Council Meets--Finally, with Some Positive Results; but the Finger Lakes Times is nowhere in sight

It took some doing, but City Council finally met to discuss “neighborhood safety” in the aftermath of a murder, an apparently related shooting, and the mobilization of two neighborhood watch groups calling for a Council decision on a curfew. Not long after our post about the need for a meeting, Mayor Cass called a meeting for the following Tuesday.

The meeting went well, but, how would anyone know? Where was the Finger Lakes Times? The City Clerk sent notices about the meeting to local media, but none attended.

The meeting featured a professional, respectful discussion of several aspects of youth violence, and of the possibilities for helping families and neighborhoods restore normalcy to their lives. The Mayor distributed a draft of the ‘charge’ he gave to the newly formed “Neighborhood Safety Task Force.” The Task Force has been asked to discuss strategies for stabilizing neighborhoods and reducing youth violence.

Council discussion quickly turned to the curfew question. Councilor D’Amico, who chairs the Neighborhood Safety Committee, agreed to ask the Task Force whether a curfew is a good idea for Geneva and bring their recommendation to Council in time for the second meeting in September (scheduled for 9/19), and that was added to their charge.

If the committee recommended going forward with a curfew, and if Council were to agree (which seems likely) there would be a first reading at that meeting on the 19th. A curfew could go into effect after a second reading in October.

Augustine questioned City Attorney Clark Cannon as to whether council could enact a temporary curfew immediately to take us through the remaining warm weather. He indicated that council could take emergency action of that sort, but Councilors D’Amico and Greco urged Council not to “get out ahead” of the Committee’s work.

The discussion of the curfew centered on three issues: First, “what is the purpose?” Second, “what is the law that achieves that purpose?”; and third “Is such a law enforceable?”

Augustine said she is less concerned with “something punitive” and more interested in giving police officers “probable cause” to stop a group of kids out late at night and ask them what they’re up to. She said the proposal brought forward in May by Dorchester Avenue resident Charlie Davis was complaint-based, meaning officers could only enforce a curfew if neighbors called in a noise or vandalism complaint. That doesn’t allow them to stop youth who may be gathered downtown or on a street where no one is watching, said Augustine.

Capraro, Greco, and Cass discussed the powers police officers used to have to approach a group of kids and tell them to “move along” or “go home.” Capraro asked if there was already something on the books that still gives the police that power today. Cannon said that the laws they mentioned were ‘loitering laws’ that were ruled unconstitutional over a decade ago. A curfew ordinance, if written correctly, could give police back some of that power when dealing with youth at night, so long as there is “reasonable suspicion” that the youth are under age seventeen.

Then enforcement becomes the issue, Cannon remarked, indicating that many curfews require youth in violation to be taken to a centralized location or to the police station, “then you have the police becoming babysitters.” An alternative, he said, would be to issue appearance tickets, whereby youth would report to city court on a set location and would then have to demonstrate to the judge, by means of a government issued ID, that s/he is over the age of seventeen. Otherwise a fine or community service could be imposed. Councilor Valentino said that he supports the idea of a curfew as a way of helping parents raise their teenagers, but he wants to hear what the committee comes up with and “what facts they present to back up their conclusion.”

City Manager Rich Rising then offered a suggestion that council, if it decides to enact a curfew, do so temporarily so that staff can evaluate response and measure the resources needed to enforce it. Then, Rising said “we can come back in six months or a year and tell you if this will require more resources to be effective.”

Capraro then steered the discussion to an “immediate response” to gun violence and an update on the gun amnesty program he proposed earlier in the month. Councilors Greco and D’Amico spoke in support of the program and Cannon said that Council simply needs to authorize the Chief to administer the program in conjunction with the necessary community and law enforcement partners. Rising said that such authorization will be added to the September 5^th agenda for Council action.

Councilor D’Amico listed other issues his committee would likely discuss. Those include: expanded youth activities, better use of athletic fields for public recreation, a civilian patrol, a public nuisance ordinance, and school safety issues.

Greco reported on concerns he’s heard regarding the start of school and asked D’Amico what was planned to ease those fears. Capraro said that a few years ago, before his sons graduated from Geneva High School, there had been increased security measures due to a rash of bomb threats. He questioned if the school would be reinstituting those measures. D’Amico indicated that Superintendent of Schools, Bob Young would be in attendance at the committee meeting and he would ask what the schools are doing. Cannon added that much of these concerns are matters for the school board to take up. Augustine reminded everyone that not every teenager in Geneva attends Geneva High School, and therefore City Council could be the umbrella group.

Capraro suggested inviting into the discussion Cornell University Professor James Garbarino, a nationally recognized expert in youth violence prevention, and author of Lost Boys: Why Our Sons Turn Violent and How We Can Save Them. Rising indicated that Chief Pane is completing a report on various community safety issues including possible gang activity and it should be available by the end of the week. There was consensus to release the report to the press.

A recommendation was made by Augustine to issue a statement to the community about the ongoing efforts. She said we should praise the force for apprehending suspects in each of the two shootings and for committing to the increased patrols. But she said the message to the community should be that this is not simply a law enforcement issue. The community must work together on prevention systems.

Councilor Valentino agreed that recent unity events are important and should continue. Capraro said we should be urging people to come forward with information, and Councilor D’Amico agreed to add that to the committee’s list of discussion points. Councilors Schroeder and Greco agreed that a statement was needed and Mayor Cass said he would meet with the press the following morning to issue such a statement.

The Council then moved into executive session to discuss the sale of the Civic Center. The meeting adjourned shortly after 7pm as the Neighborhood Safety Committee meeting was beginning in the same location.

Empire Zone or Twilight Zone?

You may have read that the Town of Canandaigua is at war with the Ontario County IDA (chaired by Chris Iversen, not to be confused with the Geneva City IDA, chaired by Charlie Bauder) over the expansion of the airport and eminent domain proceedings surrounding that expansion. Well, that’s not our topic here, but the latest move by Canandaigua is to hold up approval of Pactiv’s certification as a Regionally Significant Project through the NYS Empire Zones Program. We don’t really understand how Pactiv’s expansion is being linked to the airport expansion, and we do hope that Pactiv gets what it needs to add the jobs it plans, but we thought we’d take the opportunity to discuss the Empire Zones Program in general and raise some questions that relate to other businesses that have been certified closer to home.

The New York State Department of Economic Development (aka, Empire State Development Corporation) created Empire Zones[EZ] “to stimulate economic growth through a variety of State tax incentives designed to attract new businesses to New York State and to enable existing businesses to expand and create more jobs." There are 82 such zones across New York. Soon, says the State, every county will have at least one. Right now, Geneva has the only EZ in Ontario County. Our EZ is run by our Economic Development staff. Like the Geneva City IDA, the EZ is a deal maker’s paradise, with all kinds of tax breaks within easy reach for local companies. But are the EZ’s working? Do they actually create jobs and stimulate investment? What about the City of Geneva EZ? Is it an Empire Zone, or a Twilight Zone? Let’s take a look.

The key for a company to unlock EZ benefits is for it to become “zone certified,” i.e., to become a Qualified Empire Zone Enterprise [QEZE]. That means a company located within the boundaries of the zone (or, if outside the zone, designated a “regionally significant project”) has filed an approved application that “demonstrates it will create new jobs and/or make investments in the zone and be consistent with the local zone’s development plan, including a cost-benefit analysis.” That’s where a vivid imagination sometimes comes into play: many companies never create the jobs and/or shell out the investments they discussed in their application.

Once certified, a company can apply to the State’s Taxation and Finance Department for a variety of benefits, listed on that department’s website, as follows:

QEZE Sales Tax Exemptions: Qualified Empire Zone Enterprises (QEZEs) are granted a 10-year exemption from State sales tax on purchases of goods and services (including utility services) used predominantly in an Empire Zone.

QEZE Credit for Real Property Taxes: Qualified Empire Zone Enterprises are allowed a refundable credit against business or income tax equal to a percentage of real property taxes paid in the zone (effective for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2001).

QEZE Tax Reduction Credit:Qualified Empire Zone Enterprises are allowed a credit against business or income tax equal to a percentage of taxes attributable to the zone enterprise (effective taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2001).

Real Property Tax Abatement: EZs may offer tax abatements from an increased assessment, with the abatement value based on improvements to real property for up to 10 years. This holds true for up to seven years at 100%, decreasing over the last three years of the exemption.

EZ Wage Tax Credit: This credit is available for up to five consecutive years for companies hiring full-time employees in newly created jobs. For employees in special targeted groups, this credit equals $3,000 per year, with a credit of $1,500 per year effective 1/1/2001, for all other new hires.

EZ Investment Tax and Employment Incentive Credits: Businesses that create new jobs and make new investments in production, property and equipment may qualify for tax credits of up to 19% of the company's eligible investment.

New Business Refund: Businesses new to New York State are entitled to a 50% cash refund of unused EZ-WTC and ITC amounts. Other businesses may carry forward unused credits indefinitely.

Utility Rate Savings: Special reduced electric and gas rates may be available through investor-owned utilities in New York State. Businesses that locate or expand their operations in an EZ may receive significantly reduced rates.

Zone Capital Credit: A 25% tax credit against personal or corporate income taxes is available for contributing or purchasing shares in a zone capital corporation; or for a direct equity investment in a certified zone business; or for contributions to approved community development projects within an EZ.

Sales Tax Refund or Credit: Purchases of building materials to be used for commercial or industrial real property located in an EZ are eligible for a refund or credit of NYS sales taxes. A similar refund or credit of local sales tax may also be available from the locality.

Technical Assistance: Each local zone office is staffed with professionals qualified to assist businesses locating or expanding in an EZ.

Media, including Rochester’s Democrat and Chronicle, have been checking up on EZ outcomes across the state. When the State turned down various Freedom of Information requests, one newspaper took the State to court and won, and now we are all able to track down what’s been happening with our tax dollars. The D and C lists nearly 70 zone certified companies in the City of Geneva EZ, for the years 2003-2005, (view the list here). Of 25 companies claiming benefits, 9 are falling way short of the investment and/or job creation commitments stated in their application. See the detailed analysis here. It’s much like the IDA Revolving Loan Funds we’ve discussed in earlier posts. Many of the City’s favorite companies/developers are EZ companies.

City Council agreed to include the expansion of Pactiv as a Geneva EZ regionally significant project. A special memorandum of understanding regarding direct benefits to the City of Geneva was worked out between Geneva, Pactiv, and the Ontario County IDA, as a condition of this designation. The benefits include job recruitment for City residents and “a good faith effort to contract with businesses situated in the City for goods and services.” We contacted State EZ officials who said such an agreement for benefits in exchange for the EZ designation is not a part of EZ legislation and is not enforceable by EZ staff. Augustine voted for the inclusion of Pactiv in the EZ, after receiving assurances from City staff that Pactiv would be held accountable for its performance and for delivering the agreed upon benefits to the City of Geneva. Capraro voted against the deal, citing his general misgivings about EZ’s and IDA’s. The question is, “Is our next stop the Empire Zone or the Twilight Zone?”

Why Won't Council Meet?

Our purpose on this blog, No Strings Attached, is to present a fact-based point of view on local government. We try to research and comment on timely, relevant issues of interest to Geneva. Our regular schedule for the weekend included posts on the Empire Zone program, the budget, and other topics, but we put those on hold in order to deal with the most pressing issue: youth gun violence.

We’ve been communicating with colleagues on Council, community leaders, and the public more generally, and we’ve come up against a dilemma: there is a widespread feeling that Council needs to meet and pull the community together but the mayor and the City Manager have refused to call a meeting. It’s time for the Mayor and Council to step up and lead the city through this crisis.

Some people have approached us with fears about sending their children outside. We need to address those fears.

Some people have approached us with fears about sending their children to school this fall. We need to address those fears.

Some people have approached us with fears about going downtown. We need to address those fears.

Some people have approached us with fears about their businesses being hurt by a negative image of Geneva on the news. We need to address those fears.

How do we address those fears? First, we need to face them, head on. We need to show the community that this violence—violence of any ilk--is not acceptable. That means that the Council as a whole, or the Mayor as our leader, needs to issue a statement condemning these actions. Such a statement is long over due, but it’s not too late.

Second, we need to bring together community leaders, concerned residents, business owners, and the youth themselves to come together to dialogue about solutions. The police have done their job, and done it well. On each occasion they have apprehended a suspect, and they should be applauded for that. But they are not social workers, babysitters, therapists, or mind readers. They respond to complaints, they cannot be on every street for every minute of every day. In short, their job is ‘law enforcement’, not ‘crime prevention’. Community-based prevention is our job. It’s up to the community to work together to stop crime before it starts. There is no quick fix for this problem, but there are things that could be done differently and/or better in the future as a means of prevention.

Third, we need to do the things that will yield results. If it’s a curfew, let’s pass it. If it’s strengthening the public nuisance law to respond to bars that admit underage youth, let’s get it done. If it’s sponsoring community events, let’s get them going. If it’s gun amnesty, let’s get moving. If it’s a new strategy for anonymous tips, let’s get it up and running. If it’s additional recreational opportunities for young adults, to provide alternatives to ‘hanging out’ on the street, let’s start organizing them.

We all know that problems need solutions. We will continue to push for good solutions to ensure that Geneva is a community that people feel safe in, that adults and children alike can take pride in.

Youth Gun Violence is the Immediate Problem: Gun Lobbyist Doesn't Get It

In the aftermath of the shooting death of teenager Elvin Cruz, near Genesee Park, we heard sadness, anger, and cries for help raising children from concerned, community minded families.

The meeting also gave renewed attention to the city wide curfew proposed in May by the Dorchester Avenue Neighborhood Watch group. While there was not consensus that a curfew would solve the youth violence problem, the Mayor agreed to immediately name a committee to pick up where the discussion left off in the Spring. So far, Committee members have not been announced.

In the end, people want something done. They rightly expect government to do something that has a chance of doing some good. A unity event was held which brought folks together in grief and optimism. This went a long way towards highlighting the power of neighbors working together to build community.

There is still another pressing and obvious problem to be addressed right away: gun crimes. Apparently, some of our kids have guns, or access to guns. We’re not talking about grandpa’s hunting rifle or mom’s antiques, but, possibly even high powered, semi-automatic, illegal weapons. Capraro and Councilor Greco have encouraged the City administration to start a gun amnesty program and we believe it can’t happen soon enough.

We’ve all heard from the gun lobby that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” but Elvin Cruz was killed by a person with a gun. Access to guns by people with bad intentions isn’t something we should just sit back and accept. And what if family or friends know there’s a gun in the house that should not be there?

Rochester has run a successful gun amnesty program. Folks wanting to get rid of an unwanted gun can turn it in at one of 10 churches participating in the program: “no questions asked”. As an additional incentive, they receive a $50 Wegmans gift card. Over 100 guns were turned in just on one day this month (you can read about it here).

The program has three important components:

1. It works out of churches, traditionally regarded as safe havens, rather police stations, which makes it less intimidating for anyone wanting to get rid of a gun.
2. It provides safety from prosecution for possession of a firearm, especially an illegal one, but still allows law enforcement access to weapons that might be traced back to a crime, or might get into the hands of the wrong people.
3. It provides an incentive for participation, and demonstrates good faith from the community to reach a creative solution to the gun problem.

The Finger Lakes Times recently printed a letter to the editor written by a non-resident, downstate NRA-affiliated gun lobbyist who must troll the internet for gun stories to respond to. The writer argued that no criminal would come down and turn in his/her weapon in exchange for a bag of groceries. Well, no kidding. He obviously does not appreciate the Geneva community context. Imagine, instead, that you’re a single mother of a teenage boy. One day, you overhear his friends talking about having guns, or you find one in your home, stashed at the bottom of his closet.

Maybe you would you take the gun, march right down to the police department, and turn your son in for unlicensed possession, but that’s not everyone’s reality. A program like this is aimed at helping that mother, or father, or sister, or friend, or anyone who wants to do the right thing, turn in a gun without risk to themselves or their loved one. The gift card can provide an extra incentive, or simply a way of acknowledging the good that is done when a gun is taken out of the wrong hands.

We sincerely hope that a program like this will happen in Geneva sooner rather than later. If kids feel that guns are the answer, a good ‘talking to’ isn’t going to cut it, a curfew isn’t going to stop them, hope won’t keep people alive. Let’s try it, and see what happens. We need to find a way to get the guns off the street. Period.

Community Forum for Youth

There will be a community meeting this Wednesday, August 15th at 10am at the Presbyterian Church to hear from youth and other community members about ideas for improving the safety and well being of Geneva's children and teens. We support this effort to bring many voices to the table, and look forward to other youth speak out events in various neighborhoods across the city.

An Information "Lock Down" Doesn't Serve the Public Interest

City Manager Rich Rising some time ago ordered all City staff not to have any direct contact with Councilors. Any contact must be approved by him. He says that is his way of making sure Councilors are well served. We say it is his way of controlling government. We’re told that we’re not allowed to have direct access to any department heads because that would be "micro-managing" and we’re certainly not supposed to solicit input from the so-called “rank and file” city employees. Other communities have a ‘Personnel’ or ‘Employee Relations’ committee where union reps. and others can offer candid assessments of city policies directly to council members, but no such luck here in Geneva. This is what we call the “information lock down.”

So as we grapple with issues of youth violence in Geneva, and proposals for a gun amnesty program and a “curfew” (see our post from May on that issue), we must rely on a third hand report from the police department (the Council hears what the City Manager says the Chief reported that the officers and command staff shared). Sound convoluted? We think so, too.

And it’s totally inefficient. A question is raised months ago: What can we do to curb youth violence, vandalism, and other issues in the community? Granted, there’s no easy answer, it’s a complex problem. But it seems like the first thing you need to know in order to answer it is: What do the police officers think? These are the people dealing with the issue day in and day out. Don’t you think they have some ideas?

You might think we could just break “the rules” and go out and talk to the guys directly. Well, the last time Councilor Augustine had a candid conversation with a DPW employee about an idea for improving the department, the city administration tried to get her to reveal the identity of that person so that he could be fired for insubordination. Don’t worry, Augustine didn’t spill the beans. But we don’t want our police officers to suffer the same Grand Inquisition.

Maybe we could speak to them ‘unofficially’, like if we all happen to be in the same place at the same time and the topic happens to come up? That’s not useful either because we still can’t tell council what we’ve learned without revealing that the guys talked or having the majority of council accuse us of making it up. If they don’t believe us when we discuss studies showing the negative impact of high property taxes (and they don’t believe it) then how can we expect them to believe a report from us about what the police officers want done?

Instead, we’re expected to make decisions based on a set of facts that have been filtered through many channels. Here’s an example. Last year, a woman living on East North Street approached council asking us to take action regarding “gang activity” in her neighborhood. Councilor Capraro asked, at that meeting, to get a report from the police department about levels of “gang activity” in that part of the city and the city as a whole. We received a short memo. from the Chief of Police stating that there are no gangs in Geneva. Period. But we still have questions about that. Did he mean that we don’t have nationally-recognized gangs? Does he mean that we don’t have gangs that are specifically organized to commit crimes? What exactly counts as a ‘gang’? And how should we describe what’s going on in some of Geneva’s neighborhoods?

We need to hear directly from the officers that are on the streets and in the schools about what they’re seeing. We know that there has been an issue with making sure the department is fully staffed, but if we assume that’s being resolved (as we’re told that it will be), what other strategies would they suggest to deal with the problems of drugs and violence? What are their thoughts on the ‘curfew’, gun amnesty, or other efforts to promote parental responsibility?

All in all, we believe that Geneva is a great city, a safe city. But some of our residents have a much different experience. If there’s a way that City Council can make a change for the better, then we must act. But we can’t pull answers out of thin air.

Republicans Go "the Blog Way": Beckley and D'Amico Flip Flop, Join Democrats in Criticism of Cass

It seems like only yesterday Mayor Cass was blasting the Democratic committee for “going the blog way” by embracing concepts of open, honest, and accountable city government. Those are the values that led the Democrats to create a platform that strives for ethics and integrity in government, increased citizen participation, and a more active council that operates respectfully and responsibly. That’s the platform that Councilor Cosentino objected to when he wrote a letter to the editor explaining why he was not interested in the committee’s support.

What a delight to see the Republican committee’s platform echo similar principles! Finally we’ve reached consensus that the current majority on council is leading the City astray. Republicans say: the taxes are too high, that we need to share services with the Town and County, that Council should meet twice a month, that the City should have committees to work on major issues rather than always operating as a committee of the whole, that the ‘curfew’ proposal is on the right track, that there should be no more “back room deals”, no more violations of the Open Meetings Law, that there should be a lakefront plan that isn’t the ‘same old same ole’ group.

Wow! Where have we heard that before? Well, in these blog postings:

• Does Geneva Have the Highest Taxes in the Country? (March 29^th)
• A Tax Exemption Would be Good, but a Lower Tax Rate Would be Better (April 3rd)
• A Case Study in What We Call “The Back Room” and Why It’s A Bad Thing (April 16^th)
• Reorienting City Council (April 19^th)
• Can We Expect Different Results From the Same Old Efforts? (April 23^rd)
• “Curfew” Not Really A Curfew But It’s Still A Good Idea (May 27^th)
• Not All Property Tax Relief is Created Equal (June 25^th)
• Sharing Services In the Name of Community: City, Town, and County Have to Get It Together (July 17^th)

Not to mention all of our responses to comments on some of the posts.

But now it seems worth mentioning that these very ideas being touted by Beckley and D’Amico in the newspaper as their own original brainstorms, were some of the very things they have publicly opposed.

For example, what prompted Beckley to have a change of heart on the tax rate? It was just this past budget cycle that he wrote a lengthy article on the virtue of the majority’s increase, claiming “It’s Only A Nickel.”

And D’Amico was happy to join the majority of council in the back room when they agreed to give City Manager Rich Rising a 5% retroactive raise without a completed performance evaluation. In fact, D’Amico didn’t even serve on the council during the period Rising was being evaluated on. But that didn’t stop him from casting the deciding vote on the matter, late at night, when the matter hadn’t even been included on the agenda.

And Beckley has been an outspoken supporter of projects requesting large public investments and/or tax breaks. He even criticized Councilors Augustine, Nyrop, and Espenscheid by name for asking “too many questions” about these projects.

Beckley and Rising are on the Geneva Arts Development Council board together (see the official listing on their website), and Beckley was quick to defend Rising’s plan to demolish a block of Main Street for a tax-exempt performing arts center. That’s “progress,” they say.

D’Amico has blasted our blog in the newspaper and at council meetings, but it seems that someone in the Republican party likes what they’ve been reading. But we all know that it’s one thing to share ideas, it’s another thing to share a commitment to putting those ideas into action. Beckley and D’Amico’s track record doesn’t give us any confidence that they can make good on their promises.