Typeset from the PDF of the official document (read by OCR) — headings, motions and recorded votes are detected automatically, so spacing may differ from the original. The official copy governs.
315.435.3770 • ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT@ONGOV.NET Regular Meeting Agenda March 14, 2024 8:30 AM Call to Order the Audit Committee 8:35 AM Call to Order the Annual Meeting of the Agency 8:45 AM Call to Order the Regular Meeting of the Agency A. Approval of Minutes: February 8, 2024 and February 15, 2024 B. Treasurer’s Report C. Payment of Bills D. Conflict of Interest Action Items:
1. Audit from Grossman St. Amour Presentation of Audit to the Board Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board approving the 2023 Audit of the Agency.
Representative: Mike Lisson, Auditor, Grossman St. Amour
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify designated firms for Audit services.
Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 3. Request for Professional Services: OCIDA Counsel/Special Counsel/General Legal Services Agency Action Requested:
b. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify designated firms for Counsel/Special Counsel/General Legal services.
315.435.3770 • ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT@ONGOV.NET Regular Meeting Agenda March 14, 2024 8:30 AM Call to Order the Audit Committee 8:35 AM Call to Order the Annual Meeting of the Agency 8:45 AM Call to Order the Regular Meeting of the Agency A. Approval of Minutes: February 8, 2024 and February 15, 2024 B. Treasurer’s Report C. Payment of Bills D. Conflict of Interest Action Items:
1. Audit from Grossman St. Amour Presentation of Audit to the Board Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board approving the 2023 Audit of the Agency.
Representative: Mike Lisson, Auditor, Grossman St. Amour
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify designated firms for Audit services.
Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 3. Request for Professional Services: OCIDA Counsel/Special Counsel/General Legal Services Agency Action Requested:
b. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify designated firms for Counsel/Special Counsel/General Legal services.
Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 4. Request for Professional Services: OCIDA Government and Business Development Services Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify Lovell and Associates, LLC of their award of the RFP for Government and Business Development services.
Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify NBT Bank, N.A. of their award of the RFP for Banking and Financial services.
Representative: Nate Stevens, Treasurer
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution by the Board authorizing accounts and signature authority to Robert M. Petrovich, Nate Stevens, and Patrick Hogan.
Representative: Nate Stevens, Treasurer Adjourn 2
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Regular Meeting Minutes February 8, 2024 Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 4. Request for Professional Services: OCIDA Government and Business Development Services Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify Lovell and Associates, LLC of their award of the RFP for Government and Business Development services.
Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to notify NBT Bank, N.A. of their award of the RFP for Banking and Financial services.
Representative: Nate Stevens, Treasurer
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution by the Board authorizing accounts and signature authority to Robert M. Petrovich, Nate Stevens, and Patrick Hogan.
Representative: Nate Stevens, Treasurer Adjourn 2
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Regular Meeting Minutes February 8, 2024 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, February 8, 2024, 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York. Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:32 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Kevin Ryan Fanny Villarreal Cydney Johnson Elizabeth Dreyfuss (Zoom) DELAYED: Susan Stanczyk
ABSENT:
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director Svetlana Dyer, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary Alexis Rodriguez, Assistant Treasurer Len Rauch, Economic Development Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm (Zoom) Christopher Andreucci, Harris Beach Law Firm Kevin McAuliffe, Barclay Damon Law Firm Heather Lamendola, Barclay Damon Law Firm Catherine Gridley, TTM Technologies Joe Schneider, TTM Technologies Andy Breuer, Heuber Breuer David Aitken, Destiny USA Zachary Benjamin, Destiny USA Nancy Lowery, County Executive Office Leila Dwyer, Barclay Damon Law Firm Glenn Coin, Post Standard APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES – JANUARY 18, 2024 Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Kevin Ryan, the OCIDA Board approved the regular meeting minutes of January 18, 2024. Motion was carried.
TREASURER’S REPORT Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Treasurer’s Report for the month of January 2024. A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, February 8, 2024, 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York. Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:32 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Kevin Ryan Fanny Villarreal Cydney Johnson Elizabeth Dreyfuss (Zoom) DELAYED: Susan Stanczyk
ABSENT:
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director Svetlana Dyer, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary Alexis Rodriguez, Assistant Treasurer Len Rauch, Economic Development Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm (Zoom) Christopher Andreucci, Harris Beach Law Firm Kevin McAuliffe, Barclay Damon Law Firm Heather Lamendola, Barclay Damon Law Firm Catherine Gridley, TTM Technologies Joe Schneider, TTM Technologies Andy Breuer, Heuber Breuer David Aitken, Destiny USA Zachary Benjamin, Destiny USA Nancy Lowery, County Executive Office Leila Dwyer, Barclay Damon Law Firm Glenn Coin, Post Standard APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES – JANUARY 18, 2024 Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Kevin Ryan, the OCIDA Board approved the regular meeting minutes of January 18, 2024. Motion was carried.
TREASURER’S REPORT Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Treasurer’s Report for the month of January 2024. Upon a motion by Fanny Villarreal, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved the Treasurer’s Report for the month of January 2024. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Fanny Villarreal, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved the Treasurer’s Report for the month of January 2024. Motion was carried.
Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Payment of Bills Schedule #490.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved the Payment of Bills Schedule #490 for $999,938.48 with PILOT payments to Onondaga County for $856.60, Town of Onondaga for $2.67, Town of DeWitt for $13.13, Onondaga County for $1,238,919.44, Town of Cicero for $67,642.49, Town of Clay for $62,500.00, Town of DeWitt for $91,050.06, Town of Lysander for $86,360.00, City of Syracuse for $38,396.93, Town of Manlius for $10,265.00, Town of Camillus for $10,446.00, Town of Geddes for $625.94, Village of Solvay for $4,980.09, Town of Salina for $126,721.31, Village of Liverpool for $4,754.00, Village of Baldwinsville for $155,583.64, Village of North Syracuse for $16,794.00, Town of Elbridge for $98,567.00, Town of Skaneateles for $38,295.71, Town of Van Buren for $108,322.42, West Genesee Central School District for $36,382.00, Solvay Union Free School District for $10,469.72, Syracuse City School District for $76,222.65, Baldwinsville Central School District for $986,701.67, East Syracuse Minoa Central School District for $451,507.09, Liverpool Central School District for $856,024.00, North Syracuse Central School District for $543,965.22, Jamesville Dewitt Central School District for $15,895.00 , Jordan Elbridge Central School District for $534,655.00, Fayetteville Manlius Central School District for $34,571.00, Lyncourt Central School District for $563,562.34 and Skaneateles Central School District for $213,420.07. Motion was carried.
Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Payment of Bills Schedule #490.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved the Payment of Bills Schedule #490 for $999,938.48 with PILOT payments to Onondaga County for $856.60, Town of Onondaga for $2.67, Town of DeWitt for $13.13, Onondaga County for $1,238,919.44, Town of Cicero for $67,642.49, Town of Clay for $62,500.00, Town of DeWitt for $91,050.06, Town of Lysander for $86,360.00, City of Syracuse for $38,396.93, Town of Manlius for $10,265.00, Town of Camillus for $10,446.00, Town of Geddes for $625.94, Village of Solvay for $4,980.09, Town of Salina for $126,721.31, Village of Liverpool for $4,754.00, Village of Baldwinsville for $155,583.64, Village of North Syracuse for $16,794.00, Town of Elbridge for $98,567.00, Town of Skaneateles for $38,295.71, Town of Van Buren for $108,322.42, West Genesee Central School District for $36,382.00, Solvay Union Free School District for $10,469.72, Syracuse City School District for $76,222.65, Baldwinsville Central School District for $986,701.67, East Syracuse Minoa Central School District for $451,507.09, Liverpool Central School District for $856,024.00, North Syracuse Central School District for $543,965.22, Jamesville Dewitt Central School District for $15,895.00 , Jordan Elbridge Central School District for $534,655.00, Fayetteville Manlius Central School District for $34,571.00, Lyncourt Central School District for $563,562.34 and Skaneateles Central School District for $213,420.07. Motion was carried.
The Conflict of Interest was circulated. Janice Herzog recused from Destiny USA Real Estate LLC. There were no other conflicts.
2 TTM TECHNOLOGIES INC. (3101-24-01A) – INITIAL MEETING (Susan Stanczyk arrived at meeting.) Robert Petrovich stated for the Board’s edification and for the record, Barclay Damon is representing the applicant and Chris Andreucci from Harris Beach is representing the IDA as conflict counsel.
The Conflict of Interest was circulated. Janice Herzog recused from Destiny USA Real Estate LLC. There were no other conflicts.
2 TTM TECHNOLOGIES INC. (3101-24-01A) – INITIAL MEETING (Susan Stanczyk arrived at meeting.) Robert Petrovich stated for the Board’s edification and for the record, Barclay Damon is representing the applicant and Chris Andreucci from Harris Beach is representing the IDA as conflict counsel.
Kevin McAuliffe stated the purpose of the application is to create a campus for TTM in the Town of DeWitt. He stated there is an existing structure on Kirkville Road and TTM owns the parcels north of that location. He stated pursuant to an option agreement, they purchased land on Fly Road and will construct an approximately 214,000 square foot building. He stated the overall purpose is to coordinate the work between the two buildings. He stated at the new facility there will be mass production of high density printed circuit boards, which no other facility in the United States is currently capable of doing. He stated this facility will do things that are more frequently done in Southeast Asia. He stated the object is to have this building become part of the campus and correlate work between these two facilities. He stated the workers will be interchangeable as they work together toward the design of the printed circuit boards for ultimate end use by TTM and for defense and other such industries.
Robert Petrovich stated the narrative incorporates a lot of what Mr. McAuliffe said but in addition there is going to be substantial investment in the existing facility, as well as an expansion across the campus. Kevin McAuliffe agreed and stated they can’t simply define what it would be today but there is going to be need for more modification of the existing facility as they identify the needs of production in the future.
Kevin McAuliffe stated the purpose of the application is to create a campus for TTM in the Town of DeWitt. He stated there is an existing structure on Kirkville Road and TTM owns the parcels north of that location. He stated pursuant to an option agreement, they purchased land on Fly Road and will construct an approximately 214,000 square foot building. He stated the overall purpose is to coordinate the work between the two buildings. He stated at the new facility there will be mass production of high density printed circuit boards, which no other facility in the United States is currently capable of doing. He stated this facility will do things that are more frequently done in Southeast Asia. He stated the object is to have this building become part of the campus and correlate work between these two facilities. He stated the workers will be interchangeable as they work together toward the design of the printed circuit boards for ultimate end use by TTM and for defense and other such industries.
Robert Petrovich stated the narrative incorporates a lot of what Mr. McAuliffe said but in addition there is going to be substantial investment in the existing facility, as well as an expansion across the campus. Kevin McAuliffe agreed and stated they can’t simply define what it would be today but there is going to be need for more modification of the existing facility as they identify the needs of production in the future.
Catherine Gridley thanked the Board for letting her come and talk about the project. She stated she is excited to be here for this. She stated she was born and raised in Syracuse, a boomerang employee where she came, left and came back. She stated when TTM selected Central New York for this project it was a really big day for her personally as well as for TTM. She stated TTM is the largest Department of Defense manufacturer of printed circuit boards in the world. She stated they are based and headquartered in the United States and the aerospace and defense business is now headquartered in Central New York at the former Anaren facility. She stated they are one of the top five printed circuit board manufacturers in the world. She stated they go beyond the circuit boards, they have a strong micro-electronics presence in Syracuse acquired 3 Catherine Gridley thanked the Board for letting her come and talk about the project. She stated she is excited to be here for this. She stated she was born and raised in Syracuse, a boomerang employee where she came, left and came back. She stated when TTM selected Central New York for this project it was a really big day for her personally as well as for TTM. She stated TTM is the largest Department of Defense manufacturer of printed circuit boards in the world. She stated they are based and headquartered in the United States and the aerospace and defense business is now headquartered in Central New York at the former Anaren facility. She stated they are one of the top five printed circuit board manufacturers in the world. She stated they go beyond the circuit boards, they have a strong micro-electronics presence in Syracuse acquired 3 through Anaren in 2018. She stated they are one of the larger micro electronics manufacturers in the US, certainly for the Department of Defense. She stated in addition to that they have some extensive radio frequency microwave capability here in Syracuse which has critical strategic importance to their company. She stated when it comes to the project we are talking about today, there was an extensive selection process. She stated they looked at every county in the continental United States and narrowed it down slowly through a process and ultimately landed on a competition between New York and another state in the south. She stated one of the key elements of the selection for Central New York was this opportunity to create this campus environment. She stated the idea of a campus and creating this high tech capability here in the US on shore, on behalf of the Department of Defense, married up with their micro-electronics capability that exists today hear in Central New York and also the capability they believe will end up supplying a number of local, larger aerospace and defense companies. She stated it will allow them to leverage their existing engineering footprint in Syracuse with the new capability they are starting in this new facility. She stated they will be collaborating with engineering organizations locally on the design and development of the boards that will be manufactured at the site. She stated it is a beautiful model. She stated she can't talk a lot about the technology in the building but she can explain what is called ultra-high density interconnect. She stated this capability, at this scale, with this technology is not in the United States today. She stated there is small pockets of capability, prototyping, low volume but national security requirements are rapidly moving upwards and they cannot insert that technology into the warfighter without this. She stated she thinks they are well locked in and have a spectacular design. She stated they have existing engineering here in the Central New York at the Kirkville Road facility and it is one of their two engineering centers of excellence, the second one being in Long Island. She stated the engineering organization here is going to grow. She stated they are excited about the engineering, especially in the process engineering capability, they will be introducing in the new building. She stated they will be able to develop a workforce and grow their engineering footprint much more easily. She stated it is a bit more of a challenge they discovered as they tried to grow the workforce. She stated they cultivated capability to cross populate between the two different types of capabilities and to leverage that engineering is critical. She stated another element they are excited about is having some of the recipients of that product immediately next door and those engineers can come over and understand how it is moving through the factory. She stated the collaborative design capability is going to accelerate their ability to get the product to market and it is going to allow them to correct issues much more quickly. She stated they are excited about the campus environment.
4 through Anaren in 2018. She stated they are one of the larger micro electronics manufacturers in the US, certainly for the Department of Defense. She stated in addition to that they have some extensive radio frequency microwave capability here in Syracuse which has critical strategic importance to their company. She stated when it comes to the project we are talking about today, there was an extensive selection process. She stated they looked at every county in the continental United States and narrowed it down slowly through a process and ultimately landed on a competition between New York and another state in the south. She stated one of the key elements of the selection for Central New York was this opportunity to create this campus environment. She stated the idea of a campus and creating this high tech capability here in the US on shore, on behalf of the Department of Defense, married up with their micro-electronics capability that exists today hear in Central New York and also the capability they believe will end up supplying a number of local, larger aerospace and defense companies. She stated it will allow them to leverage their existing engineering footprint in Syracuse with the new capability they are starting in this new facility. She stated they will be collaborating with engineering organizations locally on the design and development of the boards that will be manufactured at the site. She stated it is a beautiful model. She stated she can't talk a lot about the technology in the building but she can explain what is called ultra-high density interconnect. She stated this capability, at this scale, with this technology is not in the United States today. She stated there is small pockets of capability, prototyping, low volume but national security requirements are rapidly moving upwards and they cannot insert that technology into the warfighter without this. She stated she thinks they are well locked in and have a spectacular design. She stated they have existing engineering here in the Central New York at the Kirkville Road facility and it is one of their two engineering centers of excellence, the second one being in Long Island. She stated the engineering organization here is going to grow. She stated they are excited about the engineering, especially in the process engineering capability, they will be introducing in the new building. She stated they will be able to develop a workforce and grow their engineering footprint much more easily. She stated it is a bit more of a challenge they discovered as they tried to grow the workforce. She stated they cultivated capability to cross populate between the two different types of capabilities and to leverage that engineering is critical. She stated another element they are excited about is having some of the recipients of that product immediately next door and those engineers can come over and understand how it is moving through the factory. She stated the collaborative design capability is going to accelerate their ability to get the product to market and it is going to allow them to correct issues much more quickly. She stated they are excited about the campus environment.
4 Robert Petrovich stated the investment is substantial at $120 million and asked Ms. Gridley to talk about retaining employment and growth associated with the project. Catherine Gridley stated they expect 400 jobs to be added. She stated they expect those jobs to be added in that campus portfolio but she is not sure which physical footprint those roles might sit in. She stated they do know they don’t have the space to grow the engineering footprint. She stated from an investment perspective they are building out, as soon as the project can proceed. She stated the building was first designed it started at about 140,000-15,000 square feet but the opportunity for growth under this campus model is exceptional so they immediately tacked on an additional 40,000 square feet. She stated they will equip and fit about 160,000 square feet and then grow into the rest. She stated they know the 400 jobs they will create is a no brainer for them. She stated the growth potential is significant. She stated the workforce development, how they will address that and how they retain people will tell how rapidly they are able to introduce the growth that they expect in phase two of the project.
Robert Petrovich stated the investment is substantial at $120 million and asked Ms. Gridley to talk about retaining employment and growth associated with the project. Catherine Gridley stated they expect 400 jobs to be added. She stated they expect those jobs to be added in that campus portfolio but she is not sure which physical footprint those roles might sit in. She stated they do know they don’t have the space to grow the engineering footprint. She stated from an investment perspective they are building out, as soon as the project can proceed. She stated the building was first designed it started at about 140,000-15,000 square feet but the opportunity for growth under this campus model is exceptional so they immediately tacked on an additional 40,000 square feet. She stated they will equip and fit about 160,000 square feet and then grow into the rest. She stated they know the 400 jobs they will create is a no brainer for them. She stated the growth potential is significant. She stated the workforce development, how they will address that and how they retain people will tell how rapidly they are able to introduce the growth that they expect in phase two of the project.
Fanny Villarreal asked if the jobs created will be full or part time and what levels. Catherine Gridley stated they are all full time. She stated they will run from entry level operators up through senior technology engineers and site management etc. She stated the most advanced positions will be senior engineers. She stated they will have experienced engineers as well as entry level and everything in between. She stated there are lines of production, engineering and the resources needed to supporting the facility which includes HR, finance and IT. Fanny Villarreal asked what the salary is for entry level. Catherine Gridley stated market rate at the time. Kevin McAuliffe stated the lowest pay is $53,000 and the highest is currently estimated to be $111,000. He stated there are six different categories defined in the application. He stated the numbers of people in each category is spread out so it is people at all levels that will be required for this expanded project.
Fanny Villarreal asked if the jobs created will be full or part time and what levels. Catherine Gridley stated they are all full time. She stated they will run from entry level operators up through senior technology engineers and site management etc. She stated the most advanced positions will be senior engineers. She stated they will have experienced engineers as well as entry level and everything in between. She stated there are lines of production, engineering and the resources needed to supporting the facility which includes HR, finance and IT. Fanny Villarreal asked what the salary is for entry level. Catherine Gridley stated market rate at the time. Kevin McAuliffe stated the lowest pay is $53,000 and the highest is currently estimated to be $111,000. He stated there are six different categories defined in the application. He stated the numbers of people in each category is spread out so it is people at all levels that will be required for this expanded project.
Patrick Hogan stated there are significant national security implications in this. Catherine Gridley stated she joined TTM in 2019 and prior to that she was with one of their OEM primes. She stated when she came to the company she learned that the United States is down to 4%, or maybe even less, of the percentage of printed circuit boards manufactured globally. She stated if you understand the printed circuit board, it is the foundation for every piece of electronics made today. She stated the idea that from the early 2000s to now, the United States had manufactured more than 30% of printed circuit boards and it all moved to Asia. She stated they design it, they 5 develop the technology, it is their intellectual property and it moves offshore. She stated this particular capability is well established in Southeast Asia and from a national security perspective, it cannot be manufactured in Southeast Asia in order for our warfighter to get what they need.
Patrick Hogan asked if TTM is accessing state and federal sources for funding. Catherine Gridley stated they are currently in discussions with the state and on the federal side they are having conversations with the Department of Defense.
Patrick Hogan stated there are significant national security implications in this. Catherine Gridley stated she joined TTM in 2019 and prior to that she was with one of their OEM primes. She stated when she came to the company she learned that the United States is down to 4%, or maybe even less, of the percentage of printed circuit boards manufactured globally. She stated if you understand the printed circuit board, it is the foundation for every piece of electronics made today. She stated the idea that from the early 2000s to now, the United States had manufactured more than 30% of printed circuit boards and it all moved to Asia. She stated they design it, they 5 develop the technology, it is their intellectual property and it moves offshore. She stated this particular capability is well established in Southeast Asia and from a national security perspective, it cannot be manufactured in Southeast Asia in order for our warfighter to get what they need.
Patrick Hogan asked if TTM is accessing state and federal sources for funding. Catherine Gridley stated they are currently in discussions with the state and on the federal side they are having conversations with the Department of Defense.
Patrick Hogan stated he likes the way the PILOT was crafted and wants to commend staff and the TTM team because it is about 2% more revenue for the municipal entities when everything gets done and built. Nate Stevens stated that is correct.
Cydney Johnson asked what level of education is required for entry level positions. Catherine Gridley stated degree and certificate.
Robert Petrovich stated this was a competitive process and he and County Executive worked hard with our state partners to try to make sure that TTM made the right decision to stay in New York and do the expansion in New York. He stated we couldn’t be happier and this is a big win. He stated he thinks this is going to be great for DeWitt and the overall community. He stated he is happy to support the project.
Janice Herzog asked if the ultra-high density capability that TTM will be manufacturing in the new facility is currently being manufactured in in the US or outside of the US. Catherine Gridley stated it is leading edge technology and it is manufactured in what she would call more prototype volume in the United States. She stated small scale but the capability is definitely in existence in Asia for ultra-high density interconnect. She stated what they will be manufacturing here is all leading edge development so the products themselves are not currently in production, just the capability is in production.
Patrick Hogan stated he likes the way the PILOT was crafted and wants to commend staff and the TTM team because it is about 2% more revenue for the municipal entities when everything gets done and built. Nate Stevens stated that is correct.
Cydney Johnson asked what level of education is required for entry level positions. Catherine Gridley stated degree and certificate.
Robert Petrovich stated this was a competitive process and he and County Executive worked hard with our state partners to try to make sure that TTM made the right decision to stay in New York and do the expansion in New York. He stated we couldn’t be happier and this is a big win. He stated he thinks this is going to be great for DeWitt and the overall community. He stated he is happy to support the project.
Janice Herzog asked if the ultra-high density capability that TTM will be manufacturing in the new facility is currently being manufactured in in the US or outside of the US. Catherine Gridley stated it is leading edge technology and it is manufactured in what she would call more prototype volume in the United States. She stated small scale but the capability is definitely in existence in Asia for ultra-high density interconnect. She stated what they will be manufacturing here is all leading edge development so the products themselves are not currently in production, just the capability is in production.
Robert Petrovich stated that is consistent with the County Executive’s strategy about trying to facilitate the reshoring of this kind of manufacturing to the United States and obviously Onondaga County so it's a great win for us.
6 Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved an Inducement Resolution to initiate the TTM Technologies Inc. project and authorize a public hearing. Motion was carried.
Robert Petrovich stated that is consistent with the County Executive’s strategy about trying to facilitate the reshoring of this kind of manufacturing to the United States and obviously Onondaga County so it's a great win for us.
6 Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved an Inducement Resolution to initiate the TTM Technologies Inc. project and authorize a public hearing. Motion was carried.
Amanda Fitzgerald stated back in December the sale of the Destiny hotel project located on Hiawatha Boulevard was approved along with the assignment and assumption of the current PILOT agreement. She stated in connection with the closing of the transaction, the team has come across several ambiguities in the prior closing document so the decision was made to take this opportunity of the assignment and the assumption to clarify these ambiguities so the project will be monitored and administered moving forward is crystal clear to the new owners. She stated before the Board is a resolution authorizing Robert Petrovich to enter into, on behalf of the agency, an omnibus amendment which will clarify these ambiguities. She stated the most relevant ambiguity to clarify is the number of jobs required at the project facility. She stated the number agreed upon is 74 employees.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing execution and delivery of an omnibus amendment to transaction documents in connection with a certain project for Destiny USA Real Estate, Inc. Janice Herzog recused from voting. Motion was carried.
Amanda Fitzgerald stated back in December the sale of the Destiny hotel project located on Hiawatha Boulevard was approved along with the assignment and assumption of the current PILOT agreement. She stated in connection with the closing of the transaction, the team has come across several ambiguities in the prior closing document so the decision was made to take this opportunity of the assignment and the assumption to clarify these ambiguities so the project will be monitored and administered moving forward is crystal clear to the new owners. She stated before the Board is a resolution authorizing Robert Petrovich to enter into, on behalf of the agency, an omnibus amendment which will clarify these ambiguities. She stated the most relevant ambiguity to clarify is the number of jobs required at the project facility. She stated the number agreed upon is 74 employees.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing execution and delivery of an omnibus amendment to transaction documents in connection with a certain project for Destiny USA Real Estate, Inc. Janice Herzog recused from voting. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 8:55 am. Motion was carried.
____________________________________ Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director 7
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Regular Meeting Minutes February 15, 2024 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, February 15, 2024, 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York. Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:36 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Susan Stanczyk Kevin Ryan Fanny Villarreal Cydney Johnson
ABSENT:
Elizabeth Dreyfuss
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director Svetlana Dyer, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary Alexis Rodriguez, Assistant Treasurer Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm Dan Romeo, County Legislature
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 8:55 am. Motion was carried.
____________________________________ Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director 7
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Regular Meeting Minutes February 15, 2024 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, February 15, 2024, 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York. Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:36 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Susan Stanczyk Kevin Ryan Fanny Villarreal Cydney Johnson
ABSENT:
Elizabeth Dreyfuss
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director Svetlana Dyer, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary Alexis Rodriguez, Assistant Treasurer Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm Dan Romeo, County Legislature
The Conflict of Interest was circulated and there were no other conflicts.
The Conflict of Interest was circulated and there were no other conflicts.
Robert Petrovich stated based on the movement of the review and approval from Governance to the full IDA Board, my recommendation is that we advanced this.
Janice Herzog stated she applauds the committee and staff at the Economic Development Office being proactive and forward thinking about what we are facing. She stated housing is needed in this community. She stated having two senior family members looking for housing in this community and wanting to sell their single family home, because they are widowed, single, having a hard time even keeping up with repairs, or getting a handyman, senior housing is really critical. She stated having a place where people feel good about going with amenities, access to community services, restaurants and services within walking distance is a really great idea. She stated it is not seniors who need care and medical support or with their meals, but it is vibrant individuals, contributing members and participants in the community who no longer want to care for their larger homes. She stated they really need a place that's fun, vibrant, well built, and not just like stuffed back in a corner.
Patrick Hogan stated it also frees up a house for a family.
Robert Petrovich stated based on the movement of the review and approval from Governance to the full IDA Board, my recommendation is that we advanced this.
Janice Herzog stated she applauds the committee and staff at the Economic Development Office being proactive and forward thinking about what we are facing. She stated housing is needed in this community. She stated having two senior family members looking for housing in this community and wanting to sell their single family home, because they are widowed, single, having a hard time even keeping up with repairs, or getting a handyman, senior housing is really critical. She stated having a place where people feel good about going with amenities, access to community services, restaurants and services within walking distance is a really great idea. She stated it is not seniors who need care and medical support or with their meals, but it is vibrant individuals, contributing members and participants in the community who no longer want to care for their larger homes. She stated they really need a place that's fun, vibrant, well built, and not just like stuffed back in a corner.
Patrick Hogan stated it also frees up a house for a family.
Susan Stanczyk stated she wants to make sure some things were clarified because we all received letters and she received one email from Assessor Bick in the Town of Clay that she thought was extremely unprofessional and inappropriate. She stated if the Board has not had a chance to read it she hopes they take a minute to read it. She stated she wants to make sure everyone is aware of the fact, these are guidelines, not requirements. She stated if the Board does not go 12 years on a PILOT, we don't have to. She stated this does not mean we are going to grant a PILOT to every developer that comes before us. She stated we are going to review them just like we've always done. She stated we are going to look at the merit of the project, make sure it is something we really do need and if the PILOT is necessary. She stated it doesn't mean the PILOT is all encompassing and the Board might decide to do just sales tax, just mortgage tax or a combination. She stated that if someone puts a blanket statement out there that the Agency is going to grant PILOTs to every single person who comes here, that is not the way it has ever worked before, and it is not going to work that way. She stated she just wants to make sure everyone is aware these are guidelines and they are necessary guidelines. She stated we need housing and she echoes Ms. Herzog’s comments, she has an older set of parents who would love to get into an area where they could have a single level small patio home. She stated she has been looking and she can’t find them. She stated she has a son and fiancé who would love to get into a home that is not going to cost them $300,000. She stated they are not making $500,000 a year and cannot afford it. She stated these are exactly the homes we need at this point. She stated there are 300 permits and we need 10,000 housing units, shows there is a need for housing. She stated it isn’t excluding the towns, the villages, or the school districts. She stated the Board asks every time a project comes up, what is the support level in the town or the school district; do we have any issues. She stated the Board will always take that into consideration. She stated she 2 Susan Stanczyk stated she wants to make sure some things were clarified because we all received letters and she received one email from Assessor Bick in the Town of Clay that she thought was extremely unprofessional and inappropriate. She stated if the Board has not had a chance to read it she hopes they take a minute to read it. She stated she wants to make sure everyone is aware of the fact, these are guidelines, not requirements. She stated if the Board does not go 12 years on a PILOT, we don't have to. She stated this does not mean we are going to grant a PILOT to every developer that comes before us. She stated we are going to review them just like we've always done. She stated we are going to look at the merit of the project, make sure it is something we really do need and if the PILOT is necessary. She stated it doesn't mean the PILOT is all encompassing and the Board might decide to do just sales tax, just mortgage tax or a combination. She stated that if someone puts a blanket statement out there that the Agency is going to grant PILOTs to every single person who comes here, that is not the way it has ever worked before, and it is not going to work that way. She stated she just wants to make sure everyone is aware these are guidelines and they are necessary guidelines. She stated we need housing and she echoes Ms. Herzog’s comments, she has an older set of parents who would love to get into an area where they could have a single level small patio home. She stated she has been looking and she can’t find them. She stated she has a son and fiancé who would love to get into a home that is not going to cost them $300,000. She stated they are not making $500,000 a year and cannot afford it. She stated these are exactly the homes we need at this point. She stated there are 300 permits and we need 10,000 housing units, shows there is a need for housing. She stated it isn’t excluding the towns, the villages, or the school districts. She stated the Board asks every time a project comes up, what is the support level in the town or the school district; do we have any issues. She stated the Board will always take that into consideration. She stated she 2 appreciates the form letter that came from several towns, she appreciates the individuals who did write their own emails and express their own thoughts. She stated she wants everyone to understand the Board will take those into consideration. She stated this is necessary and these are things the Board needs to do. She stated when someone applies for a PILOT, and it is a manufacturing plant, there is an annual review done to make sure they are meeting those requirements. She stated with housing it is a little different, especially if it is the marketplace and the rates. She asked how that review will be done, what is the review process and will it be annually? She stated we don’t want to get into the personal part of being able to look at someone's W-2 to confirm they meet requirements but in the end, if they're not meeting that requirement, the PILOT needs to be rescinded.
appreciates the form letter that came from several towns, she appreciates the individuals who did write their own emails and express their own thoughts. She stated she wants everyone to understand the Board will take those into consideration. She stated this is necessary and these are things the Board needs to do. She stated when someone applies for a PILOT, and it is a manufacturing plant, there is an annual review done to make sure they are meeting those requirements. She stated with housing it is a little different, especially if it is the marketplace and the rates. She asked how that review will be done, what is the review process and will it be annually? She stated we don’t want to get into the personal part of being able to look at someone's W-2 to confirm they meet requirements but in the end, if they're not meeting that requirement, the PILOT needs to be rescinded.
Robert Petrovich stated these are benefits that are available, but they are not as of right, they are discretionary benefits. He stated every project has a but-for provision in it, but-for these benefits, can you advance the project or not. He stated the applicant has to come before the Board and articulate in a way that we understand it and if we can support it great but if we cannot support it, that is also a decision. He stated there is an annual reporting that goes into the PARIS system for job goals that were put forward so the benefits to the project can be enjoyed. He stated there is a system set up for the housing.
Nate Stevens stated in the meeting materials there is additional language in the project agreements which will then require and be part of the Agency annual reporting structure. He stated it shows how it is going to be done and says if the company fails to reach its housing commitment it is a breach of the contract. He stated housing projects come before the Board and are clear as to what they are committing to just like every other project. He stated a project agreement will be signed and every year they will be surveyed and appropriate action will be taken if they fail to meet their commitment.
Robert Petrovich stated these are benefits that are available, but they are not as of right, they are discretionary benefits. He stated every project has a but-for provision in it, but-for these benefits, can you advance the project or not. He stated the applicant has to come before the Board and articulate in a way that we understand it and if we can support it great but if we cannot support it, that is also a decision. He stated there is an annual reporting that goes into the PARIS system for job goals that were put forward so the benefits to the project can be enjoyed. He stated there is a system set up for the housing.
Nate Stevens stated in the meeting materials there is additional language in the project agreements which will then require and be part of the Agency annual reporting structure. He stated it shows how it is going to be done and says if the company fails to reach its housing commitment it is a breach of the contract. He stated housing projects come before the Board and are clear as to what they are committing to just like every other project. He stated a project agreement will be signed and every year they will be surveyed and appropriate action will be taken if they fail to meet their commitment.
Kevin Ryan stated he wants to be sensitive to the comments received but the Board has done things the proper way. He stated there has been numerous times where developers have come and the Board said no. He stated the Board has not given the requested incentives because they felt it didn't meet our goals. He stated there have been times when people have received the incentive packages, not met the goals and we have taken steps to clawback the benefits. He stated he thinks this Board is fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of this county and the Board is giving ourselves the additional leeway to meet the need for housing in this 3 community. He stated if people are uncomfortable with that just look at the track record of this Agency. He stated he thinks the Board has earned a certain degree of confidence people should have to trust us to do things.
Kevin Ryan stated he wants to be sensitive to the comments received but the Board has done things the proper way. He stated there has been numerous times where developers have come and the Board said no. He stated the Board has not given the requested incentives because they felt it didn't meet our goals. He stated there have been times when people have received the incentive packages, not met the goals and we have taken steps to clawback the benefits. He stated he thinks this Board is fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of this county and the Board is giving ourselves the additional leeway to meet the need for housing in this 3 community. He stated if people are uncomfortable with that just look at the track record of this Agency. He stated he thinks the Board has earned a certain degree of confidence people should have to trust us to do things.
Robert Petrovich stated that is a point well taken. He stated he was at an IDA conference in Albany and in hearing other IDAs, the legal pundits and others commenting on what they do and what should be done, we are in very good standing. He stated this agency is really out in front on a lot of these issues and is acting in a way that is judicious but also respectful of the taxpayers. He stated also the Agency is out there competitively securing projects for the community for the betterment of everyone. He stated he thinks it is a good thing. Patrick Hogan stated just having this debate shows the growth. He stated we are talking about homes for 50,000 people that might work in Onondaga County and that hasn't happened in 40 to 50 years. He stated it is a real testament to the County Executive’s economic policy and this Board's economic plan.
Robert Petrovich commented on housing. He stated we do not do PILOTs on single family homes. He stated what we are doing in this UTEP is codifying an aspect of this for mixed income that is important, which we hadn't codified before. He stated what he thinks that says is mixed income projects are important, we are looking at those but this is also going to be driven by the town center approach. He stated we have OHB that is looking at doing something in the order of 750 housing units. He stated we have Great Northern that is going to be bringing online a substantial number of housing units.
Robert Petrovich stated that is a point well taken. He stated he was at an IDA conference in Albany and in hearing other IDAs, the legal pundits and others commenting on what they do and what should be done, we are in very good standing. He stated this agency is really out in front on a lot of these issues and is acting in a way that is judicious but also respectful of the taxpayers. He stated also the Agency is out there competitively securing projects for the community for the betterment of everyone. He stated he thinks it is a good thing. Patrick Hogan stated just having this debate shows the growth. He stated we are talking about homes for 50,000 people that might work in Onondaga County and that hasn't happened in 40 to 50 years. He stated it is a real testament to the County Executive’s economic policy and this Board's economic plan.
Robert Petrovich commented on housing. He stated we do not do PILOTs on single family homes. He stated what we are doing in this UTEP is codifying an aspect of this for mixed income that is important, which we hadn't codified before. He stated what he thinks that says is mixed income projects are important, we are looking at those but this is also going to be driven by the town center approach. He stated we have OHB that is looking at doing something in the order of 750 housing units. He stated we have Great Northern that is going to be bringing online a substantial number of housing units.
Patrick Hogan asked if they are asking for PILOT agreements. Robert Petrovich stated they have not submitted an application yet but we certainly expect they will and those are the kinds of projects that are in alignment with the County Executive’s strategic objectives, they are in alignment with Plan Onondaga and at the end of the day, they actually make sense. Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution approving the 2024 Uniform Tax Exemption Policy. Motion was carried.
Patrick Hogan asked if they are asking for PILOT agreements. Robert Petrovich stated they have not submitted an application yet but we certainly expect they will and those are the kinds of projects that are in alignment with the County Executive’s strategic objectives, they are in alignment with Plan Onondaga and at the end of the day, they actually make sense. Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution approving the 2024 Uniform Tax Exemption Policy. Motion was carried.
4 Robert Petrovich stated the application changes generally reflect the UTEP housing changes to make sure they are in alignment.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the revised Agency Project Application. Motion was carried.
4 Robert Petrovich stated the application changes generally reflect the UTEP housing changes to make sure they are in alignment.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the revised Agency Project Application. Motion was carried.
Amanda Fitzgerald stated similar changes were made to the required project agreement to reflect the changes in the UTEP. She stated it was made so the project agreement can be altered for certain housing projects and address monitoring throughout the life of the project. Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the revised Uniform Agency Project Agreement. Motion was carried.
Amanda Fitzgerald stated similar changes were made to the required project agreement to reflect the changes in the UTEP. She stated it was made so the project agreement can be altered for certain housing projects and address monitoring throughout the life of the project. Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the revised Uniform Agency Project Agreement. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis asked for a motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board went into Executive Session at 9:01 am. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Cydney Johnson, the OCIDA Board adjourned Executive Session at 9:13 am. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis stated as the Board is aware we previously issued a negative declaration under SEQR for the District East project at the former Shoppingtown facility. He stated the project is supposed to be built out over a period of approximately 12 years and anticipated to proceed in various phases of development that each will require a local site plan approval. He stated the 5
Jeff Davis asked for a motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board went into Executive Session at 9:01 am. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Cydney Johnson, the OCIDA Board adjourned Executive Session at 9:13 am. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis stated as the Board is aware we previously issued a negative declaration under SEQR for the District East project at the former Shoppingtown facility. He stated the project is supposed to be built out over a period of approximately 12 years and anticipated to proceed in various phases of development that each will require a local site plan approval. He stated the 5 project is anticipated to include 1.96 million square feet of leasable space inclusive of 912 dwelling units in 33 structures of up to 6 stories in height. He stated the applicant has requested the Agency consider in addition to benefits for the project, the acquisition of three parcels of land by eminent domain totaling 4.21 acres, namely the former Macy's and former Sears department stores parcels located in the Town of DeWitt and the undertaking of the project for the financial assistance requested. He stated the land is entirely developed within the former Shoppingtown mall, which is now derelict vacant and underutilized. He stated the Agency issued a SEQR negative declaration at the October 12, 2023 meeting. He stated following that meeting and as part of the public comment process with regard to eminent domain procedure law, comments were received challenging the sufficiency of the Agency's review of the District East Redevelopment under SEQR. He stated after reviewing the comments, the Agency requested that its consultant, JMT, review the comments and advise as to whether there was additional environmental information or review that was warranted. He stated JMT reviewed the comments and advised the agency by memorandum that the only comment that warranted additional consideration was noise and that although potential noise impacts had been previously evaluated during the workshop sessions based upon information available at that time, including conceptual mitigation, the Agency could elect to request that the company provide in writing additional technical information on operational noise and mitigation measures. He stated based on that review, the Agency requested that the company, OHB, to the extent feasible provide additional technical information regarding the District East Redevelopment’s projected operational noise and construction noise mitigation. He stated on February 12, the company submitted a final construction and operational noise analysis based upon the current project design and available information. He stated the company further confirmed that the District East Redevelopment, which is to be built out over a period of approximately 12 years is still in the design phase and will continue to refine design elements and construction scenario scenarios leading up to as part of the site plan approval process before the Town of DeWitt. He stated the Agency, staff and JMT reviewed these impacts based upon the current information and based upon its careful review and examination of the supplemental SEQR materials and the prior review and examination of the District East Redevelopment, the Agency finds that relative to construction noise, that without mitigation sound levels for construction will exceed ambient noise levels in the area. He stated the exceedance over ambient are anticipated to be 60 decibels or lower at all residential receptors and that due to the preliminary nature of the current design of the project level information the specific mitigation for construction noise cannot be finally determined at this time. He stated however, the construction noise can be mitigated to 60 6 project is anticipated to include 1.96 million square feet of leasable space inclusive of 912 dwelling units in 33 structures of up to 6 stories in height. He stated the applicant has requested the Agency consider in addition to benefits for the project, the acquisition of three parcels of land by eminent domain totaling 4.21 acres, namely the former Macy's and former Sears department stores parcels located in the Town of DeWitt and the undertaking of the project for the financial assistance requested. He stated the land is entirely developed within the former Shoppingtown mall, which is now derelict vacant and underutilized. He stated the Agency issued a SEQR negative declaration at the October 12, 2023 meeting. He stated following that meeting and as part of the public comment process with regard to eminent domain procedure law, comments were received challenging the sufficiency of the Agency's review of the District East Redevelopment under SEQR. He stated after reviewing the comments, the Agency requested that its consultant, JMT, review the comments and advise as to whether there was additional environmental information or review that was warranted. He stated JMT reviewed the comments and advised the agency by memorandum that the only comment that warranted additional consideration was noise and that although potential noise impacts had been previously evaluated during the workshop sessions based upon information available at that time, including conceptual mitigation, the Agency could elect to request that the company provide in writing additional technical information on operational noise and mitigation measures. He stated based on that review, the Agency requested that the company, OHB, to the extent feasible provide additional technical information regarding the District East Redevelopment’s projected operational noise and construction noise mitigation. He stated on February 12, the company submitted a final construction and operational noise analysis based upon the current project design and available information. He stated the company further confirmed that the District East Redevelopment, which is to be built out over a period of approximately 12 years is still in the design phase and will continue to refine design elements and construction scenario scenarios leading up to as part of the site plan approval process before the Town of DeWitt. He stated the Agency, staff and JMT reviewed these impacts based upon the current information and based upon its careful review and examination of the supplemental SEQR materials and the prior review and examination of the District East Redevelopment, the Agency finds that relative to construction noise, that without mitigation sound levels for construction will exceed ambient noise levels in the area. He stated the exceedance over ambient are anticipated to be 60 decibels or lower at all residential receptors and that due to the preliminary nature of the current design of the project level information the specific mitigation for construction noise cannot be finally determined at this time. He stated however, the construction noise can be mitigated to 60 6 decibles or less throughout the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant, including by way of example the use of best practices, placement of equipment, setbacks, lower noise equipment, earthen berms, etc. He stated whereas based on its careful review and examination of the supplemental information and prior view examination of District East, we find relative to operational noise that sound from the typical product operation is not anticipated to exceed the daytime ambient sound levels without mitigation sound from the typical product operation is anticipated to exceed the nighttime ambient sound levels by 2dB, which should have no appreciable effect on the receptors but may result in exceedance of the Town code in certain
locations along Kinney Road. He stated due to the current project design and available information this specific mitigation for operational noise cannot be finally determined until project design elements are further developed, however, operational noise can be mitigated to comply with the Town of DeWitt code through various mitigation measures. He stated whereas as part of the site plan review process before the Town of DeWitt, the company will specify the project design elements as well as the final construction scenario and identify the specific mitigation measures or combination thereof, that it will use to mitigate noise as analyzed and generally described in the supplemental SEQR material received by the agency. He stated the town of DeWitt approval process will include compliance with SEQR and the analysis of choice of mitigation measures based on the specific project design known at that time, and will be more protective of the environment. He stated whereas, as a result of its careful review and examination of the application, correspondence from other involved agencies, the workshop sessions, including the supplemental SEQR information provided, the Agency finds that unbalanced and after careful consideration of all relevant District East Redevelopment documentation, it has more than adequate information to evaluate the relevant benefits and potential impacts. He stated now therefore be it resolved the District East Redevelopment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, the Agency will not require the preparation of an environmental impact statement with respect to District East Redevelopment, the potential impacts associated with noise have been fully studied based upon current information and reasonable projections further analysis of potential impacts associated with noise cannot be further studied at this time, but will be evaluated as part of the Town of DeWitt site plan approval process and SEQR review. He stated because the District East Redevelopment project cannot proceed without site plan approval, it is permissible to segment the review of noise as it will not be less protective of the environment. He stated as a consequence of the foregoing, the Agency has prepared an amended negative declaration with respect to District East and a copy of it will be attached to this resolution.
7 decibles or less throughout the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant, including by way of example the use of best practices, placement of equipment, setbacks, lower noise equipment, earthen berms, etc. He stated whereas based on its careful review and examination of the supplemental information and prior view examination of District East, we find relative to operational noise that sound from the typical product operation is not anticipated to exceed the daytime ambient sound levels without mitigation sound from the typical product operation is anticipated to exceed the nighttime ambient sound levels by 2dB, which should have no appreciable effect on the receptors but may result in exceedance of the Town code in certain
locations along Kinney Road. He stated due to the current project design and available information this specific mitigation for operational noise cannot be finally determined until project design elements are further developed, however, operational noise can be mitigated to comply with the Town of DeWitt code through various mitigation measures. He stated whereas as part of the site plan review process before the Town of DeWitt, the company will specify the project design elements as well as the final construction scenario and identify the specific mitigation measures or combination thereof, that it will use to mitigate noise as analyzed and generally described in the supplemental SEQR material received by the agency. He stated the town of DeWitt approval process will include compliance with SEQR and the analysis of choice of mitigation measures based on the specific project design known at that time, and will be more protective of the environment. He stated whereas, as a result of its careful review and examination of the application, correspondence from other involved agencies, the workshop sessions, including the supplemental SEQR information provided, the Agency finds that unbalanced and after careful consideration of all relevant District East Redevelopment documentation, it has more than adequate information to evaluate the relevant benefits and potential impacts. He stated now therefore be it resolved the District East Redevelopment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, the Agency will not require the preparation of an environmental impact statement with respect to District East Redevelopment, the potential impacts associated with noise have been fully studied based upon current information and reasonable projections further analysis of potential impacts associated with noise cannot be further studied at this time, but will be evaluated as part of the Town of DeWitt site plan approval process and SEQR review. He stated because the District East Redevelopment project cannot proceed without site plan approval, it is permissible to segment the review of noise as it will not be less protective of the environment. He stated as a consequence of the foregoing, the Agency has prepared an amended negative declaration with respect to District East and a copy of it will be attached to this resolution.
7 He stated the resolution before the Board is an amendment to our SEQR prior negative declaration whereby the Agency are again issuing a negative declaration with permissive segmentation with regard to potential noise impacts.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution issuing an amended Negative Declaration pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis stated Mark McNamara is an attorney with Barclay Damon and has been acting as counsel to the Agency with regard to eminent domain actions for the District East project. He stated the resolution before the Board is an amendment to our SEQR prior negative declaration whereby the Agency are again issuing a negative declaration with permissive segmentation with regard to potential noise impacts.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution issuing an amended Negative Declaration pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis stated Mark McNamara is an attorney with Barclay Damon and has been acting as counsel to the Agency with regard to eminent domain actions for the District East project. Mark McNamara stated Jeff Davis has just described and reviewed the amended negative declaration. He stated the potential public benefits anticipated from the project by the town center project will be significant in the form of new sidewalks, streets and parks, updated utilities, hundreds of construction jobs and permanent full time positions. He stated once the build out is complete estimated sales tax revenue in excess of $12 million per year in housing stock of various types and the orderly development of a mixed use hub, or village center for the Town of Dewitt and the County which has been desired by the town for some time and is clearly stated consistent with their planning documents and the elimination of a blighted, long vacant shopping center through the redevelopment of the town center project. He stated this Board authorized by resolution in December, 2022 the staff to take the necessary steps to explore the potential acquisition of the necessary properties for the project which are the two Sears parcels, which are the original Sears store and the Sears auto store which was associated with it and the former Macy's store. He stated in connection with that original authorization pursuant to Article 2 of the eminent domain procedural law, we held a public hearing, properly noticed, in November, 2023. He stated that hearing was left open until November 20 in order to take additional comments as well as from anybody who wanted to speak at the hearing. He stated the public hearing was held in person and by Teams video and teleconference internet platform. He stated at the hearing, the Agency outlined the purpose, the proposed location and the other information considered pertinent, including maps and descriptions of the property to be Mark McNamara stated Jeff Davis has just described and reviewed the amended negative declaration. He stated the potential public benefits anticipated from the project by the town center project will be significant in the form of new sidewalks, streets and parks, updated utilities, hundreds of construction jobs and permanent full time positions. He stated once the build out is complete estimated sales tax revenue in excess of $12 million per year in housing stock of various types and the orderly development of a mixed use hub, or village center for the Town of Dewitt and the County which has been desired by the town for some time and is clearly stated consistent with their planning documents and the elimination of a blighted, long vacant shopping center through the redevelopment of the town center project. He stated this Board authorized by resolution in December, 2022 the staff to take the necessary steps to explore the potential acquisition of the necessary properties for the project which are the two Sears parcels, which are the original Sears store and the Sears auto store which was associated with it and the former Macy's store. He stated in connection with that original authorization pursuant to Article 2 of the eminent domain procedural law, we held a public hearing, properly noticed, in November, 2023. He stated that hearing was left open until November 20 in order to take additional comments as well as from anybody who wanted to speak at the hearing. He stated the public hearing was held in person and by Teams video and teleconference internet platform. He stated at the hearing, the Agency outlined the purpose, the proposed location and the other information considered pertinent, including maps and descriptions of the property to be 8 potentially acquired and the adjacent parcels, and we provided in person to those in attendance an opportunity to present oral or written statements which a number of people did. He stated council of the record building owners of the former Macy's parcel and the Sears parcels were
present at the hearing and they presented oral statements as well as submitted a written
submissions and subsequent to the hearing prior to November 20 provided additional written submissions. He stated following the public hearing, the agency created a transcript and record which included as exhibits all of the public comment from both the record owners as well as members of the public who were at the hearing and made that available at the Agency's office as well as the County Clerk's Office consistent with eminent domain procedural law. He stated the Board reviewed in full and issued an amended negative declaration with respect to the impacts of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act with respect to the project and the potential acquisition of the necessary properties for the project. He stated it is this resolution that the agency desires to adopt the determination and findings and brief synopsis which are attached to the resolution as Exhibits 1 and 2. He stated the determination and findings is pursuant to Article 2 of the eminent domain procedural law. He stated the determination and findings are this Agency's conclusions with respect to the public use, benefit and purpose of the project, the location of the project, environmental impact of the project and any other information deemed pertinent as articulated in the determination and findings, which is Exhibit 1 to the resolution. He stated Exhibit 2 of the resolution is a synopsis of the determination and findings which will be published in the newspaper and available for people to review. He stated it will say in the newspaper anyone who wants a copy of the determination and findings can request that from Mr. Petrovitch and a copy of the determination and findings would be provided to them. He stated the first part of the resolution is going to be the based on the entire record of proceedings, including but not limited to the applicant’s application to the Agency, all the materials submitted in support of the application, the SEQR materials, the negative declaration, the original negative declaration, the supplemental SEQR materials, the amended negative declaration, which just passed, the record of the public hearing, and the Agency's knowledge of the project and site and pursuant to the eminent domain procedure law, the Agency makes the following findings with respect to the project and the acquisition of property. He stated pursuant to the Eminent Domain Procedural Law, Article 2, the form and substance of the determination and fines attached as Exhibit 1 are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference. He stated pursuant to EDPL Article 2, the form and substance of the synopsis, which is attached as Exhibit 2 is also incorporated by reference and is being adopted. He stated Section 2 is the Agency authorizing and directing the executive director, staff and 9 8 potentially acquired and the adjacent parcels, and we provided in person to those in attendance an opportunity to present oral or written statements which a number of people did. He stated council of the record building owners of the former Macy's parcel and the Sears parcels were
present at the hearing and they presented oral statements as well as submitted a written
submissions and subsequent to the hearing prior to November 20 provided additional written submissions. He stated following the public hearing, the agency created a transcript and record which included as exhibits all of the public comment from both the record owners as well as members of the public who were at the hearing and made that available at the Agency's office as well as the County Clerk's Office consistent with eminent domain procedural law. He stated the Board reviewed in full and issued an amended negative declaration with respect to the impacts of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act with respect to the project and the potential acquisition of the necessary properties for the project. He stated it is this resolution that the agency desires to adopt the determination and findings and brief synopsis which are attached to the resolution as Exhibits 1 and 2. He stated the determination and findings is pursuant to Article 2 of the eminent domain procedural law. He stated the determination and findings are this Agency's conclusions with respect to the public use, benefit and purpose of the project, the location of the project, environmental impact of the project and any other information deemed pertinent as articulated in the determination and findings, which is Exhibit 1 to the resolution. He stated Exhibit 2 of the resolution is a synopsis of the determination and findings which will be published in the newspaper and available for people to review. He stated it will say in the newspaper anyone who wants a copy of the determination and findings can request that from Mr. Petrovitch and a copy of the determination and findings would be provided to them. He stated the first part of the resolution is going to be the based on the entire record of proceedings, including but not limited to the applicant’s application to the Agency, all the materials submitted in support of the application, the SEQR materials, the negative declaration, the original negative declaration, the supplemental SEQR materials, the amended negative declaration, which just passed, the record of the public hearing, and the Agency's knowledge of the project and site and pursuant to the eminent domain procedure law, the Agency makes the following findings with respect to the project and the acquisition of property. He stated pursuant to the Eminent Domain Procedural Law, Article 2, the form and substance of the determination and fines attached as Exhibit 1 are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference. He stated pursuant to EDPL Article 2, the form and substance of the synopsis, which is attached as Exhibit 2 is also incorporated by reference and is being adopted. He stated Section 2 is the Agency authorizing and directing the executive director, staff and 9 outside counsel to do those things and perform whatever acts and execute whatever documents are necessary or appropriate to acquire the property under the EDPL, including but not limited to retaining any professionals, consultants and contractors necessary to provide materials required under the Eminent Domain Procedural Law, He stated in connection with the negotiation of the purchase of the property and or the commencement of legal proceedings under the Eminent Domain Procedure Law to acquire the property by eminent domain and to offer to post the bond undertaking prior to vesting of title in any subsequent EDPL Article 4 proceeding, which is the proceeding by which one brings in Supreme Court to actually take title to the property. He stated the Agency is authorizing and directing Agency staff and outside counsel to post a bond or undertaking in any connection with that those proceedings to acquire the property so as to provide assurance, certain sorts of adequate constant compensation to the property owners. outside counsel to do those things and perform whatever acts and execute whatever documents are necessary or appropriate to acquire the property under the EDPL, including but not limited to retaining any professionals, consultants and contractors necessary to provide materials required under the Eminent Domain Procedural Law, He stated in connection with the negotiation of the purchase of the property and or the commencement of legal proceedings under the Eminent Domain Procedure Law to acquire the property by eminent domain and to offer to post the bond undertaking prior to vesting of title in any subsequent EDPL Article 4 proceeding, which is the proceeding by which one brings in Supreme Court to actually take title to the property. He stated the Agency is authorizing and directing Agency staff and outside counsel to post a bond or undertaking in any connection with that those proceedings to acquire the property so as to provide assurance, certain sorts of adequate constant compensation to the property owners. Janice Herzog stated this project is in alignment of all we have been discussing today and it is something the Town of DeWitt wants. She stated she feels confident we have taken all the necessary measures and she thinks Hueber Breuer has tried to reach a fair negotiation. She stated without this step, the project could be tied up for years. She stated the property could sit for years. She stated she feels confident the Board has really dotted our “I”s and crossed our “T”s and that Hueber Breuer has put good faith effort into negotiations. She stated it is all in alignment with what we need to do and we need to get things moving.
Patrick Hogan stated it is incumbent upon us to do it. He stated the folks in the Town of Dewitt have had to put up with it far too long.
Janice Herzog stated we would rather not have to take this step and we would like to have a fair negotiation and successful resolution but she is not sure that is possible. She thanked staff for all the work.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law 204 Determination and Finding Regarding Potential Acquisition of Property Interest by purchase or eminent domain and related actions for the OHB Redev, LLC – District East Project. Motion was carried. Janice Herzog stated this project is in alignment of all we have been discussing today and it is something the Town of DeWitt wants. She stated she feels confident we have taken all the necessary measures and she thinks Hueber Breuer has tried to reach a fair negotiation. She stated without this step, the project could be tied up for years. She stated the property could sit for years. She stated she feels confident the Board has really dotted our “I”s and crossed our “T”s and that Hueber Breuer has put good faith effort into negotiations. She stated it is all in alignment with what we need to do and we need to get things moving.
Patrick Hogan stated it is incumbent upon us to do it. He stated the folks in the Town of Dewitt have had to put up with it far too long.
Janice Herzog stated we would rather not have to take this step and we would like to have a fair negotiation and successful resolution but she is not sure that is possible. She thanked staff for all the work.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution adopting the New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law 204 Determination and Finding Regarding Potential Acquisition of Property Interest by purchase or eminent domain and related actions for the OHB Redev, LLC – District East Project. Motion was carried.
59 Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 9:31 am. Motion was carried.
_________________________________ Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director 59 February 29, 2024
Revenue / Expense / Income Current Period Current YTD Amount Change to Budget Operating/Non-Op Revenue 159,483 312,932 3,130,000 (2,817,068) Administrative Expense 44,667 74,963 950,000 (875,037) Operating/Program Expense 30,186 105,473 2,180,000 (2,074,527) Net Ordinary Income 84,631 132,496 - 132,496
59 Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 9:31 am. Motion was carried.
_________________________________ Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director 59 February 29, 2024
Revenue / Expense / Income Current Period Current YTD Amount Change to Budget Operating/Non-Op Revenue 159,483 312,932 3,130,000 (2,817,068) Administrative Expense 44,667 74,963 950,000 (875,037) Operating/Program Expense 30,186 105,473 2,180,000 (2,074,527) Net Ordinary Income 84,631 132,496 - 132,496 Current Assets Current YTD Prior YTD Total Cash 7,139,774 4,195,385 Less Pass Through Received 634,296 78,135 Available Cash 6,505,478 4,117,250 Receivables 343,077 611,088 Total 6,848,555 4,728,338 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss February 2024 Current Assets Current YTD Prior YTD Total Cash 7,139,774 4,195,385 Less Pass Through Received 634,296 78,135 Available Cash 6,505,478 4,117,250 Receivables 343,077 611,088 Total 6,848,555 4,728,338 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss February 2024
Income
2116.1 Agency Fees 5,110.00 2116.2 Application Fees 1,000.00 2116.3 WPCP Agency Fee 111,111.11 Total 2116 Fees 117,221.11 2410 Lease Income 1,224.30 Total 500 Operating Revenue 118,445.41
2401 Interest Income 36,408.64 501.2 Other Non-Operating Revenue 4,739.24 Total 501 Non-Operating Revenue 41,147.88
528.003 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 19,922.89 Total 534 Pilot & Pass Thru Revenue 19,922.89 550 WPCP Pass Thru Revenue 328,704.66 Total Income $508,220.84 GROSS PROFIT $508,220.84 Expenses
6407 Administrative Expense 44,666.54 6408 Meeting Expenses 226.05 6409 Conference Attendence 7,510.00 6410 Office Expense 910.36 6411 Memberships / Sponsorships 3,500.00 Total 6400 Operating Expense 56,812.95
6460 IDA General Legal 2,812.50 6470 WPCP Development 1,542.50 Total 6450 Barclay Damon 4,355.00 Total 6440 Legal Fees 4,355.00
6510.7 WPCP Marketing 13,234.81 Total 6510 White Pine Commerce Park 13,234.81 Total 6500 Agency Program Expenses 13,234.81
Income
2116.1 Agency Fees 5,110.00 2116.2 Application Fees 1,000.00 2116.3 WPCP Agency Fee 111,111.11 Total 2116 Fees 117,221.11 2410 Lease Income 1,224.30 Total 500 Operating Revenue 118,445.41
2401 Interest Income 36,408.64 501.2 Other Non-Operating Revenue 4,739.24 Total 501 Non-Operating Revenue 41,147.88
528.003 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 19,922.89 Total 534 Pilot & Pass Thru Revenue 19,922.89 550 WPCP Pass Thru Revenue 328,704.66 Total Income $508,220.84 GROSS PROFIT $508,220.84 Expenses
6407 Administrative Expense 44,666.54 6408 Meeting Expenses 226.05 6409 Conference Attendence 7,510.00 6410 Office Expense 910.36 6411 Memberships / Sponsorships 3,500.00 Total 6400 Operating Expense 56,812.95
6460 IDA General Legal 2,812.50 6470 WPCP Development 1,542.50 Total 6450 Barclay Damon 4,355.00 Total 6440 Legal Fees 4,355.00
6510.7 WPCP Marketing 13,234.81 Total 6510 White Pine Commerce Park 13,234.81 Total 6500 Agency Program Expenses 13,234.81 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:00 PM GMT-05:00 1/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss February 2024
6601 Service Charges 450.00
6606 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 19,922.89 Total 6605 Pilot & Pass Thru Expenses 19,922.89 Total 6600 Non-Operating Expenses 20,372.89 Total Expenses $94,775.65 NET OPERATING INCOME $413,445.19 NET INCOME $413,445.19 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:00 PM GMT-05:00 1/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss February 2024
6601 Service Charges 450.00
6606 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 19,922.89 Total 6605 Pilot & Pass Thru Expenses 19,922.89 Total 6600 Non-Operating Expenses 20,372.89 Total Expenses $94,775.65 NET OPERATING INCOME $413,445.19 NET INCOME $413,445.19 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:00 PM GMT-05:00 2/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:00 PM GMT-05:00 2/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024
Current Assets Bank Accounts 200 Cash 0.00 200.1 Cash - M & T Checking 5,211,122.25 200.2 Cash - M & T Money Maker Savings 1,937,559.83 200.4 Destiny USA Restricted Cash -8,957.82 210 Petty Cash 50.00 Total 200 Cash 7,139,774.26 Total Bank Accounts $7,139,774.26 Accounts Receivable 380 Accounts Rec.
380.6 A/R Fees, Lease & PILOT 1,853,875.66 Total 380 Accounts Rec. 1,853,875.66 Total Accounts Receivable $1,853,875.66 Other Current Assets
480.4 Credit Balance on Card -3,400.00 Total 480 Prepaid Expenses -3,400.00 Total Other Current Assets $ -3,400.00 Total Current Assets $8,990,249.92 Fixed Assets
101 White Pines Commerce Park 4,494,521.05
101.101 CHA GEIS 1 267,452.05 101.102 CHA GEIS 2 219,439.36 101.104 GEIS Reg Plan Board Overview 19,797.74 Total 101.1 WPCP GEIS 506,689.15 101.2 WPCP Legal 69,774.25 101.3 Engineering Services 58,128.00 101.301 Temporary Access 4,055.44 101.4 Environmental/Demo Services 10,428.98 Total 101.3 Engineering Services 72,612.42
101.501 Land Purchases 1,160,063.57 101.502 Closing Costs 3,168.14
Current Assets Bank Accounts 200 Cash 0.00 200.1 Cash - M & T Checking 5,211,122.25 200.2 Cash - M & T Money Maker Savings 1,937,559.83 200.4 Destiny USA Restricted Cash -8,957.82 210 Petty Cash 50.00 Total 200 Cash 7,139,774.26 Total Bank Accounts $7,139,774.26 Accounts Receivable 380 Accounts Rec.
380.6 A/R Fees, Lease & PILOT 1,853,875.66 Total 380 Accounts Rec. 1,853,875.66 Total Accounts Receivable $1,853,875.66 Other Current Assets
480.4 Credit Balance on Card -3,400.00 Total 480 Prepaid Expenses -3,400.00 Total Other Current Assets $ -3,400.00 Total Current Assets $8,990,249.92 Fixed Assets
101 White Pines Commerce Park 4,494,521.05
101.101 CHA GEIS 1 267,452.05 101.102 CHA GEIS 2 219,439.36 101.104 GEIS Reg Plan Board Overview 19,797.74 Total 101.1 WPCP GEIS 506,689.15 101.2 WPCP Legal 69,774.25 101.3 Engineering Services 58,128.00 101.301 Temporary Access 4,055.44 101.4 Environmental/Demo Services 10,428.98 Total 101.3 Engineering Services 72,612.42
101.501 Land Purchases 1,160,063.57 101.502 Closing Costs 3,168.14 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 1/3 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 1/3 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024
Total 101.5 Land Acquisition Costs 1,163,231.71 101.6 WPCP Marketing 2,984.34 Total 101 White Pines Commerce Park 6,309,812.92 106 North Salina Properties 0.00 106.1 435 North Salina 17,083.55 106.3 435 North Salina Building 634,421.53 Total 106 North Salina Properties 651,505.08 107 800 Hiawatha 604,840.42 Total 100 Land 7,566,158.42
104.1 Office Furniture 1,429.00 104.2 Equipment 4,589.00 Total 104 Machinery & Equipment 6,018.00 211 A/D Office Furniture -4,124.00 213 A/D Buildings -113,870.00 250 Investment in Real Property 29,508,083.00 Total Fixed Assets $36,962,265.42 Other Assets 240 Blue Sky Redevelopment 1,641.76 Total Other Assets $1,641.76 TOTAL ASSETS $45,954,157.10
Total 101.5 Land Acquisition Costs 1,163,231.71 101.6 WPCP Marketing 2,984.34 Total 101 White Pines Commerce Park 6,309,812.92 106 North Salina Properties 0.00 106.1 435 North Salina 17,083.55 106.3 435 North Salina Building 634,421.53 Total 106 North Salina Properties 651,505.08 107 800 Hiawatha 604,840.42 Total 100 Land 7,566,158.42
104.1 Office Furniture 1,429.00 104.2 Equipment 4,589.00 Total 104 Machinery & Equipment 6,018.00 211 A/D Office Furniture -4,124.00 213 A/D Buildings -113,870.00 250 Investment in Real Property 29,508,083.00 Total Fixed Assets $36,962,265.42 Other Assets 240 Blue Sky Redevelopment 1,641.76 Total Other Assets $1,641.76 TOTAL ASSETS $45,954,157.10
Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 300 WPCP Pass Thru Payable 1,182,093.16 Total Accounts Payable $1,182,093.16 Other Current Liabilities 600 Accounts Payable 0.00 600.1 Due to Related Party - OED 802,782.94 600.102 Due to BD WPCP -0.34 600.204 OHB Redev LLC Funds 800,000.00 600.205 Exp Pay Prev Period 9,700.03 600.206 Mileage Reimbursement 0.34 600.208 BlueRock Energy Agreement Deposit 25,000.00 600.209 Syracuse Rail Overpayment 500.00 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 28,079,656.77 600.31 Accrued Interest - OC Note Payable 488,656.00 Total 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 28,568,312.77
Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 300 WPCP Pass Thru Payable 1,182,093.16 Total Accounts Payable $1,182,093.16 Other Current Liabilities 600 Accounts Payable 0.00 600.1 Due to Related Party - OED 802,782.94 600.102 Due to BD WPCP -0.34 600.204 OHB Redev LLC Funds 800,000.00 600.205 Exp Pay Prev Period 9,700.03 600.206 Mileage Reimbursement 0.34 600.208 BlueRock Energy Agreement Deposit 25,000.00 600.209 Syracuse Rail Overpayment 500.00 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 28,079,656.77 600.31 Accrued Interest - OC Note Payable 488,656.00 Total 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 28,568,312.77 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 2/3 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 2/3 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of February 29, 2024
Total 600 Accounts Payable 30,206,295.74
602 Pass Thru Payable 32,471.00 603 PILOT Pass Thru -6,834,754.89 Total 601 PILOT and Pass Thru Payable -6,802,283.89
631.15 Salina -0.81 631.155 Skaneateles 0.10 Total 631.1 Towns -0.71
631.356 Syracuse -0.10 Total 631.3 Schools -0.10 631.4 Onondaga County -0.09 631.5 City of Syracuse -0.36 Total 631 Due to Other Governments -1.26 Total Other Current Liabilities $23,404,010.59 Total Current Liabilities $24,586,103.75 Total Liabilities $24,586,103.75 Equity 3900 Equity Unreserved 11,353,678.45 3901 Equity-Investment Fixed Assets 2,345,838.63 463 Reserve For Contracts 368,811.84 465 Equity - Unreserved 4,017.16 Net Income 7,295,707.27 Total Equity $21,368,053.35 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $45,954,157.10
Total 600 Accounts Payable 30,206,295.74
602 Pass Thru Payable 32,471.00 603 PILOT Pass Thru -6,834,754.89 Total 601 PILOT and Pass Thru Payable -6,802,283.89
631.15 Salina -0.81 631.155 Skaneateles 0.10 Total 631.1 Towns -0.71
631.356 Syracuse -0.10 Total 631.3 Schools -0.10 631.4 Onondaga County -0.09 631.5 City of Syracuse -0.36 Total 631 Due to Other Governments -1.26 Total Other Current Liabilities $23,404,010.59 Total Current Liabilities $24,586,103.75 Total Liabilities $24,586,103.75 Equity 3900 Equity Unreserved 11,353,678.45 3901 Equity-Investment Fixed Assets 2,345,838.63 463 Reserve For Contracts 368,811.84 465 Equity - Unreserved 4,017.16 Net Income 7,295,707.27 Total Equity $21,368,053.35 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $45,954,157.10 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 3/3 Accrual Basis Friday, March 1, 2024 04:02 PM GMT-05:00 3/3
PAYMENT OF BILLS - SCHEDULE #491 March 14, 2024
PAYMENT OF BILLS - SCHEDULE #491 March 14, 2024
1. ONONDAGA COUNTY PLANNING FEDERATION* $ 85.00 Symposium Registration 2. JMT OF NEW YORK, INC. $ 8,940.50 Roth Steel, Inv#37-104489 3. BARTON & LOGUIDICE $ 10,737.00 Caughdenoy Business Park, Inv#'s 139763, 139359 4. NATE STEVENS $ 211.09 Mileage Reimbursement 5. SVETLANA DYER $ 211.09 Mileage Reimbursement 6. ALEXIS RODRIGUEZ $ 221.49 Mileage Reimbursement 7. ROBERT PETROVICH $ 176.88 Mileage Reimbursement 8. BARCLAY DAMON LLP $ 177,777.78 January 2024 Legal Costs 9. JMT OF NEW YORK, INC. $ 128,787.88 January 2024 Engineering Costs 10. GORICK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. $ 423,700.00 Demolition Costs TOTAL $ 750,848.71 *Ratification of check dated February 26, 2024
1. ONONDAGA COUNTY PLANNING FEDERATION* $ 85.00 Symposium Registration 2. JMT OF NEW YORK, INC. $ 8,940.50 Roth Steel, Inv#37-104489 3. BARTON & LOGUIDICE $ 10,737.00 Caughdenoy Business Park, Inv#'s 139763, 139359 4. NATE STEVENS $ 211.09 Mileage Reimbursement 5. SVETLANA DYER $ 211.09 Mileage Reimbursement 6. ALEXIS RODRIGUEZ $ 221.49 Mileage Reimbursement 7. ROBERT PETROVICH $ 176.88 Mileage Reimbursement 8. BARCLAY DAMON LLP $ 177,777.78 January 2024 Legal Costs 9. JMT OF NEW YORK, INC. $ 128,787.88 January 2024 Engineering Costs 10. GORICK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. $ 423,700.00 Demolition Costs TOTAL $ 750,848.71 *Ratification of check dated February 26, 2024
PAYMENT OF BILLS - SCHEDULE #491 March 14, 2024 PILOT Payments 1. ONONDAGA COUNTY* $ 35,366.00
2. TOWN OF CLAY* $ 4,712.00
3. TOWN OF DEWITT* $ 12,978.00
4. TOWN OF CICERO* $ 7,770.00
5. TOWN OF ELBRIDGE* $ 1,286.00
6. TOWN OF SKANEATELES* $ 226.00
7. TOWN OF LAFAYETTE* $ 2,966.00
8. NORTH SYRACUSE CSD* $ 72,707.00
9. JORDAN-ELBRIDGE CSD* $ 6,908.00
10. MARCELLUS CSD* $ 2,854.00
11. LAFAYETTE CSD* $ 9,664.00
12. EAST SYRACUSE MINOA CSD* $ 66,986.00
TOTAL $ 224,423.00 Ratification of checks dated February 21, 2024
PAYMENT OF BILLS - SCHEDULE #491 March 14, 2024 PILOT Payments 1. ONONDAGA COUNTY* $ 35,366.00
2. TOWN OF CLAY* $ 4,712.00
3. TOWN OF DEWITT* $ 12,978.00
4. TOWN OF CICERO* $ 7,770.00
5. TOWN OF ELBRIDGE* $ 1,286.00
6. TOWN OF SKANEATELES* $ 226.00
7. TOWN OF LAFAYETTE* $ 2,966.00
8. NORTH SYRACUSE CSD* $ 72,707.00
9. JORDAN-ELBRIDGE CSD* $ 6,908.00
10. MARCELLUS CSD* $ 2,854.00
11. LAFAYETTE CSD* $ 9,664.00
12. EAST SYRACUSE MINOA CSD* $ 66,986.00
TOTAL $ 224,423.00 Ratification of checks dated February 21, 2024
(A DISCRETELY PRESENTED COMPONENT UNIT
(A DISCRETELY PRESENTED COMPONENT UNIT
December 31, 2023 and 2022
December 31, 2023 and 2022
(A Discretely Presented Component Unit of the County of Onondaga, New York) Table of Contents Independent Auditor’s Report 1‐3 Required Supplementary Information:
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) 4‐7 Financial Statements:
Statements of Net Position ‐ December 31, 2023 and 2022 8 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position ‐ For the Years Ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 9 Statements of Cash Flows ‐ For the Years Ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 10 ‐ 11 Notes to Financial Statements 12 ‐ 21 Supplementary Information:
Supplemental Schedule of Revenue Bonds and Other Bonds (Conduit Debt Obligations) 22 ‐ 23 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT Board of Directors Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Syracuse, New York Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements
(A Discretely Presented Component Unit of the County of Onondaga, New York) Table of Contents Independent Auditor’s Report 1‐3 Required Supplementary Information:
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) 4‐7 Financial Statements:
Statements of Net Position ‐ December 31, 2023 and 2022 8 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position ‐ For the Years Ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 9 Statements of Cash Flows ‐ For the Years Ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 10 ‐ 11 Notes to Financial Statements 12 ‐ 21 Supplementary Information:
Supplemental Schedule of Revenue Bonds and Other Bonds (Conduit Debt Obligations) 22 ‐ 23 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT Board of Directors Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Syracuse, New York Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements We have audited the financial statements of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency (the Agency), a component unit of the County of Onondaga, New York (the County), as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Agency’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Agency, as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the changes in its financial position and its cash flows thereof for the years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion We have audited the financial statements of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency (the Agency), a component unit of the County of Onondaga, New York (the County), as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Agency’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Agency, as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the changes in its financial position and its cash flows thereof for the years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the Agency and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements The Agency's management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Agency’s ability to continue as a going concern for one year beyond the financial statement date.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the Agency and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements The Agency's management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Agency’s ability to continue as a going concern for one year beyond the financial statement date.
Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with GAAS will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements. In performing an audit in accordance with GAAS, we:
Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with GAAS will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements. In performing an audit in accordance with GAAS, we:
• Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. • Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Agency’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements. • Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Agency’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time. We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control–related matters that we identified during the audit.
Required Supplementary Information • Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. • Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Agency’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements. • Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Agency’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time. We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control–related matters that we identified during the audit.
Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the Management’s Discussion and Analysis on pages 4‐7 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the Management’s Discussion and Analysis on pages 4‐7 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Supplementary Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Agency's basic financial statements. The supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations), as required by New York State General Municipal Law §859 (1) (b), are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations) is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations) is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Agency's basic financial statements. The supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations), as required by New York State General Municipal Law §859 (1) (b), are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations) is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplemental schedule of revenue bonds and other bonds (conduit debt obligations) is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated March 14, 2024, on our consideration of the Agency’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulation, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the Agency’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance.
Syracuse, New York March 14, 2024 Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated March 14, 2024, on our consideration of the Agency’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulation, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the Agency’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance.
Syracuse, New York March 14, 2024
This is a long document — showing the opening sections. Read the complete text.