This past week more information was revealed about the new office park going up in New Hartford behind (west of) “The Orchard.” What at first seemed somewhat objectionable as another example of Urban Sprawl is now starting to look like taxpayer subsidy of a private developer.

First we find out that Oneida County will give a PILOT for the project: reduced property taxes for several years, and a $700,000 sales tax exemption. This ostensibly was for the purpose of retaining existing jobs at “The Hartford” in New Hartford.
Then we find out that New York State will give Hartford Financial a $500,000 grant (our tax money) to locate in the new office park.

While NO new jobs are to be produced, the area requiring police and fire protection will be expanded, as will the demand for water and sewer services and need for storm water control — costs that will fall on the tax and rate payers in general (many of whom live in Utica).

But it’s for job retention . . . That makes it OK . . . Right?

Now we find out that in addition to the PILOT, the County, the Town of New Hartford, and the New Hartford School District will take the already reduced PILOT payments and dedicate a significant portion of them to improving the “country” (it did not say County) road to accommodate more traffic.

Clearly, the road deal is unnecessary to retain the jobs at “The Hartford.” The PILOT and Grant accomplished that, and the company’s new building is already well under construction.

As for the proposed hotel and medical office complex, these will likely draw upon existing demand within region. While some jobs may be created at this location, the project will likely result in job losses elsewhere in the region. The market for these services is only so big (and here, it is shrinking). But, free market competition is a pillar of our society, so that is OK. Traffic at this location, however, will increase, and that will be something the public will have to cope with. But since the Town will be the ultimate tax beneficiary, it will have the funds to take care of the traffic.

This is not a County industrial park, so why Utica taxpayers should be asked to pay for road improvements there through their county taxes is unknown. There was no County help for the Utica Business Park.

The deal with the New Hartford School District seems questionable. What does developing a road have to do with education?

Is it not New Hartford’s policy to require payments from developers to mitigate the environmental impacts of their projects? Here, New Hartford should be getting payments from the developer to improve the road, not (effectively) the other way around.

Plenty of questions arise the more you think about this one. Why the unusual deal here — and not elsewhere?

One hundred scientists, including many earth scientists and climatologists, have sent a letter to the UN Secretary General warning that the UN’s attempts to stop climate change will be futile, will increase human suffering, and will be a distraction from adaptation.

“Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports: – Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.”

But we already knew that.

Wind farms, particularly in Herkimer County, have been a favorite target of mine. Although touted as “green,” their “foot prints” often extend over thousands of acres, radically changing the landscape and, for most people living near by, diminishing both their quality of life and property values. Benefits regarding “global warming” are speculative if not incalculable. They could justify more long distance power lines, such as NYRI — extending negative impacts all over the countryside. Consumers usually are charged more for such “green” power than conventional power, so it is not cheap. Companies seeking permits to construct such projects usually seek a “PILOT” or “payment in lieu of taxes” agreement — which amounts to a taxpayer subsidy not given to other businesses — to make their projects viable. And the power is simply not needed locally, because our so-called power ‘surplus’ is the basis for the NYRI proposal. In sum, certain businesses request our subsidy and acceptance of negative environmental impacts for the “greater good” — of people living elsewhere, of ‘the earth’ — but probably for their own enrichment.

So why is Mr. Brezinski’s proposal worth looking at?

Several county officials met Thursday with Empire State Wind Energy President Keith Pitman to gain information about how much revenue can be made from wind projects, Brezinski said.

Pitman told county officials he would be able to give the county 75 percent of the revenue if he did a large project for the county, said Herkimer County Administrator James Wallace. That’s 10 to 20 times as much money as other developers are offering, Wallace said.

If the local benefit is great enough, it may make the local impacts more tolerable. (A year ago I wondered if some of the other proposals were simply ‘lo-ball’ offers that preyed upon Herkimer County’s economic desperation.)

Brezinski said he thinks the county should try to make it so that any project
it’s involved with developing will produce electricity to be used locally instead of sold to other areas. This could bring down electricity costs and attract businesses to the area, he said.

If the power is used locally, that reduces the need for lines and impacts to people not receiving a benefit. It also reduces transmission costs. This suggests that the cost of production and local distribution might be cheaper than if the County buys power from National Grid. IF cheap power can be created, it will be a business advantage.

Also discussed was the possibility of a small wind project that would place a few turbines near Herkimer County Community College to help power the college and possibly other county facilities, Wallace said.

Smaller projects mean smaller impacts mean fewer objections.

Not to get carried away, the County would be taking on both a significant investment and significant risk. Like other local government-run utilities, the expertise needed to be successful is likely to be lacking — hence the need for some professional management. And the negative impacts will still have to be dealt with in a way that is fair to neighbors.

But it is worth looking into … NOT for global warming . . . NOT for the ‘greater good’ … but for the possibility of bringing benefits to the people who will be paying the costs and living with the consequences.

I wonder how it ever became State policy to give grants that encourage construction in undeveloped areas? I wonder if a generic environmental impact statement was done on such a policy – - and what mitigation was proposed for the sprawl that it promotes?

Just wondering . . .

Should this be any surprise when these administrators and school board are the same people who brought you the scheduling fiasco and no-textbooks fiasco a couple years back?

One has to wonder, also, about the competence of the state leaders who made such a tempting huge pot of money available. It only encourages waste. 300 million for Utica, almost a billion for Syracuse . . . now add together similar projects across the state and you know why NY is the highest taxed state in the land.

If New York can blow this kind of money on education, New York can well afford to give us a free Thruway . . . which will probably do more to boost Upstate’s economy than all the new school facilities combined.

In Syracuse, the conversation is taking a different tone. Like the Arterial, I-81 overpasses are nearing the end of their useful life, but there, the talk is about removing them all together. Sandra Barrett of the Onondaga Citizens League commented.

“Basically, we think someone needs to take an advocacy role for downtown, or others will make the decision for downtown,” Barrett said. “We want to make sure it’s not just dollars and construction costs on the table, but that people take a look at the community at large. We want to take a look at alternatives to a highway that cuts through our city and separates our downtown from our fastest-growing industries.”

People are starting to realize how superhighways, cutting through city neighborhoods, can destroy them. We need to think about this ourselves when remaking our own Arterial.

The school district, town, village and local BOCES unit may collaborate to build a shared transportation facility.

The effort reflects an opportunity to consolidate services and facilities, Superintendent of Schools Daniel Gilligan said Monday.

“Rather than everyone building their own, we should share one,” Gilligan said as the Board of Education passed a resolution that could help further the project.

Other potential partners: Oneida-Herkimer-Madison BOCES and the town and village of New Hartford.

But this idea really needs to be taken further because there is a customer already looking for a transportation facility: CENTRO.

CENTRO wants to consolidate its bus maintenance facility for both its Utica and Rome-based fleets. The City of Utica has voiced some reluctance to having it in downtown Utica — not thinking that it would fit with the City’s plans for downtown. The Mayor proposed that it be located between Utica and Rome. That seems to make sense. . . and that seems to make New Hartford’s proposal for a facility on Middle Settlement Road a perfect fit for CENTRO as well.

Location aside, there are other obvious benefits:

(1) CENTRO’S expertise. The local bus system seems to have gotten a boost by the boys (and girls) from Syracuse. Something sorely lacking in almost all school districts, no matter how handsomely compensated the superintendent, is a business sense for running operations. Although CENTRO is subsidized, it competes for passengers against taxis and private automobiles. It has to make those fares it collects go as far as possible to survive. Integrating school transportation with a professionally run public transit system would seem to lead to both cost savings and increased customer satisfaction.

(2) Educational Opportunity. A facility co-located with BOCES would seem to tailor-make an opportunity for training mechanics much like MVCC’s aircraft maintenance training facility already does at Griffiss. Students would not only learn about nuts and bolts, but they would have a chance to learn about the transportation business as well.

Location, Expertise, and Education . . . Adding CENTRO to the mix would seem a natural fit.

A Big Win for Open Government

As reported today, the Towns of Warren and Stark will now pay for their failure to comply with the Open Meetings Law. Anything decided by the towns in violation of that law is void. This is a good thing. When decisions are made illegally behind closed doors, it usually is because government is being co-opted by private interests for their own benefit and the expense of their neighbors. Some of our Towns in Oneida County need to read this decision and learn a lesson from it. When government runs openly and honestly, everyone benefits.

A Big Win for the Environment

Another aspect of the ruling is that government decisions that are made without a ‘hard look’ at their environmental impacts will also be set aside. This has long been the law, but it is often forgotten because, quite frankly, local government seems to have been bought off by business interests, it’s easier and less costly to ignore one’s environmental responsibilities, and it is unlikely that private individuals or civic groups will fork over the money needed to sue. This case, however, was the exception: people did sue — and they won. If they had not, GOVERNMENT would have simply continued to violate the law. Some of our Towns in Oneida County need to read this decision from the environmental angle and learn a lesson from it. New Hartford in particular should read very carefully the “Pyramid” case cited within this decision. Again, this decision is a good thing. If environmental impacts are ignored, it is usually the neighbors – - – the little guys who derive no benefit — who are hurt. When all the impacts are revealed and studied and mitigated, everyone benefits.

Phase 1 includes construction of the athletic field and the auditorium.
Phase 2 will consist of the math, science and technology wing.

The athletic field is going to involve installation of artificial turf. However, the safety of such turf has recently been called into question. Apparently ground up tires are an essential ingredient in the installation, and there is a fear that toxic chemicals from the tires could pose a health risk. It has become somewhat of an issue in Fayetteville-Manlius, which has postponed a referendum for such a field. Legislation has been introduced by Assemblyman Englebright of Long Island to impose a moratorium on such installations, pending a study of the public health aspects of same.

Could New Hartford be trying to beat the clock and get itself grandfathered in?

If it was unaware of the legislation, maybe it should consider F-M’s concern and postpone the installation until the health effects of the artificial turf are better understood.

Wouldn’t you rather play on grass than cadmium?