New York State Department of Labor

This document outlines the strategic approach and initiatives of the Regional Economic Development Councils (REDCs) to drive economic growth and job creation across New York State. It details community-based strategic plans with four recurring themes: Innovation, Collaboration, and Industry Growth; Housing & Community Development; Equitable Growth; and Workforce Development. The report highlights funding opportunities such as the Regional Council Capital Funds and the ACHIEVE Competition, alongside other programs like the Downtown Revitalization Initiative, NY Forward, Pro-Housing Community Program, and FAST NY, all aimed at aligning state resources with regional priorities for sustained economic vitality and community revitalization.

The meeting agenda includes a review of professional examinations, discussions regarding the scheduling of future meetings, and an opportunity to address other business items.

The meeting began with updates on the contractor registry system, noting the number of applications received and certifications issued, and the associated fees collected for worker protection efforts. Discussions covered the upcoming implementation of the Electronic Certified Payroll Reporting system for prevailing wage work starting January 1, 2026. The Board then addressed two main topics for public hearing recommendations. Topic one involved calculating tax savings, where members debated three different recommendations regarding the valuation of tax benefits, specifically focusing on whether to use the full value or a net present value approach. This topic was tabled for further discussion at the next meeting. Topic two concerned the calculation of other funds, where the Board unanimously adopted Recommendation #2, stating that funds dispersed to a New York State entity with discretion are public funds, while federal funds issued directly are not, with specific conditions for projects receiving federal grants that mandate Davis Bacon wages. The Board then moved into an executive session to discuss specific projects confidentially, after which they reported that fourteen projects were reviewed, resulting in eight Secretary determinations, two Not Covered determinations, and four referrals for further investigation.

The meeting commenced with quorum establishment and procedural notes regarding remote attendance and public testimony restrictions. Board members and staff introduced themselves. Board activities updates included statistics on the contractor registry system and the forthcoming electronic certified payroll reporting system set to launch on December 31st. Board business included the unanimous approval of the minutes from the December 11th, 2024 meeting. The primary focus was the continuation of the public hearing on calculating tax savings and calculating other funds, with board members presenting proposals for determining subsidy values. Proposals discussed methods such as using Net Present Value (NPV), deferring to Industrial Development Agencies (IDAs) for discount rates, and establishing specific minimum/maximum parameters (2% annual tax growth and 7% maximum NPV) if local methodologies are deemed unreasonable. The process for finalizing recommendations to be voted on at a future meeting was also outlined.

The meeting convened to discuss procedural aspects related to public subsidy law, specifically focusing on holding a public hearing. Key discussion points centered on obtaining clarity for three major categories: defining 'total construction project costs,' determining methodologies for calculating tax savings (including present dollar value and factoring in inflation/increases), and clarifying which funding sources qualify as solely federal or state funds. The board secretary detailed the extensive logistics and requirements for conducting a public hearing under the Open Meetings Law, including public notice and testimony protocols. The General Counsel also addressed legal arguments concerning the scope of the board's authority to issue recommendations on statutory interpretation versus specific project determinations, emphasizing the need for binding determinations to be defensible under Article 78 review.