clayny.news

AI for transparency
Clay, New York · Friday, August 7, 2026· Aug 7, 2026
Public Records › OCIDA › ocida-meeting

November 2025 — 11.13.25 OCIDA Reg Mtg Minutes SIGNED

Document date 2024-12-12 Collected 2026-08-07 Extracted text 2,266 words Format PDF
Official copy ↗ Archived copy Plain text (OCR) Search mentions
Same source November 2025 · 2024-12-12

Machine-extracted (OCR) from the official document — formatting is approximate; the official copy governs.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Regular Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2025
A Regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday,
November 13, 2025, at 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York.
Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:30 AM with the following in attendance:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan
Susan Stanezyk
Elizabeth Dreyfuss
Cydney Johnson
Leslie English
ABSENT:
Fanny Villarreal
Garard Grannell
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director
Nate Stevens, Treasurer
Alexis Rodriguez, Secretary
Robert Schoeneck, Assistant Treasurer
Evan Carter, Assistant Secretary
Jeffrey Davis, Esq., Agency Counsel
Amanda Fitzgerald, Esq., Agency Counsel
Sarah Spencer, Esq., Agency Counsel
Joe Goethe, Cameron Hinsdale, LLC
Approval of Meeting Minutes: October 23, 2025
Upon motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, the Board approved the Regular
meeting minutes of October 23, 2025. Motion was carried.
Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 7, 2025
Upon motion by Susan Stanezyk, seconded by Cydney Johnson, the Board approved the Special
meeting minutes of November 7, 2025. Motion was carried.
OGIDA
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Treasurer’s Report:
Nate Stevens gave a brief overview of the Treasurer’s Report for the month of October 2025.
Upon motion by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, seconded by Cydney Johnson, the Board approved the
Treasurer's Report. Motion was carried.
Payment of Bills:
Nate Stevens gave a brief overview of the Payment of Bills.
Upon motion by Leslie English, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, the Board approved the Payment of
Bills. Motion was carried.
Action Items:
1. Cameron Hinsdale, LLC (Project #3101-25-05A)
The applicant is proposing to construct a mixed-use residential building/s consisting of
roughly 175 units and a total of roughly 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in the Town of
Camillus.
Joe Goethe explained that the Applicant is proposing a mixed-use project, directly across the
street from Township 5 on Hinsdale Road. He noted that the project aligns with Plan
Onondaga, as well as the pro-housing community of Camillus.
J. Goethe noted that the project is receiving a PUD (planned unit development) for the project
to make it mixed-use, which fits into the comprehensive plan of Camillus. The project is
taking place on 20 acres, mostly owned by the Christ Community Church of the Nazarene,
which is currently religiously exempt from property taxes. The five parcels directly across
from Township 5 on Hinsdale Road will also be part of the proposed project and PUD.
J. Goethe noted that the original project was approximately 170 multi-family apartments
consisting of 30-35 townhouses, and one- or two-bedroom apartments. The project has now
increased the units from 170 to 232 and the retail component has been reduced.
J. Goethe noted that the Applicant has increased the number of workforce units to 46 (20%).
J. Goethe advised that they will be putting in a town road, off-site infrastructure, an
interchange in between Township 5 and this project, and pedestrian walkways, to ensure that
the project aligns with Plan Onondaga’s identification of an emerging center.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
J. Goethe explained to the Board that they’re looking for a negative declaration to move
forward with the PUD. The Town (of Camillus) is going to take an action and has had public
hearings at the last three meetings. The Town plans on closing the public hearing and
making this a PUD zone change on November 25" and will recommend it back to the
planning board for planning discussions.
J. Goethe noted that there were few issues received from Agency letters. J. Goethe noted that
County DOT (Marty Voss) provided a response on November 12.
J. Goethe noted that Gordon Stansbury has done a traffic study and advised that the change in
the scope from 170 units to 232 units will improve the overall traffic issues because it will
reduce it due to the commercial aspect of the project.
Susan Stanezyk asked if the 20 acres being acquired from the church, that are currently tax
exempt, will eventually go back on the tax rolls.
J. Goethe responded yes.
S. Stanezyk inquired how much of the units are workforce housing.
J. Goethe responded that there will be 20% workforce housing.
S. Stanezyk asked if the retail portion has been reduced since the original plan.
J. Goethe confirmed that the retail portion of the project has been reduced.
Patrick Hogan asked if the AMI for the workforce housing is 80%.
J. Goethe confirmed that the AMI is 80%.
R. Petrovich noted to the Board that the action put forth today is for SEQR. The Agency
staff is currently vetting the application and there is no proposal that has been put forward yet
for any incentives.
Sarah Spencer advised that her team at Bond Schoeneck & King was tasked with the
environmental review for this project.
S. Spencer advised that no other Agency can take action on the project until the SEQR
review is complete.
S. Spencer noted that the Agency received an application in August 2025 and determined that
a coordinated review must be conducted. At the September 11 meeting, the Agency adopted
OEIDA
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
a resolution with its intent to serve as lead Agency, preliminarily classifying the project as a
Type I action under SEQR. Following that meeting, Bond Schoeneck & King sent
coordination letters to all potentially involved and interested agencies, requesting comment,
sharing the project details, and Part I of the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). The
agencies had 30 days to respond with comments, consent for the Agency to act as lead
Agency, or opposition to that role.
S. Spencer noted that the Agency received letters from NYS DOT and Onondaga County
DOT, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), Office of Parks and Recreation
and Historic Preservation, and Onondaga County Department of Water and Environmental
Protection (WEP).
S. Spencer noted at the October 23 meeting, the Agency officially classified the project as a
Type I action under SEQR. After that meeting, the project was revised slightly to include the
two additional parcels on Hinsdale Road. After receiving this revision, Bond Schoeneck &
King sent updated letters to the potentially involved and interested agencies with the updated
concept plan, requesting additional comments. The Agency did not receive any additional
comments on that change.
S. Spencer noted as the Applicant previously stated, the project scope was revised to include
additional residential units and fewer retail buildings. S. Spencer stated that they do not
believe that this change has an impact on the project in terms of Agency coordination
because the footprint of the project will remain essentially the same, and they did update the
analysis to look at things like traffic, the issues that were important in their original analysis,
and how the residential change will impact those environmental concerns.
S. Spencer noted that the application was reviewed with the Applicant when it was first
received. They requested updates to Part I of the EAF and to clarify items or request
additional details. Counsel and the Agency met with the Applicant on multiple occasions to
discuss the project and request additional information. Counsel and the Agency have also
spoke with the Town Attorney about their review process.
S. Spencer advised that they have also coordinated with other agencies via email, letter, and
phone calls. They have reviewed the minutes from the Town’s public hearing and there were
very few comments, all of which were minor.
S. Spencer advised that the Agency is not required to hold a public hearing for SEQR on this
project because there is no EIS (Environmental Impact Statement).
S. Spencer noted that they also reviewed Onondaga County’s Planning Department
recommendations that were issued to the Town as part of their zone change application
process and there was nothing concerning in those recommendations that won’t be accounted
OEIDA
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
for in the remaining review process. They reviewed the various comprehensive plans:
Onondaga County’s Housing, Plan Onondaga, Town of Camillus Comprehensive Plan,
Metropolitan Transportation Council’s Plan, the bus system routes, public transport to the
project site, the NYS Energy Plan, and disadvantaged community mapping, which is now
required under the environmental review process.
S. Spencer advised that the next steps for the Agency is to review and complete Part II of the
EAF, which takes Part I and all of the due diligence that the Agency has done and classifies
each environmental impact as small or no impact, or moderate or large impact.
S. Spencer noted that they identified 3 potentially moderate impacts. One was to traffic due
to the size of the development and the need for updated infrastructure surrounding the site.
The second was for energy use, because the number of units and the square footage that will
be heated and cooled as part of the project. The third was impacts to community resources
such as schools, fire, or police. Those are noted on Part II of the EAF.
S. Spencer asked if any Board members had any questions on Part II of the EAF that they
would like to discuss.
No questions were raised.
S. Spencer noted that Part III of the EAF is the analysis document. It was noted that there
were a few changes made to the document, based on the letter that the Agency received the
day prior from Onondaga County Department of Water Environment and Protection, relating
to the sewer facilities at the site.
S. Spencer explained that this analysis goes through each of the impacts. Whether or they
noted that they would be small or moderate, they analyzed all of them the same way to be
thorough. The document discusses the impacts and the process thus far and is a very
thorough explanation of the review the Agency has done.
S. Spencer advised that they ultimately concluded that there will be no adverse environmental
impacts from the project and recommended adopting a negative declaration.
R. Petrovich questioned S. Spencer if that recommendation and conclusion includes the
updated comments from WEP.
S. Spencer responded yes. She also noted that the Agency has a record of all of the
documents compiled, which include the Agency responses, and all the various plans that have
been reviewed supporting the determination today.
OCIDA
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board issuing a negative
declaration under SEQRA.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth
Dreyfuss. Motion was carried.
Public Relations/Marketing Services — Contract Authorization
R. Petrovich advised that the Agency is currently under contract with ABC Creative Group,
who has been providing support services in terms of marketing, public relations, and other
support to the Agency, relative to the projects that are being put forward and initiatives that
are being executed by the Agency, specifically relating to Micron, supply chain, and other
projects of substance.
R. Petrovich advised that for planning purposes the existing contract with ABC should be
increased by $70,000 for the rest of 2025 and all of 2026 for those types of support services.
Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested of, “A resolution of the Board increasing the
contract with ABC Creative Marketing Group in an amount not to exceed $70,000 for public
relations/marketing services to communicate the Agency’s objectives.” Motion was made by
Elizabeth Dreyfuss, seconded by Cydney Johnson. Motion was carried.
Lease Agreement Authorization
The Onondaga County Department of Water Environment Protection is requesting to lease
and eventually purchase a portion of property located at 5064 State Route 31 in the Town of
Clay, owned by the Agency to undertake certain activities consistent with its Oak Orchard
municipal sewer expansion project.
R. Petrovich recalled for the Board that the Agency owns property at the corner of
Caughdenoy Road and Route 31, south of that intersection and east of that intersection. In
support of development that will occur in that area, WEP has initiated a pump station project
to provide sewers not only for the Micron campus, but others in the immediate service area.
That project is underway. This is to ultimately “carve out” a portion approximately 1.13
acres of that land that WEP will own and be transferred from the Agency to WEP, so that
they can maintain their facility in the future and provide sewer services to the immediate
area.
R. Petrovich advised that there is an appraisal supporting the value of the land, and WEP has
been made aware of the cost. It is a 15-year lease. The total dollar amount is approximately
$190,000 over that 15-year period. If at any time WEP chooses to execute on the lease to
own it, they can exercise the option to acquire the property from the IDA.
OCIDA
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing the
lease and sale of property located at 5064 State Route 31 in the Town of Clay to the
Onondaga County Department of Water Environment Protection in connection with the
development of land in the Town of Clay, and execution of documents in connection
therewith, subject to compliance with the Public Authorities Law requirements.” Motion was
made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Leslie English. Cydney Johnson abstained. Motion
was carried.
4. Committee Appointments
Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board appointing Leslie
English to the Audit Committee.” Motion was made by Susan Stanezyk, seconded by Cydney
Johnson. Motion was carried.
Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board appointing Patrick
Hogan as Chair of the Audit Committee.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by
Cydney Johnson. Motion was carried.
Motion to adjourn was made by Susan Stanezyk and seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss at 8:50 AM.
QW aps Rodrigues
Alexis Rodriguez, Secretary