that the structures stay up. What I've been suggesting is that we get more information before we put it into motion.

Which is tantamount to what I said. Mr. Sewell, you're next. No, it's not. I mean, it definitionally is.

Thank you. I hear what you're saying. I'm still not very good at politics, but I do understand the practicality of what you're saying. That makes sense to me. One part I totally forgot to mention earlier was that It sounds like you did take time to reach out to some of the constituents that would have really impacted this, like the DIA, for example. We saw that Nan wrote an email to us earlier, and it's fantastic. It's got a lot of great information. I really, really want to make sure that we continue to have a strong relationship with them. Trying to make sure, because she's really got her eye on this. So if you can just make sure to keep her in the loop as much as possible, I would really appreciate that. She's, I think, been very helpful in us getting a good sense of the needs of the downtown businesses and also the people who are shopping down there. Thank you.

As noted, had a dedicated meeting with her on the 22nd, and then she set up the one I had on the 4th. But yes, 100% agreed. Thank you. Appreciate it. Mr. Trumbull.

Yeah, also, I think that email from Nan was great and I appreciate her insight as always. I think it's also important to remember that we've set priorities as council now. Like one of the things in the executive work plan is zero parking minimums in residential neighborhoods. And requiring the city to build and then subsidize a parking garage in the most transit sort of parcel in the county just seems like a complete like opposite direction of where we're trying to go for that. And nobody's saying we shouldn't have parking there either. In fact, if anything, a major employer or a major retailer is almost certainly going to come with parking included. You know, if you kind of read between the lines there, it's the questions whether or not the city should compel public parking. And I don't think we should. So I think that's just kind of my remarks there. I do hear everyone downtown that's been emailing and reaching out, and it sucks, and it's a hard position to have to take, but it's a condemned building at the end of the day. I think we're just making the smart financial decision here. Mr. Nguyen?

Yeah, well said, Robin. And in that same spirit, I was hoping either Nels or the city manager could, for the public's edification, give an update on the utilization of the two remaining downtown public garages. Yes.

Yeah, I'll just say really briefly first, something for context. There are around 3,000 or more parking spaces in downtown Ithaca. That is broken out about 1,000 each across private spaces, public on-street spaces, and garage spaces in the two existing garages that we have. Numbers for those two garages, and Nels may have a little more granular detail for you, but those hover in the 60 plus percent average occupancy range. throughout a day for those garages. Now there are times of day where those garages do get more use, especially the Green Street garage, where someone may find that it is more full, but the Cayuga Street garage continues to have several hundred open spaces at any given time. Without a doubt, I continue to believe that parking is really a convenience factor, I think that things like handicap parking spaces for specific businesses are critical every single. question that's come to us about a potential handicap parking space we've immediately looked into options for them tonight I forwarded a suggestion of handicapped spaces to our parking team for the public commenters that came forward. Because I do think that on-street parking is particularly valuable to those with disabilities or handicapped needs. So we're at more than 60% capacity for those two garages on average, with sometimes being much lower and sometimes being a little bit more full, especially in the Green Street garage. Oh, Jad.

Right. I mean, the Cougar garage is the larger garage, 680 spaces and a green garage is around 450. So we're about 1100 spaces in those two downtown parking structures. The Cougar garage has a regular basis, 300 empty spaces, even at peak time. So there's, I mean, there is occasionally a theater, a show at the theater or something like that, or a restaurant night where they get a little bit more, but they've never used the top deck. That's 90 spaces up there. So we've got surplus capacity right now. If we build enough demand, at some point we might get closer to filling it up. But then we could start looking at how we structure the pricing to manage that and incentivize other uses. Right now it's hard to encourage people to use other means when there's so much parking and it's relatively inexpensive. So that works against looking at other modes that we could subsidize. it's much cheaper probably to convince people to not do single driver cars to downtown than to build parking. So we might wanna think about how do we invest or get the best bang for our buck in terms of meeting the needs for transit and getting downtown because parking structures are not only expensive to build, they're expensive to maintain. They're basically like bridges in the elements and upstate New York elements are pretty rough on concrete structures.

Ms. Fabrizio?

Yeah, no, I get it. I think the issue with the Cougar Street garages, it's just inconvenient for people who are using those hotels. It's further away. So that's the problem. And it's further away for people with disabilities. That's a problem. I guess I do want to ask if you thought at all about public-private partnership and how that concept might be applied to this parcel. So in other words, instead of putting this out there for just a private developer to do, given the construction costs and just how difficult financing is right now, and given our growing vacancy rate, is there some kind of public-private partnership that you might envision for this parcel?

Well, I think the agency will talk about an outreach plan to get more input from stakeholders. So the Hilton Garden Inn is a stakeholder. They now are parking their guests over at the Green Garage, and I think they preferred a location closer to the hotel. Maybe they would want to get involved some way in partnering with the development somehow to bring back some of their parking closer. For example, there are others who have potential parking interests or other or or other investments downtown that may want to You know, get involved or make themselves known to a developer probably will have a single developer more likely come forward and then they would compile some other partners to work with. And we want to make sure we can convey to them if there's interest from other parties.

So I guess what I was thinking, and I don't really know much about this area, but I'm thinking about the city having an active role in creating housing and the city being a partner in that sort of public-private partnership in a way to really not have market rates that are unaffordable.

Well, that's a different approach, yeah, than what I was thinking about. I think we want to start with the developer coming towards us, and then we can respond back on how the city can assist. I think we are going to try to encourage them to, you know, if a housing project comes in, we're going to ask questions about can there be middle income housing included? Can there be affordable housing included? Can there be senior housing included? You know, understand that mix and why they're getting there. But I think anytime the city, commits to be a partner, we have to look at the offset of the costs and the expenses and affordable housing requires subsidies, so they have to come from somewhere. They're not coming from New York State or the federal government or some other source. We would have to look at whether the city is willing to invest in that way.

Before there's a discussion about abatements or any other kinds of subsidies with any potential developers, would that come back to Council? Or is that something that is totally out of our hands and then what I think that.

Is that a developer come in and. If they can convince the Agency it's a good project. Before they go to the planning board, they should make a stop at the common Council if they think there is uncertainty about whether the Council will support it because it's a very expensive proposition. to go through the entire planning board process and then come to the council and get rejected. So we've encouraged developers in the past to make a stop on a non-binding basis to come back to council and discuss their project if we think that it's got, if it's not clearly gaining strong support, you know, if it's got some concerns in the community to come back and discuss it with council or pitch it. And that's what we did with some of the earlier projects. They don't always turn out the way we best, you know, approach, but it gives everybody another chance at it before they invest several hundred thousand dollars developing the plans to go through the planning board process.

Yeah, I mean, that's just part of that business. So I don't feel too much sympathy about that. But what I do feel sympathy for is the community that has watched so many development projects happen over the last 10, 15 years and have not seen, because of the abatements that were given, have not seen the sort of return to our tax amount that we should have And so I just put that out there as sort of like a word of, like sort of cautionary, like I don't want to see a lot of tax abatements for a project like this. If this is that, and I don't want to see us obviously give it away at a, you know, some ridiculous price.

Mr. DeFendini and then myself. Motion to call the question. Seconded by Mr. Sewell. All those in favor? Those opposed? That carries eight to one. Motion, now we're gonna vote on the disposal of this to the IURA. All those in favor? Those opposed? That carries eight to one. Thank you, Nels. Next, I think our final voting item this evening. Nope, two more. We have item 7.1, paid family leave for certain employees. Mr. Defendini, please summarize and move.

A resolution opting certain City of Ithaca employees into New York State paid family leave. This is about opting certain City of Ithaca employees into paid family leave program. Now therefore be it resolved that the acting city manager is directed to sign the memorandum of understanding with the administrative unit and resolved that the acting city manager is directed to sign THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE CITY'S EXECUTIVE UNION AND RESOLVE THE ACTING CITY MANAGER TAKE ALL NECESSARY STEPS TO ESTABLISH PAID FAMILY LEAVE BENEFITS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY'S ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT, CITY'S EXECUTIVE UNIT, AND UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES UNLESS EXEMPTED UNDER THE LAW. I MOVE AS WRITTEN.

THANK YOU, MR. DIFUNDINI. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY MS. SCHVETZ. I WILL Okay, I'll turn it over to acting city attorney for the evening, Musken.

You guys have been keeping up with this over the course of almost a year now, but upon a request from the city executive unit during negotiations, they asked that we consider paid family leave. This is a multi-step process that involved asking all of our city employees that were in bargaining units to pull their membership, decide if they'd be interested in paid family leave, held some informational sessions, tried to disseminate information before those votes, and of our bargaining units, the city executive unit and the administrative unit opted in. When you are a private employer in New York State, you have no choice. When you are a public employer, you do have this choice. And so in making the determination as a Common Council last year that we wanted to explore this, it also puts unrepresented employees automatically in the paid family leave program. So what will happen is there will be these deductions from anyone in the specific bargaining units, paychecks, to cover that leave, and then anyone in managerial and confidential to cover that leave as well. If future bargaining units want to opt in, they'll have to request it, and then we'd have to vote similarly to do this for them specifically.

Thank you. Ms. Musken, questions? Mr. Sewell.

Not a question, but I just want to make a statement to, um, employees who are not part, who have decided not to join the union. Keep it germane though. Uh, I couldn't participate in the vote because of about PFL. Uh, I assume because they weren't part of the union, um, that it's always, um, useful to be part of the union so that you can invoke on these sorts of things because the unions required to give you this benefit, whether you like it or not. Um, or, or whether you pay in or not, they protect you. And so, um, anyways, uh, I support this thing. There we go.

Tied it back in. There we go. Uh, all those in favor that carries unanimously, which is reflected as a seven to zero with Mr. Trumbull, eight to zero with Mr. Trumbull out of the room. Um, I will move the adoption of the 2026-2027 Executive Work Plan. Mr. Recchio submitted this for consideration in the last few weeks. Council members were afforded an opportunity to provide comments. A couple of them did take that opportunity. I believe those comments have all been appropriately reflected in the work plan. So let us approve this so they can begin the work. I so move, seconded by Mr. Sewell. Discussion? Ms. Fabrizio.

So I guess what I was expecting is that there were going to be some like dollar signs on some of this because I noticed that almost every single deliverable requires additional resource needs, but there aren't any estimates on the cost. And so I'm just wondering, I know that I think at the last meeting, we had said, you had a couple of weeks to pull that together.

I want to clarify what I think you're remembering is that we gave budget guidance as well and that the costs associated with this work plan will be reflected in the budget that gets presented to council.

Right, I'm wondering if those are gonna all be in over target requests because this looks like really great aspirations but I have no idea and we have no idea if we can afford all of these, I suspect not. And so the resolution instructs the controller and the city manager to propose these funding requests and we're gonna be supporting these at the same time that we have given guidance to stay below the tax cap. So I'm just trying to figure out how realistic this is and if this maybe needed more prioritization as we figured out what this would cost. Because what can we afford? This is just a practical question. There's a lot of stuff on here. Almost every single deliverable requires additional resources. So I'm just wondering how you would be able to sort that out.

So I'm going to quickly jump in first. Not every deliverable requires additional resources. Almost every single one. That's an overstatement. I said almost every single one. I think that characterization is incorrect as well. But I also think it's appropriate, and I'm giving a great lecture at Binghamton University on this tomorrow, if anyone likes to attend. The appropriate role of the board in financial and budgetary management in municipalities is for us to say, here are the outcomes that we want. These are the things we want you to do. Bring us a financial plan. And they can't bring us a financial, because if they were to bring us a financial plan in advance of us giving them the directives, they would be presumptively seizing policymaking authority outside of the scope of what any democratic body would want, right? You don't want the administration to make those determinations. it would also be highly inefficient for the taxpayer for them to do a bunch of preliminary work iteratively before guidance is given. And so there is a degree of uncertainty at the approval of the work plan stage, but over the next, Within a month, we will have the budget delivered to us, which will provide us the financial context that the alder person is looking for, at which point council can look at that complete document and say, this is acceptable, this is not acceptable, we will amend it in such ways. And then we have the prerogative as we always do to amend existing policy and modify the city manager's work plan in such a way that reflects the fiscal realities. But so I think I'm in agreement with your point of like, we need to know what the financial implications of this are, but we have to do it in a way that makes logical planning sense for the administration. And this is the way to achieve that.

So let me just ask, if a reprioritization or a prioritization of all of these things needs to be done, how will that happen? Like, say it comes back in and it's like this mega amount of money that we have to put into, I'm assuming you're going to put all of these in over-target requests or these would also go into department requests? Maybe that's what I'm not understanding.

Several of them will likely show up as over target requests, but, as I said in the last meeting, some of them may come with as you know budget adjustment requests this year. This is a work plan that involves this year, so you may see items come outside of the budget process as well, I intend to include as many as possible. in the city manager's recommended budget to you all. Some of those are reprioritizations of existing work plans. I think that's a lot of the resource needs that's called out in here is you're telling me by adopting this, if you do, that I should tell our staff to reprioritize their work plans to ensure that this work gets done over some of that other work. In the last meeting, we also went over that 70% of the work that the city does is serving constituent needs on a day-to-day basis. For some departments, it's higher. For some, it's lower. But that 70% of work, I hope to not be dramatically impacted by our needs here. I would request additional funding that might come in. So I do see some of them being over-target requests. Some of them may already be base budget adjustments that departments have made because they know that this work plan is being considered, and so they've been asked as part of their budgets to shift resources to help ensure these items can get done. So I do want you to expect to see some as over-target requests. I want you to expect to see some as being baked into the regular budget, and we will identify in the budget document Each and every investment that aligns with these policy goals so be a nice little key and some icons so you can scroll through and see which investments relate to which legislative priorities. That you might make in the budget and then there will in order to get started on this work plan in the months of October November and December we're going to need some additional potential. resources in the short term, I don't have the dollar and cent answers to you per the mayor's points.

Right. I mean, no, thank you for that. To me, it just seems a bit backwards, right? We need to know what this would cost before we can say, do this. You need to do this. So I'm struggling. I'm struggling with this. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

But so respectfully, Wouldn't we want to begin with knowing what we want the city to do? You don't have the floor, Alderperson. I do. Yes, you got to put a number on it. But you begin with what is the direction that we're going to set the city toward? And once you agree on that, then you work out the financials. And it's an iterative process. And so... When we are talking about the work plan that we're gonna set for the administration, to the city manager's point, we are talking about scoping the direction of all of these departments, making sure, as has been requested by several members of this council over the last couple years, that they are responsive to the policy guidance of the council and that the appropriate work commensurate to the political import of that work is executed. And if they come back and say, we actually need $15 trillion for an aircraft carrier, as I often like to use as an example around budgeting, we go, no, right? But we can't even get them to that point. It would be inappropriate use of the controller's time to run out hypothetical scenarios before there is even the possibility of knowing what direction that the council wants the city to move toward. This is not the final word on this. If the budget is approved at a lower target than the city manager requests, there will need to be changes and there will be things that get stripped out. And it will be incumbent upon this body to say, these are the things that are lower priorities for us that we think you should strike. I think it's a good point, but it has to go in the order that makes sense financially.

Well, I appreciate that there's the willingness and the understanding that when we figure out what it costs, that we actually figure out if we can afford it, right? And we might have to take something out. So there will need to be reprioritization potentially. I just want us to commit to that.

Mr. Defendini.

Again, compliments to the chef. I really appreciate the work that Dom has done on the executive plan. Myself and some other colleagues got him some comments, and I appreciated not only seeing them incorporated in the new plan, but the response about it that we got, including on some more granular details. So I really appreciate that. In my day job, I'm a program director for a health and safety nonprofit. And so I have to, and our organization's only slightly financially better shape than the city of Ithaca. So I understand having to do a whole lot with a whole little, and how do we plan our situation around our financial crises really intimately well. And oftentimes when I'm developing my programs, I am starting with the North Star of where are we going, what direction do we want to do, what are our objectives that we want to say to not just ourselves as staff and to our board of directors, but also to the people that we're serving. From there, then we often develop that budget and we wind up going with a couple of different budgets for each application because we have to then reassess, all right, where are we financially? What makes more sense? That's often going to get retooled once we get, if we get awarded funding. So that, seems to be what we are doing with this approach and so it makes sense to me and I really appreciate the work that the administration has done doing this. I'm a big fan of central planning and I'm glad to see the city is taking proactive steps towards connecting the different elements and departments and divisions of our city to have a shared vision and how we can accomplish that collectively. So I'll be voting for this.

Mr. Winn.

Oh, I thought you had your hand, Mr. Sewell. Just as a matter of efficiency and I would ask that the controller please do not put the budget in the executive work plan, but the budget in the budget and then we can treat those as two separate documents as it makes sense is more efficient for both of us as a council so that we can set our priorities and for the controller and the city managers to then give us the numbers for these things and we can just as is, thank you. All those in favor?

That carries unanimously. I have a few appointments. I will be moving to reappoint Christine O'Malley to the Sustainability and Climate Justice Commission with a term ending in a few months. Sorry, at the end of next year. Any questions? Mr. Sewell?

I was reading Christine's resume and she has a, or they clearly have a history and an interest in historic preservation. And I would really encourage this individual, I don't know who they are and I don't know how they, like who connects with them.

Because it looks like it was submitted by Siobhan. It would be either Director Evans, Siobhan Hall, who is our sustainability planner, or you could reach out to Alderpersons Trumbull or Schwetz, who are liaisons on that.

Alderpersons Trumbull and Schwetz, please. The ILPC is desperately in need of people, and it seems like that would be a really good fit for this person, so please ask if they would be interested in serving on that committee. Thank you.

Any further questions on this appointee? Seeing none, all those in favor? That carries unanimously. I also move to appoint Kristen Brennan as an alternate member to the ILPC. Any questions on this? Ms. Fabrizio?

Yeah, some of us were not able to access any resumes, so we don't really know anything about this applicant in the next one. On Granicus, there's supposed to be like a little paperclip link. It doesn't show up on mine. I don't know if it shows up on any of yours, but I couldn't access any resumes.

I thought, I mean, I not thought, I saw that the deputy clerk sent a tutorial on how to do this. We can double check permissions, but I know that they were included. So that's strained. And they appear for me, but maybe my permissions are different. You have them? Okay, then that's peculiar how they would show up for some of council, but not the rest. But they are included. Mr. Sewell was next, then Mr. Trumbull.

Oh, I can just speak on behalf of Kristen because I know her personally. She's a local contractor who has a degree in historic preservation. And we are begging her to get on the ILPC. However, she's very busy and that's why she's just going for an alternate. To be clear, an alternate does not allow them to serve when there's too few members only to serve if someone has a conflict of interest. So it really doesn't resolve the issue of the ILPC being short. And I want to Every meeting this comes up, I'm going to reiterate it. We really need people on that because if we don't, aren't able to make quorum, it can hold up people being able to work on their houses. So really want to make sure we get people on the ILPC and it takes a lot of, you have to have credentials in order to serve on there.

So I'm going to start appointing some of these people who come into the audience. Mr. Mr. Trumbull.

Yeah, I mean, I was going to bring up what Alderperson Fabrizio said, and maybe this is a crazy ask to make here, but is there a way we could potentially get the resumes emailed to us if that's not too much to share?

So two things. One, there is no requirement that I provide them. And I would object to the staff doing that because these materials are not public. It's people's private resume that is used in the consideration as to whether or not staff and I recommend them for appointment. I share them with council because it is useful to council at times. When they are on Granicus, that is a document platform that is accessible to council members when they are in email. Not that this happens, but they get forwarded sometimes, right?

And I don't want to make that easier. Totally fair. And I will definitely be voting in favor of this, especially after your comments. But I will shout out my ex-colleague, Alderperson Keel, that the ILPC should be reworked.

All those in favor of the appointment? carries unanimously. And then I have an appointment of Karen Johnson Feldman for a planning board seat that will expire at the end of next year. I talked extensively with Nikki Sarah about this particular appointee. Her and the planning director were extremely excited about this person and gave them a very strong recommendation. Ms. Ferruccio.

Is there some particular expertise they have or like something you can share with us? I don't have their resume or anything. Background in design. Yes.

Yeah.

Mr. Sewell, did you have a hand or was that just a?

I mean, I can read what's in the thing. Oh, sure. Yeah. Yeah. Under skills and experience, it says I have experience as a university administrator, associate dean that included conversations with a variety of people about important matters. My colleagues appreciated my patience in all conversations. Additionally, I've traveled Quite a bit, and I think that I have a broad view of the city and spaces. Served briefly on the town of Ithaca Conservation Board, was impressed by the board's use of social media to keep the community updated on projects. It seems that savvy and timely use of social media is the best way to keep the community updated.

Which just for edification, was from the application.

Yeah, I'm sorry, that's from the application.

Mr. Shapiro, do you have a hand? Okay. All right, all those in favor? That carries unanimously. Mr. Recchio, the city manager's report, anything that you want us to flag particularly for our attention? And then, of course, council will have future prerogatives at other committee meetings to raise questions.

I have a few quick things, too, that came up that are relevant this evening. I just want to mention briefly. One is welcome to our new city clerk, Brittany Greep. She's been attending the meeting tonight. So if you haven't had a chance to meet her, please get a chance to before the end of the meeting and many thanks to Shaniqua for all the work that she does in the role of deputy clerk so just wanted to do a shout out there and there's been some talk this evening and previous evenings about the bowling alley site that we own and I just wanted to share with council I'll be sending you a brief memo from our acting superintendent of public works about an assessment of that site It is not recommended by our staff that we use that site to be reuse that building as is there's a significant sense utilities were shut off to that building there's been a lot of dampness issues. And other concerns with it that do not lend itself well to being reopened as a bowling alley. You know there was food in the fridges when they when they left it and it took a long time for them between when they left it to when we. When we acquired it so some of these issues are not related to the city. Not addressing those issues we have recently contracted to it to patch the roof so it doesn't get any worse for vermin or otherwise, and we have done some significant trimming of the. area around it, I am interested in the future bowling alley in the city, so maybe we can find a way to do that on this side or somewhere else and i'm open to that. As a possibility, but this particular building like likely cannot be repurposed as such, so I just wanted to clarify. That and I will send you those further details from the Superintendent of Public Works assessment. Two other very brief items, unless you have any other questions in this or future meetings. One is around the flood mitigation project. I want to call out some specifics in that. Part of the city staff and consultants from Barton and Lajudis were in ongoing communication with FEMA. relative to the work that needs to be done. We did get granted a 24 week extension of our grant submission timeline. We requested 30 weeks. I think that's the maximum that we could have requested and we got 24 of those. So the new and final deadline to complete our mitigation project is February of 2029. That is aggressive. It is right around the corner and we must be doing everything we can as a city in order to meet that deadline. per the work plan that you adopted this evening. and potentially through OTRs or other sort of budgetary aspects, we'll be presenting the plans in order to get that over the finish line by that date, but we're also looking at contingency planning along as well in case that the final construction of a very complex project is infeasible. A lot more consideration to be made, but also our engineering division is currently down four staff members and we're trying our best to recruit for those positions but that's provided some real challenges in terms of capacity, but they know that this is the top priority for the city, and I've communicated as such. And I just wanted to also call out the building division complaint form, which has received a lot of conversation here at council, and I appreciate all the feedback we got from council members. 69 complaints had been submitted through the building division complaint form in its first five weeks. They seem to be increasing over time as more people learn about it. 94% of those complaints had been assigned to an inspector within two business days of receipt. We're continuing to monitor that specific number, both on how long it takes and how many are responded to. And the seven violations have been issued since the complaints were received. So those are just some initial numbers we're going to continue monitoring over time. Staff are working out some kinks in the system, but I know that's a priority for council, so I wanted to reference it here. That is all I have for that report from from my end tonight, thank you, Mr Ricky Mr crumble.

yeah first off I love that they are already on top of the flood mitigation project planning from our last follow up that is something really hard to deal with, and it seems like they took all of our concerns very seriously. I hope anyone watching that has a planning degree isn't aware yet is considering putting their name in the hat Lisa. Did an amazing job, but that's a really hard position that we really need to fill with a great candidate. So thanks for your update there. How are the Roots responder interviews going?

We've selected the initial batch of individuals who will be interviewed across the full-time responder, part-time responder, and working supervisor positions. And today, the search committee had its kickoff meeting. So those interviews will begin, what's today, Wednesday? Either this week or next weekend. we will hope for those candidates in place as soon as possible. It is a kickoff meeting was great today. I wasn't a part of it, but I got an update after it happened.

Awesome. That's amazing to hear. And I think the community will be excited to follow along with that. And I guess finally, you know, if we can't make it a bowling alley, I think that the bowl of drums still could be used as like a nightclub. That's something that's really lacking in Ithaca right now. And if we included Dominic, Victor, and maybe Carissa. That'd be 14 people. We could have two bartenders on each day and we could be the first public official facing bar run in Ithaca. It's food for thought.

Love that we keep the McGonagall principle alive. We do have two executive sessions after our reports. Mr. Defendini.

Uh, co-sign, but, um, I, uh, I appreciate this report, Dominic. I really appreciate the monitoring and tracking that's been going into the habitability reports, uh, and the work that all staff have been doing on this. Um, really appreciate it. I'm going to be including this in my communications to the, to my constituents. So appreciate your work.

Mr. Shapiro.

You know, there used to be a great United Way fundraiser where they'd bring in celebrity bartenders and Mayor Savante many years, whereas a celebrity bartender. And it'd be great to see our mayor have that. No one. Let's don't play. I made it germane. I tried to I tried to fit it in there.

Nobody wants that.

No, honestly, I know we already approved in our consent agenda some some permission to kind of look at other ways to think about our police department and not think about the The bowling alley, honestly, it makes my stomach queasy and my head hurt to hear that we're thinking about or that we need to do patching on the roof. I want to ask a question that you probably can't answer, but who the hell is assessing purchases before we make them? You don't have to answer this, but... Like we invested in a building that has issues that can't even fit our needs. And I feel like we should have been given better information before we made that decision at council. And I'm frustrated that we made that decision.

I'll actually just jump in on that one, which was the narrowly, the plan on that was to tear that building down. For the public safety facility, it wasn't going to be able to be retrofitted. It would have had to be a complete rebuild.

It's still a building that we're holding on to. Now we're fixing, which is the main point. We're fixing a vacant building that we don't even know how to get rid of at this point.

I will say, just for context, it's a great point, and it does make my stomach queasy as well, investing in a facility that we won't use. We have selected the least expensive route to repairing the roof. The contractor sort of suggested that we do retile the whole roof, but that is not an investment that... We feel confident with so we're more in the five to $10,000 patching scheme, rather than the hundred and $50,000 roofing of something that we might take down and you will likely see. The takedown of the building as a capital project in this year's capital budget proposal we're looking at different ways to do it i'm not sure if it will land in that exact space, but it is something that staff have been actively considering and pricing out.

Okay, well, keep the mic just for one more second, because I do agree that developers, it is a benefit for them to have a nice flat surface to be thinking about. But I would just wonder, is this also the type of project we would bring in IURA and say, can you help us figure out how to move this?

It could be. I'd like to answer the police station question first and let the dominoes fall from there. Fair enough. This site is strategically positioned in the city because it is on the same block as our water and sewer infrastructure. And so there could be some DPW use there over time. And it is also adjacent to a child care facility. And we know that there is a significant child care need in the city of Ithaca and the county, entire region. And so I do think that there are some interesting opportunities possibilities for that site long-term, or it could be presented as a development opportunity. Though note that the city bought that site in the past for a little bit less than I think it came in below asking price ultimately for that site. And so there was some developer interest. The rezoning will be very interesting to me for that specific site to make some of those considerations in what an IURA process could look like.

Thank you for that. Ms. Fetz?

I wanted to say thank you so much for how seriously you've taken the code enforcement thing. It's been incredible. I filled out a form on behalf of a constituent and I got a response the next day. And the inspector, Beth Gerard, I know she's new. She's been great. I just shout out. Would it also be possible to maybe get some more information up about that form, like the way that we have C-Click fix in the garages on the walls, have in whatever city property we have reporting QR codes?

Absolutely, we have developed a poster about I think that the headline is that is apartment issues question mark with like a picture of a leaky faucet and a picture of something like examples of what someone might you might use as a as a complaint form. So yeah, I can make sure those posters get more widely distributed as well and and put up in city properties.

Great.

Thank you. Yeah, of course.

Mr. Buskey, you have the floor. Anything you want to flag on your report?

He wasn't sure I could spend five minutes going through my life. I know. And I speak so quickly anyway. And then I feel like it's the end of the night. And so I know I'm so sorry.

It's not the end of the night.

I'm only going to, right, okay, so for this month, I'll just kind of jump straight to the couple of highlights I have both on the revenue and the expenditure side for the monthly financials. So one thing I want to note here is that I am continuously looking at this, you know, the fees, we're at 58% through the fiscal year looking at these numbers are through July, and we're only at 40% of our fee collections, which is a concerning number. And so I did a deep dive last month and I had walked through some of the details on some of the areas why we know those numbers are down and make sense. I'm at a point now where we're looking at the revenues and we can see that not all of them have been timely posted, which makes complete sense to me because we've been down staff. And we are staffed to a level that just one position being down the Chamberlain's office is... detrimental. And we've had to really, you know, focus on completing critical daily cash reconciliations. We have to prioritize the work required for the 2022 audit, which by the way, the 2022 financial statements are with the auditors and the auditors are coming in October, like it's happening, but there is only so many work hours to do all these things at once. So All that being said, we are counting every single dollar that comes in, and we have the dollars, and that's really important. But sometimes coding them to the correct place, like that is the thing that you can delay a bit, and I do not want to fall behind. And I'm very excited that we have a solution to this, which is that even though I'll lose capacity in the controller's office, we are... staff accountant who has volunteered and applied to go become the fiscal manager downstairs so we don't fall further behind on this. So she's starting full-time next week in that role, so I don't think we'll fall much further behind. So I appreciate kind of the creative solution to make sure that while we're still not fully staffed then in the finance department, this won't continue to be an issue. But I wanted to say the scale of that is not substantial. There's not some big windfall of funds that haven't been put in the right codes. It's just not a great use of my time to do a deep dive again on the numbers that I know are not fully together. be there just in a month or two i know we'll kind of catch up on that so just want to be really transparent about my assessment of the revenue dollars and we'll continue to look at this because i do know we're behind i know you know when it comes to the parking revenues at the end of the day if we have parkers parking at cayuga and not you know because they because seneca is not there like we don't see parking revenues that way because of the way that we you know um the city doesn't run the Cayuga Street Garage. So that revenue doesn't hit us in a way where you see it in our revenue lines. It's a whole nother financial agreement with how the debt and how Cayuga Street Garage's finances work. Okay, that being said, I also know that these reports are not so useful right now in terms of being able to show year to date, by month, because we didn't do these reports last year. So for the sales and use tax, I did just want to point out the New York State Comptroller's Office shows 5% growth for the city of Ithaca from January through June over the same period from the previous year. And this is higher than Tompkins County, which is 3.8%, but lower than the New York State average, 6.8%, which is mostly like New York City and Long Island. But the city's budgeted for 5.5% growth. And I do think that can still be achieved because we typically see anticipated revenue bumps in September and December. And June is one of our bump months. And we saw 8.4% growth in June. And then this past month, July, we were at 39% of expected revenues, and now we're at 49%. So we had a really strong July as well. So I do think we're seeing good economic activity with the sales and use tax. So those are kind of the two areas and revenues that are lower, and I just wanted to address those two. From the expenses side, my big, what we're looking at is just kind of personnel, because we're at 54%, which is below, you know, we're under budget right now, but we also have this large turnover vacancy assumption in our budget. And so one thing I just wanted to point out But that is that we have two main drivers of that, one being overtime, which is now at 80% of the $1.5 million that was budgeted. And so both of what I'm going to say is when we go into the 2027 budget process, I really want to emphasize a truth in budgeting. Because I don't think it's fair to say, oh, we're really overspending on overtime. I think we are really under budgeted in overtime. And that didn't reflect if you see historical trends. And it's a little hard to manage overtime when we do have vacancies. And that's part of the reason, you know, that's why we have to do the, you know, why we have to expend the overtime. So we continue to look at it and manage it. Hopefully, I'm looking to, we're all looking to budget it more appropriately, as much as feasible in the 27 budget. But another area is just, and I have the word buyouts here. And I know we talked about this, you know, in the admin group on Friday, that buyouts kind of sounds like we bought somebody out. This is just the term that is used for payouts of leave balances. which happens both when people separate from city service and also just due to provisions in specific labor contracts that allow people to get paid out for unused comp time or unused vacation time. And so, you know, to date, just in 2026, we've almost $380,000 of expenses in that. And that doesn't show up on any line in the budget. It's just part of salary. And that's one of those things that vacancy savings can cover. But then if we assume vacancy savings, you know, we have to think about how we try to think about that in the budget and that it's just it's a known expense, but it's a very unknown expense. We don't know when people are going to leave and retire and what their balances are. But I do think we can look at historical trends to kind of have a good conversation about that this year in the budget of like, how do we think about these buyouts? Because it is just a known expense. So we don't want to come up as a surprise when we're looking here and saying, oh, we're overexpending. It's known, but it doesn't have its own line item. So those are my comments on major drivers right now or trends in the expenses and revenues. And then my very other quick things are that I did promise in this, I said that I was going to very much try to have the bands reimbursement update for this meeting, but I'm very, because we're working on 27 budget at the same time and we're working on the debt service, I think that it will be a much more accurate picture of actually what's going to be in the 27 request if I have a couple more weeks to finalize it. So I did ask us for a couple more weeks and my plan is to bring that back to council on September 16th. All the debt information is updated here in the report as well. And like I said, with the audit, we had a kickoff meeting with Drescher and Malecki, and like I said, they will be on site. So it's happening, and we are excited to get audited financial statements by the end of the year.

Thank you so much. Any questions for Ms. Robusty?

That's so fast. I'm so sorry.

All right, well, thank you very much. With that, I'll entertain a motion to enter into executive session to discuss the personnel matter. That is Miss Fabrizio, seconded by Mr. DeFendini. All those in favor? That carries unanimously. We can go to my office. May I have motion to exit executive session? Trumbull, DeFendini, all those in favor? Carries unanimously. I am introducing a resolution authorizing certain recruitment and retention benefits for the human resources specialist candidate. I will read the resolves. The entire resolution will be entered into the record. Therefore, now be it resolved that the Common Council hereby authorizes the granting of an initial sick leave balance of 200 hours to the candidate upon appointment to the position of Human Resources Specialist. Be it further resolved that the Common Council hereby waives the 10-year continuous service requirement set forth in Section 4.4 of the City of Ithaca Human Resources Manual for the candidate upon the appointment to Human Resources Specialist position, and in its place, establishes eight consecutive years of continuous employment with the City of Ithaca as a service requirement for the eligibility of retiree health insurance coverage subject to all other applicable eligibility requirements for such coverage, and be it further resolved that the candidate, should the candidate separate from the city prior to completing eight years of continuous service, the candidate should not be eligible for retiree health insurance coverage pursuant to this resolution, and be it further resolved, be it finally resolved, that their benefits authorized herein are granted solely in connection with the candidate's appointment to the human resources specialist position as a recruitment and retention incentive approved by Common Council and shall not establish precedent for any other employees absent further action of the Common Council. I so move. Seconded by Mr. DeFendini. All those in favor? Unanimous. May I have a motion to enter a new executive session to discuss collective bargaining? Mr. Devendini, Ms. Schvetz, all those in favor? That carries unanimously. My office, please.

May have a motion to exit executive session.

Moved by Mr. Trumbull, seconded by Mr. Kirby. All those in favor? That carries unanimously. With no further business, we are adjourned.