Accoutrements of Success. . .

Today's OD presents another example of the "build it and they will come" fairy tale: Expansion of high speed Internet can help region stay competitive.

“Access to high-speed Internet is critical to ensuring that all New Yorkers can reach their full potential in today’s technology-driven world,” Gov. Andrew Cuomo said. . . . 

Internet providers are being offered matching funds if they opt to expand into areas with no service, or improve service in places that already have it. Providers often are reluctant to extend service into sparsely populated areas because there might not be enough customers to recoup costs.

The problem with the OD's headline is that it assumes that we are already competitive. With among the highest sales tax rates in the nation, highest property tax rates in the nation as a percentage of property value, highest utility rates, highway tolls, and onerous regulations that have driven literally tens of thousands of people and countless businesses from our region in the last 40 years, can anyone seriously argue that we are competitive?  

Economically competitive areas DO have high speed internet  . . . they also have bustling airports with regularly scheduled airline service . . .  symphony orchestras . . . museums, libraries, theaters, zoos,  etc., etc.  -- because they are economically successful -- not because the taxpayers paid for them.

We once had all these things, and still have some of these things, because we were once economically successful.  But that is the past.  And slowly but surely, as the "old money" gets spent, we are losing these accoutrements of success -- and not obtaining new ones -- because we are no longer successful.

Repeat: "Providers often are reluctant to extend service into sparsely populated areas because there might not be enough customers to recoup costs."

The OD speaks of internet providers, but it is the same for water lines, sewers, roads, airports, and virtually any other service that you can think of.  If the costs cannot be recouped, why should the taxpayer (or water/sewer/utility user) be forced pick up the costs for those it is uneconomical (or "unsustainable") to serve?   That would require higher taxes and fees . . .

And That would make us LESS competitive. 

There Are No Shortcuts . . .

Per WKTV: Left, right ally against Cuomo's Start-Up NY

In a statement Wednesday, the coalition says Start-Up NY should be shut down pending a detailed audit following a report showing that so far the year-old program has created 76 of the nearly 2,100 jobs promised over five years in return for tax breaks.

Seventy-six jobs created with how many millions of tax dollars spent just to advertise this fiasco?  Even 2,100 jobs would be a drop in the bucket state-wide.

Start-Up New York rightly recognizes that one of New York State's main problems in attracting employers is its high rate of taxation.  So the program offers a 10 year tax break from all taxes.

But why would businesses flock to New York State for a special program when they would be better off in another state with generally lower taxes and operating costs? . . . in another state with more economic freedom?

If New York wants to beat the competition, it must at least offer the same degree of economic freedom as its competition, not as a special program, but as a matter of long term policy. But that would require rethinking state and local government -- shrinking it in an intelligent way -- to do and spend less.

The problem for Upstate NY is that our policy is made from the perspective of Manhattan where money is plentiful.  

From the Deseret News: How high taxes and regulation are killing one of the most prosperous states in the nation.  

For more than half a century, this huge region — once the nation’s breadbasket and a manufacturing capital — has been losing jobs, dollars and people. . . . 

Weather was certainly a contributing factor. . . . 

But other states — New Hampshire, Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Colorado — have similar weather and have not seen mass evacuation. The difference is that upstate New York is tethered to New York City, whose residents overwhelmingly support higher taxes, stricter regulation and bigger spending than the national averages. Those policies are blamed for upstate’s economic woes by many in the region. 

“Basically what you’ve got in New York is a state tax code and regulatory regimen written for New York City,” says Joseph Henchman, vice president for state projects at the Tax Foundation in Washington. “Legislators say, `Look, New York is a center of world commerce. Businesses have to be here. It doesn’t matter how high we tax them.’ I hear that a lot. But when you apply that same logic to upstate, the impact is devastating.”

The answer for Upstate NY isn't "Start-Up NY." Rather, it is granting Upstate NY a degree of freedom from the tax-and-regulate attitudes and policies fostered by the NYC Metro area.   That requires detailed planning. There are no shortcuts.

Milking the System?

There's an interesting article in the Los Angeles Times today that focuses on our local dairy industry: Dairy farmers, in dire need of workers, feel helpless as immigration reform sours.

"It's just crazy," said McMahon, who has several hundred cows at his farm more than 200 miles north of New York City.

"I'm a lifelong Republican," he said, shaking his head. "But I'm telling you, there are days when I think about switching."

McMahon and other dairy farmers in central and upstate New York are in a quandary. On one hand, farms have thrived because of several factors, including the popularity of yogurt in recent years and drought in other milk-producing countries. At the same time, they are battling to find the reliable, year-round labor that 24/7 milking operations require.

Locals won't do the dirty, manual jobs, farmers say, and immigration laws limit farmers to importing only seasonal agricultural employees. That does not help dairy farmers, who need year-round workers. . . .

"It happened overnight," said Dale, who watched the state's dairy industry shrink through the 1980s and '90s. "All of a sudden, New York had all these great yogurt things going on."

He and McMahon said they tried to stick to local labor but succumbed to hiring migrant workers as their workloads increased.

Both men, and Norton, blame the problem more on attitudes than on economics. McMahon, for example, said his farmworkers all started at $2,000 a month and get a three-bedroom house plus utilities and other benefits. Even so, McMahon said attempts to hire locals have failed.

"Nobody wants to go out there and deal with cows and get manure up their sleeves," said McMahon, who once advertised three straight weeks to find workers. Three locals applied, and only one worked out, he said. He now depends on Latino workers, most of them members of an extended family from Mexico. . . .

"I pray to God Jeb Bush is our next president," McMahon said, "because he's married to a Mexican woman. He gets it."

As could be expected for the LA Times, the article only focuses on the "immigration reform" aspect of the problem -- an issue dear to both Democrats and Progressive Republicans alike.  Nowhere is even a thought given to who or what might be competing with the farmers' labor demands.

It should be amazing that farmers cannot find reliable labor when the number of individuals on public assistance is at an all time high.  But actually it is not, per this NY Post article, when welfare  pays better than work.

In the Empire State, a family receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, public housing, utility assistance and free commodities (like milk and cheese) would have a package of benefits worth $38,004, the seventh-highest in the nation.

Do the math! Why should "locals" do dirty, manual jobs when they can do just as well or better by signing up for public assistance?  Illegal immigrants provide the labor for local farmers because illegal immigrants are unlikely to apply for welfare benefits. Our government's policies have created this situation.

Perhaps the answer for the local dairy industry is not immigration reform, but, rather, welfare reform.

Clinton's Emails: More than Meets the Eye. . .

I watched Mrs. Clinton's "press conference" yesterday, wherein she explained that she chose to use her personal server for email instead of a government server because she did not want to lug around two different devices.  That may satisfy some people, but to me it was as believable as the story that a YouTube video started the Bengazi attack.

Mrs. Clinton's release of 55,000 emails in PRINTED form is a disingenuous gesture that strikes a familiar theme to anyone who has tried to use the FOI Laws against an uncooperative government agency. What better way to avoid scrutiny than to take electronic documents and change them into an overwhelming number of printed documents. This does three things: (1) prevents them from being electronically searched for key words, (2) deletes the "header" information contained in each e-mail that documents the servers that the e-mail passed through, and (3) discourages the discovery process by making it time consuming and expensive.

There is clearly more going on here than Mrs. Clinton ignoring protocol.

Just before Mrs. Clinton took the podium, she was shown sitting in a seat at the UN . . . and sitting behind her was her top aide, Huma Abedin.  If you remember, former Rep. Michelle Bachmann long ago raised a question how Ms.Abedin was able to obtain a security clearance given her familial relations to Muslim Brotherhood (a terrorist organization) operatives. . . but Bachmann was quickly labelled an "extremist" by certain Republicans, including our local congressman, and Bachman's logical, rational questions about Ms. Abedin's status were never answered.

Now, with discovery of Mrs. Clinton's e-mail irregularities, Judicial Watch has filed a FOIA request seeking

 1. Any and all records of communication between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013; and  

2. Any and all records of communication between former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013. 

Why the interest in Mahmoud?  Per Judicial Watch quoting its sources:

. . .Morsi’s wife “is threatening to expose the special relationship between her husband and Hillary Clinton, after the latter attacked the ousted [president], calling him a simpleton who was unfit for the presidency. Sources close to Nagla confirmed that she has threatened to publish the letters exchanged between Morsi and Hillary.” 

The report continues by saying that Nagla accuses Hillary of denouncing her former close ally, the Brotherhood’s Morsi, in an effort to foster better relations with his successor, Egypt’s current president, Sisi—even though, as Nagla laments, “he [Morsi] was faithful to the American administration.”

Mrs. Clinton was careful yesterday to state that "most" of her communications were with US government employees which would have been captured by government computers on the receiving end.  But if she wrote to Morsi, or to Nagla Mahmoud, those communications would NOT have been captured.

Mrs. Clinton stated that she "deleted"  e-mails that were "personal"  in nature.  Would that include communications with Morsi?  Would that include communications with Morsi's wife?  Is what might be considered blackmail by Morsi's wife the subject of a "personal"  communication?  If a high government official has a "personal" relationship with a member of a terrorist organization, should the "personal" relationship shield communications from public review?

The Judicial Watch release, which has not been discussed in the media, gives a new urgency to getting to the bottom of Mrs. Clinton's actions.

OC's Shiny New Toy . . .

Oneida County's Griffiss "International" Airport unveils a new terminal building . . . And it is gorgeous!

The design of the new complex mixes wood siding, stone and plenty of windows on the outside and exposed wooden beams and support posts and piping on the inside. “They [sic] way we look at it, it is the gateway to the Adirondacks,” said [OC Aviation Commissioner] Stark. “It is upstate New York.”

The terminal consists of two buildings that are connected.

The smaller building is a one-floor structure to be used by US Customs for incoming "international" flights -- of which there are none regularly scheduled, although planes occasionally come in from abroad for maintenance by MidAir USA or Premier Aviation. (You remember MidAir, the company that just got evicted from one of its hangers for being over $700,000 behind in its rent - the company that is expanding in Florida, but not here in Rome.)  Now MidAir, Premier, and private pilots will no longer have to divert flights to Syracuse or wait for customs agents to arrive from Syracuse.

How convenient!  

The larger building is a two-floor structure with the top floor housing airport administrative offices and car rental.

The bottom floor is really cushy! It is entirely occupied by Million Air, the County's fixed base operator (FBO), that caters to "general aviation" needs - i.e., private pilots, private aircraft and their private passengers. Per the Sentinel . . .

In the center on the ground floor is the Million Air service desk. There’s a conference room, as well as a cafe. There are three seating areas, with wall-mounted flat-screen televisions. Adding to the warmth of the seating areas are two double-sided gas-burning fireplaces. Additionally, pilots will have access to a space with computers linked to the internet for flight planning. There’s a theater room to help them fill in wait times before takeoff. If a nap is desired, there are two rooms where pilots can catch a few winks.

Nice!

The terminal cost $7.1 million dollars to build.  After a $500,000 grant (from taxpayers), Oneida County Taxpayers are on the hook for $6.6 million . . .  plus the annual cost of a customs agent of $160,000 per year. Of course, revenues will be coming in from terminal tenants.  OC Taxpayers will rake in a total of $138,400 annually from rents.  I.e., the rents coming in will not even cover the cost of the customs agent.  (Don't even think about the debt service on the structures).

But won't it be worth the convenience of being able to fly out of Rome instead of schlepping to Syracuse or Albany to catch a flight to Disney World, or Vegas, or to visit Aunt Martha in San Diego?

Think again.

There are No facilities for scheduled commercial flights . . . No ticket counters . . . No luggage carousels . . . No waiting rooms for You.   You, the OC taxpayer, will continue to schlep to Syracuse or Albany.  You, the OC Taxpayer, will continue to pay among the highest sales and property tax rates in the country to finance sumptuous and convenient facilities for the corporate welfare takers and regional elite.  

Per the Sentinel . . .

Majority Leader Joseph [sic] E. Joseph, R-10, Westmoreland, said the county has been a “good steward” of the millions of federal, state and county dollars invested at Griffiss since the Air Force moved out and the county airport moved over from Whitestown.

It is not being a "good steward" to secure millions from other levels of government only to saddle County Taxpayers with additional costs to support an infrastructure that is far too large to be justified by our regional population -- which is dropping.  

Airports are not viable "economic development" vehicles.   Read "Airfields of Dreams: If you build it, they won't come" by Steve Malanga in the Autumn 2012 City Journal.

No matter what we build to "attract" others here, we have totally failed to fix the fundamental problems that drove our own people and businesses to other parts of the country. Those forces of repulsion are still there. One of the forces of repulsion is our high rate of taxation -- now just made worse by our building new infrastructure that only serves private interests.

It's time for OC to put Joe and Jean Taxpayer first.  Only then will we see real economic growth.

Democrats Reducing Freedom: Net Neutrality . . .

Today the Federal Communications Commission is set to pass on a partisan 3-2 vote (Democrats vs Republicans)  a comprehensive set of rules to control the Internet, commonly called the "Net Neutrality" rules.

Although the FCC Commissioners are public servants, they have permitted very few members of the public to actually see what these rules are.  That should be a red flag for everyone. Another red flag is the fact that the FCC Chairman has refused to testify before Congress when invited to do so.

If the FCC is hiding what they are doing until after they make a decision, you can be sure that what they are doing is contrary to the interests of the public,  otherwise, "Why the secrecy?"

A former FCC Associate General Counsel raises the question "Is the FCC lawless?" suggesting the specter that "administrative law" is being used in a way to avoid the balance of powers crafted in the US Constitution. Longtime readers of this blog will remember the warning of the threat to our freedoms posed by administrative agencies, "The Ominous 4th Branch of Government."

An alleged "need" for these rules is the practice of certain Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to charge a premium to certain content providers that ensures a "fast lane" on their networks -- e.g. certain streaming services that use a lot of bandwidth.  The new rules would supposedly (assuming no waivers are given to the politically connected) prohibit the practice.

But why should the companies who paid for and constructed their very expensive networks not be able to control how their networks are used? If they cannot control their own property to ensure a return on investment, then private investment in networks will be discouraged.

Lack of investment in networks will result in deterioration of service as traffic increases unless the taxpayers are made to pay for same via the government.  But why should the taxpayers do this when the private sector has, to date,  met everyone's needs?

So far the internet works just fine, as suggested by a Republican FCC Commissioner, Agit Pai, who calls Net Neutrality "a solution that won't work to a problem that doesn't exist."

If there is a threat to the Internet that requires government intervention, it is the mergers of ISPs that reduce competition in the marketplace... But the government has been approving mergers left and right, perhaps because it is easier to control one or two big players than a multitude of lesser players.

It is the lack of internet regulation that makes the internet so useful -- it is freedom --  giving a voice to even the most minor of minority viewpoints.  

The Internet is not broken.  It does not need fixing.

Undoubtedly, with these rules, all that we have come to appreciate about the Internet will ultimately become undone.  Voices will be silenced . . . And the public will be left hearing only "government approved" viewpoints.

Republicans Reducing Freedom: Student Success Act

The warnings are out: H. R. 5, the "Student Success Act,"  is about to be taken up by the House of Representatives in Congress, co-sponsored by only Republicans.  Although this very lengthy bill (610 pages in PDF) has an official Summary that gives an impression that the legs will be cut out from under Common Core, it is an Un-Official Summary by "Three Moms Against Common Core"  that people should be talking about:

“Student Success Act” to Crush Religious Freedom, Private School Autonomy, Parental Rights: #NO on HR5 ... Per the article ...

It ends private schools’ religious freedom from government control. It harms funding freedom in private schools. It puts into question parental rights and control over education. It pushes sameness of testing. Those are just a few things. There are more. 

We have conscious deceivers in D.C. pushing this bill: its damages are so painfully ironic. The bill is touted specifically to “reduce the federal footprint and restore local control while empowering parents“. What a poignant lie. 

If H.R. 5 passes this week, in exchange for billions in federal funding, we will be crushed in the following ways. The federal Department of Education aims to take over: 

1. STATE AUTHORITIES AND RIGHTS  

2. PARENTAL RIGHTS TO DIRECT EDUCATION OF A CHILD 

3. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM – NO MORE RELIGIOUS COUNSELING, MENTORING OR TECHNOLOGIES ALLOWED IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS 

4. PRIVATE SCHOOL AUTONOMY: GOVERNMENT-APPOINTED OMBUDSMEN WILL MONITOR COMPLIANCE 

5. PRIVATE SCHOOL FUNDING – PRIVATE SCHOOLS MUST CONSULT WITH PUBLIC DISTRICTS WHICH ENFORCE EQUALITY

One has to be suspicious of what is in any bill as big as this one. Here, the Moms did their homework and back up their claims with explanations that cite specific sections of the bill (which you can check out yourself using the links provided above).

Education in this country is only gotten worse since the Federal Government became involved. Control over education needs to be brought closer to the people directly affected, and the Federal Government (with no constitutional authority in this field)  needs to get out of it entirely.  But it is too easy to take the money (our money) so the expansion of Federal power and mediocrity has continued.

Our Congressional Reps. need to vote NO on this act.

Nano Sleight of Hand. . . .

The OD headline blares: NANO IS HERE. Believe it . . .

But please forgive me for feeling sceptical.  

The problem with SUNY Poly having one name but two campuses is that unless the Utica or Albany campuses are specifically identified, you never know which campus they are talking about.

Therefore, should anyone take comfort in knowing that

"SUNY Poly has 215 researchers and faculty members and about 350 more people already are working for some of the existing tenants who will occupy the Computer Chip Commercialization Center in Marcy . . ." 

when the article fails to state that these people are assigned to work at the UTICA Campus?  Given the lack of transparency on this project, one must assume that the people Kayoleros is referencing are stationed in Albany until we are told otherwise.

Infiltrated!

It has been the view of the administration for years that the Muslim Brotherhood is, essentially, a bunch of 'good guys' that has "eschewed violence."  But if you remember months back, while a Muslim Brotherhood member, Mohammed Morsi, ruled Egypt, Christians there lived in fear.

The Egyptian people, not liking Mr. Morsi's Islamist agenda, ultimately overthrew him,  and the Egyptian military moved to take over the government to create stability. However, our administration refused to assist the Egyptian military.

Now, from the Washington Free Beacon comes this report: Muslim Brotherhood: White House Official Met Us at State Department.

News of the meeting between the Brotherhood allies and the Obama administration caused anger among many in the Egyptian government, which is fighting furiously to crackdown on the Islamist group and its supporters.

“These statements are incomprehensible to me, we do not understand that there will be such a communication with the elements involved in terrorist acts to intimidate the Egyptians,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shukri was quoted as saying in the regional press following the Free Beacon’s initial report.

“The Brotherhood is not a political party,” but “a terrorist organization,” Shukri said.

Almost three years ago then-representative Michelle Bachmann questioned how a certain highly placed US official with familial connections to the Muslim Brotherhood could have received a security clearance.  Please see a series of correspondence on this issue. She was immediately called out on this by several members of her own party, including being branded an "extremist" by our own congressional representative. 

You really have to wonder what is up with our foreign policy?  We seem to involve ourselves with destabilizing stable situations in Libya (backing the take down of Qadaffi) and Iraq (with the American pullout), yet stay uninvolved when it comes to backing those who would try to maintain safety for all religious minorities, such as current Egyptian President el-Sisi.

Now we have this story: ISIS Beheads Coptic Christians, El-Sisi Vows to ‘Avenge’ Murders, with a terrorist seeming to echo views expressed by our President at a recent prayer breakfast:

All of the killers wore black except the spokesman, who, wearing camouflage, talks in English and sounds American . . .  “Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for,” he says. . . . “And we will conquer Rome, by Allah’s permission,” the American-accented narrator says, pointing his dagger at the sea.

The White House responds by calling for a "political solution" in Libya. . . . a solution to a crisis that WE helped to create.

One could wonder what has informed our foreign policy . . . but some of our "extremists" already know.

The NY Divide, an Upstate Agenda, and Choosing a Speaker

With the removal of Sheldon Silver from his position as speaker of the Assembly, there is talk about who will be his successor. Per the NYPost, the Assembly may be getting Carl Hestie as its first African-American Speaker.  The Post indicates that he has great credentials, including an undergrad degree in math and statistics from Stony Brook University, masters in finance from Baruch, experience as a budget analyst in the City's comptroller's office, and a reputation as a consensus builder.  While others have questioned Mr. Hestie's background, what seems to be most important to the Post and for some people is that he is African-American.

Frankly, the focus on race, gender, ethnicity, and other human characteristics that created "protected classes" during the last 20-30 years (while accomplishing little in solving their associated problems) has prevented us from seeing the REAL divisions among us.

The REAL divide in New York is geographical, illustrated by the map of NY's 100 richest and poorest places based on information listed here.  While ten of the poorest places are in our own area, the real take-away from looking at the map is that almost all the richest places are in the metro-New York City area while almost all the poorest places are Upstate.

Now, how can a government essentially run by "three men in a room" who are ALL from the metro New York City area, where incomes and wealth are high, possibly understand Upstate's problems and represent Upstate's interests, where the opposite is true?  

There was once a time when Upstate and Downstate both succeeded through leveraging Upstate's natural advantages of an efficient transportation route to the West and hydropower.  How this all came undone, and how both Upstate and Downstate have suffered since, was previously discussed in "What's the Fix for Upstate?"

If the shoe was on the other foot, what might an Upstate-controlled agenda look like?

1) Dissolve the Thruway Authority, eliminate all tolls north of I-287 by turning that portion over to NYSDOT and run it like the other interstates in NYS; and turn the remainder over to the NY / NJ Port Authority, and run that portion like other metro-area toll bridges and approaches. Upstaters were promised, when they controlled the Senate, that Thruway tolls would be removed when the construction bonds were paid off.  But even after being paid off TWICE (first, when US Sen. Moynihan secured a Federal payment for same in the 1980s, and again when they were actually paid off via tolls in 1996), a now reapportioned state legislature controlled by Downstate has not only continued tolls to this day, but also directed them to pay for the state's canal system (which helped NYC to grow) and for maintenance of Downstate's toll-free I-84.  While tolls in the high income metro area may be viewed as either a necessity or an annoyance, to Upstate they are death because they generally do not exist among Upstate's business competitors, burden Upstate's advantageous trade route, and are less affordable to Upstaters than their well-heeled Downstate counterparts.

2)  Require that regions generate most of their own electricity.  Because Upstate is rich in green hydropower resources, its electric rates should be less than those of its less-endowed competitors. Instead, rates are significantly higher owing to state policies that have shifted Upstate electric power into the metro area to lower costs there, mandated high-cost "green" wind and solar power alternatives, and directed closure of metro area generation facilities. If regions were required to develop their own electrical resources, localities could decide for themselves what mix of sources is best for them and what associated environmental impacts they are willing to tolerate.

3)  Require the State to pay its entire share of Medicaid rather than pass a portion of it on to counties where it shows up in Upstate's crushing property taxes. Alternatively, require the State to pay its entire share of Medicaid at the MINIMUM level of benefits and allow local municipalities to determine and pay for any supplemental services desired.  NY provides one of the nation's highest level of benefits. While Downstaters whine about their sky-high property taxes, they are not so bad when viewed as a percentage of property value (which represents accumulated wealth) .  In fact, given the extremely high property values in Manhattan, property taxes there as a percentage of property value are actually among the lowest in the nation. (See Why People Don't Come Here . . . By the Numbers).  With such low rates, Downstaters might feel generous when determining the kinds of benefits they want to provide to the poor via Medicaid.  However, most of Oneida County's budget consists of mandated Medicaid costs. The same is true for many Upstate counties.  Medicaid is the reason why tax rates are as high as they are Upstate. The highest property tax burdens in the nation, when calculated as a percentage of property value, are found in Upstate NY counties. Essentially, Downstate, via State government, has mandated that Upstate take money from the poor to give to the poor.  No wonder why Upstate cannot compete for jobs!

Removing Thruway tolls,  letting Upstate keep most of its hydropower energy, and having the State pick up its entire cost of Medicaid, would help Upstate become competitive again without the need for expensive specially targeted programs (Utica Nano, Buffalo Billion, etc.) that may or may not work and simply shift some monies from Downstate to particular Upstate localities.  You might think of other things to add to this agenda.

But these things won't happen because the people in control, Downstaters, come from a very different place economically. They don't readily comprehend how their well-intentioned policies have hurt Upstate, which is not just a supplier of natural resources and power generation for the City, and not just a repository for the City's garbage, but a place where people live, work, and raise families. 

Having an Assembly speaker from Upstate won't solve the problem, but it may, in a small way, help the Upstate perspective to be seen.

The Assembly should choose someone from Upstate to be its new speaker.

A Pattern of Duplicitousness . . .

Last year some of Rep. Hanna's duplicitous behavior was documented here.

Now,  the Vass Political Blog documents a pattern of duplicity.

For a clear picture of our representation in congress: Stop listening to what Mr. Hanna says, but instead, look at what he does.

No wonder why he did not want to debate his opponent in the last election cycle.

The Buffalo Billion, the Utica Connection -- and NYS Secrecy . . .

As noted in an October post, the state is in the process of spending $750 million (of Our Money) to construct and equip a solar panel manufacturing facility in Buffalo for Solar City, a California company. The project furthers Governor Cuomo's plan to spend a $Billion (a/k/a "the Buffalo Billion)  to revive the economy of Western New York.

Jim Heaney, veteran investigative reporter and founder of the Investigative Post, intended to document how that large sum of money was being spent. Instead, he wound up writing an article entitled "Suppression of Buffalo Billion spending records," documenting the run-around he got from officials responsible for the project when he attempted to get information.

In addition to Alain Kaloyeros, new president of SUNY Poly, Utica readers may recognize the names Alicia Dicks and, perhaps, Fort Schuyler Management Corp. in Mr. Heaney's article.  Ms. Dicks is a local resident, director at Mohawk Valley EDGE, co-owner of Aqua Vino Restaurant, and was President of Fort Schuyler Management Corp. when, at about the time Mr. Heaney was researching his article, she was named CEO of the Community Foundation of Herkimer and Oneida Counties, Inc.  (FSMC is now looking for a new president).  Fort Schuyler Management Corporation was a Non-Profit created by the Albany NanoCollege (now SUNY Poly) for its economic development operations in Utica. The undeveloped western portion of SUNY Poly's Utica/Rome campus, which comprises 300 acres, has been ground leased to the Fort Schuyler Management Corporation, which in turn, has subleased this property to Mohawk Valley EDGE for the development of the Marcy NanoCenter.

Fort Schuyler Management Corp., at some point, became a vehicle for fostering the governor's development agenda not only in the Utica area but elsewhere, including Buffalo -- which led to it becoming a focus in Mr. Heaney's article.  According to Mr. Heaney . . .

The Fort Schuyler Management Corp. contends it doesn’t have to abide by the Freedom of Information Law, a point disputed by the state’s open government director.

After describing contacts with other players in the governor's agenda (who are also involved in Utica area projects) Mr. Heaney noted:

I have never, in my nearly four decades as a reporter, encountered such heavy handed tactics to thwart the release of information.

FOI requests have not been honored.

Interview requests have gone unanswered.

Information casting the developer selection process in a favorable light was provided to another news outlet in an apparent attempt to head off the story you are reading now.

And Kaloyeros, who has not hidden his displeasure over my pursuit of documents, sent me an email last month in which he declared he does not “respond to perceived threats and terrorism.”

How does this matter?

Mr. Heaney's article suggests that the developer selection process could have been skewed to favor a large donor to Mr. Cuomo's campaign.  Another article by Mr. Heaney reveals that

The company that New York taxpayers are investing so heavily in has not been able to produce a profit for its shareholders.

The lack of transparency on the part of the State with the facts noted in Mr. Heaney's articles can lead to conclusions that (1) the economic development schemes are designed to funnel money to the politically connected and/or (2) the governor is recklessly gambling with our money hoping to hit a jackpot.

Perhaps these conclusions are erroneous, but government stonewalling does not encourage taxpayers to accept government conclusions on faith.

How does this matter locally?

The Utica area has had a long history of state officials making hyped-up promises that fell way short of expectations: The Center for Brownfield Studies, Griffiss Institute, and Homeland Security Training Center come immediately to mind.

The biggest promises have been Marcy NanoCenter and Nano Utica. Local funds (such as increased sewer rates) have been ponied up in support of these projects.

Marcy NanoCenter has been a project for perhaps a dozen years and, other than the jobs at EDGE itself to promote it, jobs have yet to be created.  Telling is its total absence from the Fort Schuyler Management Corp.'s website (as of posting today) even though FSMC is supposedly involved. The site, rather, has small pieces on Quad-C and a Syracuse project, but is dominated by Buffalo Billion information -- likely recently posted in response to Mr. Heaney's article. (Listen to his interview by Fred Dicker at about 36:00) .  Does the lack of information on Marcy NanoCenter suggest that it is not an important project for FSMC?

Although a gleaming, costly, building has been constructed (at taxpayer expense) for Nano Utica next to the SUNY Poly library, people were supposed to be working there last month. Where are they? The lack of activity has the folks on Utica Topix speculating in several threads that Quad-C is not going to be a manufacturing facility with 1500 jobs, but, rather, nothing more than an expensive academic building. The contradictory statements last summer regarding which companies were participating in Quad-C certainly bolstered the negative outlook.

TODAY in the OD we read: Major Quad-C expansion on the horizon. Now the cost of the building will rise from 125 to between 250 and 300 million dollars, and the potential workers will increase from 1500 to 2250. . . . with completion postponed until summer.  But this announcement comes after the building should have been completed and people should have been working.  The descriptive language also seems to have changed from emphasizing manufacturing to research. The lack of specificity in who will be participating is telling.

This is starting to sound too familiar -- like Griffiss Institute's "world class research facility" turning into little more than field trips and summer jobs for middle and high school students and some seminars.

Only time will tell whether Greater Utica will have its hoped-for economic transformation --  or whether highly-paid Economic Development Music Men  hucksters have taken advantage of our naivety - - - again.  Let us hope it is the former.

Seventy-Six Trombones, anyone?

 

A Cold Dose of Reality for Utica-Rome ...

The Guest Editorial by Dr. Anthony Vennero in the Utica OD over the weekend, "Nanotech center might not be our economic panacea," should be a cold and bracing dose of reality to all of our regional leaders, both elected and non-elected.

In a nutshell, Dr. Vennero cites numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to show that even if the rosy projections of job growth from nano are met, they will not even bring the region back to the number of jobs held in 2009! Worse, Dr. Vennero describes the formidable competition our region has in the nanotech field, suggesting that the promise of virtually guaranteed (taxpayer-subsidized) jobs may be empty. Additionally, Dr. Vennero cites demographic information to show that our population downtrend, with negative economic consequences, will continue.

None of this is new to long-time readers of this blog as similar things have been said here for many years. What is new is that we now read about this in the local media.

Perhaps this is because the regional elite know that the situation has become so dire that it can no longer be hidden, and they wish to prepare us for the worst.

Now . . . What should be done with this information? 

Teacher Evaluation: Who's the Boss?

The Washington Post had a New York-focused article yesterday, Teacher evaluation: going from bad to worse?  Per the article, we are reminded of how Gov. Cuomo, using the threat of withholding state aid, bludgeoned local school districts into implementing a teacher evaluation system based 20% upon student standardized test scores. Now we are informed that the Chancellor of the Board of Regents, Dr. Merryl Tisch, not only wants to double the portion of a teacher's evaluation that is based upon student standardized test scores to 40%, but also wants to eliminate the locally selected measures of performance.  Essentially, per the article, the purpose is to increase the number of teachers rated as INeffective from 1% to 10%, to reach the goal stated in the state's "Race to the Top" application to the Federal government for a huge grant -- with two "ineffective" ratings sending the teacher out the door.

Per a 12/29/14 New York Times article, Cuomo Vetoes Bill That Would Protect Teachers From Low Ratings -- a bill drafted by his own administration in response to pressure from teacher unions.  Likely this 180% change was payback for the union's failure to endorse Cuomo during the last election, but Gov. Cuomo is now echoing Dr. Tisch that the 1% ineffective figure is "not real" and that the teacher evaluation system needs to be "more rigorous."

Lost in this struggle over teacher evaluations between Unions, the Governor, the Board of Regents, and even the Federal Government, is the fact that the Local School Boards are charged with the hiring and firing of teachers.  Thus, the rules for teacher evaluations are a power grab from the Local School Boards, removing their discretion and effectively turning them from supposed policy-makers into unpaid employees of the State (or maybe even the Federal) government.   So Who's (really) the Boss?

While the debate over how to calculate the effectiveness of teachers continues, new rules, directed by the Federal Education Department, are being crafted to define how the Teachers, themselves, are to be educated.  These are summarized by Susan Schneider on her blog, along with a link to how you can comment on them.  Essentially, the rules will reduce the range of types of persons who will become teachers -- further limiting the meaningful choices of Local School Boards.

What will be the end result of these rules for teacher evaluation, teacher preparation, and, likely, Common Core itself ?

Since psychiatry heavily informs schools of education and the education elite, recent changes to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders should be instructive: Nonconformity and Freethinking Now Considered Mental Illnesses.

Is this the ultimate object here? An enforced conformity?

Who should be the Boss?

"Festivus" at the Firehouse . . .

A humble little sign saying "Happy Birthday Jesus. We love you" at the Shepherd Place firehouse in Utica, NY, received a lot of national attention last week when the Freedom From Religion Foundation complained about it and threatened legal action.  For the most part, FFRF's complaint and threats went over like a lead balloon judging from the on-line comments posted on the multiple renditions of the story that could be found --  a public relations nightmare for those who wish to remove religion from the public square -- both nationally, but especially in Utica .

Utica, after all, has a long tradition of being a "melting pot" -- a place where people of different races, ethnicities, and  religions are welcomed -- a place where the stirring incantation of the call to prayer each Friday from the new mosque next to City Hall  has become as familiar as the noontime chiming of traditional Christian hymns from Grace Episcopal Church or the noontime factory whistle.

The  "melting pot" works in Utica because its diverse groups of people tolerate and respect each others' sensibilities and traditions  -- including respect for the dominant culture.  How could it be a "melting pot" otherwise?   Respect for the dominant culture -- or lack of it -- explains why a new mosque in Utica raised nary an eyebrow while one proposed for New York City created a firestorm of controversy.  

Context is the key to understanding everything.

Now, a new tactic is being tried per this story out of the O-D: Festivus group celebrates outside fire station.  The corner of Shepherd Place and Sunset Avenue would seem to be an unlikely place to "celebrate" "feats of strength" and "airing of grievances" unless the celebration is not really a celebration, but, rather, a protest against that humble little "Happy Birthday Jesus" sign.

This was no spontaneous "celebration." It was advertised in the local paper the day before, and in the Syracuse paper on the day of.  The organizer is a Utica College adjunct who has political connections and has mobilized activists.

There is nothing wrong with organization and mobilization.  Free speech is valued. . .   But what are they promoting? 

Although these folks speak in inclusive terms about Utica's amazing diversity and not "bringing any one group down, but it’s about bringing everybody up," if they get what they ask for what will be achieved?

The Festivus group, meanwhile, is calling for other local religions to request the fire department post signs representing their faiths to foster feelings of unity and togetherness in the city during the holiday season.

If the fire department received such calls, what would be the response?  Post other signs? Remove the original sign? Ignore the calls?

Posting other signs would dilute and confuse the firefighters' simple message about the meaning of Christmas. . . . A victory for anti-Christians.

Removing the sign would be a victory for those who would remove religion from the public square altogether.

Ignoring calls would make other groups feel slighted or discriminated against. . . . A victory for those who would exploit our differences.

Utica,  the "Town that Loves Refugees," needs no group of activists to "foster feelings of unity and togetherness."  Far from "bringing everybody up,"  the "Festivus"  group's tactics would undo Utica by shutting off or confusing certain messages while setting groups of people against each other.

True to their "live and let live" nature,  Uticans ignored the Festivus' call -- this time.  But those who would divide us for political gain, though few in number, are strategically located, highly organized, and know how to use the media.    

Perhaps this is what political 'science' is all about . . .  right, professor?

Celebrating Nonsense . . .

Oneida County "celebrates" the One Millionth Gallon of jet fuel sold at Griffiss "International" Airport with a big press release.

Does this mean that the Airport is finally self-sustaining?  . . . . I didn't think so.

The number of "operations" at the airport continues to fall.  The only reason O.C. did so "well" in the fuel department is due to military -- i.e., government -- flights.

But how "well" did we do?  As of 12/11/14 OC took in $84,473.46 . . . just about what we are paying the new airport commissioner.

Perhaps O. C.  celebrates this "non-event" to distract from the fact that O. C. has to chase down Mid-Air to collect $700,000 it is owed.

What nonsense!

NYS Single Payer: No Choice, No Jobs . . .

From the Rochester D&C: Supporters call for universal healthcare plan in NY .

The proposal is to replace private health insurance with New York State Health Insurance -- insurance without premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc.

No one likes dealing with premiums, deductibles and co-pays!  Health care should be Free!!  It is a "Basic Human Right" -- No?

It is easy to make promises that sound good . . . it is quite something else to deliver on them.

For some politicians, the fact that insurance companies make a "profit" on providing a "basic human right" is downright wrong . . . and they intend to fix the situation by replacing the health insurance companies with government. [Never mind the fact that NYS heavily taxes this "basic human right" in hidden ways.]

"Free" health care ultimately has to be paid for.  With a "single payer" system in New York, the "government" becomes the payer . . . You can surmise where the government will get the money from.  Who pays ultimately will be determined by  . . . politics. Do you trust NYS politics?

If it is "free" healthcare,  you will pretty much have to settle for the health care you are given. "Beggers can't be choosers" we used to say . . . If the government is doing the paying then the government will determine what health care you are allowed.  What you get will ultimately be determined by . . . politics. Again, do you trust NYS politics?

And if the government is the sole payer, the pay of the people working in the health care system will ultimately be determined by . . . WHAT?  And if the healthcare workers don't like their pay, then what happens?

Frankly, I do not want politics -- especially NYS politics -- determining who pays for my health care, what my health care provider is paid, and what health care I will be allowed to receive.

But there are a couple other issues here, perhaps even bigger . . .

Insurance companies compete with each other for your business.  If you do not like the service you get from one, you can choose to do business with another.  If NYS politics makes the government your insurance company, if you don't like the service, where will you go?  YOU WILL HAVE NO CHOICE to go elsewhere for your insurance unless you move elsewhere.   

But why stop with health insurance?  Why not Workers' Comp. insurance? It's not that different.  Or auto insurance?  Or life insurance? Or homeowners?  Etc. Etc. If NYS politicians can go after health insurers, they can go after the whole insurance sector.

Insurance companies are big employers in New York,  including ones employing many in this area. We've seen what NYS politicians have done to the arms businesses in New York because they don't like guns.

It looks like the insurance sector is next.

Their Piece of the Pie . . .

A couple months ago Oneida County Executive Picente complained about a proposed casino in Tyre, Seneca County, and announced a coalition to fight it. Seneca County Chairman Hayssen shot back

“Picente and Halbritter know we have the best model for our casino in our zone, and it will rival theirs someday,” he said. “They just don’t want it to happen.”

But Mr. Picente said

that the placement of a casino in Tyre goes against the intent of the Oneidas’ exclusivity agreement with the state, even though Tyre is just outside the Nation’s exclusivity zone.

The agreement is the agreement. If Tyre is outside the Oneida Nation exclusivity zone, then it is a legal location. Is Mr. Picente afraid of a little competition?

Now these same top officials in two counties battle over Turning Stone's planned luxury retail center.

Is Mr. Hayssen afraid of a little competition?

You have to love the spectacle of Government types (both Hayssen and Picente) battling over "their" piece of the "pie." 

But the problem is neither Turning Stone nor Tyre. Rather, the problem is with how Government (State, Federal and Local) allows certain entities (such as Turning Stone) to operate free from the rules that everyone else has to live by.

It is cronyism that WE THE PEOPLE wind up paying for  . . . sometimes in subtle ways  . . . like Utica area sewer users funding sewers for uncommitted nanotech companies . . . and Utica area water users funding a pipeline to Verona for Turning Stone.

WE THE PEOPLE need to put a stop to cronyism by getting rid of the government officials who engage in it.

Oneida County Is Coming for Your Wallets!!!

"Sewer rates could increase 10% in Oneida County."  This headline is misleading. The sewer rates are not increasing for everyone in Oneida County -- just for those users of the Oneida County Part County Sewer District . . . which is centered on Utica.

About $442,000 of the money generated will go to pay debt service on the $11.6 million project to accommodate increased sewer use expected from nanotechnology enterprises in Marcy.

The population of the sewer district is down.  The current users do not need to "accommodate increased sewer use." 

Leave it to the Oneida County Legislature and the County Executive to find a way to tap Utica-area citizens for County-sponsored development.  We should all be so lucky to find a way to pass the costs of our pet projects on to someone else!

Gotta Hand It To These Guys !!!

 Turning Stone Resort Casino announces $100 million luxury retail outlet, entertainment complex . While MV EDGE is running around like a bunch of losers spending Oneida County taxpayers' money trying to stifle potential competition for Turning Stone from Seneca County,  Turning Stone has moved on to beat any potential competition.

Love 'em or hate 'em, you have to admire Turning Stone's entrepreneurial spirit playing their fair or unfair advantages for all their worth.

Let's face it.  There is no way the Utica/Syracuse market alone could support such an outlet center. Now the well-heeled of the region won't have to travel to Manhattan for luxury items.

This is a PLUS for US.  

Global Warming Baloney

Gotta love this guy . . .    :-)

Should Upstate Split from NYC?

This was a question someone posted on Topix, generating the "we can get along without them" vs "we need them" type of discussion.  One person posted that both regions need each other.  I agree with the last view.  (I remember in the 1970s when NYC was in an incredible amount of debt, but the Upstate economy was fine and kept things afloat for all).

The problem now is that the needs of these different regions are no longer reflected in state policies. The Downstate majority runs everything to its favor. The Upstate perspective is inadequately represented.

Before the NYS Senate was reapportioned in the late 1960s to reflect a "one man one vote" US Supreme Court interpretation of the "equal protection" clause of the US Constitution, State policies had to be good for both Upstate and Downstate to get past the NYS Senate. A bit like the US Constitution's giving each state 2 senators regardless of population, the NYS Constitution gave Upstate regions more representatives to ensure that differing regional perspectives had a voice in policy making. The result was state policy that was good for the entire state. Compared to now, Upstate was booming back then.

This balance was done away with by the US Supreme Court. You can point to that event as marking the beginning of Upstate's descent both financially and in population, and the entire state's loss of representatives and importance in Washington. Now it is the "tyrrany of the majority" found in a pure democracy that rules us ... something that the framers of both the US and NYS Constitutions sought to avoid.

Restoring the Balance would resolve the issue, but how to get there is a big question. Getting the US Supreme Court to revisit and reverse its past decision -- and then NYS restoring the old Senate representation formula -- would be one approach. Splitting the state administratively into Upstate and Downstate regions with laws having to be approved by the representatives of both regions to become effective might be another approach.

But if the balance cannot be restored, then the only hope for Upstate survival is to break away and make its own policies.

Another Year, Another Rate Increase for MVWA . . .

Water rates rising for fifth time in five years. Will it ever end?

Probably not.

The board controlling the Water Authority is appointed rather than elected by the public.  They answer to politicians.  Therefore, decisions are likely to advance the local (read County) political agenda (formerly New Hartford expansion, now Nano Utica/Marcy, but always crony favoritism) rather than the interests of the consumers. Take a look at the rate structure . . . it heavily favors the high volume industrial users rather than the typical stay-at-home consumer, yet the cost to treat each gallon of water is the same for all.

The board also depends upon Water Authority officials for their information -- officials whose expertise is limited.

Since the paying-public has already lost control of the system, perhaps now is the time to consider selling the water system to a large waterworks corporation such as American Waterworks or Aqua America. These corporations serve many regions rather than one, have developed an expertise that cannot be matched by our local utility, and, most importantly, would be answerable to the  NYS Public Services Commission when they try to increase local water rates.

Will you ever see persons that think this way appointed to the board?

The McDermott Surprise . . .

I don't know about you, but after watching the NY Governor debate last night the Libertarian candidate, Mr. McDermott, was  the big surprise! 

Mr. Astorino came across as being plastic... He presented nothing that we haven't heard before. While he is against Common Core, he would "replace" CC standards with New York State standards . . . but we've already had NYS standards that didn't help.  He would, at best, be another Pataki . . . appealing to more conservative voters, but not fundamentally transformative.

Mr. Hawkins was the big disappointment. Based on the last debate I expected a more intelligent discourse from him, even though I disagree with him on almost everything .... But all I heard was his Utopian wish list . . . and his accent!  . . . Where did that come from?

As for Mr. Cuomo ... The state is a mess.  The targeted corporate welfare on steroids only spends taxpayer money.  It will not create a sustainable economic revival because the structural problems that created NYS' malaise are never addressed (high taxes, over regulation, high utility costs, etc.).
 
Mr. McDermott nailed both the Common Core and the Charter Schools issues for me. I know some of my conservative leaning friends will disagree on the Charter Schools issue because Charter Schools create choices for parents.  But Charter Schools are still Government Schools.  They may create choices for now, but they are tuition-free competition for the truly independent private parochial schools. After the parochial schools get killed off, there will only be government schools -- and they all will be promoting the government's agenda rather than a diversity of thought.

Mr. McDermott is really a long-shot to actually win because he is not of a "major" party.  But in this era of three Republican County Executives (including our own) endorsing Democrat Governor Cuomo, are the Republicans really a viable party in New York State anymore?  The People have no real choices any more. . . . 

Unless they seize power for themselves.

That was Mr. McDermott's overall message last night:  Give power back to the People, and they will fix things themselves.

That Idea, is truly something new

"Trophy Project" . . .

A healthy dose of pure skepticism was on display last week in Buffalo's ArtVoice over Gov. Cuomo's deal with Solar City (the subject of a post here) and whether it would be a "game changer." Using local economic statistics, writer Jim Heany demonstrates that while the project might be nice for Buffalo to have, it really doesn't change anything.

Deals like SolarCity provide Cuomo with the kind of trophy project that politicians pine for. 

But they also underscore how uncompetitive the business climate in Western New York and New York State remains. What’s more, these deals are a stark reminder that Cuomo and the rest of the Albany crowd have failed to enact reforms that would give us a fighting chance to improve our economic plight without having to ply companies with corporate welfare.

While taxpayers are being forced to pay to manufacture solar panels in Buffalo, the governor is working dutifully to expand the customer base for solar panels, also at taxpayer expense, right here in Oneida County.

Our money is being spent to create an unsustainable false economy . . . unsustainable because these projects do absolutely nothing to change the conditions that have caused NY's economic decline.

Mr. Heany is correct.  Trophy projects change nothing until state policy is reformed.

The Pied Piper of Green . . .

God bless Howie Hawkins . . . I always enjoy listening to an intelligent conversation about current issues and politics, and you can count on that from Mr. Hawkins, rather than the public-relations focus-group-tested  rhetoric you get from mainstream politicians.  Mr. Hawkins elevates the grade-level of the discourse, and for that you have to welcome him and thank him.

Nevertheless, Mr. Hawkins, in the report of his presentation to the OD Editorial Board, really offers nothing more to the voters of New York State than promises of what many would like to see . . . a Utopian vision if you will . . . of things that have already been tried but would end up causing more harm than good in the long run.

Employment assurance: People who are unemployed will be able to find full employment by doing community service or public work.

Roosevelt's WPA may have put people to work, but it prolonged the Depression by distorting market forces... keeping people in "public" make-work jobs rather than jobs in the private sector doing things for which there is a demand. This has been done before (Soviet Russia) and does not work. When the government puts people to work, it builds things that bureaucrats want rather than things that people (i.e., the "market") want . . . Remember the Yugo? I wonder how Mr. Hawkins feels about "workfare?"

Affordable housing . . .it matters in New York City and other larger areas...

Not necessarily . . . There is plenty of "affordable housing" in Detroit . . . and there will be in New York City, too, once the green ideas take hold.

. . . increasing the minimum wage - possibly to $15 per hour

This is the "living wage" shibboleth: That everyone, whatever their job, should be paid enough to support themselves and their families. While "living wage" is a nice outcome . . . and has actually been achieved in some places without government mandate (like North Dakota where fracking is allowed, or Switzerland which has no minimum wage) it is a distortion of the "market" and ultimately must fail unless the entire economy is government rather than "market" controlled (which again, like Soviet Russia, ultimately will fail). YOU pay someone wages based on the perceived value of services YOU receive in return. If a minimum wage is set, that means that people earning the minimum are most likely NOT providing a commensurate value of services in return . . . YOU are "overpaying" them. Of course, value is relative to the local economy. If it is humming with near zero unemployment, then you will likely pay a "living wage" to others to get menial tasks done.

Clean energy . . . “To me, it’s a no-brainer,” Hawkins said. “Lower electric costs, full employment, clean energy. That’s the way to go.”

No-brains is more like it! Wishing does not make these things so. It's time that we learn from others.  As already noted in der Spiegel, the German "green energy" policies have turned electricity into a luxury item -- busting the "lower electric bills" myth. In Spain the promise of "green energy" lead to a 26% unemployment rate! So much for "full employment."  And Clean?  How clean is it with windmills chewing up and solar reflectors frying birds?  With entire landscapes covered with windmills or solar panels?  And with landscapes festooned with powerlines?  What happens when these "large footprint" projects fail . . . or just get old and wear out?

Mr. Hawkins says things that a lot of people like to hear . . . like children enjoying a fairy tale.  And the more plausible-sounding the tale, the greater the enjoyment. . . . But it is still a tale.

Mr. Hawkins is the Pied Piper of Green.    

Is It Communism?

Last week I commented on Oneida County's solar projects, noting that one of the companies involved had just entered a huge deal with New York State to build a panel manufacturing facility in Buffalo. Something about the deal in the Sentinel article referenced caught my eye . . .

Under the deal with SolarCity, the state will spend $350 million to build the sprawling factory on South Park Avenue and provide $400 million in funding for equipment, with the state following the economic development model that it used to build up the semiconductor industry in the Albany area. 

Under that model, the state invests in state-of-the-art facilities and equipment that typically are too costly for companies to acquire on their own and then signs agreements with companies, like SolarCity, that want to access it. . . . [emphasis supplied]

The "economic development model" is State ownership of the factory and State ownership of the equipment. . . .  i.e., "public" ownership of the means of production -- a hallmark of Communism.  Although one or two factories may not mean NY has gone communist ...

SUNY Poly has also sought to use this same model in Marcy where it owns a site that is being developed in hopes of attracting up to three computer chip manufacturing plants.

We certainly have not had armed revolutionaries taking over factories like in Russia a century ago . . . But we have had over-regulation, taxation, and trade laws shut down factories here sending the jobs overseas  to the benefit of large transnational corporations that are cozy with the government. . . . and now we are trying to "lure" jobs back and reopen factories with taxpayer financed incentives like the deal discussed here plus a loose immigration policy that drives wages down.

Whether by armed revolution or by laws and regulations, isn't the end result the same?  Elites (rather than the public) will control the means of production . . .  and the people working in the factories will be nothing more than serfs.

Lower That Sales Tax!

The OD gave us a "sneak peak" at the County's 2015 Budget a couple days ago, but we didn't see what we were looking for.

Before another dime is spent on "economic development" projects, the County's Number One Priority should be cutting our total sales tax rate from 8.75% to 8.00% -- the rate that is paid in Syracuse, Rochester, Schenectady, Albany, and Binghamton.

Oneida County needs to bench mark its costs of doing business against those of other places and to bring them in line with other areas .

This region cannot continue to stand head and shoulders above its peers in taxation and expect to be taken seriously as a place to do business.

Make Milk When the Sun Shines . . .

Let's pretend that you own 5 acres of vacant land near Oriskany.  A dairy farmer approaches you and asks if he can graze some cows on your land for free for 20 years. In return, you promise to buy milk from the farmer for 20 years. . . You are told that at current prices you could save $12,000 a year.  (You really love dairy products!) Is this a good deal?  or bad deal?

A reader wrote that something unusual was going on over some land in Oriskany near the old County Airport. . . but instead of grazing cows, it was solar panels.

A February Rome Sentinel article revealed that Oneida County made a deal with a company called Solar City -- to allow Solar City to install almost 7,000 solar panels that it owns on 5 acres of county land and keep them there for 20 years to make electricity.  In return the county agrees to buy power from Solar City for 20 years. . . . Under current market conditions the county expects to save $12,000 a year.   Is this a good deal?  or bad deal?

Per the Sentinel: "in exchange, the county agrees to buy power from SolarCity, usually at a lower rate than they would pay a conventional utility."

"USUALLY?"

The milk deal is pretend -- the solar deal is real.  If you were considering the milk deal what questions would you ask?  If you were considering the solar deal, wouldn't you ask similar questions?

The deal with Solar City was approved by the O.C. Legislature back on February 12 by a unanimous vote. Per the ocgov.net website, the legislators were presented with an "expedited communication" outlining the agreement that had been sent to the County Executive only a few days earlier.  Although the letter to the C.E. says that the service agreement is attached, what was attached to the communication given to the legislators via the website was only an outline.

If you were asked to give up 5 acres of land for 20 years wouldn't you want to read the contract yourself before going forward?  Wouldn't you want time to research the company and think about what could change in the next 20 years before signing on the dotted line?

The Better Business Bureau has rated the company A+, though an article on CaliforniaWatchdog.org regarding homeowner project horror stories would make me at least want to review the fine print of any contract.

Perhaps more concerning is the fact that there seems to be a "bandwagon" for this and similar "green" projects that is driven by Federal and State incentives.   How likely will this continue? Should it continue?

Some people point to Germany as a model for green energy.  The Germans have been at this for a long time. However the headline of a recent article in der Spiegel says it all: Germany's Energy Poverty: How Electricity Became a Luxury Good.

The German consumers are waking up to the fact that they've been sold a bill of goods with "green energy" and now must reduce their standard of living.  Are we next?

Yesterday's Sentinel had an update on the solar panel project ... It also notes that Solar City will be building a solar manufacturing facility in Buffalo.  Read the deal the state is giving to Solar City  . . .

There is something a lot bigger than "green energy" going on here.  Can you figure it out? Stay tuned . . . 

Don't Forget to Vote

Today is primary day and in this area there are primaries for both major parties.

For the Republicans in the 101st Assembly District, the choice is clear:  Vote for the person willing to engage in a public debate. 

For the Democrats in the Governor's race, the choice is clear:  Vote for the person willing to engage in a public debate.   

For both parties for Family Court Judge:  The voters are lucky! Each candidate has something a bit different to offer . . .  but I don't remember the last time I saw such a well qualified bunch at once!

No matter who you vote for, the important thing is to vote.  

Empire Building in Herkimer County?

Herkimer County has been looking into building a new jail since 2006 when the State's Commission of Corrections placed a limit on the existing jail's capacity.  A site was picked but the Village of Herkimer did not like it and denied a sewer connection.  Rather than look for an alternative site or consider an alternative arrangement, the County fought back with a lawsuit that has been going on for years.

Per TWC News: Lawsuit Continues to Stall New Herkimer County Jail

 "The Commission of Corrections in 2006 told us we were going to have to cut our maximum facility capacity to four inmates, per day,” said Herkimer County Sheriff, Christopher Farber. 

Today, most inmates are boarded elsewhere including Oneida, Otsego, Montgomery, Fulton and Rensselaer Counties. . . . 

Sheriff Farber says it is their duty to run a correctional facility in the county and says they won't know the real costs until it opens. [emphasis added]

Duty? A county legislator, Mr. Korce, apparently does not think so and wants to look into a cooperative effort with Oneida County.

 . . . And why not? Herkimer County has roughly the same population as the City of Utica.  It has been generations since Utica got rid of its jail on Bleecker Street in favor of sending inmates to the Oneida County Correctional Facility.  Cooperating with Oneida County would seem to give Herkimer County taxpayers not only the cost effectiveness of a larger facility, but the expertise of the O. C. managing staff.  

In the meantime, the expenses are adding up. Korce says the price of architects and lawyers has already totaled more than a million dollars.

The lawsuit, which is still churning along, does not put bricks on the ground, house inmates, avoid the costs and hassles of locating and boarding inmates elsewhere, or bring Herkimer County into compliance with the State's directives.

It seems that some Herkimer County officials appear more interested in empire building than in doing what is best for the taxpayers.  

Bad Ideas in Washington . . .

Instinct is part of the self-preservation process of being human. Instinctively people view others different from themselves with suspicion. But over time with interactions they learn behaviors to get along. The behaviors can be "good" or "bad" from society's perspective depending upon how the interactions turned out for the participants.

Political Correctness (PC) is taught (either directly in school or the rhetoric of social and political leaders) rather than learned by personal interaction.  Under PC, one is taught to suppress one's instincts and embrace certain groups and ideas deemed worthy of special deference by social and political leaders . . . and shun those groups and ideas deemed unworthy.

PC's suppression of the self-preservation instinct inherently makes us more vulnerable to those among the "worthy" groups who would do us harm . . . and less likely to affiliate with the "unworthy" groups with whom we may have common interests.

Simply, PC is a method of "divide and conquer"  . . . . and we are being divided today by the politicians in Washington like never before.

Race, gender, sexual-orientation, affluency, political affiliation have all become the subject of strident rhetoric to divide us into squabbling groups . . . while the distraction allows groups who would do us harm escape notice while attending to their nefarious tasks.

The entertaining Brigitte Gabriel hits the nail on the head when she explains the harm of PC in the clip below: In a nutshell, evil can exist and take root in ANY group. . . . The Germans, Japanese, Russians, Chinese are all called out as having spawned evil at one time or another. (I would add the Italians as well -- I'm sure you can think of others). PC was not an issue before, and evil among these groups was recognized, confronted and dealt with.

Evil needs to be confronted wherever it is.  Today it is the Muslims where evil is taking root. Brigitte reminds us that treating this group differently due to PC from the way we dealt with the others in the past threatens our existence.

Great Idea in Rome . . .

They are breaking ground for 128 luxury apartments in Rome.  Fantastic!  For too long high-end construction has been left to suburban areas.

It's good to see that some of this is going on in Utica, too, with the Pezzolanella's project at the re-christened Landmarc building.  It certainly is exciting to see those steel beams flying through the air! And the County seems to be on the right track, too, by creating incentives for in-city projects.

We all benefit from in-city projects because they more-intensely use the valuable infrastructure already in place: the roads, sewers, and water lines which were originally designed for intense use.  This avoids taxpayers having to build and maintain new infrastructure.  But more needs to be done.

One of the biggest flaws in the Utica Master Plan is its emphasis on "affordable housing" (a/k/a public or publicly subsidized housing) with total ignorance of high-end development. One gets the impression that the Plan was consciously designed to concentrate the region's poor in Utica.  The Plan defers to the Federal HUD ideas of social engineering rather than what Utica really needs:  a shot of taxpayers who can pay to keep the city running.

Utica leaders . . . wake up!  By fixing the Plan to encourage people with money to come to town, other problems will solve themselves.

 

Great Ideas in Syracuse . . .

Regarding the I-81 remake, Mayor Miner in Syracuse says that neighborhoods and economic vitality are more important than commute times.

A group of architects there are proposing a revitalized street grid as the means of moving heavy traffic through Syracuse.

It's too bad that we did not have such leadership and creative thinking in Utica a few years ago when the North-South Arterial remake was planned.  The West Utica Wall is now rising . . . leaving it to the 22nd Century and a future generation to correct the mistake.

But all is not gloom in Utica. . . . The State is catching on that maybe a better street grid is the way to go and has implemented some notable projects.

• The Oneida Square Roundabout has increased connectivity among the feeding streets, shortened commute time through the intersection, and made Park Ave.-Oneida St. an alternate to Genesee.
• The new Lincoln Ave. - Burrstone Rd. intersection allows Lincoln Ave to function as an alternate to Genesee St. or the Arterial and has eased access to the south end of Lincoln Ave.
• The new Champlin Ave. - Oriskany Blvd. intersection allows Champlin Ave. to function as an alternate to the Arterial.
• And from the construction it looks like we are getting a new Cornelia St. - Oriskany Blvd. intersection at the Aud which will increase access to all that developable land  behind the Aud!

Parallel through streets can substitute for add lanes to an expressway when heavy traffic needs to be moved. . . . but offer the advantages of (1) increasing access to developable parcels of land  and (2) provide alternate routes when the unforseen traffic jam happens.

City leaders now need to catch on to the advantages of improving the street grid and look for opportunities to do so.

Making Utica easier to navigate will not only make it more pleasant to be here, but will lead to increased economic vitality in the city.