In this report:
BOS Announcements
Stories
Amended 2023 Budget
2023-2028 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
Opposing land transfer to DEC
Housing Incarcerated Individuals at Other County Jails, and Accepting Inmates from Other Counties
Broadband Data
Contract with Finger Lakes Communications to provide interoperable communications equipment
NYS DHSES Grant
Mandated MAT
Child Trafficking Numbers
Flu Shots, Public Health Updates
Enhanced Court Security and Law Enforcement Services
Office of Conflict Defender
NYSDOH increases funding for Children with Special Health Care Needs
RTS Contract for Senior Citizens Renewed
Mobility Management and Home Modification Services
Snowmobile trail grant
Glen Wilkes recognized for 39 years of service
Big Spenders
Events
Jail Updates
Here is a link to the Board of Supervisors (BOS) agenda and resolutions packet for the cycle that this report references: https://ontariocountyny.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_11172022-1935
If I cite a page number below, that is the page of the packet where you can find the resolution being discussed. Alternatively, you can search for the resolution from Ontario County’s home page.
BOS Announcements:
Board of Supervisors (BOS) Chairman Jack Marren announced that he will not be seeking re-election as Chair. He has served as Chairman for ten years and has been a Supervisor for 14 years. “I will not be seeking re-election for this year,” began Marren, “and I certainly look forward to serving the new Chair, whoever that individual will be, and, certainly, supporting him or her in any way I can.”
The New York State Association of Counties (NYSAC) is considering County Administrator Chris DeBolt for a seat on the NYS Indigent Legal Defense Board. According to Chairman Marren, members of this board are appointed by the Governor. Although DeBolt confirmed that he is interested, nothing is finalized yet.
Charles Evangelista, Ontario County Democratic Elections Commissioner, has announced his retirement effective January 1st. Evangelista told me once that Ontario County is a rare example of bipartisan collaboration: in many other places, he said, Republican and Democrat elections commissioners maintain separate offices on opposite sides of the building. This is not the case in Ontario County. (Let’s keep it that way!) In his resignation letter, Evangelista said that in the last five years, in addition to holding elections during a pandemic, the Board of Elections has had to implement more than 60 new NYS election mandates and “remained unwavering during attacks on our election process” while “prioritizing voter access and integrity.”
Stories:
Amended 2023 Budget. The tentative 2023 Ontario County budget was amended to reflect an increase of $863,659. The majority of the increase comes from adjustments from the Office of the Sheriff in the amount of $686,255, followed at some distance by Ontario County Tourism with an increase of $225,000. (The increase for Tourism was due to a miscommunication wherein Tourism thought they would have a $1.4M budget, while the Treasurer thought it would be $1M. The Tourism budget is largely based on occupancy tax income, which is specifically earmarked for Tourism and cannot be spent elsewhere. Ultimately, the County decided to split the difference, resulting in the apparent budget increase of $225,000. The increases for the Office of the Sheriff were not discussed in detail during the meetings I attended.)
Although these changes do not change the tax levy, “There are some pretty significant changes to the tentative budget,” said Ontario County Finance Director Mary Gates. “Some of them — quite a few of them, because there were changes that were approved through management comp or through other avenues, if you will — that did not make it, that were missed, during the budget preparation. But then, we also have had a few things that happened since budget preparation, and that included the new SRO position, the raises for the Board of Supervisors members, the re-evaluation of the Sheriff vehicle prices and those increases, and then the increase in the psychiatrist position.”
Finance Director Mary Gates recommended taking the difference from the general fund, which increased the allocated fund balance from about $5.9M to just under $6.6M.
“In order to not mess with tax levy, I am requesting that we appropriate [this money] from fund balance,” said Gates. “So, that raises the fund balance appropriation from $5.9M to just under $6.6M.”
Gates said she explored the option of changing sales tax revenue projections, but said, “Given the state of the current economy, I don’t feel comfortable messing around with that,” perhaps indicating that consumer purchases (maybe even purchasing power) are difficult to predict for the coming year.
It was agreed that this change (as opposed to borrowing the $864k difference from the 2023 contingency budget) most accurately and transparently reflects the true budgetary needs of the County. Although the tentative budget document will not be amended to reflect these changes, Gates made sure that they are acknowledged in the resolutions that pass the budget.
Supervisor for the City of Canandaigua and Board of Supervisors Budget Officer David Baker introduced the resolution to accept the 2023 budget at the November 17th BOS meeting, saying: “It is a pleasure to be able to stand before this Board, just about every year, and say we are one of the best counties in New York State for so many reasons, but primarily, one of them is our fiscal position. We are in very sound fiscal shape. We are able to meet our obligations to our constituents out there. We’re able to take on all of those state and federal mandated programs and continue to push those services out to the people while keeping our expenses at a reasonable level. We certainly understand the difficulties communities face with revaluation and properties go up. But we try to balance that with what we need to do in the county for the entire county. One thing we strive to try and do is keep that tax rate at either the same or very slight increase, slight decrease. Over time, we have found it is much better to keep that line moving at more of a steady increase than to have volatile swings every year and have people’s tax rate jump up 30, 40 cents at a time as some counties do. […] I’m pleased to say we’re able to increase our expenses by $866,000 and not have to adjust our tax rate up meet that with it. We’re in healthy shape going into next year.”
The County will levy $74,114,234 in property taxes in the 2023 fiscal year, up 10.67% from 2022. In spite of this increase, the County tax rate remains flat at $6.31 per $1,000 of assessed property value.
The amended county budget and the tax levy were both approved by the BOS. (page 97)
2023-2028 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is exactly what it sounds like: a list of infrastructure-related projects, including maintenance, upgrades, renovations, replacements, engineering, and so on, to keep things in good working order, modern, and generally working smoothly. The CIP is a six-year plan which is expected to cost $37,325,392 in total, including: $384,000 for heating system upgrades in the county courthouse, $300,000 for general elevator work, $268,000 for Ontario Beach Park improvements, $3,000,000 for FLCC things; $4,205,600 for highway improvements, $1,173,455 to repair or replace culverts, $11,360,000 for major renovations and construction, $3,858,392 for major equipment systems, to give you an idea. To see a more detailed breakdown, you can see the resolution in its entirety on page 91 of the November BOS agenda.
Of the anticipated $37,325,392 price tag, $10,760,693 will be paid for with [County] tax dollars. The County will be using $10,645,250 from its reserve fund to put toward major construction and renovation (the vast majority of this is will go toward the Building 3010 renovation). State and Federal aid, grants, and “other agencies” are other sources of capital listed in the resolution. The 2023-2028 CIP was approved by the Board of Supervisors.
Opposing land transfer to DEC. In September, the Genesee Valley Conservancy informed the Town of Richmond that it intended to purchase five parcels of land totaling 261 acres and then transfer ownership to the NY Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). This would permanently remove the land from town and county tax bases and, therefore, increase the tax burden on other landowners. After laying the resolution over (tabling it) at their last meeting, the BOS voted to support the Town of Richmond in its opposition to the transfer of the 261 acres to the DEC.
The vote was split, however: several Supervisors, including Rich Russell from the City of Canandaigua, opposed the resolution as phrased. “I have decided that I cannot support this resolution for some pretty straightforward reasons, and that reason is one of the most sacred rights that an American can have is to own property, control property, and use property for the betterment of a person or a person’s family. It really is one of the foundations of this country. My ancestors came from a little corner of Ireland and they weren’t allowed to own property. They had to rent property from a landlord and they were so happy to get here, to be able to buy a piece of property, use it for their own interests and for their own profit and for their own welfare. And, even though this resolution doesn’t try to prohibit that, it has some pretty strong comments in it that just don’t allow me to support it. And if I go into the first “resolved,” that “the Ontario County Board of Supervisors supports the Town of Richmond in opposition of land transfer to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation” and “Resolved, that the Ontario County Board of Supervisors urges the Genesee Valley Conservancy to conserve these five parcels through conservation,” this is in essence trying to steer the direction of a person’s ability to control their property. For all I know, this person, they bought the property with a forward look that maybe they would sell it at some point and use the funds for retirement, or for supporting their family. This resolution doesn’t help the cause of a person keeping control of their property, and I just can’t support it. Thank you.”
Daryl Marshall of Richmond responded: “The intent of Richmond’s resolution in opposition, and, I think, the intent of the County’s resolution, is not to prohibit the right of the landowner to sell the property, or to deny his the access to sell the property. The resolutions intent, and the Town Board’s intent, is to make the DEC pay up. There’s a section of real property tax law, Section 532, that governs state-owned property and it states certain townships and counties are allotted the right to collect tax on these parcels that the state acquires. Well, the Town of Richmond is stated [named] in this Section 532, that any land acquired after December 15th of 1989 by the State of New York is to be taxed, is to be put on Roll 3, which is a roll for taxable land. The way this was presented to the Town was that it would be transferred to the DEC and tax-exempt. Well, that’s not the way New York State Real Property Tax Law is written, and we’re asking New York State to abide by the law, is what we’re asking for. And, y’know, the problem is that, as I had said at our last meeting, the State currently has, I think it’s 755 acres in this Honeoye Creek Wildlife Management Area that is tax exempt. We do not collect a penny off it. The Town, the County, the school, we don’t get anything. I have written to Mr. Jeff Odell, who is the DEC real property director, and requested that they abide by the law. I have yet to get a response from him. They said they would look into it. Well, it’s clear in real property tax law that they are obligated to pay tax on it. And all we’re doing is insisting that they abide by the law. That’s what our resolution’s intent is, and I think that’s the County’s intent, is that we, at the Town, we certainly are supportive of the conservation of this land. This land is, probably three-quarters of it is swamp. I mean, there’s no development opportunities to this property, and we certainly, in the Town of Richmond, we certainly have an abundance of property that has public access. I think combined we’ve got a thousand acres. So, we certainly encourage, y’know, public access and the opportunity. But, years ago, New York State legislators were at the same point that I’m at now: stop the bleeding. These communities cannot continue to take this type of action and the impact from taking property off the tax rolls. Y’know, a lot of this started back when the City of Rochester owned two lakes. They owned the whole watersheds for Canadice and Hemlock Lake. And they got the idea of transferring it to the DEC. Well, what would that have done to these communities to have lost that tax revenue? So, legislation was passed in Richmond, and Conesus was brought into it, and — I forget the third town — but, the three of us were identified as municipalities that, if the DEC or the State wants this property for public access, they need to pay their share. That’s all we’re asking for. This is support to make the DEC, New York State pull their weight. There’s enough programs out there — unfunded mandates — and this doesn’t need to be one of them. Thank you.”
The BOS voted to support the Town of Richmond 12-5 (roughly. I’m pretty sure this is correct; if not, it’s very close).
Housing Incarcerated Individuals at Other County Jails, and Accepting Inmates from Other Counties. New York State counties originally started trading inmates in response to a shortage of correctional officers. At that time, Ontario County accepted and housed female inmates from neighboring counties, and sent a number of its male inmates to Monroe County Jail. In Public Safety committee, Sheriff Phil Povero and County Administrator Chris DeBolt discussed the financial advantages of specializing in a class of inmates (female inmates, in Ontario’s case). Now, the County intends to extend these inter-county arrangements. “The Sheriff and the Public Safety Committee of the Ontario County Board of Supervisors recommend that Ontario County contract with other New York State counties and federal agencies to house their Incarcerated Individuals because such arrangements enable the Ontario County Correctional Facility to operate at a higher capacity and recover costs in so doing,” according to the resolution. (page 72)
So long as this system does not incentivize incarceration as privatizing prisons has done…
Broadband Data. Ontario County wants to understand which areas of the County have access to broadband internet and which areas do not. The New York State Department of Public Service has this data, but will only share it with the County if it agrees to a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that emphasizes that this data is strictly confidential and cannot be disclosed to the public. Further (or perhaps accordingly), this data is not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests. Its distribution must be severely limited, even within the County. Some of the information may be provided to internet service providers: “The County may provide to an Internet Service Provider (ISP) a list of unserved and underserved addresses upon notification to the ISP that such information is confidential and should not be disseminated to the public.” (Interesting. I wonder if the County would be allowed to publish anonymized, community-level data?)
The County seeks to use this information to identify communities that would benefit from expanded access to broadband, then to develop a “cost proposal with an ISP to expand broadband services in those unserved and underserved areas.” (page 38)
Resolution to contract with Finger Lakes Communications to provide P25 compliant interoperable communications equipment. In 2018, Ontario County received a grant from the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services to “improve interoperable radio communications,” including the installation of a microwave link connecting Monroe and Ontario Counties and new interoperable communications equipment for the Office of the Sheriff. Since the term of the grant ends on December 31st of this year, there seems to be some rush to spend the money as directed. Finger Lakes Communications has provided the County with a quote for various interoperable communications equipment totaling $302,207.10. The contract to purchase this equipment was approved by the Board of Supervisors. (page 40)
NYS DHSES Grant. New York State’s Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services awarded Ontario County a $170,714 grant “addressing four required Federal Emergency Management Administration National Priority Areas and two locally determined projects.” Here’s a quick breakdown of how the money will be spent:
$39,025 - annual software costs, including DisasterLAN, WeatherBug, Crisis Track, FireMobile
$8,536 - Purchase of license plate readers (“to address required Intelligence and Information Sharing FEMA National Priority Area”)
$8,542 - Police overtime “to provide counter-terrorism patrols during mass gathering events”
$34,141 - Side scan sonar system for Sheriff’s office
$69,470 - consultation to update Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
$11,000 - purchase of alerting software
The resolution to accept this grant was passed by the BOS. (page 53)
Mandated MAT. The NY Office of Mental Health (OMH) has mandated that mental health clinics provide Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) to clients who present with substance abuse problems and consent to receive the medications. As a result, “We are going to start instituting some much stronger controlled substance policies in the clinic,” said Jessica Mitchell, Director of Ontario County Mental Health. “We are working toward getting as many adults off of controlled substances in our clinic as possible starting this week.”
She estimates that, of 47 to 50-something individuals in her clinic who are prescribed controlled substances, “there’s probably 60-70% of that 47 that really don’t need that script.” Starting this week, unless there is a “very clear documentation of a need for a controlled substance,” the mental health clinic will not be providing prescriptions. The clinic is working on a plan to help individuals come off of such substances. “There are going to be some unhappy people,” warned Mitchell. “We’re really trying to limit people’s access to medications they don’t need and also, we don’t want to contribute to this overuse of controlled substances and addiction problems.”
Child Trafficking Numbers. “We just reported 44 brand-new cases, and that was the total of 2021,” reported Ontario County Youth Bureau Director Marsha Foote on November 7th. “But that’s a good thing! That means those are 44 kids that we are connecting with to keep them out of five-to-seven years of trafficking… That means more people are reporting. But the scary part is, those are the only kids we know about.”
The Youth Bureau came out with flyers, bookmarks and pens with information human trafficking and hotlines that vulnerable individuals can call for help. The items are being distributed to County libraries, community centers, churches and schools to start.
Flu Shots, Public Health Updates. The Ontario County Department of Public Health established a charge of $40 for flu vaccinations this year. This is the same amount that was charged last year. For those who are insured, this charge should generally be carried by insurance providers: “The costs for the vaccine and administration of these shots is reimbursable from certain insurance companies where possible.” Uninsured individuals will be charged the full amount.
Public Health Director May Beer confirmed that there is a lot of flu and RSV out there. At the time of the November 7th Health and Human Services Committee, she was unsure how many people are receiving their flu shots, but said she would know sometime in December.
Beer also announced that next year’s flu shot will be combined with the Covid shot. “They are working on combining next year’s flu shot with the Covid, just as they had done after H1N1 — the H1N1 now is combined with the flu every year — they may be doing that, depending on the studies.”
Enhanced Court Security and Law Enforcement Services. A slew of November resolutions enhanced the presence of law enforcement officers in many towns throughout the County and at their courthouses.
The towns of Bristol, Canandaigua, East Bloomfield, Farmington, Gotham, Richmond, Victor, and West Bloomfield continue to partner with the Ontario County Office of the Sheriff to obtain part-time officers to secure their courthouses. The anticipated need in the various townships ranges from 8 hours/month (costing $2,307 annually) to 15 hours/week (costing $30,000 annually). All of these contracts are renewals with the exception of the Town of Richmond, which is a new contract.
In addition to enhanced court security, some towns also use County Sheriff’s deputies to supplement their town law enforcement. Farmington will pay the Office of the Sheriff $15,000 annually for an unspecified level of support; Geneva will pay $20,000 for the same; South Bristol has requested about 15 hours a week in exchange for $10,000; Victor will pay $24,500 for an unspecified amount of support. According to Sheriff Phil Povero, all of these contracts are renewals. (pages 56-68)
Office of Conflict Defender. On October 28th, Carrie Bleakley, Ontario County Conflict Defender, was informed of an administrative order from the Administrative Judge of New York State. The order requires family court attorneys to be assigned at the first court appearance or sooner, if representation is requested sooner. “Our practice has been we assign an attorney after that first appearance, so it could potentially effect the amount of money that expended on these family court cases,” said Bleakley. “It was made effective immediately. From my perspective, I believe in the concept, but it’s unfunded. And again, 95% of family court is handled by the assigned counsel attorneys. So I already have a panel of attorneys that are overworked, and it’s just more work on top of that. So, it’s a little frustrating.”
“I really can’t say right now what the impact will be on my budget,” she continued. “In theory, if I added one more court appearance to every family court case that we handle, it would be a difference of about $30,000. I don’t know if that’s going to be the case, because it could potentially make the system more efficient than what it currently is, and it could actually save money.”
Bleakley also said that her office had just been approved for a $716,000 grant over a period of three years. This grant would allow her to hire a full-time assistant conflict defender, a part-time office specialist, and social workers and peer advocates to help in family court and “offset the extra tasks that would be put on [Bleakly’s] current staff.”
“I do think that that will help offset some of the costs that are going to be occurring. Of course, we still have the issue of the assigned counsel rates up in the air right now, so I don’t know how that is going to play into all of this.”
NYSDOH increases funding for Children with Special Health Care Needs Contract. In 2020, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) awarded Ontario County a five-year grant of $26,904 per year to support the Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs program. Effective October 1st, the State increased the amount of the grant to $62,806 per year. The increased funding passed the BOS. It is unclear what prompted the increase. (page 20)
RTS Contract for Senior Citizens Renewed. The New York State Office for the Aging provides the Ontario County office of the same name with funding to pay for public transportation services for seniors. “To provide transportation services for medical appointments, shopping and other essential appointments for Ontario County residents aged 60 or over who have no other means of transportation.” The County pays RTS $48,886 per year for these services. (page 23)
Mobility Management and Home Modification Services. The Ontario County Office for the Aging has contracted with Lifespan of Greater Rochester, Inc. to provide “mobility management and home modification” services. These have been identified as unmet needs among the older population. It is unclear how older adults can access these services or what they will be entitled to under this contract. The contract amount is $73,800. If you have mobility problems and would like to inquire about assistance modifying your home, please contact Lifespan of Greater Rochester and the Ontario County Office for the Aging. (page 26)
Snowmobile trail grant. The New York State office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) is providing Ontario County $37,923 in grants for snowmobile trail creation, improvement and maintenance work. This money will be distributed to local snowmobile clubs. This grant “does not require any cash contribution from Ontario County,” meaning that the County is glad to accept it. The resolution also states that “any unspent funds and unencumbered appropriation be carried forward into future Planning Department budgets.” According to the Planning Department, the money will be divided between Ontario’s three snowmobile clubs. (page 34)
Glen Wilkes recognized for 39 years of service. Glen Wilkes, a resident of Phelps, was recognized for a staggering 39 years of service as a volunteer on Ontario County’s Planning Board. Wilkes will remain as an alternate to the Planning Board moving forward. According to all that spoke of him, Wilkes is a fountain of practical knowledge, local history and generosity, and an important asset of the planning board. “For a non-paid position, that’s true dedication to your community,” said Phelps Supervisor Norman Teed. “Glen, as a friend and a colleague of mine, you’re the best. Thank you.” (page 101)
Big Spenders:
Contract renewal with Catholic Charities of the Finger Lakes to support the Drug Court program. Catholic Charities provides administrative support, drug screening, monitoring, and peer support services for $241,333 per year. (page 47)
FLCC Master Plan Update Project awarded to LaBella Associates, PC. (Received five proposals, chose LaBella from among them.) LaBella will provide consultant services and prepare the 2023 FLCC Facilities Master Plan. Contract for an amount not to exceed $235,500. The total project budget is $250,000 (I think this includes a contingency, hence the higher amount). The cost will be split 50-50 between OC and NYS. (page 9)
Events:
Public hearing regarding “A Law to Increase the Salaries for the Board of Supervisors for the Year 2023.” Public hearing is set for December 8th at 6:30pm at 74 Ontario Street in the Board Room. (page 86)
Public hearing regarding “A Local Law Applying the Management Compensation Program to Certain County Officers Appointed tor Definite Terms for the Year 2023” will be held on December 8th at 6:30pm at 74 Ontario Street in the Board Room. (page 87)
BOS organizational meeting set for Thursday, January 5th at 4:30 pm at 74 Ontario Street, Canandaigua in the Board Room. (page 11)
Jail Update:
As of November 7th, Sheriff Phil Povero reported that the jail population was at 103 individuals: 85 males and 18 females. One Ontario male inmate is still being “boarded out,” while the OC jail continues to house five female inmates from Seneca and Oswego Counties. The weekend high (jail population) was 105. Povero noted that the jail population has increased recently, saying, “The courts are more active, and post-Covid trials, etc., are continuing to be caught up with.”
At the time of Povero’s report, there were no inmates waiting to be transferred to state prisons. Staffing at the jail remains an issue and will be “a work in progress for a period of time,” but Povero expressed optimism, citing an abnormally large percentage of candidates passing a recent physical agility test.
Thank You Abigail. I am concerned/happy to read about the effort to reduce the use of controlled substances. Also, without doing the math, it appears there is some drastic differences between what the County charges schools for police protection and what they charge towns for police protection. It would seem that since there is a greater number of citizens in a school than in a courthouse, that the presecense at the school to protect 100's or 1,000's would be more important and more heavily subsidized than a courtroom with 10-30 people in it where a defendent is already in custody of a sherriff?