{"content":[{"text":"HM -­‐ just amendment to resolution passed last year re transfer of ownership – to correct \n name of new owner.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.091955,"width":0.738591,"height":0.03564200000000002}},{"text":"MR moved – JT second – approved 7-­‐0","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.145288,"width":0.339537,"height":0.017763}},{"text":"Cargill Final Approval","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.180743,"width":0.182264,"height":0.017763}},{"text":"Jim Dennis moved to approve the inducement resolution allowing the sales tax \n abatements for the Cargill Inc. project. Jennifer Tavares seconded the motion.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.216197,"width":0.705847,"height":0.035642000000000035}},{"text":"Ms. McDaniel reviewed the project and the need for a new shaft. If there is no new shaft the \n mine will close in 9-­‐10 years due to a lack of fresh air. This is not a threat, it is just a fact. \n The actual project has been in the public realm since 2012. Cayuga mine has been in \n Lansing for 100 years and employs 200 people. Entry-­‐level jobs start at $18/hour – Doing \n the math in terms of cost per job – this project would cost $3,200 per job saved. The usual \n cost to attract new jobs can cost up to $15,000 per job.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.269531,"width":0.764267,"height":0.106551}},{"text":"Can the mine afford to do this on its own? The mine needs to make its case to the parent \n company.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.394076,"width":0.737302,"height":0.03533900000000001}},{"text":"Would a new shaft increase productivity and thus increase “profits”? Salt sales are based \n on demand, and that is not going to increase much.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.447106,"width":0.742653,"height":0.03564199999999995}},{"text":"Cargill has never asked for an incentive prior to this project. If this is denied, what message \n would we be sending to the parent company and NYS?","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.50044,"width":0.762959,"height":0.03564199999999995}},{"text":"Ms. McDaniel reviewed the process so far: At the last TCIDA Board meeting the board \n accepted the application as complete. A public hearing was held. SEQR was done and a \n negative declaration of environmental impact was issued by the State DEC. Today, the \n project is back before the board for a final vote.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.553773,"width":0.7234119999999999,"height":0.07109600000000005}},{"text":"Mr. Burbank asked how it was determined that the mine “needed” this incentive? Ms. \n McDaniel stated that she has been working with the company for the past four years to put \n this project together.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.642561,"width":0.7564529999999999,"height":0.053217999999999877}},{"text":"Ms. Robertson commented that she is interested in the question as to why the mine is not \n moving south under the lake in its operations.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.713773,"width":0.744761,"height":0.03533900000000001}},{"text":"Mr. Wilczynski stated that safety and stability are key issues in this question. The mine has \n tried for the past 10 years to move south into the Southern reserves. From 1920 to 1970 \n the mine was under the Town of Lansing and a geological feature prevented moving further \n south. Also it was not economical as only they could only mine 4-­‐5 feet. As they explored \n south under the lake a similar geological feature was encountered – thus barring their \n move south.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.766803,"width":0.764284,"height":0.106854}},{"text":"They review mine stability every year and hire 4 outside experts to do this.","bbox":{"left":0.1192,"top":0.891349,"width":0.6249990000000001,"height":0.017762999999999973}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}