Troubled Bridges Over Waters . . . and Other Things…

The Sentinel reports that Oneida County has 180 structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges.

In Rome, there were 15 bridges that were given one of the two possible negative grades. Nearly all of the bridges in the city with poor grades are open to traffic.

Curious about Utica . . . or New Hartford?

Go to N.Y.S.D.O.T’s Oneida County list and count ‘em yourself.

Rome Helping Utica . . .

The story about Rome police helping Utica police is a welcome bit of news, especially for the besieged people of Cornhill.

What isn’t quite understood is why no help from New Hartford, Whitestown, or the various Villages nearby. Those areas will have a lot to lose if Utica goes under.

Perhaps it takes a City to understand the problems of another City, and know what to do.

Our Schools: How Bad Can They Get?

New Statistics are in and they don’t look good. In Herkimer County, the high school graduation rate is about 75%. In Rome, the RFA graduation rate is only 65%, and at Utica’s Proctor it’s about the same at 66%. But don’t worry . . . it could be worse . . .

In the Big Apple it’s 50%, in Syracuse (Dan Lowengard’s new home) it’s only 47%, in Rochester (at one time known for high teacher pay) it’s 39%.

Perhaps it is fitting that one of the worst performing school districts is in State Education Commissioner Mills’ backyard in Albany at 38%.

* * *
The Rome paper fittingly tells us about a little distraction from the 3Rs. If students have to go to SUNYIT for a special “STOP-DWI Program” program, then they must be missing at least a half day of school. It seems like every special interest wants to make their pitches to schools — and gets the “air-time” to do it. Nothing against “STOP-DWI,” but the students have basic academic subjects that are not getting learned. Maybe with fewer distractions, some of those graduation rates will come up.

Griffiss Institute: Time to Pull the Plug

Thank you, Observer-Dispatch, for taking off the rose-colored glasses and giving us a hard-hitting story today about the Griffiss Institute’s failures as compared to the Sentinel’s story yesterday on the GI’s new plans for expansion as a business incubator.

A Google Search on “Griffiss Institute for Information Assurance” produced a plethora of hits which provide a virtual time line of events and give more depth to what came out in the Sunday OD. After reading these, the only feeling left is sickness.

The Griffiss Institute for Information Assurance was launched, like other Pataki-era local news-grabbers, with much political hoopla in September 2002.

“This new collaboration will establish Rome as a national center of research and economic development in the field of information security—bringing new high-tech jobs and private sector investment to the Mohawk Valley,” Governor Pataki said.

Two months later the first employee was hired: a “chief scientist” who was supposed to formulate a “technical vision” for the Institute that would help it to secure research grants. This Chief Scientist, splitting his time at GI with time at Cornell, expected the Institute to “become a focal point, rather than a new competitor” among the New York’s institutions that were involved in cyber security — a place for them to join together.

According to news accounts of the day, the first year administrative budget was supposed to be about $1 million, including $175,000 for a director, $80,000 each for two associates, and $75,000 to Cornell for the Chief Scientist. The budget should have been a tip-off that things were not right because it seems a little top heavy in administration and very light on what was supposed to be its main mission, research.

GI’s Form 990 for 2003 reveals what actually occurred, which should have been another tip-off. On total revenue of $314,641, $290,451 was allegedly spent on program “services.” Closer inspection, however, reveals that of these “services” only $75,000 was spent on research (presumably the Chief Scientist’s pay), with the bulk of the remainder ($206,250) spent on the Executive Director’s salary for an alleged average 40 hours of work/week, although the Executive Director actually took a total of $222,025 (see p 7) that year, with the additional amount being legal fees. I.e., almost 71% of the first year’s revenues went to the Executive Director . . . A sweet deal for the Executive Director . . . but with so much money going to one person, how would the Institute have the manpower to get anything accomplished?

It is not really clear what was accomplished in 2003, other than an invitation-only symposium to kick off GI’s existence. The Chief Scientist indicated that the symposium would give the participants a chance to present an overview of their work and provide an opportunity for them to talk to each other. All this for a “tête-à-tête” seems rather extravagant. Interestingly, the Executive Director in the news account indicated that the Institute was “partnering with local academic institutions to train young people for careers in information assurance.” Funny, the concept of training young people did not come through the governor’s original announcement of GI only a few months earlier. (One thing this blogger has learned, the word “partnering” is usually a red flag for some sort of shenanigan, especially when educators are involved.) It should have been a tip-off that something off-target was going on.

By the end of 2003, the first Chief Scientist was to be replaced by a new Chief Scientist from Syracuse U. The first Chief Scientist, meanwhile, in early 2005, went on to become Chief Scientist for “a new Science and Technology Center, that will bring together researchers with a strong background in security research from eight academic institutions along with industrial and government partners.” The description of this “center” sounds awfully similar to GI, n’est-ce pas? Where the Cornell press release gives a description of the Chief Scientist’s previous experience, GI’s status was demoted to merely “a New York state security consortium.” So it would appear that the concept behind GI was moved to the first Chief Scientist’s home turf — where he could head it as Chief Scientist. So much for GI being the “focal point.”

In a 2004 speech, the Executive Director of the New York State Office of Science Technology & Academic Research (NYSTAR), gushed that “The Institute has established Rome as a national center of research and economic development” and that “The more than 60 academic partners with the Griffiss Institute represents the absolute cream-of-the-scientific crop.” The NYSTAR exec sounded like a shill for the Pataki administration because he identified no specific project that GI was working on, in contrast to the several other institutions mentioned in his speech. His statements regarding GI: lots of puffery . . . but no substance.

What was GI working on in 2004? By 2004, GI had entered the education business — not graduate school level, nor college level, but, rather, High School education — for Disadvantaged Youth — sponsored by the County. It also entered the job-creation/charity/money give-away business because the 50 youths participating were paid $5.15/hr for their 200 hours in the program (i.e., $1030 each or $51,500 overall). Funny, supplying summertime jobs was not among the objectives mentioned in GI’s initial announcement. Of course, the education part (not the summer jobs) should have been expected: We were alerted to this eventuality the previous year by GI’s Executive Director. GI also, apparently, went into the business of giving out awards. (Like “partnering,” giving awards is another red flag.)

In 2005 GI lost one of the floors in its building when its landlord rented it to a local business. Of course, this was spinned as a success, but it should have been a tip-off.

By March 2006, the Institute reorganized and officially shifted its focus from research to training. While the EDGE press release claimed that “At its inception, the GI was designed to concentrate on three major areas: basic and applied research, training and degree education, and information assurance products and services,” that is not so clear from the original 2002 Governor’s press release which emphasized research.

So now, four years after the initial announcement and after spending 4.5 million state taxpayer dollars to fix and equip GI’s building, supposedly for research, the OD reports that the Griffiss Institute never produced any research on its own and never even applied for any research grants. It is amazing that the principals involved can claim as a roadblock the federal requirement that grant applications have a sponsoring college research institution when several colleges and universities are represented on GI’s Board of Directors, including Cornell, SU, Utica College, and SUNY-IT. It is also amazing that they can cite a federal accounting requirement forbidding pass-thru of federal funds to GI as a roadblock to GI’s work when they have high-powered legal assistance on their payroll. The first Chief Scientist had it right, right in the beginning: GI would not be a competitor. But maybe the real reason is because Cornell, SU and UC, all of whom sit on GI’s board and have competing programs of their own, would not want any competition. About all GI has accomplished is a “cybersecurity boot camp” for high schoolers … but even that seems to have been taken over by SU for its own.

The Griffiss Institute seems to have been “Dead on Arrival,” picked to pieces by the people and institutions responsible for its very survival. Now GI wants a new mission and a new life.

TIME TO PULL THE PLUG!

A Flight of Fancy from “UCA

Appointed Oneida County Executive Picente wants to sell the Old Oneida County Airport (UCA) land to the State. People in Whitestown are not happy.

“Bill Barry, who was chairman of the reuse committee for the former airport, said he hoped to see the roughly 1,800-acre parcel used for businesses . . . “That’s the largest single-owner piece of property in the state of New York, and there’s documents around that say there are individual companies that are interested in a large piece of property in the Northeast.““

Yes, Mr. Barry, there are companies looking for those few-and-far-between large parcels — companies like AMD.

And we did not read of any substantial monetary commitment to the Homeland Security Training Center when it was announced, so where is the money to purchase the old airport going to come from? Senate discretionary money perhaps?

Is Mr. Fiorini trying to kill off Rome’s competition? Is Mr. Bruno trying to kill off Luther Forest’s competition? Is this all just a “flight of fancy” (the only kind of flight leaving UCA these days)?

Who knows? But with announcements like todays coming seemingly out of left field, and people like Mr. Fiorini who appear to speak on behalf of an entire county legislature but also cut off discussion, the public has been given a license to speculate.

School Board Worries . . .

The Rome School Board worries about potential traffic problems a new hotel could cause at Rome Free Academy. The Rome School Board complains about unusual tax breaks given by EDGE at Griffiss to East Coast Olive Oil.

Now THIS is ENTERTAINMENT!

It was love at first sight. Only a couple three years ago the Rome School Board welcomed the opportunity to construct its new $50 million (and now extremely troubled) school at the Griffiss site. Only a couple three years ago EDGE was desperate to fill vacant land and be able to claim new job creation at Griffiss. The EDGE-Rome School District match seemed to be made in heaven — at least to the participants.

What were they thinking when they decided to plunk a High School down in the middle of an Airport Industrial Park????

The parties to this affair seem to be having problems getting along. Will counseling help?

Can complaints about jet-aircraft noise disrupting classes be far behind?

Obviously the individuals involved in making the decisions weren’t thinking of the students. Were they perhaps thinking of how a quick buck could be made off of all that easy NY State School Construction Aid Money. Who knows?

Why should the Rome School District complain about a tax break being given to a company that hasn’t even located there yet? It’s not like they are losing revenue due to the company pulling out, which will happen in Utica, the community being left behind by ECOO. Maybe the Utica School District should have the opportunity to participate in the decisionmaking, too, because it will lose tax dollars from this deal.

We’ve created a cast of characters with our government set-up.

Sit back and try to enjoy the show . . . just don’t think about what you paid for your ticket.

Utica helping Rome . . . sort of . . .

Per Today's OD, Utica Safe Schools Partnership is helping Rome City Schools on a grant in a so-called "model of regional cooperation." To be sure, it may make sense for Rome to hire some of the people from the Utica group because the latter has had 4 years experience with its own program. But Romans need to understand what they are getting.

The circumstances surrounding the creation of the program in Utica were a bit suspicious when a 501(c)(3) corporation was founded by SOME school officials and board members, the corporation was set up to do business with the school district and hold grant funds to be used in the district, but the corporation kept their meetings closed to the public – - – inspite of the fact that federal funds (ie public tax dollars) were being spent. See a prior post in 2002 "The Safe Schools Project — What's the real intent?" for the "low down."

Now here we are four years later . . . The Utica federal grant has been exhausted, but, somehow, the program's existence continues. Rather than a "model of regional cooperation," this sounds more like an example of people (the Utica Safe Schools people) perpetuating their jobs (by latching onto Rome's grant).

Tax, Spend . . . Don’t Spend . . .

Three news items caught our eyes this morning.

In Pataki vetoes $20 million for SUNYIT ice rink, it looks like all the "regional" plans for a sports facility are on ice, rendering moot the discussion of where it should be best located. The legislators are already planning to get around this one.

Rome mayor names chief of staff . . . Wow. Mayor Brown has taken a page out of Mayor Julian's playbook and appointed a $50K "Chief of Staff" to join the likes of the President and other Heads of State.

Sales tax rollback? Not so fast . . . Of course … The county legislators have money to give a break this year, but it apparently is not steady revenue to enable permanent removal of the tax.

While the first story is "bad news" for the region, it could be "good news" if such cuts are applied evenhandedly across the state (Binghamton U and its almost $90 million in new facilities and Albany Nanotach come to mind). The state cannot continue to spend on lavish new facilities that have a questionable Return on Investment and be able lower taxes and fees at the same time. Lowering taxes and fees, however, is essential to making New York competitive.

Even if you don't live in Rome, Mayor Brown's padding the payroll with another political appointee is bad for the region because it sends a signal: local government doesn't care how it spends your money as long as the political system is served. Rome, like Utica, is shrinking. Neither city needs these positions. Rome got along fine all these years without one. But someone from Sen. Meier's office will soon be out of a job, so a place had to be found for her. That's all this is, and all this ever is. When do our political leaders start doing what's best for the people?

Naturally, our Board of Legislators will have a cash shortfall next year and won't be able to fully roll back the sales tax. Why? Because they still spend too much. They can start saving by (1) eliminating their own salaries and benefits and (2) scheduling all meetings at night so that OTHER PEOPLE willing to serve at no cost will be able to run to take their places.

Educa$$ion News

Yeowwwch!!! There goes the wallet again …

Rome school budget may have 8 percent hike . Oriskany school board OKs 6.9 percent spending increase.

Evr'y body's doin' it …

As UpstateBlog.Net repeatedly points out in similar stories:
"The state Division of the Budget has projected a 2.8 percent rate of inflation for New York State for 2006-07."

Our schools lack discipline . . . It comes right from the top!

Water Rate Hike, MHA Shuffling, More County Borrowing and Losing More Ground

Just when things seemed to have quieted down, a spate of news stories has pricked our interest. Unfortunately, as usual, the news is more of the same.

We no sooner put our wallets away in anticipation of a spring end to high heating bills when we get confronted with a potential double digit hike in water rates. While recent changes to federal regulations may have something to do with the hike, the unhappy homeowner should know about how he or she may be subsidizing some of our large “industrial” users in the area, such as the prisons, Hamilton College, and the Brewery. To see what we mean, look at the table on p 45 of 141 at MVWA 2003 Bond Series Info and notice MVWA’s ranking for “Industrial” rather than “Residential” users, and it will tell you why your individual home rates may be so high. If you want to know who are the beneficiaries of YOUR largess, check out: MVWA 2005 Financial Report Page 105 of 116.

On another front, we find out that the Utica Municipal Housing Authority has chosen a new leader, a former Utica City School District superintendent, who apparently interviewed for a superintendent’s job in Fall River last summer, when questions were raised about his departure from East Providence. The Internet sure makes life interesting, doesn’t it? No questions seem to have been raised here … Is MHA still on dialup?

Meanwhile, Oneida County (with the highest sales tax in the state) feels the need to borrow some more – up to $2 million dollars more – to construct an aircraft maintenance training center for MVCC (or is it really for Empire Aero) at Griffiss. While our local colleges should be providing our students with training that will lead to jobs in the local economy, do we really need to BORROW to do this, especially now when our tax burden is already so crushing? What is the projected Return On Investment for this borrowing? (The legislation may be reviewed at page 18 of 58 here.) It’s interesting to compare the tons of press coverage and back-slapping given to the State’s security training center ($1-6 million state dollars) as opposed to the practical silence on this proposal ($2 million County dollars).

Finally, we have the non-news story of the year, since we can literally see it every day in boarded up houses and businesses: the region’s population shrinking.

Perhaps the first three stories explain the last.

PS Happy St. Paddy’s Day to you all. Maybe if we pray real hard we can drive the “snakes” that hold us back out of Oneida County. Don’t miss Utica’s big parade tomorrow morning!