On the Bottom . . . And the Top

Per the O-D, Forbes Magazine confirmed what we already knew: Area at bottom of Forbes list for business -- Taxes cited as an issue.

And the Utica Daily News also confirmed what we already knew: Utica, NY - We Have It All

Greater Utica is a great place to live -- IF you have a decent job. . . which are becoming harder and harder to find.

We also already know that our economic and business problems are all centered on how we govern ourselves -- and the resulting tax burden.

The question is, are we ready to do something about it?

Fooling Ourselves . . .

"Utica students take stage at Ithaca culture conference" proudly crows the headline. Sixty students from Martin Luther King Elementary School provided the opening entertainment at an "international conference for educators" at Ithaca College. Before the performance, an associate professor of music from the college spent several hours teaching them to play their percussion instruments.

“Some songs are very profound and give tears to the eye,” said MLK music teacher JoAnne Kucerak. “And others are moving and grooving and just a hoot.” . . .

Kucerak said the experience was unbeatable for the students.

“They have learned from three or four directors today and are learning how to adjust the music as they go. You can’t get this in the classroom,” she said.

You can't? Why not?

It's lovely that the children have the opportunity to perform . . . And it was probably a happy, memorable experience for them. But it's not so lovely that they are missing a day of school to do it. This is not the spring recess. These are elementary students, and elementary school is supposed to provide the foundation for education in later years.

It is interesting that this day missed from school was to provide entertainment at an 'education conference.'

The fact that Educators see nothing wrong with this explains why our children can't read or do simple math.

Divide New York?

While the piece of legislation to split Upstate from the rest of New York is probably more an expression of alienation than a viable proposal, it is a clear indication that all is not well in New York.

Splitting Upstate away IS the answer if we cannot find a way to make NYS work as a whole again.

It all goes back to the reapportionment of the State Legislature forced on us by the US Supreme Court. The Court got it wrong. States have the right to choose their own government, and if they want to ensure that certain constituencies are heard, they have that right.

The decision from the 60s needs to be looked at anew.

The Last Exit for West Utica . . .

The Last Chance to Turn Around . . .

On March 31, 2009, 1-4PM & 6-9PM at the Utica State Office Building 1st Floor, the State Dept. of Transportation will be holding a public meeting on the revamping of the North-South Arterial both between Sunset Avenue and Oriskany Blvd, and in the Burrstone Road areas.

The current concept includes:

1. An elevated highway over Court Street (3 alternative interchange configurations)
2. Elimination of access to the arterial toward North Utica from westbound traffic at Court Street, forcing such traffic northbound over State St. through 3 intersections before the arterial is reached.
3. Dead-ending of Warren Street, eliminating access to and crossing of the arterial.
4. Elimination of Sunset Avenue's access to and crossing of the arterial and replacing it with a pedestrians-only bridge.
5. Extension of Lincoln Ave. to a new intersection at Burrstone Rd. with elimination of the current ramps to the arterial, forcing westbound Burrstone Rd. traffic to make a left turn through the intersection to get on the arterial going toward North Utica.

The 60s-era North-South Arterial achieved its goal of removing traffic from Downtown Genesee Street . . . But traffic is what businesses want. Now there is no traffic on Genesee Street and no Downtown to speak of.

The 60s-era North-South Arterial brought through-traffic with dirt and noise into West Utica and discontinued several east-west streets. Blight followed.

What role did the Arterial play in the decline of Downtown and West Utica? or in the rise of development on former farmlands and orchards? or in our bad case of Urban Sprawl? or in our unaffordable property taxes? "No role" is not a credible response.

Now we have this new proposal that will make numerous blocks of West Utica even more "land locked" and difficult to access than they are now. The highway that is proposed is out of character with the city, being more suitable for the countryside. Properties adjacent to the arterial will either be in the shadow of viaducts or facing walls.

This proposal will succeed . . . at driving more people and money out of Utica into suburban areas, forcing suburban taxpayers to build more infrastructure to support development while wasting the infrastructure that city taxpayers already built.

DOT has the alternatives that will both improve traffic and safety while improving access to and appearance of West Utica. The public needs to demand them.

Angry? . . . or Happy?

The rapid-fire goings on in Washington allegedly to "fix" the economy are enough to make you dizzy. As noted in the last couple days, the AIG Bonuses seem to have stolen the spotlight from where the BIG money is really going: Foreign Banks. Regardless, the posturing by so many on the Hill to make examples of big bad executives getting bonuses and to play to the masses, shows just how despicable these people are. . . and I'm talking about the Senators and Congressmen, not the executives.

Well, they are about to make good on their threat to take back these bonuses though confiscatory taxation . . . The House just passed the bill 328 to 93. Clearly this is a law that singles out a particular group for punishment... a "bill of attainder" . . . and the type of action that our Founding Fathers sought to prohibit via the Constitution.

This abuse of government makes me angry.

But wait! Now some people are saying:

"It will have a chilling effect on participation in any government recovery effort," warned Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group. "It harms middle management and the rank-and-file sales force, thereby weakening the very firms we are working to strengthen."

A chilling effect? Does this mean companies will be discouraged from taking bailout money?

Now that would make me happy!

Welcome Whitestown Buzz and Republicrat . . .

A couple new bloggers moved to our regional block this week, and have been added to the Fault Lines Blog Roll ...

The Republicrat takes as its premise that our two main parties are different sides of the same coin:

Often the usage of “Republicrat” expresses the sentiment of “ordinary citizens” who see all politicians as serving the same special interests and make little distinction between the two parties.

Wow! How often have you felt that way lately? The Republicrat is off to a flying start with several posts in just the last 3 days. Welcome!

The Whitestown Buzz so far has only one post from the 13th . . . but it is a very intriguing one. Seems that the Town Board intends to pass a law that will allow non-residents of the Town to serve on the Town Planning Board and the ZBA, as long as they own property in the Town and reside in either Oneida County "or an adjoining county within the State of New York."

That certainly is curious wording! I wonder what developers the Town insiders plan on putting on the Planning Board and ZBA?

We'll have to follow the Whitestown Buzz to find out.

Distraction . . . .

While everyone is upset over the AIG bonuses, hardly anyone is mentioning the fact that about half of all the money given to AIG is going to FOREIGN BANKS! The bonuses amount to less than a drop in the bucket of all the taxpayer money being doled out.

This is the real outrage . . . and hardly anyone is talking about it.

Is the silence part of the "global agenda" -- to put us all under "one world" rule?

The solution to all -- the bonuses and American bailout of foreign banks -- is BANKRUPTCY.

The CREDITORS through the bankruptcy trustee would have taken over rather than the government. The Creditors who have the most to lose, would have an incentive to make things work. The Creditors are more likely to know what they are doing than the government is. The taxpayers would have been off the hook.

Indignation . . .

I really hate it when politicians get indignant. It's a signal that they're going to abuse their power . . . .

In a speech on the Senate floor, Democrat Charles Schumer, a signee of the letter, noted AIG lost nearly $100 billion last year and is now being propped up by U.S. taxpayer funds. He said providing performance bonuses to employees of the insurance giant "defines 'Alice in Wonderland' business practices ... it boggles the mind."

Schumer called on the AIG employees to return the bonuses.

"If they don't we plan to tax virtually all of it," he said.

This was much more revolting when I heard it on TV and radio than it looks in print. An "attitude" was evident. While I agree that the bonuses are outlandish, especially for a company in the hole, they are, nevertheless, compensation that AIG is required by contract to provide. Just who is the government to come in and, essentially, undo contracts THAT ARE PERFECTLY LEGAL just because they become embarrassing to key politicians.

Now Andrew Cuomo is getting into the act, subpoenaing records. But without any evidence of wrongdoing, this is simply harassment. . . a fishing expedition where one hopes that something will turn up. The Mario Cuomo era of Big Bad Ugly Government is back, apparently, with politicians taking frustrations with their failures out on those who may be in the best position to bring things back in this state.

We've see this on the local front with Prestwick Glen's tax exemption agreement with the Town of New Hartford. The public, rightfully, was outraged to discover that Prestwick Glen's well-heeled clientele would be able to live in fancy digs without paying their fair share of property taxes. When this became known the Town went to court to have the development declared not tax exempt. But what of the agreement? How can the Town have it both ways? Shouldn't Prestwick Glen be entitled to damages for the Town's breach of its agreement?

Decisions have consequences. Sometimes the consequences are unforseen. The AIG debacle could have been avoided by the government placing restrictions on how taxpayer money was used. The Prestwick Glen issue could have been avoided -- or at least defused -- by a lot of public disclosure and discussion before the agreement was signed.

After-the-fact indignation is a clear signal that someone did not do their homework.

Greater Utica Green . . .

St. Pat’s Parade 2009

NY: Home of the LEAST Free . . .

A recent study of freedom concludes that of all the 50 states, people in New York State are the LEAST FREE when it comes to Fiscal Policy Freedom and Economic Freedom, ranked 44th in Regulatory Policy Freedom, and 48th in Personal Freedom. Overall, New York State is ranked Dead Last in "Freedom" - -

NO SURPRISE HERE!

Read more from World Net, and the study itself.

A Utica Plan? Pardon My Skepticism . . .

Because of blight, Utica has erased buildings from large swaths of land left and right. The lack of a city plan discourages redevelopment. (Would you want to build something without knowing what could potentially be placed next door?)

It's about time that the Mayor is finally moving on a plan . . . . but Pardon My Skepticism . . .

Urban Renewal Project No. 1 from the '60s immediately comes to mind. It was a grand plan that was going to transform Downtown. Some nice buildings (New City Hall, Kennedy Plaza Apts., Radisson, and parking garages) were constructed -- But these were soon joined by cheap steel shell "pre-fab" buildings that were wholly out of place in the downtown district and lacked character -- and other parts of the project are still vacant after 40 years. What went wrong?

When moving forward on the new plan, let's figure out what went wrong on past failed plans so that mistakes are not repeated.


Another reason for some skepticism here are some of the partnering firms. While Saratoga Associates comes with a compelling portfolio (including a rather nice plan for Amsterdam's South Side - a familiar place to this blogger), the choice of "local consultants" Shumaker Engineering and Paige Marketing raises some concern. Shumaker and Paige were both picked by the Oneida County Sewer District to study and "market" the county's response to its DEC Consent Order. Although Uticans will pay a significant portion, if not most, of their cost on that project, Utica was totally left out in the cold in the selection process. Will these firms be working for Utica . . . or will they be working behind the scenes for the County or New Hartford? Does the Mayor really believe these firms have the best interest of Utica at heart, or is he playing "nice nice" with the county and suburban powers-that-be which, so far, show no understanding of or concern about the hand that they have played in Utica's decline?

Let's be thankful that planning is finally going to take place . . . . and make sure that the process is transparent.

UCSD Job Cuts . . . And New Positions?

The Utica City School District is simply amazing!

Willis proposed eliminating the positions of Director of Fine Arts Carmela Brown, Early Childhood Coordinator Alicia Mroz and Administrator of Special Programs Jamie Hanretty to create two new assistant superintendent positions.

I have a better proposition . . . cut the three positions (because they are not needed) and cut the proposed ones as well (because they never existed).

The UCSD administration is bloated.

High Speed Rail? (3)

More detail came out today on the State's plan for high speed rail. $10.7 Billion would be spent! While I don't buy high speed passenger service as transforming our economy, one part of this plan DOES make me SIT UP AND TAKE NOTICE:

• Adding at least three new intermodal facilities/inland ports across the state to serve the rapidly growing container segment of rail traffic. This would help remove long-haul trucks from highways and deliver products to consumers faster.

Can we talk GRIFFISS PORT now???

Rail, Highway, Air, and Canal are all here.  If Griffiss International Airport is chosen as the site of one of the three intermodal facilities/inland ports, our albatross of a County Airport could conceivably "take off" and transform the Utica/Rome economy at the same time.  There are no guarantees, of course . . .but I always thought that Griffiss' only chance for success was as a cargo port.

Messrs. Arcuri, Picente, Valesky, Griffo, Townsend, Gray and Ms. Destito:  Make it Happen!

The Pipes, The Pipes Are Calling . . .

... but they are not bagpipes.

The pipes are clay, steel, cast iron, lead, concrete and plastic. They are the pipes that bring water to your home, take your waste away, or drain stormwater from your cellars or yards. These pipes, and the systems they are connected to, are telling us they are in trouble.

Just how much trouble became evident in the news this past week: $158 million is needed to fix Oneida County Sewer District problems, $152 million to fix Utica sewer problems, and $140 million to fix Mohawk Valley Water Authority problems. Not mentioned were New Hartford's vexing storm water management problems, only a small fraction of which will be resolved by a $2 million bond recently approved by voters, and already almost entirely committed. Fixing these systems will cost literally thousands of dollars for each and every resident in the region. Could bankruptcy be around the corner? Or another bailout?

Drinking water, wastewater and stormwater systems are related. Public drinking water and wastewater systems are usually located together to allow higher population densities to develop than what would be possible with private wells and septic systems. Conversely, higher population densities are required to make such systems fiscally feasible. The relationship is simple: drinking water goes into homes and businesses, wastewater comes out. Stormwater needs to be managed not only to protect people's property, but to protect the drinking water and wastewater systems. Stormwater picks up contaminants. If stormwater makes its way into a public water supply, the water becomes undrinkable. This happened in Amsterdam, NY, during the 1990s, forcing the entire city to use bottled water for a couple weeks. Stormwater that gets into the sanitary waste system takes up expensive treatment plant capacity, causes treatment plant or system upsets that spill waste into our streams or backs sewage into people's homes.

Given the relationship of these systems, it would make sense to have one unit of government manage them, but this is not the case locally. Wastewater treatment and part of the collection system has been turned over to the County. Drinking water has been turned over to an authority. Stormwater and wastewater collection from homes and streets remain assigned to local municipalities, of which there are many. Why do we need multiple organizations, each with their own administrators, engineers, laborers and equipment, to take care of what is mainly a bunch of pipes? It should be obvious that significant costs could be saved by merging these organizations, but that is only part of the story that the pipes are telling us.

Since pipes are necessary for intensive land development, they could be used as a planning tool. They are, after all, maintained by the public through taxes and fees. Should not we, the public that pays the maintenance costs, determine where these pipes go? Here in Greater Utica we do not. The part-county sewer district is run by the board of legislators, half of whom have nothing to do with the district and answer to interests other than the people living in the district who pay the bills. The sewer district is solely concerned with wastewater. The water authority is run by appointees who are not answerable to voters and who represent a variety of interests that also may not represent the people affected. The authority is solely interested in selling water. The creation of the sewer district and water authority removed water and sewer services from effective public control and turned them into mere commodities instead of the planning tools that they should be.

Once water and sewer were turned into commodities, it became easy for the suburbs to develop vacant land in their own self-interest. With the sewer district and water authority socializing their systems' costs across the entire region, city residents' water and sewer fees subsidized suburban sprawl. If this sprawl lowered population density back in the city increasing the per capita cost of city services, it was not a concern to the suburbs because there was no effective regional organization to stop it.

The result has been a vast expansion of water and sewer infrastructure into the suburbs, with negative growth in regional population. When 100,000 people are encouraged to spread themselves over double the area, the cost of maintaining services to them -- all services -- must increase. The $450 million bill to fix water and sewer issues is only the tip of the iceberg that sprawl has created for us. Add in the costs for extending other services outward (police, fire, new courthouses, new fire stations, etc.), and we may have already sealed this region's doom.

The fact that our pipe systems pass through several jurisdictions hinders solutions to problems. For example, it might make sense for New Hartford to send some of its storm water flows downhill into Utica's stormwater system. However, that would place an increased burden on Utica's system, and Utica would get nothing in return. Similarly, there is no incentive for Utica to remove storm water from its combined sewers to free capacity at the County's treatment plant when that capacity will further suburban expansion.

The astronomical bill we have just been given is the result of our prior "regionalization" of water and sewer services while maintaining our mini-sized local governments. The whole has no control of its parts. We have created an infrastructure that far exceeds the requirements of our population. If we are able to somehow get federal money to throw at the problem, it will only enable the status quo to be maintained. Without a wholesale reorganization of local government, the situation will develop again.

The pipes give us water and take it away. The pipes enable development. They are also unforgiving. Extended too far they become a burden. They are begging to be controlled, but by whom?

The pipes tell us the answer. Where they are located defines the true extent of our city, and it extends beyond Utica's limits. The pipes tell us that the urbanized suburbs and Utica must merge, and the new enlarged city must take over the sewer district and the water authority. If we do not do this, the pipes will destroy us.

[This article was originally published in the February, 2009 "Utica Phoenix."
Be sure to pick up the March, 2009 "Utica Phoenix" to read "Don't Confuse Sprawl with Growth" --- Now available in a news rack near you]

Say Good Night, Utica Monday Night . . .

This breaks my heart, but Utica Monday Night may have to go.

Uticans are being pushed against the wall with government created costs. The proposed increases in city taxes, school taxes, county taxes, and water and sewer fees are simply too much.

We all need entertainment, and have had some good years with UMN. But let's face it, this entertainment is a Regional Amenity - one of those things among many that make it worthwhile for us to live in the Mohawk Valley. But it is one of those things that the people of Utica can no longer afford to host. In addition to the performers, there are police that need to be paid to keep everyone safe. There are DPW workers that need to be paid to clean up afterward. But right now, the people of Utica are being tapped to pay for sewer fixes for people living in the suburbs. Should the people of Utica also be expected to pay to entertain the people who live elsewhere?

Bye Bye, Boilermaker? So Long St. Patrick's Day Parade? Farewell Fourth of July?

Moving these events elsewhere is impracticable because no place else is centrally located to the population that would attend. None of the surrounding communities probably even has the ability to host such events on the scales that they are.

Say Good Night, Utica Monday Night :-(

High Speed Rail ? (2)

Now Sen. Valesky has joined the chorus pushing for high speed rail: "An Erie Canal for the 21st century."

The development of a high-speed rail system in New York state has been discussed in one form or another for years. A system which would enable passengers to travel from Syracuse to Buffalo in an hour, or to New York City in a couple of hours, has incredible potential to transform the way we live, the way we work and the way we do business in Upstate New York.

Transform the way we live? How?

High-speed rail represents opportunity in Upstate New York at a time when we need it most, not unlike another infrastructure project that, 200 years ago, also seemed unlikely at best — the Erie Canal. The creation of the Erie Canal in the 1800s demonstrated the best of New York state.

Mr. Valesky needs to think about another Upstate canal from the 1800s -- the one for which Utica passed up an opportunity to be capital of New York State -- the one that was supposed to transform Utica's economy and perhaps even let it rival New York City: The Chenango Canal. The thinking was, the Erie Canal brought such success to Utica, imagine how much more success there would be if two canals joined here!

It simply didn't work. All that is left of this canal are a few sections paralling Route 12 to Binghamton. It succumbed to the railroad.

The Erie Canal worked because it filled an existing need. The Chenango Canal failed because the need did not exist.

Now even the railroad (on this route anyway) doesn't get very much use now, railroad use being largely supplanted by personal automobiles, trucks, and the interstate highway system.

Which gets us back to the Thruway. All of Upstate New York lost its competitive advantage over other parts of the country with completion of the interstate highway system. Simply, other places became as easy to get to and travel through as Upstate.

But what have we done in New York? We placed a tax on our interstate highway -- the Thruway Toll -- which puts Upstate at a distinct DISADVANTAGE to other parts of the country.

I mean no disrespect, but it seems that we really have put a bunch of idiots in charge.

High Speed Rail?

Utica Daily News had this article: Utica mayor to meet with senator in support of High Speed Rail

State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith is pushing a "high speed" rail project to connect Buffalo to NYC.  Mayor Roefaro is joining in.

I have to support Mayor Roefaro on this.  IF this project is implemented, UTICA MUST be part of it. This area has been left off the roster too many times from other state projects.

That said, is this something that we should be pursuing at this time?  

For this same "Empire Corridor" from Buffalo to NYC, wouldn't it make more sense, be a bigger economic boost, and be a lot easier to implement and quicker TO SIMPLY REMOVE THE TOLLS FROM THE NYS THRUWAY?????

Somehow "high speed rail" has suddenly become a mantra.

“There is no question whether or not New York needs high speed rail, because the answer is yes, definitely," Arcuri said in a prepared statement.

"No question whether or not New York needs high speed rail"? I think that is a very big question. Are there any studies to support the alleged need? Or projections with supporting data of what the economic impact of high speed rail will mean?

The first question is what is "high speed?" If you are talking 300 mph, there MAY be a potential to transform the economy, because with travel time to NYC being less than an hour, it plugs Utica into the NYC commutter zone. If we are talking only 150 mph, that is unlikly to transform anything. For most people, any time savings over thruway travel will be eaten up getting to and from the train station.

The second big question is what will it cost to operate the system. What will a ticket cost? If costs can be reduced to make it feasible to do a ROUND TRIP fare from Utica to NYC in the $30-50 range (IE similar to commutter fares from Suffolk County into NYC), then high speed rail might have some potential -- But right now low speed rail is about double this cost already, so high speed rail will likely be more expensive. 

In its era, the Erie Canal was a brilliant government move. It enabled goods and raw materials to be transported at extremely low cost and at a competitive speed compared to other modes of transportation at the time. It transformed the economy of Upstate NY. Even now, its ability to transport heavy materials at the lowest fuel cost is unmatched . . . but now the canal lies virtually unused. 

What "need" is this project going to fill? If people jump on the train, what part of the economy will lose?

It's fun to dream about being able to zip from one place to another. And its OK for public officials to be thinking about things that could transform our economy. But it is quite another for public officials to latch onto something as the "big solution" to our problems without the facts and data to support their conclusion.

Golisano - Right on the Money.

In an O-D Guest Editorial today, Tom Golisano is right on the money. Statistics recently published by the Tax Foundation not only verify his point that taxes Upstate are disproportionate compared to Downstate, they show that when calculated as a percentage of property value, property taxes in Upstate New York are the highest IN THE NATION! Check out Mr. Golisano's website "Responsible New York."

I would be willing to bet that if a similar calculation were performed on utility rates, those, also, would be the highest in the nation.

What Mr. Golisano did not get into was the cause: State Policy forged from a Downstate Perspective. This was forced upon us by the US Supreme Court's 60s-era split decision in WMCA v Lomenzo which (erroneously in my view, see the dissent) said that 'one-man one-vote' was required by the 'equal protection' clause of the Constitution, and required reapportionment of the NYS legislature. Before reapportionment, Upstate interests were predominant in Senate legislation, Downstate in the Assembly, and the bill reconcilliation process that would take place before laws were passed to the governor for signature balanced both.

Since reapportionment, the Upstate Perspective has been lost. The Downstate Perspective has resulted in closure of the Shoreham Long Island Nuke plant, exemption of power line siting from SEQR review under the Environmental Conservation Law, the Marcy-South power line, routing our 'cheap' Upstate hydropower south to relieve Downstaters' higher rates (caused in part by closing Shoreham); maintaining Tolls on the Thruway long after the bonds were paid off and longer after the Federal government paid NYS for the road; removal of tolls from certain Downstate roads and transferring expenses to the Thruway; a host of regulations that make it more difficult for Upstate to maintain its manufacturers; rules that use state (our) money to encourage redevelopment on brownfields in Manhattan and Brooklyn but which are unworkable for Harbor Point or Bosserts in Utica where land values are lower; and a whole host of social programs that make sense in the Metropolitan area, but not here.

Nothing will change Upstate without recognizing this as the root cause.

Then the solution becomes evident: either get the Supreme Court to reverse itself and revert the state legislature to its prior makeup (which made us, truly, One Empire State), give Upstate home rule, or turn Upstate into a new state.

Welcome to The Utica Daily News . . .

If you haven't visited the region's newest news outlet, you should.

The Utica Daily News is up and running . . .

and it looks GOOD for the long haul.

World, national, and local news are easily accessible. There are sports, editorial, photo and video sections.

In a nod to Utica's historic past, the entertainment-lifestyle section is called the "Saturday Globe" (the name of the national newspaper that was published in Utica a century ago) . Be sure to check out the Utica Music Fest section of the Globe.

I've already bookmarked the Utica Daily News for daily reading.

Bend Over Utica . . .

Utica residents get reamed by the County again on the Sewer Deal.. . . Uticans will be required to pay to fix suburban created problems . . . but will be left on their own to fix problems with the city's sewers. Larry Tanoury, Jr. has the details. . . .

But if you are a regular reader of this blog, you already knew this was coming, as far back as July 17, 2007. . . .and you also know that the royal screwing Utica residents are getting will get worse.

I've blogged several times about how wrong it is that legislators from outside the sewer district get to decide how sewer users' money is spent . . . especially so because no county funds are put at risk.

But how could Roseanne Convertino support this?

The good thing is that other Utica legislators are finally starting to wise up. Now if only the mayor and city council would start using their Bully Pulpit. How about Utica becoming part of Herkimer County?

Different Treatment?

Tonight's OD article on the New Hartford Scully Site cleanup contained an interesting statement:

While Lockheed Martin recently completed a $20 million environmental cleanup there, site uses for the 2.3-acre property will be limited only by town laws and zoning, said Stephen Litwhiler, a spokesman for the state Department of Environmental Conservation.

“We would have no restrictions for use,” Litwhiler said. “There is no contamination left.”

Hmm. This site, which was reportedly used for disposal of toxic wastes from other places, gets cleaned up to the point where no restrictions will be placed on future use, while the Bossert Site, which is in the middle of a densly populated residential neighborhood in West Utica, which site was used for manufacturing rather than intentional disposal of wastes, will have perpetual restrictions on reuse.

The City has placed a mulch cover over the soils at the site to prevent any dust migration. The site will continue to have controls in place to prevent any potential future health or environmental effects at the site: deed restrictions regardless of property ownership include limits on groundwater use, an approved "Soil Management Plan," maintenance of a protective cover, and a restriction of use of the site to industrial/commercial purposes.

Sixteen thousand tons of contaminated soil and debris were removed from the 6.9 Acre Bossert Site in Utica, according to DEC's official press release.

Over fifty-four thousand tons of soil were removed from the 2.3 acre Scully Site in New Hartford, according to Lockheed Martin's latest statement.

Perpetual restrictions on reuse are also the order for another Utica site, the Dredge Spoil Area along the canal, which is prime water front property.

These observations beg the question: Why the disparate treatment? DEC requires removal of almost three and a half times the material from a 2.3 acre site in New Hartford than it does from an almost 7 acre site in Utica. Cleanup of a dump in New Hartford results in no restrictions on future land reuse, while cleanups in Utica require permanent restrictions.

Must we speculate on the reasons?

Toxic Cover Up In New Hartford?

News broke on this story in the mainstream media -- from WTVH Channel 5 in Syracuse: "New Hartford's Big Secret" -- this evening.

New Hartford OnLine Blog has the details. From the blog, in a nutshell ...

• A private dump owned by the Scully family near Valley View Road was directed to be closed by court order in 1961.
• Twenty five years later in 1986 "severely rusted" 56 gallon drums were found at the site which once contained chemical solvents according to preliminary DEC reports. State officials planned to take soil and water samples.
• In April 1987 135 people attended a public information meeting at the NH HighSchool on two suspected hazardous waste sites in the town, but DEC and OC Health Dept. officials had few answers on this site because they said more testing was needed.

NH Online notes that Lockheed Martin, which is responsible for cleaning up the site (presumably because its wastes wound up at the site) reports in an online document that industrial waste was transported from GE's French Road plant to this site from 1966 to 1973. NH Online asks:

"How can that be? The Supreme Court ordered the dump closed in 1961."

NH Online further notes that Lockheed Martin's cleanup of the site and Sylvan Glen Creek involved the removal of 1000s of truckloads of soil, and the removal of 300 mature trees and comments:

"No wonder there has been increased stormwater problems in that area of town...300 mature trees removed???"

The WTVH clip notes a cluster of cancer cases/deaths in the neighborhood.

Isn't the Sylvan Glenn area the site of recent flooding events? Could contaminated waste have been transported from the contaminated site into the adjoining neighborhoods by these flooding events?

The Scully Site was on the Town Board's agenda tonight. After all these years, it will be interesting to see if people's concerns are answered.

Update: It didn't take the OD long to put a positive spin on all this.

The Straw . . .

Proposed Utica school budget tax hike: 8.42% screams the headline.

This hike on top of the water rate hike, the sewer rate hike, city tax hike, county tax hike, electric rate hike . . .

35 positions are being added . . . on top of the 60 that were created last year. Included are two $100K administrators.

Sorry, but the increase in immigrants simply does not justify this.

The private sector is shedding jobs. The public sector needs to do the same.

The public will only take so much.
With the arrogance being displayed by the UCSD . . . things could get ugly.

Hot Air . . .

Yes . . . "They"  will be taxing everything in the name of global warming prevention.  The charges are already showing up in your electric bills as of this past December as part of the "Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative."

32,000 scientists DISAGREE that humans are creating or contributing in any significant fashion to global warming . . . 

Find out more about the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change at The Heartland Institute.

Winter Light . . .

They Don't Get It . . .

State Sen. Valesky had a guest editorial in the OD this weekend about how we should spend our federal "stimulus" money.

This guy (along with our other elected state reps who essentially say the same things) doesn't have a clue.

' . . . the relief should help us make needed investments in higher education, especially SUNY'

Now, just, exactly, how will more investments in higher education help us grow the economy? We've seen SUNYIT expand considerably. Although it provides opportunities for our students to educate themselves locally -- and we should be thankful for that -- it has NOT attracted significant numbers of jobs to the area.

'. . . create long-term funding for successful state programs like Power for Jobs a program that has proven to keep manufacturing jobs in our area. '

Another way of saying this is that the taxpayers/electric rate payers should continue to SUBSIDIZE lower electric rates for companies who otherwise cannot make ends meet in New York's unfriendly business climate. If the stimulus is used for this, taxpayers will get some temporary relief, but what happens when the stimulus runs out? The companies go back on the public dole. Using stimulus like this only perpetuates New York's failed government model.

'. . . enable us to move forward on a statewide high speed rail system'

Again, just how will this make New York more business competitive? This needs to be thought through. Is there a market/demand for such service? What will be the maintenance costs? What will tickets cost? Rochester tried something similar with its 'fast ferry' to Toronto, somehow believing that there were thousands of Torontonians just waiting to hop on the boat with bundles of 'loonies' ready to spend in a has-been Upstate New York city. Rochester lost 10s of millions of dollars as the scheme went belly-up within a matter of months.

I'm sick of these politicians spending our money on harebrained schemes. They basically want to use the stimulus to do more of what they have already been doing: growing government, growing government dependency, and growing government control where it is not needed. If we are given money to spend, then at least let's spend it on repairing all the infrastructure things that we failed to maintain . . . . and not use one penny for further expansion in the name of 'growth' or 'economic development.' With our declining population, we already have enough public infrastructure to take care of.

True growth and development will not occur until New York drastically shrinks the size of government, limits its involvement in our day-to-day lives, and casts aside its socialist tendencies.

In Case You Missed It . . .

The bond vote in New Hartford passed last week 432 to 362. (It's taken this long to bring myself to write about this, it is such a disappointment.) If all goes according to plan, payments in lieu of taxes that this project would generate will be used to pay off the bonds that the Town is issuing for improvements at the New Hartford Business Park.

That's sort of like you being able to direct your property taxes into improvement of your own property, isn't it?

Of course, this project will need police and fire protection, road maintenance, and will receive all the other "services" that residents of the Town receive such as assessment services, Town Court services, Town Clerk services, library access, etc., etc. . . . . and you know who will be paying the developer's share of those since his will be going into his road improvements.

Anyway, this is allegedly promoting "growth" and/or "economic development" so that may be why people voted for it.

I caught Michael Hennessey (Minority Leader on the OC Legislature) talking on WIBX' "First Look" show this morning . . . He was looking for funding to extend water and sewer services into rural areas to promote "growth." SIGH! More of the same mentality . . .

People and businesses will not move into the region because someone will subsidize a water or sewer line. They will move here only if the economic climate is such that their businesses will be sustainable . . . For most, we know that our climate is not that way because people are leaving . . . Other parts of the country have significantly lower business costs because taxation is less.

Extending water and sewer lines, or roads, may foster some new construction (because the developer is passing part of the cost to taxpayers) but it is not "growth" . . . it is just sprawl . . . people and businesses simply trading their old places for new ones . . . and somewhere along the line something gets left vacant. Meanwhile, we've just extended the public infrastructure that we must maintain . . . requiring more taxes and fees that drive more businesses away.

. . . AND NOW the whole country seems to be going our way with the "stimulus" package.

A kind reader directed me to this article: The Stimulus will lead America in the direction of Western New York . Essentially Western NY was way "ahead" of the curve in taxpayer-financed economic "stimulus" -- but the poorly thought out projects only made things worse. While occasionally a government project will result in an economic transformation -- like the Erie Canal -- that is the exception rather than the rule. Most taxpayer financed schemes only dig a bigger hole for us to get out of. When this region was in its heyday, it was the product of private enterprize, not government subsidy.

We need to focus on creating a climate where enterprise can grow . . . and forget the "quick fix."

Welcome to Joe . . .

A new blogger has joined the local blogging scene who may be familiar to some of you -- Joe Bottini, who used to write an education column in the Observer-Dispatch. From a recent post:

Most schools however, are not in dire need of cash. They are in dire need of a seriousness of purpose, structure and an appropriate behavior modification program.

Schools have become too user friendly with few of the elements that kept them on a serious path for years. . . .

Interesting stuff!
Welcome, Joe, to the blogosphere! We're looking forward to your postings on the education scene.

Liars and Thieves . . .

The arrogance of our public officials . . . and their failure to serve "We the People" . . . has reached new heights . . .

Some of our state leaders are generous giving out state (taxpayer funded) cars:

Republican Assembly Minority Leader Jim Tedisco, who's temporarily forsaken that six-figure job to run for Congress in the March 31 special election in NY-20, fancies himself a fiscal conservative/tax-cutter Reagan/Limbaugh type. . . .

"Fiscal conservative" Tedisco gives out 12 cars -- to himself and nine other members and two top staffers.

Why do Assembly members need state cars?

Not to be outdone in the hypocrisy department, Governor Patterson, who has asked state civil servants to forgo their upcoming 3% raise, has been caught giving raises to his friends.

Cassie Prugh, a confidential assistant, was given a 46 percent pay hike in late November, raising her annual salary to $125,000 from $85,721 . . .

Meanwhile, the New SUNY Chancellor will be making $500,000 a year plus a lot of other perks -- a huge increase over her predecessor -- And the state's judges are still seeking a pay raise . . .

Of course, we cannot forget the federal level of government . . .



Open government? The public will have an opportunity to review every bill? No more pork? How many broken promises can you count here in one minute and 58 seconds of speech?

Real "Civil Servants" seem to be absent among our leaders.

Just Whom is government serving these days?

Required Reading . . .

The Year of Magical Thinking by Bruce Fisher in Artvoice is a "must read" for anyone trying to figure out what is wrong with Upstate New York. He talks about Buffalo, but much applies here as well. An excerpt . . .

Two scholars with Buffalo connections are among the observers who have compared Buffalo and other Upstate New York communities to the Third World. ... [They] have each taken a look at the local ownership of the big commercial and industrial institutions here and found that, mainly, there isn’t a lot of local ownership. They concluded that we are set up to export our capital. We’re like a Third World region: Whatever profit is derived from our work is exported to where the owners live, not kept here. . . .

I don’t know anybody who has done the study, but I would venture that the region’s tipping point came in about 1970, which is about when Upstate New York’s population growth stopped. . . .

Ever since then, whatever prosperity the Upstate cities have enjoyed has been built on the twin illusions of rapid suburbanization and the transfer-in of Washington and Albany money via SUNY campuses and make-work projects. Sprawl gave this community the illusion of growth, but sprawl is not growth: The same number of people who lived here in 1970 live here today, but occupy 76 percent more land area. (Cornell’s Rolf Pendall did the definitive studies showing that, as bad as sprawl is in Buffalo, it’s even worse in the rest of Upstate.) We still have astoundingly high rates of new-housing construction, but there is far more supply than demand, and that gives us the illusion that our economy is still cooking along. To keep this illusion going, our political structure here is dominated by the developers, construction firms, construction unions, and banks that all depend upon producing more and more inventory for the same number of people, and that also depend upon massive ongoing infusions of public money to build new infrastructure—and infrastructure that is arguably too large for our needs, even as the pieces of it that the region truly needs (especially sewers) go under-tended.

Folks know that something isn’t quite kosher. . . .

I am not sure how significant the role of corporate colonialism is in Upstate's condition, although it would be hard to deny that export of wealth through "big box" retailers, and export of decision making away from local financial institutions, are bad things. In the past we learned that when companies get too big, the monopolies that result become inefficient and can pretty much do as they please. Government's response used to be anti-trust legislation. We seem to have gotten away from that these days, allowed for a spate of mergers, and now have organizations "too big to fail" about to wreck our economy. This is a national level issue . . . and unfortunately we seem to be going in the wrong direction with the bailouts, because we are encouraging more "bigness".

The technological advance of the automobile made possible the "sprawl" that Mr. Fisher complains of . . . And it is New York's system of local government (which predates the auto) that exacerbated the problem and turned it into a bad thing. The wealthy class could live in a fancy neighborhood and take advantage of all that the city had to offer, but when that neighborhood became developed on the other side of the municipal boundary, their wealth became unavailable to be taxed for the good of the general population. The lower suburban taxes fueled more "sprawl" by encouraging more people to leave the city -- leaving fewer behind in the cities to support a massive infrastructure. That raised taxes there and created a "feed back" loop of sorts. Municipal boundaries need to be redrawn to reflect those regions where people live, work, and shop primarily within. This is a state level issue.

Upstate's demise, however, seems to come from something more fundamental. The 1970 "tipping point" mentioned for population marks the first census following reapportionment of the NY Legislature . . . which meant that New York State from then on would be ruled from the perspective of heavily urbanized, densely populated, dominated by the financial services industry, Downstate, minimizing consideration of the urban - rural, manufacturing - agriculture mixes found Upstate.

Key to working out effective policy is to ensure that all interests are heard and accounted for. New York State's founding fathers designed a system that would do just that . . . a system that worked brilliantly until it was cast aside more than 40 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court in a slap at State Sovereignty.

That decision needs to be revisited.

The Consolidation Push . . .

Long time readers of this blog know that I am a supporter of "consolidation" ... but only when it joins people together that share a common interest and vision, and advances fairness to all.

Sean from "Slums Along the Mohawk" had an interesting post this week: The Forces Behind Consolidation. Some people are considering elimination of the Village of Cobleskill and merging it into the surrounding down.

To those of us who have followed village affairs closely over the past three years and have watched numerous developers unsuccessfully request village water service for projects located outside the village, it is obvious that this is the real impetus behind the push for consolidation. Village officials may attempt to throw sand in your eyes by telling you consolidation will save money and increase efficiency. But this is not true and THEY KNOW IT! The truth is, this attempt to consolidate the village into the town is essentially a smash-and-grab operation to plunder the village’s water and sewer services in order to fuel growth benefitting only a handful of developers.

We've see the "smash-and-grab" happen in Greater Utica . . . only here we called it "regionalization" and created a part county sewer district and a water authority as vehicles for developers to plunder city water and sewer services. The result was the same: sprawl . . . a population spread too thin and an infrastructure that is far too large for the population required to support it.

We learn from Sean's story that consolidation pushed by developers and their friends in government and the media can be just as bad as "regionalization" . . . it all depends on who's interests are the ones being served.

Just Say No In New Hartford (3) . . .

Just a reminder . . . 2.10.2009 [TODAY] is the vote, Noon to 8PM. . . . Vote NO on the bonding proposition.

For more info check these prior posts: Just say No, Just Say No (2) ;
Cathy's NH Online posts: Tomorrow is the Day, The More You Know, Mr. Reed You're Killing Us, Special Voting Machines, Tangled Web
And this post on UticaSux.com

J U S T * S A Y * N O ! ! ! ! !

Maintaining Identity, Advancing a Region . . .

[This article was originally published in the January, 2009 "Utica Phoenix":]

To the editor:

I've blogged many times about the disappearance of the "Utica" name from various organizations, how its replacement by "Mohawk Valley" is often inaccurate and confusing, and how it ultimately hurts the marketing of our entire region. Simply put, "Utica" is easily found on a map, but "Mohawk Valley" means anywhere from north of Rome to Albany. The Mohawk Valley Chamber of Commerce ("MV Chamber") has been a focus of criticism because it changed its name from the "Utica Area" Chamber a few years ago. How could a group, founded to promote "Utica Area" commerce, choose a name that hides its location?

You recently forwarded to me an e-mail from Mr. Elias, President of the MV Chamber, which indicated willingness to consider revival of the "Utica" brand. Mr. Elias stated "I am supportive of 'The Greater Utica Area Chamber of Commerce'.....but this will ...and has taken time" (ellipses in original). He went on to propose that his organization and the Rome Chamber take the lead of the Oneida County Convention and Visitors Bureau to effectively promote the area, and stated that "This would also force consolidation of other chambers of commerce.... and ultimately force a chamber of commerce structure throughout Oneida County that would better promote our region.....the myopic thinking I am encountering is frustrating!" He also stated that "we have only two true chambers in this region...Rome and Utica!"

Mr. Elias' words gave me something to ponder.

Changing the "MV" Chamber to "Greater Utica" Chamber should be an easy name change. If restoring "Utica" to the MV Chamber's name is going to take time like Mr. Elias says, then it is important to disclose why. Who would resist such a change?

The MV Chamber's website, however, suggests that it is NOT promoting Greater Utica, but, instead, aspiring to be a "regional" chamber. Four pictures flip on its homepage: the Stanley Stage, the Boilermaker, Ft. Stanwix, and Herkimer Diamond Mines. The first two are not identified as being in Utica, and the latter two are not in Greater Utica but are in areas having their own chambers. There is a lot more to showcase in Utica than the Boilermaker and the Stanley: the Utica Symphony, M.V. Ballet, O.C. Historical Society, the Utica Zoo, M-W-P Arts Institute, Children's Museum, and the Brewery. There are interesting places such as Varick Street, Bank Place, Bleecker Street and "Uptown." There is rich history, interesting architecture and one of the most extensive municipal park systems in the state. You can bike on the Canalway Trail, ski and sled at Val Bialis, golf and cross-country ski at Valley View, hike and birdwatch at Utica Marsh, and play tennis for free at several locations. Utica has one of the most diverse populations in the country, and, undoubtedly, some of the best restaurants and pastry shops this side of New York City. All these things are worthy of promotion by our chamber but are not. Greater Utica's assets are lost in the chamber's "regional" static. Is it any wonder why outside businesses such as Standard Chartered Bank do not give Utica a second look? Or why other communities in the region do not want to join the "Mohawk Valley" Chamber? If Utica is treated so poorly, what fate would Boonville or Camden suffer? It is not "myopia," but survival.

While effective "regional" promotion is important, Mr. Elias' goal will continue to be frustrated by a "Top Down" approach that disregards the needs closest to the ground. Unlike other places that may have "regional" chambers, our region contains several distinct areas of commerce, the largest being Greater Utica, Rome, and southern Herkimer County. They draw clientèle from primarily their respective zones rather than each other. Besides being geographically distinct, they are served by separate newspapers and somewhat separate broadcast media. Looking at where their customers reside, businesses might expect their needs to be better served by a local chamber that is familiar with their marketing area over one styling itself as blanketing all three places and more. The MV Chamber, by placing itself in direct competition with the local chambers, would be regarded as an unneeded interloper, and, worse, a threat.

Regional needs would be better met by a "Bottom Up" approach which guarantees that local needs will not be overlooked. In this vein, most of the local chambers have already grouped themselves under the "Chamber Alliance of the Mohawk Valley" (the "Alliance"). While the effectiveness of this group may be debated, it does provide a vehicle for regional promotion, while allowing localized needs to be met by the local chambers. Curiously, the MV Chamber no longer participates with the Alliance. This deprives the Alliance of the strength of the region's largest market. It also deprives the MV Chamber of supportive friends, and the region of effective marketing.

From my arm-chair vantage point, I see organizations competing when they could be cooperating. Here's what needs to happen if the region is to progress.

First, the MV Chamber, the chamber that serves the region's largest city, needs to use that city's name in its own name. That will put itself on the map.

Second, the MV Chamber needs to abandon its "regional" aspirations and focus on its core business: Utica and its suburbs. Too many good things in Greater Utica have not been promoted.

Third, the MV Chamber needs to promote "Greater Utica" as the identity for all of Utica and its suburbs. That includes New Hartford. While some in New Hartford are proud of their recent development, that would not have happened if Utica were not next door. Utica and New Hartford, Whitestown and the other suburbs, are all interdependent, sharing the same marketplace, customer base and more. If the chamber can get the region's largest economic entity (Greater Utica) behaving as one instead of as rival Balkan states, then there will be hope for moving the entire region forward.

Fourth, a renewed "Greater Utica" Chamber needs to do some serious fence mending with its neighbors in Rome, Herkimer County and elsewhere, respecting the others' boundaries while acknowledging their contributions. This may be difficult because the MV Chamber had positioned itself as a competitor organization, but for the region's sake, it must be done. (The Rome Chamber could serve as a model. It's website promotes Rome first, but shows how life in Rome is enhanced with Utica and other Mohawk Valley communities near by.)

Fifth, a "Greater Utica" Chamber needs to rejoin the Alliance, contributing its strength, but as one among equals . . . And the Alliance needs to accept this new member if it has any desire to move a regional agenda forward.

[Be sure to pick up the February, 2009 "Utica Phoenix" to read "The Pipes, The Pipes Are Calling . . . "]

Readers' Links: Reapportionment and The Fat Tax

My readers are right on the ball and have been sending me links . . . I thought I'd post them while they're still hot . . .

Reapportionment and Upstate's Demise:

Ryan M. was interested in my theory that the NY Senate reapportionment of the 1960s -- caused by a US Supreme Court Decision -- is the root cause of Upstate's demise. I had been been going mostly on memory, but Ryan was kind enough to fill in the blanks with some research on how the whole reapportionment issue unfolded in the US Supreme Court. These make interesting reading:

Congressman Udall's Reports: Reapportionment I Reapportionment II ; WMCA v Lomenzo 377 US 633 (1964)(from Justia.com) ; WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo (from Oyez.org)

The decision involving NYS was by a split bench 6-3. The court said that the NY Constitution's apportionment scheme (which gave Upstate a lot of clout) violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause - the Court equating "one man - one vote" with "equal protection." I happen to think they got it wrong, particularly since the US Senate does not follow this scheme. As the Dissent points out, there may be good reasons for a state to ensure that particular geographic areas have a voice, and it's a violation of State Sovereignty for the US Supreme Court to second guess the reasons why a particular arrangement was chosen. Now that we have the "evidence" of the Court's error (i.e., Upstate's economic travails), it might be time to revisit the issue. . . . .Thanks, Ryan!

The "FAT TAX":

Wow, did this issue ever get people riled! I got a lot of links on Gov. Patterson's proposal to tax non-diet soda.

Erica N. submitted a Daily News column questioning why New Yorkers are being targeted for obesity when we're actually one of the healthiest states.

Grant S. pointed out a Rasmussen Poll on "nanny state" issues indicating that 70% of Americans would oppose a tax on soda like the one being proposed here.

Lisa P. submitted a Siena College Poll about Gov. Patterson and his tax proposals including the fat tax, and a Daily News article that some Democrats think the governor's political future is on life support.

Ian R. submitted a Marketwatch article indicating that Gov. Paterson's soda tax will conservatively result in the the loss of 6100 jobs.

Christian C. sent an American Council on Science and Health article: NY Soda Tax: All Politics, No Science . . . and an article and a video of a "Boston Tea Party" of sorts . . .


only it was Binghamton rather than Boston, the Susquehanna River rather than Boston Harbor, and soda rather than tea that got dumped! This one made my day!

Thanks for contributing guys!

Just Say No In New Hartford (2) . . .

It is interesting how next week's proposition only mentions "improvements to Woods Highway in the New Hartford Business Park" as the object of the proposed bonding . . . .



. . . while the Town Board's resolution talks about many other improvements including curbs, gutters, landscaping and other improvements located in or near the NHBP . . .



So just how much are the taxpayers going to subsidize this private endeavor?

J U S T * S A Y * N O ! ! ! ! !

Just Say No In New Hartford . . .

February 10 is approaching, and New Hartfordians have an opportunity to cast their vote on bonding for the New Hartford Business Park. . . . Please . . .

JUST SAY NO . . .

• to more roads, water and sewer lines to maintain . .
• to more area to police, more area to cover with fire protection
• to more traffic, congestion and noise . . .
• to reductions in agricultural land, wildlife habitat, open space, and orchards

JUST SAY NO to Urban Sprawl

JUST SAY NO to 'Bait and Switch' . . .

• When the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the New Hartford Business Park was issued in 1999, it was promoted as a site for industrial use, for "new high-technology industries" intended to "meet the economic needs of the entire region . . ." Instead, we are getting more office buildings and a hotel . . . things that the region already has plenty of.

JUST SAY NO to SEQRA Violations . . .

• The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the New Hartford Business Park did NOT include the site of "The Hartford" office building. The FEIS was never amended.

JUST SAY NO . . . to the government playing favorites

• This office building gets a subsidy but others in the region do not . . .
  

JUST SAY NO. . .

• to the real estate developers, national chains, lobbyists, and public finance lawyers who are the only ones that really benefit from this project.

JUST SAY NO . . . for your neighbors' sake . . .

• New Hartford is a wealthy community. When financial incentives "are used in healthy and prosperous communities the regional effect may be to destabilize the fiscal health of neighboring areas."

JUST SAY NO . . . for your own sake, to preserve what you moved to New Hartford for.

JUST SAY NO . . . to arrogant public officials who will force a tax increase down your throat if you vote down their plan.

The wrongness of this plan and the manner in which it is being advanced is symptomatic of the way this entire region is governed, which is for the benefit of special interests. The taxpayers will continue to be ignored, put upon, robbed and stepped on by our local leaders -- and the region will continue to decline -- unless we put a stop to them.

J U S T * S A Y * N O ! ! ! ! !

Cathy at NH Online Blog has a lot more reasons for voters to Just Say NO.

New Hartford Moves . . . And a Questionable Statement

Hans Arnold is stepping down as Planning Board Chairman. This is too bad for New Hartford. A long time public servant in the truest sense of the word, Mr. Arnold was always open to discussion on issues, and understood how the planning process should work.

Supervisor Reed's statement in the story is a bit confusing, however.

“You've got to realize these developers are out to do their projects and we've got to protect the good interest of the town,” Reed said. “We want development, but we don't want urban sprawl and uncontrolled development.”

I think people will find Mr. Reed hard to believe because urban sprawl is exactly what we've got ... and the Town seems to bend over backwards to accommodate developers.

How is the approval of the New Hartford Business Park and arranging to finance associated road construction NOT fostering sprawl? Local government is reducing the developer's cost of doing business, giving him an economic advantage over his competitors. It then would become advantageous for prospective tenants to go to this developer's development, because the taxpayers are subsidizing the project. That will attract economic activity from elsewhere in the area, and move it to this heretofore undeveloped land . . . THAT'S SPRAWL.

As far as protecting the town's interests, that is what an Environmental Impact Statement is for -- so the decisionmakers and the public know what the project's impact on them will be. It must be pointed out that the current New Hartford Business Park is not the manufacturing business park that was proposed and subjected to SEQRA review and a final Environmental Impact Statement in the late 1990s. Development for manufacturing would likely be more acceptable to people than the development of more office buildings and a hotel -- things which are not in short supply regionally. From that perspective, no Environmental Impact Statement for the New Hartford Business Park -- as it is being implemented now -- was ever done. Furthermore, the site of "the Hartford" itself was never made part of the Environmental Impact Statement, as noted last September.

Without a proper Environmental Impact Statement, the "good interest of the town"cannot be protected.

Uh Oh . . . .

In the NY Times . . . Iran Launches Satellite in a Challenge for Obama

We'll Be Back After a Commercial Break . . .

Via Buffalo Pundit:


Wow . . . Someone else who is worked up over our politics!

Another $7.50 Per Person for Debt Service

Per the Sentinel, the Oneida County Comptroller is seeking to borrow another $19.7 Million for construction and equipment. That's more than $85 for every man, woman, and child living in this county of some 230,000 people (and dropping). The annual debt service (which won't kick in until 2010) will be $1.7 million -- that's almost $7.50 a person.

Don't these people know that we are in a recession?

Global Designs . . .

Per Bloomberg: Davos Dreams of Global Cooperation Face Protectionist Schisms

The financial industry’s effort to reduce risks from credit- default swaps is being held up because of regional competition, NYSE Euronext Chief Executive Officer Duncan Niederauer said. A mechanism set up by the London Clearing House has met resistance from banks and authorities in continental Europe, he said. . . .

[German Chancellor] Merkel said the financial industry needs “clear-cut rules worldwide” and “a charter for the global economic order” that could lead to the creation of a United Nations economic council. She criticized “unfettered capitalism”

A global economic order?? Viva la resistance!

A more ominous story was on World Net Daily the other day: Globalists see econ crisis as excuse for 'new world.'

A call to utilize the current global economic crisis as a panic in which governments worldwide can move to nationalize banks is emerging from the 2009 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The forum's founder, Klaus Schwab, told CNN yesterday the current global economic slowdown is a "transformational crisis" that should be utilized to shape a "new world."

"Above all else this is a crisis of confidence," Schwab said. "To restore confidence you have to establish signposts that the world after the crisis will be different. We have to create a new world and that is what Davos 2009 will be all about – serving society."

A "transformational crisis?" "Shape a 'new world'?" I don't know about you, but this talk scares me rather than soothes me . . . . Just who is this Klaus Schwab? Why should we trust him? And why should we trust ANY of the leaders (especially Vladimir Putin) attending the conference? This sounds like a plan to concentrate control of the whole world in the hands of a few!

I'm having a hard enough problem dealing with the erosion of "state's rights" just within the US. . Our Founding Fathers understood that in Diversity there is Strength. They insisted on a large degree of State Sovereignty to allow for different ways of doing things. That has been eroded by all the "federal" programs that our Founding Fathers would never have dreamed of, which were never specified in the constitution. Now when a federal program is defective, the entire nation is placed at risk. Things have simply gotten too "nationalized." When something goes wrong, like bad peanuts in Georgia, the entire country gets sick. Can you imagine if the Imperial Valley in CA has a long lasting drought? We'll be out of vegetables because we don't grow them here in NY any more in any great quantity. Now imagine if everything is globalized . . .

So now we should look forward to Schwab, Bill Clinton, Merkel, Putin, and other attendees to give us a new WORLD order? I don't think so. Control of finances will give way to control of other aspects of our life . . . Consider that in Merkel's Germany, homeschooling has been outlawed and parents have been thrown in jail for it (enabling the state to control the next generation).

This is just an excuse for world domination by big multi-national businesses partnering with big government . . . This is for the benefit of the elite ... Not you and not me. Unfortunately, the mindset we have in Washington and the State, and in both political parties, seems to be to play ball with these people.

We will be controlled by elites . . . and the American dream will be dead.

We are being led like sheep to slaughter.

"Economic Development" - A Tale from the Mid-West

This story from the Mid-West, found via the Regional Communities blog, could have been set in the Mohawk Valley: Billions of dollars blown in regional development subsidies.

Since 1990, the St. Louis region's crazy quilt of taxing authorities has dedicated more than $2 billion in public money to subsidize private "economic development" projects. And there's almost nothing to show for it.

At best, the subsidies have created a handful of jobs, few of them long-term or high-paying. The subsidies have created no increase in retail sales nor have they sparked any other economic activity.

The primary beneficiaries of the public investment have been national retail chains, real estate developers, lobbyists and public finance lawyers.

These are some of the findings of the first comprehensive study on the impact of local development incentives in the St. Louis region . . .

The report is titled "An Assessment of the Effectiveness and Fiscal Impacts of the Use of Local Development Incentives in the St. Louis Region"

From the Executive Summary:

Local governments in the St. Louis region have made extensive use of public financial incentives to compete for tax-generating businesses. In some areas, most new development is, in effect, publicly subsidized through foregone taxes in the form of abatements, tax increment financing, and related mechanisms. . . . While the short-term effects of these incentives are usually positive for the local government or private sponsor, the overall impact on regional growth and the financial viability of local governments is less clear.

Sounds like the New Hartford Business Park, no?

Among the conclusions:

Broad measures of regional economic outcomes strongly suggest that massive tax
expenditures to promote development have not resulted in real growth. While there are certainly short-term localized benefits in the use of incentives, regional effects are more elusive. Development incentives have primarily acted to redistribute spending and taxes. While distribution effects might yield broader economic benefits when used to redevelop economically distressed communities, when incentives are used in healthy and prosperous communities the regional effect may be to destabilize the fiscal health of neighboring areas.

That, my friends, is exactly what is happening here . . . the rich communities benefit themselves, neighboring areas become destabilized, and the whole region suffers.

The key to making sense of all this is found in the first story's phrase: the "region's crazy quilt of taxing authorities . . . "

It is the "crazy quilt of taxing authorities" that makes it possible for one community to negatively impact its neighbor fiscally. If the communities were part of the same tax jurisdiction, governed by a common body of elected representatives, one community could not take advantage of another, and solutions benefiting the region would emerge.

The implications of this should be obvious. . . .

Vote "Yes" . . . or Take a Hike?

This was a stunning headline: New Hartford residents' choice: Vote 'yes' or face tax hike.

A special election set for Tuesday, Feb. 10, will give town residents their first chance to vote on funding for roadway improvements at and around the New Hartford Business Park. . . .

Last April, the Town Board committed Town residents to fund road improvements for a private developer at the NHBP, using short-term borrowing to get around the requirement of putting the matter up for a vote before making the commitment. But that will result in a steep tax hike in 5 years if the voters do not approve long term financing before then. The public, apparently, will be repeatedly subjected to vote on this matter until it either approves the funding, or the tax hike goes into effect.

Certified public accountant Frank Basile, whose firm FJ Basile, CPAs, PC, acts as a financial consultant for the town, said a bond anticipation note was used because it provides greater flexibility during the planning and construction phase of a new development. . .

As far as deciding whether money is spent, voters choose a town supervisor and board members to make decisions on their behalf, Basile said. Without the PILOT agreement, The Hartford would have moved elsewhere, he said.

“That is why it is so important for the taxpayers to fully understand the concept of the PILOT agreement and that the bond debt service will not be a burden or a cost to the town taxpayers,” Basile said. “If the taxpayers vote in favor of the 15-year serial bond, the payment of the related debt service will cost the taxpayers nothing as originally designed.”

We, the taxpayers, fully understand what is going on, Mr. Basile, and don't need you, our overpaid consultant who is part of the problem, to lecture us on what we should approve or not approve.

Private interests, including accountants and realtors and developers and their EDGE enablers, have hijacked local government to suck money from the taxpayers' pockets and put it into their own. It is irrelevant that there may be no net cost to taxpayers if they go along with the scheme (and everything works out as planned) -- although there will be increased costs related to the "sprawl" that is being created.

The real issue, the one that will be voted upon (although the proposition will be couched in terms of "funding") is whether Government should be used to further private interests.

The fact that voters will be going to the polls with a financial gun to their heads means that, quite simply, New Hartford Town government has become corrupt.