HOUSING MEMBERS: Bronz, Kaplowitz, Spreckman
OTHERS: C.E.’s Office: Bill Randolph, Susan Tapper; Budget Department: Kate Carrano, Dianne Vanadia, Arthur Vietro; CBAC/Planning Board: George Hosey; CBAC/LWV: Barbara Strauss; PRC: Paul Reitano, Joe Stout, David DeLucia; Planning: William Brady, Fran McLaughlin; Law: Alan Scheinkman; DOT: Harry Stanton, Bill Leverence, Chris Burkart, Rob Bracchitta, Patty Chemka, Richard Stiller, Kathy Napolitano; Airport: Joel Russell; DPW: Hugh Greechan; BOL: Legislator Ryan, Barbara Dodds, Sally Schecter, Robert Boland, Chris Chang, Tina Seckerson
Chairman Wishnie called the Budget Committee meeting to order at 10:15 a.m.
DISCUSSION:
MINUTES: On motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Swanson, the motion to approve the Minutes of October 30, 2000 was carried by a vote of 6-0.
C) BOND ACTS:
7. RMAC1: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $2,260,000 in bonds – Macy Park and Woodlands Lake. (8/1/00)
· Previous discussion was had on this item.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES - NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 2
· Mr. Kaplowitz asked about the dredging of the lake and raising the ball fields with regard to the possibility of flooding to the area south of Macy Park. The response was that the fill coming out of Woodlands Lake will be pumped to the other side of the street. The way it is designed the water will go north into the river, not south into the rest of the park. PRC has met with the Village Engineer as well as the Village Manager on this matter.
· Mr. Kaplowitz asked about the impact on critical area, specifically the increase in pervious surfaces within the park. Commissioner Stout responded that it is on the Cantina side of the park. There is an old parking lot that is going to be removed and made into a field.
· Mrs. Swanson asked if permits were obtained from the DEC and the Army Corps of Engineers for the dredging of Woodlands Lake. They were.
· Mrs. Swanson stressed her concern with regard to possible odors from the dredging of the lake. Commissioner Stout stated that there isn’t a residence within a half mile of where this work will take place.
· $100,000 for design: The design for dredging has been completed and ready to go to bid. Landscaping will done in-house.
On motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Young, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
8. RTB04: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $200,000 in bonds – Tibbetts Brook Park Site Work. (8/1/00)
· To finance the rehabilitation of an existing playground at Tibbetts Brook Park, which will include new park benches, picnic tables and plantings.
On motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Young, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
6. RGC10: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $1,705,000 in bonds – Sprain Lake Golf Course Rehab. (8/1/00)
· To finance the rehabilitation of the Sprain Lake Golf Course.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES - NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 3
· The rehabilitation of the golf course tees and greens will consist of reconstructing and enlarging of tees and greens, including grading, topsoil, drainage improvements, and re-establishment of lawns, regrading fairways, reconstructing sand bunkers and establishing various cart path connections throughout the course and associated site work.
· Mr. Kaplowitz asked if to get longer usage out of these tees will they be rotated more? Commissioner Stout stated that to try to correct some of the problem they were having is to make larger tees in multiple tee locations so they can be rotated.
On motion of Legislator Young, seconded by Legislator Kaplowitz, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
3. RB027: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $200,000 in bonds – Halstead Avenue, Harrison. (8/1/00)
· Required to finance the design of pavement repairs and resurfacing of approximately 1.9 miles of Halstead Avenue, including improvements to traffic control devices.
· This project extends from Hunter Street in Harrison to North Street in Rye.
On motion of Legislator Young, seconded by Legislator Kaplowitz, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 5-0 with Legislator Swanson out for the vote.
COMMITTEE ON HOUSING:
Chair Bronz called he Committee on Housing to order at 10:30 a.m.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 4
A) COMMUNICATIONS - COUNTY EXECUTIVE:
1. Hoover Road Affordable Housing Development: Legislation authorizing the County to enter into an intermunicipal agreement with the City of Yonkers and Hoover Road, LLC, in connection with the Housing Implementation Fund Project known as the Hoover Road Affordable Housing Development. Authorization of the issuance of bonds in the amount of $256,850 to provide funds for infrastructure improvements is included. (9/26/00 – Referred by Chairman; 10/16/00 referred by BOL) (Also referred to Housing)
· This item was discussed at a previous B&A meeting.
· Mr. Brady of the Planning Department distributed a memo (on file) with answers to questions that were asked at the previous meeting. Some of the matters addressed in the memo are as follows:
Ø Width of Road: The proposed width of Delia court will meet City standards.
Ø Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yonkers: A letter (dated January 18, 2000) from Mr. Raymond Fitzpatrick, Esq., Attorney for the City of Yonkers, was attached addressing the matter of the 1996 Yonkers City Council Resolution. According to the letter the resolution is considered valid for the current application to the County or HIF funding, particularly since the size of the development has not increased in size and amount of funding requested.
Ø Minority Contractors: Letters (on file) from Mr. Timothy Williams of the Minority Contractors Association of Westchester Inc. to Mr. Peter Cantillo of Westhab regarding the Association’s participation in the Hoover Road Project.
Ø SEQR: Materials previously submitted to the Board include a SEQR Status Sheet explaining that this project is a Type II action due tot he project being undertaken to implement the federal housing desegregation order known as the 1986 Housing Remedy Order. An Environmental Assessment Form was, therefore, not necessary to be prepared and approved by the Board.
· Mrs. Stewart-Cousins asked who the current President is of the Minority Contractors Association. Mr. Brady was not sure and said he would find out. She noted that there is a list of Minority Contract members but doesn’t state what their commitment is to using minorities in terms of this particular project and as it relates to the funds that we are planning to contribute.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 5
· Mr. Mosiello stated that he is opposed to the Hoover Road Project as well as the Sprain Lakes Affordable Housing Project. Specifically he has an objection to each of these projects. Preliminarily his objection had to do with fire equipment access and the width of the roadway, which it now appears that the City has addressed. There is one question he had, although addressed, has not been answered to his satisfaction. That is the Resolution of the Yonkers City Council, which was done in 1996. Three of those Council members are no longer members of the City Council and while it certainly may give a sense of the City Council in 1996, it does not give a sense of the City Council today. He stated that is his primary objection at the moment.
· Mrs. Stewart-Cousins requested a breakdown of the median income requirements. Mr. Brady responded that the Hoover Road Development will consist of 10 two family townhouses. Five of the townhouses will be considered affordable. The highest affordability level goes up to 90% of the County’s median income. All of the owners and tenants will be between 50% and 90% of the County’s median income level.
7. Sprain Lakes Affordable Housing Project: Proposed legislation authorizing a Housing Implementation Fund Project known as Sprain Lake Estates Affordable Housing Development. (10/16//00) (Also referred to Housing)
· The City’s Rory O’Moore Park and the County’s Sprain Lake Golf Course are directly adjacent to this property.
· The City submitted an HIF application requesting the County provide funds for the construction of public infrastructure improvements including, but not limited to, the construction of sewer and water lines, road and curbs, storm drainage, grading, appurtenant landscaping and engineering.
· The project will consist of 34 single family homes (17 of which will be affordable)
· The amount requested ($510,000) is approximately 1/3 the total cost of these infrastructure improvements. Additional funding for the project will be provided from the Yonkers Housing Trust Fund ($938,535), Federal Home Loan Bank ($130,000), and the New York State Affordable Housing Corporation ($425,000).
· The City will construct, on behalf of the County, the infrastructure improvements and will be responsible for the costs of operation and maintenance of the improvements.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 6
· The County will own all of the infrastructure improvements upon completion for the life of the County bonds.
· Access from East Grassy Sprain Road, north of the Yonkers Police Station
· The County Attorney stated that the dededication of the Rory O’Moore Park portion of this development was not without controversy. In 1997, the Board authorized the waiver of the County’s converter clause based on the Mayor’s promise to devote an additional 25 acres of parkland to the City in the place of the 3 acres that this project would consume. There is a dispute between the County and the City, and the City and the Federated Conservationists, as to whether the City has met its obligations under the promise that was made by the Mayor. Essentially, the County, as well as the Federated Conservationists, have taken the position that City has not met its obligation. The City believes that it has. There was one bone of contention between the County and the Federated Conservationists, which was the Federated Conservationists believe that the remedy for the breech by Yonkers was to give back the 3 acres. The County took the position that the remedy was for Yonkers to come up with the 25 acres. What essentially happened was that the Federated Conservationists brought a lawsuit. It was removed to Federal Court by Yonkers on the belief that what the Federated Conservationists were doing was trying to disrupt the affordable housing plan for the City. On that basis Judge Sands, who is the Judge who was supervising this issue in the Yonkers matter, took jurisdiction of the case and essentially the Judge concluded along the lines the County had taken. He said he wasn’t really going to get into the question of whether Yonkers did or didn’t meet its obligation, but if Yonkers didn’t meet its obligation, he perceived the remedy as being Yonkers coming up with the additional 25 acres, not for a return of the 3 acres. In the process of rendering his opinion, the Judge said two things of great significance. One is that he made it very clear in his opinion this site should be used for affordable housing and nothing else. He essentially issued an injunction against the Federated Conservationists or anyone associated with them from any more challenging of the use of this site for non-housing purposes. Secondly, he indicated his exasperation or frustration at the fact that to this point no housing has been constructed and essentially issued a warning to all involved that unless there was going to be action on the housing front the Judge was going to start directing more positive forms of action. Mr. Scheinkman stated that he has some concerns about this issue going to Federal Court with the County getting involved because this is the first time that we have been directly involved before Judge Sands. The City has taken the position in the discussions that went
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 7
· on before the Judge that the County was somehow at fault or not timely in providing the infrastructure money that is being discussed today. He further stated that there are still some outstanding actions that the City has to take in order to make this happen. It is his view that assuming that the Legislature is comfortable with this project, that it should move forward as quickly as possible because he has concerns for the potential of the County being involved in this situation on an on-going basis if the Judge perceives that we are not meeting the commitment that the Judge believes the County made for the $510,000 for funding for this project. What Judge Sands Did in addition to issuing the injunction was return the balance of the Federated Conservationists case to State Court. We have outstanding a claim against the City in which we contend that the City has to come up with the 25 additional acres. No matter what happens with this we intend to pursue that litigation. If the State Court were to conclude that Yonkers is right in its position then Yonkers will have met its obligation and no further action would be required. On the other hand, if we’re right, we would intend to pursue this to get an injunction and order from the State Court against the City requiring the City to come up with the additional 25 acres. The County Attorney assured the Committee that the 25 acre issue is not being forgotten about or being swept under the rug. The County does not believe that the City has met its obligation.
· Mr. Scheinkman stated that they asked the City for a list of what the 25 acres consisted of. They gave the County a list of 5 relatively small strips of property and one big strip of property. The big strip of property is the property known as Mariner’s Point. The Mariner’s Point property was actually acquired by the City a year earlier (in 1996) with a resolution from the City Council saying they were buying it with ETPA money as parkland. The dispute is that the County says that was bought in 1996 and can’t be counted towards the Mayor’s pledge which wasn’t made until 1997. The City says that the Mayor has this property in his head and he believed he could count this when he made his pledge.
· Mr. Scheinkman stated that this legislation has nothing to do with the 25 acres. It would be a mistake to link the two issues.
· Mr. Wishnie stated that the 25 acre issue should be discussed in Executive Session in a Committee of the Whole meeting.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 8
· Mr. Mosiello stated that as the Legislator that represents that area He believes that everyone can understand his frustration over this issue. He preceded to give a little background. As a new Legislator at the time that this hit, and was a major issue on the Board there was little or no concern relative to SEQRA and to his understanding, there was no full environmental study done at the time and interestingly enough there is a very high water table on that project and a stream that runs into the reservoir. He stated that if this had been up County we would not be sitting here today and he doesn’t believe there is anyone who can take objection to that comment. When there was a vote on this Mr. Mosiello was successful in defeating this project. However, there was a minor change in the construction of the acreage and a request that we do it again. And on the second vote, he lost the vote. He reminded everyone that the reason he lost the vote is because the Mayor said that if we did this they would give the residents of Yonkers 25 more acres of greenery. His two main concerns on this project were the environmental, which may already be a lost cause as far as the Board is concerned, and the acreage that should be returned to the people of the City of Yonkers.
· Mrs. Spreckman stated that she felt questions should be answered before taking action on these two items.
· Mrs. Carsky asked what constitutes affordable. The standards the Housing Opportunities Commission has set has been 80% across the Board. Depending on various funding sources, at times, affordability for a rental development is either 50 or 60%. Ownership is often at 80%. Often it depends on the funding source. We are trying to bring it in at 80% for our funds.
The Committees did not act on these items at this time.
ADJOURNMENT-COMMITTEE ON HOUSING:
There being no further items for discussion by the Committee on Housing on motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Spreckman, the Housing Committee meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 9
2001 Capital Projects Budget:
Transportation:
· T001P: Bus Acquisition Program-Standard Transit Buses: $3 million: $2.4 million in non-County shares: $600,000 in County funds: Depending on the outcome of the transportation bond issue this will purchase approximately 12 buses (40 ft flexible buses, not articulated buses)
· T012C: Bus Acquisition Program: 30 Ft Buses: $3,329,000 less $$2,591,000 in non-county shares and $648,000 in county funds. This will purchase 15 buses.
· T019A: Bus Mini Terminals: $250,000 – Bronx Street – County transportation facility
· T0023Modernize Maintenance Facilities: $2,670,000 less $2,130,000 in non-county shares and $540,000 in county funds.
· A0025: Electrical System Upgrade: $200,000
· A0029: New Terminal/ARFF/GHE: $250,000: remaining item on new terminal construction – legal costs- outstanding lawsuit that dates back to the original construction. There is a proposed settlement. If the Board approves the settlement this item could go away.
· A0042: Storm Water Management Program: It was asked why this is out to 2005. Mr. Stanton explained that we do not have an actual plan at this time for de-icing or storm water management. De-icing has to be determined first.
· A0050: Security Fencing/Cameras: $40,000: ongoing program
· A0054: Rehabilitation of Various Taxiways: $200,000 county share
· A0056A: Heavy Equipment Acquisition (2001-2005): $450,000 for 2001. On-going program
C) BOND ACTS:
4. RB069: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $505,000 in bonds – Broadway, North Castle. (8/1/00)
· Required to finance the rehabilitation of Broadway in North Castle.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 10
· Project involves the reconstruction of approximately .4 miles of road from Route 22 to Kensico Dam Plaza.
· Scope of work includes installation of paved shoulders, concrete curbing, rebuilding the existing sidewalk, drainage system of catch basins and manholes, lighting repairs, safety improvements and resurfacing.
· The estimated total is $1,750,000 to be financed with $1,495,000 in non-County funds authorized by ISTEA 21 legislation and $505,000 in bonds.
· The proposed bonding legislation amends bond act 34-1999, which authorized the issuance of bonds in the amount of $250,000 for the design of this project.
· The proposed bonding legislation modifies the authorization from preparation of plans to construction, corrects the cited location of the work from the Town of New Castle to the Town of North Castle and increases the authorization for the issuance of bonds by $255,000 to comprise the total bond act amount of $505,000.
· Mr. Ryan stated that he has had discussions with Supervisor Lombardi with regard to this project. Supervisor Lombardi has informed him that he has entered into discussions with Con Ed on this matter to reduce the costs.
On motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Stewart-Cousins, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
5. RB085: Proposed Bond Act Amendment authorizing the issuance of $100,000 in bonds – Service Road Extension to Ridge Hill Road, Yonkers. (8/1/00)
· To finance the design of certain necessary improvements to accomplish an extension of the service road at the County’s Material Recovery Facility to connect into Ridge Hill Road to provide for ease of traffic flow from the Austin Avenue and Ridge Hill developments with direct access from the Thruway.
· The work will include necessary improvements to the existing roadway and to exit ramps and traffic signals at Interchange 6A of the Thruway.
On motion of Legislator Stewart-Cousins, seconded by Legislator Carsky, the motion to approve this item was carried by a vote of 6-0.
COMMITTEE ON BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
MINUTES – NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PAGE 11
11. Repeal of Bond Acts: Legislative Package containing three acts which would repeal Bond Acts for financing various capital projects previously adopted by this Honorable Board. (10/2/00)
· This package contains three acts which would repeal bond acts for financing various capital projects previously adopted by the Board. The unissued authorizations contained in the bond acts are not necessary since the projects have been financed with cash. All are sewer district projects as follows:
Ø Bond Act 10-2000: $850,000 in bonds to pay the cost of the replacement of the Primary Gravity Thickener Sludge Collection mechanism at the YJTP.
Ø Bond Act 34-2000: $500,000 in bonds to pay design costs in connection with improvement and modification of the waste activated sludge thickening facilities at the YJTP.
Ø Bond Act 58-2000: $300,000 in bonds to finance the cost of the preparation of surveys, preliminary and detailed plans, specifications and estimates necessary for planning improvements to the Briarcliff Pump Station.
On motion of Legislator Swanson, seconded by Legislator Stewart-Cousins, the motion to approve this package of 3 items was carried by a vote of 6-0.
A&C CALENDAR:
The Committee reviewed the November 8, 2000 A&C Calendar. Several requests for back-up information were made.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further items for discussion, on motion of Legislator Kaplowitz, seconded by Legislator Swanson, the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 p.m.