COURT FACILITIES AND COUNTY SPACE NEEDS COMMITTEE

DECEMBER 3, 2008

 

** NOT APPROVED **


 

Members Present:  D. Pullen, G. Benson, W. Hall, T. Hopkins, T. O’Grady, C. Crandall (Absent: D. Fanton)

 

Others Present:  D. Burdick, W. Dibble, A. Finnemore, K. Kruger, J. Margeson, T. Miner, T. Parker, B. Riehle, T. Ross, N. Ungermann;  Media:  B. Quinn, Wellsville Daily Reporter

 

Call to Order:  3:00 p.m. by Committee Chairman David Pullen.

 

Approval of Minutes:  The minutes of the November 19, 2008 meeting were approved following a motion made by Legislator Hopkins, seconded by Legislator Hall and carried.

 

Court Facilities Project Bond Resolution Process:

            County Attorney Thomas Miner prepared a resolution for consideration entitled, “A Resolution Authorizing the Renovation of Existing Court Facility Space and County Office Space Together with the Construction of New Court Facility Space Contiguous to Existing County Space in Order to Implement the Court Facilities Capital Plan in and for the County of Allegany, New York, at a Maximum Estimated Cost of $18,684,000, and Directing the Preparation of a Bond Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $18,684,000 Bonds of Said County to Pay the Cost Thereof.”  It is an abbreviated form of a bond resolution, which is the next step necessary to move forward with the Court Facilities Project.  The amount used in the resolution is the amount provided by the architectural firm, LaBella Associates.  The document presented is not the formal bond resolution, but authorizes the County Attorney to prepare the bond resolution and to have the County’s bond counsel review and sign off on it.  The bond amount represents a maximum; there is no requirement to spend that amount.  At the last meeting, the committee approved, and forwarded to the Ways and Means Committee, a contract to retain Hodgson Russ Attorneys to prepare a Project Labor Agreement, waiving the Wicks Law requirements and hopefully generating savings from the estimates provided by LaBella.

 

            Legislator O’Grady questioned the future possibility of separating the two projects (Court Renovation/Addition and County Office Building Renovation) if they are bonded for as one total.  At what point could they be separated, or does bonding for them together preclude separating them later?  County Attorney Miner noted that the bond amount is the maximum for the whole project, but it can still be separated out.  County Treasurer Terri Ross stated that it depends on how we release the specs for the project.

 

            Ms. Ross explained the bonding process.  Normally the committees will refer the bond resolution to the Board and the Board will approve it.  The amount included is an estimate.  Once the bidding is completed, the dollar amount based on those bids is the amount that is actually borrowed.  Due to regulations on spend-downs, the total amount for the project is borrowed in sections.  The financing is broken down through Bond Anticipation Notes (BAN), which are short-term for the interim, to allow completion of the project, and then the bonding is done.  Mr. Pullen added that the bond resolution approves a maximum dollar figure that the County is willing to borrow for the project.  Additional resolutions will be required for the approval of contracts and expenditure of funds on each portion of the project.

 

            Legislator Burdick asked for clarification that we would need a two-thirds vote to authorize bonding, and then a simple majority vote for authorizing each individual contract and corresponding expense associated with the project.  Mr. Pullen stated that was correct.

 

            Legislator Hall expounded on Mr. O’Grady’s question.  It wasn’t about the total to be spent, but whether the physical project is separate from this resolution.  Can decisions still be made on how to move forward on the project.  County Attorney Miner replied in the affirmative.  The formal bond resolution will be discussed with bond counsel to ensure it is a properly authorized public project.  We can still do a hybrid project.

 

            Legislator Kruger commented that it would be difficult to separate the project, because the plan that OCA has tentatively approved includes space in the County Office Building.  Mr. O’Grady explained that he feels the County Office Building is separate from the Courthouse Renovation/Addition portion of the plan.  Only the Legislative Chambers in the Office Building will be used by the Grand Jury.  Mr. Pullen pointed out that nearly $14 million will be for the Courthouse Renovation/Addition, and $4.8 million will be for renovations in the County Office Building - predominantly in the former Jail space. 

 

            Chairman Crandall remarked that the proposed resolution will be forwarded to the Ways and Means Committee if approved here, and there may be some wording changes on the actual bond resolution, depending on what bond counsel recommends.  Mr. Miner stated that changes would be very esoteric, just some legal phrasing.  Mr. Pullen noted that this makes sure the process moves forward, and was prompted by correspondence from Chief Administrative Judge Pfau.  This is the next step.  The resolution request will be considered by Ways and Means on December 17 and won’t have to come back to this committee for approval of any wording changes.  Chairman Crandall pointed out that the essence of the resolution would not be changed, only the legal phrasing.

 

            A motion was made by Legislator Hopkins, seconded by Legislator Benson and carried unanimously to refer the proposed resolution to the Ways and Means Committee.

 

Relocation of Office for the Aging and Veterans’ Service Agency to Crossroads:

            Committee Chairman Pullen reported that at a prior meeting, the Industrial Development Agency was authorized to move forward on the Crossroads project.  There is no further information at this time.

 

Reminder – Special Committee of the Whole Meeting:

            Mr. Pullen made note of this evening’s Committee of the Whole meeting that was scheduled to present information on the financial impacts regarding the Court Facilities Project.

 

NEXT MEETING:      Tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 3:00 p.m.

 

Adjournment:  The meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m. following a motion made by Legislator Hall, seconded by Legislator Hopkins and carried.

 

Respectfully submitted by

Adele Finnemore, Journal Clerk