►
From YouTube: August 27, 2020 IURA Board Mtg. - Part 1
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
In
the
cdbg
cv
activities
involving
the
security
deposits
with
catholic
charities
and
the
child
development
council,
provision
of
ppe
to
daycare
centers
that
are
located
outside
the
city
of
ithaca.
C
C
D
Okay,
we
had
a
meeting
this
past
month.
Maybe
it
was
even
last
week.
I'm
not
sure
we
have
no
official
action
report.
We
did
do
two
update
items
on
the
green
street
garage
redevelopment
urban
renewal
project,
so
nels
brought
us
up
to
speed
in
the
process
of
the
west
end
and
the
visino's
efforts
to
move
through
the
planning
board
process
and
I
think
there's
some
things
in
the
packet.
You
provide
some
update,
nails
right
in
the
packet
and
on
that
I.
A
D
There
we
spent
more
time
on
the
eastern
end
of
the
garage.
We
could
take
questions
on
the
western
end.
If
you
have
them,
we
spent
more
time
on
the
eastern
end
of
the
garage
where
the
developer
has
came
back
with
additional
red
lines
and
comments
on
our
draft
agreement
that
we
had
approved.
D
I
believe
at
our
last
meeting
to
move
forward
to
designate
them
as
the
preferred
developer
and
move
that
process
forward
with
a
disposition
agreement,
so
they
came
back
through
their
attorneys
and
others
with
some
comments
and
a
larger
issue
around
the
financing
and
viability
of
the
project
in
light
of
their
going
to
the
ida
to
get
incentives
from
the
ida
and
learning
that
the
you
know,
the
the
benefit
package
is
shifting
in
light
of
the
requirement
to
actually
provide
either
20
of
units
at
eighty
percent,
median
income
or
lower
on
site
or
make
a
financial
contribution
to
the
community
housing
task
force
fund.
D
They
had
always
committed
to
provide
10
units
minimum
on
site
with
a
goal
of
trying
to
provide
20,
but
they
had
committed
to
10
now
they're
weighing
the
options
of
20
on
site
or
making
an
additional
payment,
which
would
be
on
the
order
of
either
between
250
or
500
000
to
the
housing
trust
fund
or
pushing
back
on
the
idea
and
trying
to
negotiate,
and
so
they
basically
wanted
us
as
iura
to
weigh
in,
and
we
kind
of
indicated
that
this
is
really
between
them
and
the
ida.
D
So
it
took
us
a
little
while
to
kind
of
get
clarity
on
who
really
had
jurisdiction
over
the
decision
that
policy,
and
once
they
understood
that
the
ira
did
not
have
the
ability
to
kind
of
unilaterally
influence
that
decision.
They
agreed
that
they
would
continue
through
their
process
of
meeting
with
the
ida
and
maybe
laura.
You
can
have
an
update
because
I
think
you're
out
in
the
ida
as
well.
Just
where
they
are.
D
You
know,
try
to
negotiate
that
with
the
ida
and
come
to
a
resolution
that
they
think
can
work
for
the
financials
of
the
project.
Based
on
that,
they
would
then
come
back
to
the
edc
again
and
we
would
either
modify
the
agreement.
Keep
the
agreement
as
is,
and
then
address
their
sort
of
other,
which
are
more
minor
kind
of
red
lines,
so
that
we're
a
bit
of
a
pause
with
that
project
in
a
holding
pattern.
D
While
the
sort
of
underlying
financials
and
the
amount
of
affordability
for
the
project
in
terms
of
numbers
of
units
and
et
cetera,
are
worked
out
that
sufficient
nils
or
would
you
add
anything.
A
D
E
Well,
I
do
have
a
question.
I
understand
that
the
developer
had
committed
to
10,
but
wasn't
there
a
goal
or
the
possibility
of
including
20
percent.
D
But
here's
but
here's
the
catch.
Well,
here's
the
catch,
so
they
committed
to
doing
10,
but
they
always
say
well.
We
would
go
to
20
if
we
can
get
the
appropriate
incentives
from
the
ida,
and
this
was
before,
of
course,
the
revision
of
the
policy
which
required
20
of
units
on
site
or
the
financial
alternative
right.
The
making
of
this
one-time
payment.
So
now
they
kind
of
feel
like
oh
well.
D
Actually,
the
the
the
burden
of
trying
to
get
the
incentives
has
actually
increased
to
the
extent
that
makes
the
20,
in
their
view,
not
feasible
right
because
it
costs
them
more
to
get
to
20
than
they
thought
they
thought
they
would
get
greater
incentives
in
terms
of
tax
relief
to
try
to
get
to
20,
but
now
what
the
idea
is
telling
them
is
actually
no
you
have
to
go
to
20
or
you
have
to
make
this
payment,
so
they're
inclined
to
try
to
try
to
stick
the
10
percent
and
and
try
to
negotiate
away
the
other
10
and
so
we've
kind
of
said,
okay.
D
Well,
our
requirement
in
the
dda
is
a
minimum
of
10.
That's
what
we
require
you
to
meet
if
you
can
resolve
this
some
other
way
now,
we've
also,
we
had
some
conversation
with
them
about
the
benefits
and
of
are
those
units
on
site
or
is
there
a
benefit
to
them,
making
that
payment,
which
then
would
give
us
the
resources
as
a
community
to
provide
affordable
housing
elsewhere
in
the
community,
and
I
think
they
were
listening
to
that.
D
I
think
they
were
trying
to
think
through
like
is
it
actually
maybe
more
advantageous
for
them
to
just
make
a
financial
payment?
And
I
think
that's
what
they
want
to
go
away
and
think
about
and
calculate
some
numbers
and
come
back
to
the
idea
and
discuss
in
greater
detail
how
that
would
meet
the
requirements.
The
idea
has.
C
D
Well,
I
mean
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong,
nells
or
lower
right,
I
mean
the
whole
reason
you
would
go
to
the
ida
is
to
get
an
instead
of
incentives
which
could
include
tax
abatement
could
include
sales,
tax,
etc
right.
So
when
they
looked
at
the
agreement
with
us,
they
didn't
know
what
kind
of
package
they
would
get
from
the
ida,
but
they
thought
well.
D
If
I
we
can
negotiate
a
good
package
of
the
ida,
we
might
be
able
to
provide
20
okay
right
in
the
interim,
because
this
is
now
over
a
period
of
series
of
months
right.
The
ida
implemented
their
new
policy,
which
is
to
try
to
increase
the
amount
of
workforce
housing
in
every
multi-family
project
in
the
city
that
they
support
right
right,
so
so
because
of
the
extended
duration
of
the
project,
but
now
now,
when
they're
actually
applying
for
those
incentives,
there's
new
requirements
to
access
those
incentives.
A
A
Well,
if
I
can
just
add
they,
they
read
the
city's
resolution
to
the
ida
and
thought
that
was
the
direction
it
was
going
to
go,
which
was
to
require
twenty
percent
affordable
housing,
but
also
have
an
enhanced
incentive
package
to
make
that
possible.
That
was
the
city,
the
council's
recommendation,
essentially
to
the
ida.
A
The
idea
adopted
the
requirement,
but
did
not
sweeten
the
incentive
package.
They
thought
it
was
sufficient
to
make
it
feasible
and
it
appeared
on
an
analysis
of
several
projects,
historic
projects,
if
you
applied
this
requirement,
that
it
would
reduce
the
return
on
investment
by
one
percent.
So
if
the
project
was
making
nine
percent
before
it
would
make
eight
percent
in
terms
of
return
on
equity
investment,
and
that
was
viewed
as
something
that
was
still
within
reason
for
most
projects
that
they
that
they
provide
incentives
for.
C
C
No,
no,
no,
no,
okay,
that's
the
thing,
but
everybody
asks
for
incentives.
Whether
or
not
it's.
No,
I
don't
know
I
mean
what
will
happen
with
city
center,
not
city
center.
I
mean
both
the
boat
place.
What's
it
called
you.
D
C
D
D
I
suspect
you
know
in
a
month
or
two
it's
going
to
come
back
and
there
might
be
a
decision
that
the
agency
needs
to
make
about
potentially
changing
what
our
requirements
are,
depending
on
how
it
ends
up
at
the
ida,
and
I
think,
therefore,
I
think
this
group
should
be
sort
of
thinking
about
the
trade-offs
and
balances
of
how
many
affordable
units
we
desire
on
site
and
if
they
came
back
with
an
alternative
that
included
less
on
site
but
more
of
a
payment
to
the
fund.
D
Is
that
actually
a
good
thing
in
the
ira's
viewpoint,
or
do
we?
Are
we
interested
in
trying
to
get
the
maximum
number
of
affordable
units
in
this
particular
project?
Recognizing
that
the
other
important
component
of
this
project
is
the
garage
and
we
have
very
limited
options
about
how
we
get
a
garage
built
on
this
site?
So
we
kind
of
need
to
balance.
I
think
these
as
we
have
throughout
this
particular
project.
D
I
I
actually
feel
like
it
was
actually
a
relatively
productive
discussion
at
the
committee.
There
was
no
real
answers,
but
I
felt
like
it
was
a
productive
discussion.
They
were
willing
to
kind
of
go
away
and
realize
they
had
to
crunch
some
more
numbers
and
then
you'd
have
more
discussions
with
the
iea
and
knew
that
they
could
come
back
and
review
it,
which
we
think
probably
won't
be
until
october.
At
this
point,.
C
E
Yeah,
if
I
could
just
jump
in
the
next
ida
meeting,
is
scheduled
for
september
9th,
the
ida's
workforce
housing
policy
was
approved
by
the
ida.
On
july
8th,
there
has
been
some
discussion
of
the
ctap
process
at
the
pedc
meeting
and
there
have
been
some
questions
as
to
whether
there
will
continue
to
be
a
two-part
application
policy,
an
application
through
the
city
and
application
through
the
idea-
and
I
don't
know
that
that
is
yet
resolved.
E
E
There's
a
belief
of
some
that
the
opt
out
amount
is
too
low.
Presently
that
opt-out
is
five
thousand
dollars
per
unit.
So
that's
just
an
overall
comment.
I
don't
think
there
has
been
a
review
again
of
the
east
end
of
the
garage
project
that
may
come
up
in
the
september
9th
idea.
D
I
mean
if
I
could
just
opine
it
on
that.
I
did
see
somewhere
in
the
media
that
discussion
about
the
latest
comments
at
the
pedc
meeting.
About
that
you
know,
I
think
it
depends
on
how
you
look
at
that
payment
right.
We
know
that
it
costs
way
more
than
5.5
000
per
unit
to
build
an
affordable
housing
unit
right.
So
if
you
look
at
it
through
that
lens,
you
say:
wow,
yeah,
okay,
so
5000
is
actually
quite
low.
D
If
you
have
a
really,
if
you
have
a
significant
sizable
low
development
like
the
one
we're
talking
about
here,
then
that
actually
becomes
real
money
real
fast.
That
in
the
hands
of
the
housing
fund,
is
actually
quite
useful,
because
in
many
cases
we
actually
leverage
those
funds
against
other
funds
right.
So
you
don't
need
the
full
funding
of
that
particular
unit.
D
So
I
think
we
have
to
look
at
the
you
know.
You
have
to
look
at
the
macro
picture
and
say
what
is
the
best
vehicle
in
the
community
to
try
to
get
affordable
housing
built
and
is
it
project
by
project,
or
is
it
trying
to
put
real
tangible
money
into
people
who
actually
are
committed
to
building
affordable
housing
projects
from
the
people
who
actually
want
to
do
market
rate
housing
and
recognizing
the
larger
economics
in
the
community
of
who's
going
to
be
able
to
afford
to
pay
that?
D
D
But
I
think
just
that.
I
just
wanted
to
make
the
point
that
just
looking
at
on
the
per
unit
cost,
I
think,
can
be
unidimensional
and
you
have
to,
I
think,
have
to
consider
that
payment.
In
light
of
all
the
other
factors
at
play,.
C
I
think
it's
also
interesting
to
consider
that
they
are
talking
about
10,
so
there
would
be
affordable
housing
in
that
project.
C
D
D
B
All
right
any
report
from
the
neighborhood
investment
committee.
B
Time
and
then
governance.
F
Hi
everyone.
So
we
have
the
one
action
item
that
came
one
action
item
that
came
out
of
the
governance
committee
for
the
agency
to
consider,
but
before
doing
that,
I
think
it
would
be.
F
The
best
course
of
action
would
be
to
make
a
motion
for
to
move
into
executive
session,
because
it
involves
the
performance
of
a
particular
employee
and
and
then
within
that
we
may
take
an
action
that
we
can
then
make
public.
F
If
that
makes
sense-
and
I
think
everyone
has
received
materials
around-
that
possible
action
under
separate
cover
because
of
his
confidential
nature.
So
if,
if
it's
okay,
I'd
like
to
to
move
that,
we
move
into
executive
session
to
discuss
the
performance
of
a
particular
individual.
C
E
B
Once
again,
let's
just
make
sure
that
we're
not.