Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency
Board of Directors Meeting ApprovedMinutes
September 10, 2015
Tompkins County Legislative Offices
121 E. Court Street, Ithaca, NY
Present: JimDennis, Martha Robertson, Jennifer Tavares, Svante Myrick, Will Burbank
Excused:Grace Chiang, Nathan Shinagawa
Staff Present:Heather McDaniel, Ina Arthur (recording), Mariette Geldenhuys, Michael Stamm
Guests Present:Phil Proujansky (209-215 Dryden Associates), Paul Mazzarella, Joe Bowes (INHS), Max Steinhardt, Jodi Denman (CBORD Group)
CALL TO ORDERThe meeting was called to order at 4:05 PM
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR
Stacey Black, Business Development Coordinator, IBEW Local 241 – My name is Stacey Black and I am the Business Development Coordinator with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union #241, based here in Ithaca. Thank you for the opportunity to address you here again today. Much discussion and considerable effort has been invested in the subject of including the use of local labor on projects that receive tax abatements or bonding from the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency. Tompkins County Area Development, on behalf of the IDA, have been researching the subject and are preparing to present a policy to the IDA for their consideration. There are differing views on this subject, how it should function, what is considered “local” and so on. At this time, I would like to present my suggestion, in broad strokes, how that policy should be shaped.
- Developers that are seeking a tax abatement or bonding from the TCIDA will be required to invest in local labor on their project.
- 95% of the workers on the project need to be residents of the following counties: Cayuga, Chemung, Cortland, Seneca, Schuyler, Tioga and Tompkins. I would refer to this area as the Local Labor Area (Tompkins County and the counties that touch it).
- 5% of the workers on the project may come from outside the Local Labor Area. This accommodates trades that have few if any workers that reside in the Local Labor Area.
- Construction management staff such as non-working foreman, general foreman, supervisors, project managers from the General Contractor and Sub Contractor agencies will not be counted as being part of the workers included in this policy. Management staff that work with the tools in the field will be considered a worker and shall be counted as such. Support staff that handles tools and materials will be counted as a worker. To the point, if they pick up tools, work with materials, they are to be considered a worker.
- A report shall be created by the contractors and delivered by the 15th of each month showing all the workers and management on site. Including workers and management in the report ensures that consideration is given to every person on the site, and allows for independent confirmation of each person’s classification. The report will contain each worker’s name and address, allowing confirmation that the worker lives with the Local Labor Area.
If the contractors on the project do not comply with the local labor requirements, the developer will be held responsible and will face potential penalties such as claw-back proceedings.
As a reminder, this is a broad strokes presentation, and further considerations and alterations may be necessary. These suggestions would represent a move in a positive direction in providing a community benefit, an investment in our community that would employ many local workers.
I’ve spoken in previous meetings on how not having a local labor policy can harm workers from our community. In the last IDA meeting, we heard from at least one worker who is potentially losing his home because he can’t get a job working on projects in our community. That’s a profound statement considering all the work I’ve observed in our city and surrounding county. A local taxpayer, unable to find work in his own home community. Local workers are being harmed right now. Please give consideration to policies presented to the IDA, how the policy will help local workers feed their families, save their homes, and let’s invest in our community’s greatest asset – our own county residents.
Will Burbank commented that he was not at the last IDA meeting. He mentioned that two months ago he brought up the subject of a moratorium on considering projects. Now he feels that there has been progress by the City on reviewing and updating its CIITAP policy as well as progress with the IDA’s local labor task force. Therefore, he will not be suggesting a moratorium on project consideration.
Ms. Robertson commented that the City’s CIITAP policy only applies to projects in a section of the city of Ithaca whereas an IDA local labor policy would apply to all IDA projects in the County.
BUSINESS
The CBORD Group, Inc. Sales Tax Exemption Application
Ms. McDaniel gave an overview of the project. The CBORD Group is a company founded in Ithaca 40 years ago and is wholly owned by Roper Technologies. The company is requesting sales tax abatement for the renovation and furnishing of 41,000 square feet of space at the South Hill Business Campus. The company currently leases space in two buildings at the Cornell Business and Technology Park. The move will consolidate and retain 245 employees in one facility to enhance the work environment. The company will occupy vacant space at the South Hill Business Campus, a 280,000 square foot multi-tenant building. The SHBC was formerly a vacant manufacturing facility that was 100% privately developed to provide space for the growing demand by a variety of local companies and service providers.
Ms. McDaniel pointed out that since this is an interior renovation, the Town of Ithaca only requires a building permit. Therefore the IDA Board will be the lead agency in the SEQR process.
Jim Dennis moved to send the project to a public hearing. Will Burbank seconded the motion.
Max Steinhardt and Jodi Denman from The CBORD Group came to the table.
Ms. Robertson asked about any job growth in the company in the next few years. Ms. Denman commented that they do expect about 3% or 3-6 new employees in their R&D division.
Ms. Robertson asked if they would amend their application to the IDA to reflect that job growth. Ms. Denman stated that they would do so.
Mr. Stamm reminded the board that while this is a homegrown company, its current owners are not local. This is part of an international company. They did look outside of Tompkins County for relocation prospects. He feels that it is a win to keep them and their 245 employees here in the County.
Mr. Burbank asked if there were any other examples of companies assisted by the IDA that had job retention as a key element. Yes, these are Kionix, Rheonix, BinOptics, DairyOne, and Transonic Systems.
Ms. Robertson noted that they did check off the local labor box on the application. She also asked about the relocation of employees to the South Hill Business Campus from their current locations in the Cornell Business and Technology Park. Would this move impact the current location?
Mr. Stamm stated that the vacancy rate at the business and technology park is very low.
Mr. Dennis asked about the seemingly very high profits listed on page 3 of the application and their need for sales tax abatements. Ms. McDaniel commented that these are the profits of the parent company and CBORD is not broken out of that amount.Mr. Steinhardt also commented that the sales tax abatement request helps in making the best case to corporate headquarters for staying in Tompkins County.
A vote was called on the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
35 Thornwood Resolution re Financing
Ms. Geldenhuys stated that this resolution pertains to a project that the Board granted approval for ownership transfer back in December of 2014. This is the resolution dealing with the mortgage and financing of that project. There are no new incentives being approved. This just authorizes signing of the bank documents.
Martha Robertson moved to approve the Inducement Resolution for Thirty-Five Thornwood/Ithaca B&T, LLC Mortgaging of 25 Thornwood Drive, Village of Lansing. Jennifer Tavares seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
209-215 Dryden Associates, LLC – Final Approval
Ms. McDaniel presented a letter from the applicant that amends their August 5th application as follows:
- Page 4 – project description: addition to 240 Linden Avenue tax parcel 64.-10-6 as this was inadvertently omitted.
- Page 5 – financing: amount of anticipated financing from a lending institution was amended to $50,000,000
- Page 6 – Mortgage Recording Tax – amount of abatement was amended to $125,000.
Due to the omission of the 240 Linden Avenue address, the public hearing will need to be redone before final approval can be considered.
Svante Myrick moved to send the 209-215 Dryden Associates, LLC project to a new public hearing and to accept the amendments to the application and to deem it complete. Martha Robertson seconded the motion.
Ms. McDaniel stated that a public hearing for the project and a special meeting of the Board of Directors to consider final approval has been set on Friday, September 25, 2015 at 4:00 PM in the TC Legislative Chambers.
Ms. Tavares asked what the nature of the urgency is. Could this not wait until the October TCIDA meeting? Mr. Proujansky commented that there are performance bonds associated with the construction that are in play and if the project does not start soon a large amount of money will be lost.
A vote was taken on the motion. The motion was approved 5 – 0
Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (210 Hancock Street) – Final Approval
Ms. McDaniel reported that public hearing notice for this project omitted part of the address of the project. There are actually two addresses and two tax parcels for this project. Both were on the application, but one, 423 First Street, was left out of the public hearing notice. Therefore a new public hearing will need to be held before final approval can be considered.
Svante Myrick moved to send the INHS project to a new public hearing. Martha Robertson seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0.
Ms. McDaniel reviewed two items that the developer has agreed to: 1) that the design team for the project will consist of all local companies and 2) that to the best of their ability, they will have construction done by local labor.
The developer has also asked that the IDA administrative fee be reduced from 1% to .5%. This is being requested as the financing of the project is very “thin” and a reduction of the fee will help with keeping the costs lower.
Ms. McDaniel also commented on the name of the entity that will ultimately be the agent of the IDA and thus receive the property tax abatements. At this point, INHS is named. However, once the tax credits for the project are approved, INHS will create a new entity that will be that agent.
Ms. Robertson asked for clarification as to why INHS did not agree to pay a living wage on the application. Mr. Mazzarella stated that INHS is bigger than the 210 Hancock entity and all of its employees are not directly tied to this project.
Ms. Tavares commented that perhaps projects could provide information for the annual report to the IDA that outlines their use of local contractors and local labor.
Ms. Robertson asked why the PILOT length is 30 years. Mr. Mazzarella stated that it is tied to a 30 year mortgage and NYS regulatory agreements. After 30 years, the mortgage will be paid off and the property taxes will then rise.
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Stamm reported that the Ithaca College Refinance Bond deal was priced today and that the project will close on September 23, 2015. The final bond amount was $43,970,000
MINUTES
The minutes of the August 13, 2015 TCIDA Board meeting were approved 5-0
The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm
Minutes were approved at 10/8/15 Board meeting