[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",5974161,"mediaKeyId","5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c","parentId",5842599,"title","City presents proposed unarmed “Roots” responder team: supervisor plus two two‑person teams, $800K annual cost, phased start requested","audioSeconds",1976,"startMs",9135000,"endMs",11111000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c&start=9135&end=11111","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c/thumbnail_9135000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5974161/New-York/City-presents-proposed-unarmed-Roots-responder-team-supervisor-plus-two-twoperson-teams-800K-annual-cost-phased-start-requested","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5974161-f8c107dff2c46f216e2507c88fdab801/orig.mp4?Expires=1775416355&Signature=DZtXrfnkq7OoG-ChGO37Qk99f86InSaPTnYvhQLg~FmbSiyA-6DXc6W6~bNss6HudyvxLH9XjYFOWUqBwAbrbmYvcbRf56vCrXYORdLYuYamVfsnbMOawBCDdY7io2-zzj4-aZoC6l1BuvGZCJEOQ6~2M9yWXHdwxTeWHvCGlv74q2j4AR2J0DyqqekMcXzugQJAqpB209Jzd-L5CZga3zg5q2vBrQG3Oly3CST4BI~xs6A3H~lGPXNrUbEHPTlK-VlmXJzIG~mK5QPu6BlG19vYlH83B4T2eH2d9Ie-qEF9GMfiQU174AL4RBYtIu-BSj901uTWhZt6maae~dKwXg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Ithaca City","date","2025-09-25T14:24:19Z","article","City staff, the Community Justice Center and the Ithaca Police Department presented a proposed community responder program on Sept. 16 that would add a small unarmed response unit to the city’s public-safety toolbox. The draft program — presented under the working name Roots (Responders Offering Outreach, Trust and Support) — would deploy trained civilian responders to low-acuity, nonviolent calls, perform proactive outreach, and make warm handoffs to social-service providers.

What was proposed: The staff-recommended, medium-sized model would create one team supervisor and four community responders, operating in two overlapping shifts so two two‑person teams are available during peak hours. Staff estimated an operating cost of roughly $800,000 per year for the full model; using funds council had previously reserved for reimagining public safety (about $757,000), the administration proposed a phased start with a 2026 over‑target budget request of about $416,000.

Why it matters: City data and outside models show a large share of police calls are service-oriented or nonviolent. Staff presented analysis indicating that a large majority of calls categorized as “low risk” remained low risk after officer response; the proposed team is meant to provide an alternative first responder for many such calls, reduce disproportionate minority contact with the criminal justice system and increase connections to housing, health and social services.

Program structure and supports: Staff described the proposed team as city employees integrated into 911 dispatch and IPD’s response framework. The supervisor would coordinate with dispatch, IPD and partner agencies; community responders would conduct outreach, handle scene transfers when IPD clears a nonviolent incident and make warm handoffs to providers. Staff emphasized three supporting programs: a peer‑led outreach program run by a community agency, an expanded violence-prevention initiative, and a 2‑1‑1 “callback” system so responders can request a scheduled outreach call from the Human Services Coalition’s 2‑1‑1 staff.

Examples and evidence: Presenters drew on national examples from Durham (HEART), Albuquerque (Community Safety), Denver (STAR) and Olympia (Familiar Faces). Staff cited Durham’s reported low rates of calls for police backup and Albuquerque’s reported call diversions as evidence these models can work when integrated into dispatch and supported by local services.

Questions, concerns and council reaction: Council members asked about overlap with existing programs (LEAD, the CARE team, the Community Outreach Worker program and services through GIAC and Reach), whether the city could reassign or centralize existing programs instead of adding staff, and whether the new unit would truly reduce police overtime. Presenters said the Roots team is intended to complement — not replace — existing programs and that a phased rollout, shared data collection and strong coordination with existing service providers are essential.

Budget and next steps: Staff asked council to indicate whether it supported the medium-sized, phased model as an over‑target request for the 2026 budget cycle. Presenters proposed creating an action team of community and agency partners to work on hiring, training, peer programming and data metrics if council approves a budget request. The meeting included no final vote to create the unit; council members suggested additional community engagement and requested an organogram showing how the new positions would coordinate with existing agencies.

Ending: Presenters and several council members said they hoped to proceed with a carefully phased start if council chooses to fund the program in 2026, with monthly and quarterly metrics and ongoing community and interagency review.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","09-24-2025 Budget Meeting- 2026 Capital Projects Fee Study","oneSentenceSummary","City staff, the Community Justice Center and the police chief proposed a new civilian community responder unit (“Roots”) to handle low‑acuity calls and proactive outreach; staff recommended one supervisor and four responders operating in overlapping shifts and estimated full-year operating costs near $800,000.","taxTitle","Ithaca City, Tompkins County, New York","taxId",52738,"location","New York","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5974166,"City finance staff outline $151M debt, $51M short-term borrowing and recommend austerity, reserves and a five-year capital plan",1483,6188000,7671000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c&start=6188&end=7671","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c/thumbnail_6188000.jpg","/articles/5974166/New-York/City-finance-staff-outline-151M-debt-51M-short-term-borrowing-and-recommend-austerity-reserves-and-a-five-year-capital-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5974166-a987f37d382e279cf8487a53f5d9cba8/orig.mp4?Expires=1775416355&Signature=JVFYpL9gJwcpwMm~zafI1czk1NtoeiL5de2PKvBUugGgW-3oyqRa02u27VzFNNmWC8Xqf0rwPx2-UIbmhA85xlKgqCNhaBsN7flmWaPzo~K0PUk6yTml0ClwFyTj5N2Dr8yTw50ocZK6WOjJLbi42I-IBYpc-jeZ0pUoj-ETAnYNCWGxeEyhktFOFm9lNnQLYIuJa0a1ecYcwiU16KjDRuH07Bs9oahEz89HFBb0-dpKAc1bBuz6fFu6jtxYjjcgdghQ9Hdf5msH-cOxWbhlZi8b6Zh3XA8dOBMc1lhBejAjibeLhx8JpGoYXNrIwsljQlPbi3p6rDQUOaQK8V~m5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Wendy (city finance staff) told the Ithaca Common Council on Sept. 16 that the city’s total outstanding debt stands at about $151 million and that the city retains statutory capacity to borrow roughly $72 million more under the state constitutional limit. She said the city’s long-term bonded debt is declining as principal is paid down, and that short-term borrowing (bond anticipation notes, or BANs) accounted for about $51 million of the total as of the presentation.

Why it matters: City staff said a high level of short-term borrowing can raise volatility and stress the budget when BANs must be rolled forward. Finance staff urged a cautious approach in 2026 — focusing on critical projects, advancing a five‑year capital improvement plan and building reserves to smooth future costs.

Details from the presentation
- Debt totals and capacity: Total debt was presented as approximately $151 million; staff said the city could borrow up to about $72 million more before hitting the statutory debt cap metric commonly reported by financial advisors.
- Short-term vs. long-term debt: Finance staff explained that short-term BANs are used while multi-year projects are underway. The BAN total of about $51 million was split broadly among city facilities (roughly $24 million of the BANs), transportation/infrastructure projects, and equipment. Of the equipment portion, staff said about $2.7 million of the current short-term borrowing relates to fire apparatus or fire vehicles.
- Project phasing and reimbursements: The finance director described the fire station project as an example: the city used short-term borrowing as design and construction costs came due, expects proceeds from the sale of an old station and grant reimbursements (including a roughly $1 million Empire Grant) that will allow the BANs to be paid down and the remaining cost to be converted to long-term bonds when appropriate.
- Interest-rate context: Short-term borrowing has carried higher rates (presented as roughly 4.0–4.75% during the recent period) than some long-term instruments. Staff noted eligibility for long-term financing of water/wastewater projects through state programs (EFC) once projects are complete.

Staff recommendations and next steps: City staff recommended an “austerity year” for new borrowing in 2026, creation or expansion of reserve funds (bridge maintenance, emergency building repairs, technology infrastructure and pump-station reserves for water/sewer), continuing a move toward leasing non-police vehicles, and developing a five-year capital plan. The presentation also recommended continuing a centralized grant-tracking function to improve reimbursements.

Council response: Council members asked for detail on how much of the BAN total is covered by expected reimbursements or property sales and asked for a plan to convert short-term borrowing to longer-term serial bonds where appropriate. Several council members expressed a preference for limiting new short-term borrowing in 2026 and for using reserves and phasing projects to reduce exposure to interest-rate volatility.

Decision vs. discussion: The committee received the presentation; there were no ordinance votes or bond authorizations at the meeting. Staff said they will return with more detailed schedules showing which BANs are expected to be reimbursed or converted to long-term bonds.

Ending: Council directed staff to provide detailed BAN roll‑forward plans and to prioritize the five-year capital plan and reserves work as part of the 2026 budget process.","City finance staff told the council the city’s outstanding debt totals about $151 million with $51 million in short-term BANs. Staff proposed slowing new borrowing in 2026, establishing or expanding reserves and developing a five-year capital improvements plan to manage infrastructure needs and reduce volatility.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5974169,"Consultants tell Ithaca council full cost recovery unlikely; recommend standardized fee sheets, targeted hikes and expanded transparency",5120,220000,5340000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c&start=220&end=5340","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5842599-7a3f8c42fd9150e551c26c0ecc44bd5c/thumbnail_220000.jpg","/articles/5974169/New-York/Consultants-tell-Ithaca-council-full-cost-recovery-unlikely-recommend-standardized-fee-sheets-targeted-hikes-and-expanded-transparency","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5974169-3798e5e97c972bee43e02388f72df52c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775416355&Signature=LW1xdTwRU2Cm6yq6QsVyFjq9qCTkkGki9M1Ktx5pBQ-ghcScSH8ncZDvr0Hkja~UFJQzsytWFx29FuscXXX9HvmQBdbpg8kqa71AcOevyEnbonkYYFLieVFT3qalHivOn0byqg7Rh3KenWX6fi2jWOrYbc-VvuCmMfUm9Rb0bnaWMyUkr6CLxwtsyF8Y7UN~vEuOmNCe3tkNKsGLeSImJCzFDW50XlgCooNl6lcY60OCvPJs2Y3ktMt2AACyJagL9Bk3i01b9T396jOvh58btZRPw2hnqX0p3uj~xOw5AqzHGPzmzMS~UgqYm3Ximmg4ds~a73zQtj8T9iN9V3UBSg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Kieran Bazilla, a senior associate with CGR (the Center for Governmental Research), told the Ithaca Common Council on Sept. 16 that the city’s municipal fee structure is large and fragmented and that “full cost recovery is unlikely on many fees.” The consultant presented a compiled spreadsheet of the city’s fees, a standardized method to calculate costs and a set of recommendations for centralizing and regularizing fee-setting in the annual budget process.

The study identified roughly 500 fee lines across departments and recommended that the city require departments to complete a fee template showing units, transactions, staff time and related overhead so officials can judge cost recovery more accurately. Bazilla said some departments — notably the clerk’s office — reported substantial staff time would be required to complete the templates.

Why it matters: City leaders told the council the city lacks a single, consistently updated inventory of fees. That makes it harder for the public and elected officials to see who pays, which fees subsidize public benefits, and where increases would be most equitable. The study’s recommended tools would let the council review fees as part of the annual budget rather than in multiple, ad hoc steps.

Key findings and examples
- Scale and process: The study lists roughly 500 discrete fee entries (the display CGR prepared runs to more than 600 rows with department breakdowns) and found inconsistent processes, multiple platforms for transactions and “diffuse responsibility” for setting fees. Bazilla said many fees have not been updated in years.
- Subsidies: CGR proposed a two-part test for subsidizing fees: whether the fee delivers a public/community benefit and whether participants are price-sensitive. If both are true, a subsidy is likely warranted.
- Dog licenses: CGR used the SPCA contract (approximately $60,000 a year) and 2024 license data (about 600 licenses) to illustrate limits of cost recovery. The consultant calculated license revenue of roughly $9,000 — about 15% of the SPCA contract — and said a full cost-recovery license would be about $100, which the report called “exorbitant” for public acceptance. CGR recommended modest fee increases and public education to boost compliance rather than a single large increase.
- Parking and garages: Parking staff recommended modest parking-hour increases (staff suggested raising garage and street rates toward $2 an hour and $12 daily for garages), a graduated overtime meter penalty, demand-based pricing in high-use areas and enforcing two-hour limits downtown to free spaces.
- Water and sewer: CGR advised the city to study a revised rate methodology that more closely tracks usage (billing per 1,000 gallons rather than a 9,000-gallon lump) but warned such changes will shift costs among users — for example, multiunit buildings on a single meter — and the utility lacks the detailed meter-level data today to do a targeted, progressive change.
- Trash tags: The city manager reported the administration will include a $1 increase to the per-bag trash tag in the manager’s proposed budget to keep tag revenue better aligned with rising collection and tipping costs. The manager said the administration plans to make longer‑term tags “forever tags” to ease transitions.

Process recommendations and next steps: CGR urged centralizing fee review in the annual budget process, inventorying the city code’s fee-authorizing provisions, and considering limited, regularized increases tied to inflation. The consultant also recommended departments produce brief written rationales when they seek a change larger than inflation.

Council reaction and concerns: Council members asked about differentiating city residents from non-residents for facility uses (golf course, youth programs and Stewart Park), enforcement practicality (e.g., dog-license compliance), and equity impacts for fees that affect low-income households. Several members urged caution on raising rates that could reduce program participation. The clerk and department staff flagged the administrative time needed to complete CGR’s templates and suggested the city phase the work by department.

Decision vs. discussion: The meeting recorded no formal vote changing fees; the presentation was informational. The city manager said staff will work with departments to complete templates on a department-by-department schedule and consider some fee changes for the coming budget; the trash-tag increase was the only change the administration said it had already integrated into its proposed budget.

Ending: The council directed staff to return with the compiled fee schedule and suggested specific areas for follow-up (parking, water/sewer methodology, and community-resident vs. nonresident distinctions). The consultant’s full report and the fee templates will be used to guide departmental work and the council’s review during the 2026 budget process.","A consultant presentation to the Ithaca Common Council found more than 500 municipal fees, recommended a standardized fee-tracking template and said many fees will remain partially subsidized. The study included examples and preliminary recommendations for parking, dog licenses, water and sewer rates, special-event fees and trash tags.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

City presents proposed unarmed “Roots” responder team: supervisor plus two two‑person teams, $800K annual cost, phased start requested

City finance staff outline $151M debt, $51M short-term borrowing and recommend austerity, reserves and a five-year capital plan

Consultants tell Ithaca council full cost recovery unlikely; recommend standardized fee sheets, targeted hikes and expanded transparency