(letters from March 2, 2006)
Dear Editor,
On Monday Feb. 13, 2006 Onteora Central Schools had a bid opening for the district’s transportation needs for the coming year. The bid opening this year was not for each run individually but for all routes lumped into one bid winner take all...
If good business sense dictates that it is beneficial to put all your eggs in one basket AND eliminate competitive bidding perhaps the district has done well. If not… get ready to pay the piper. Looking back over the past years, the district in the early 60' s did exactly the same thing. All transportation was awarded to Lakeview Transit. The move lasted 4 months, at which time the company could not maintain a large enough driving staff to meet it’s needs... nor could it maintain its fleet of buses to the requirements of NYS DOT regulations. It is interesting to note that in the 60’s all regulations were only a small fraction of what they are today. Lakeview’s fleet had fallen under such gross disrepair that the State DOT in a surprise inspection stripped the inspection stickers off the buses and put them out of service on the spot. This was done in the middle of a school day, if it were not for the contractors that we are now eliminating via a take all bid this district would have had parents coming to pick up their children. These are only some of the risks we will face if this bid is accepted at the next board meeting.
It is my understanding that the lowest bid submitted by Hoyt Transportation Inc was $500,000 more than we currently spend. The current price if all runs were to simply be extended with a state mandated percentage increase would only be approx. $150,000.
All of this sounds wonderful for the OCS Transportation Dep’t. It would merely have to oversee Hoyt transit, eliminating all the hands on control we have carefully established for over 50 years. The system and the bus drivers who have been so dedicated to our children’s safety will fade away. Is this what the people and the Board of Ed. really want?
I have worked for the OCS transportation system since 1967 — 28 years as a full time OCS bus driver and after retiring I now drive for Tonche Transit. There have been many times during the years when the OCS district has investigated alternatives to a multiple contractor-District owned operation. The first time they tried, it failed miserably. When it was from time to time investigated, it was determined that we already had the best system to service our needs.
I believe that a change of this magnitude should be presented to the public, with all facts and figures, both pro and con, presented at an open forum where all sides may be heard. All the district has now is the opinion of a consultant. It is my belief that the past history of the district operation has not figured sufficiently into his opinion as to what’s best for all concerned.
When you toss out the local contractors and they seek work elsewhere OR reduce their fleet OR go out of business… What prevents the next round of bidding from going sky high, since the competition is no longer present to control it?
The district has the option to reject the existing bid and re-bid all routes or extend the current routes as per state mandates. I suggest that they give serious thought to doing one of the above. Attendance at the next board meeting might not be a bad idea for anyone who feels that this move might not be in our best interest
Steve Stettine
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
Dean Gitter's recent letter asking how we would like the community of Shandaken to spend a portion of the eventual profit from the proposed Belleayre Resort, seems generous, conciliatory and inclusive. But it preempts important issues.
The future existence of the resort and its profitability is far from certain. And we need to remain cleqrly focussed what we might be exchanging for this pay-off.
Judge Wissler's thorough work distilling twelve points of adjudication for the environmental impact assessment for the resort, gives some indication of our potential deprivation. We have chosen to live in a uniquely beautiful and fragile, wild environment; to many of us it is clear that, along with the nourishment we receive, goes the responsibility to maintain these increasingly rare advantages for future generations. To have the nature of our area despoiled by a massive development with its attendent structures and activities, so that the area becomes as uninviting as many other developed parts of this country, cannot be compensated with money. We must not be distracted by Mr Gitter's offer from the potential damage that may be caused by building this resort — the environmental impact must be thoroughly investigated.
But a question has been raised on how we would like to spend resources in the community, and this is worth considering. Growth and development are essential human activities; for to be fully alive we need to expand and deepen our endeavors and take up the considerable challenges of our time.
I would like to see growth in fearless generosity arising out of our fortunate living conditions. Therefore the items on my wish list are large, as well as vital for our future.
As examples, I would like growth in:- quality health care for all; better education resources and opportunities for all normal and challenged children; rehabilitation and education for this country's embarrassingly large prison population; worthy employment for all and removal of poverty; support for businesses taking care of employees and customers, using the environment sustainably, and protecting soil, water, air, forests, wildernesses, and community harmony; environmental protection of unique natural areas; clean water, air and soil; improved disposal and recycling of waste, clean-up of pollution, and constructive information and laws related to the effects of pollution on health; information on consumer products allowing us to choose to avoid exploitation of people and environments; research on sustainable agriculture, environmental practices, and alternative energy sources; support for wisely creative artists, scientists and social planners; urban and other living spaces that promote rich community life; secure and accurate electoral systems with candidates obliged to voters rather than the wealthy "investors" in their campaigns; international diplomacy that increases national security.
Historically we have sought growth in, for example:- production of consumer goods by means which destroy environments and human societies; non-nutritious, exploitive foods; access to oil and the war that maintains it; reduction in costs of polluting to the businesses which profit from it; subsidies for unsustainable industries; people marginalized from the community; differences in lifestyle, health and life-expectations for the wealthy and those from whom their wealth derives.
Those who dedicate themselves to improve constructively any of the above issues, leave their mark on history, locally, nationally, and globally. Now is the time to take up the real challenges of our time and place.
Ros Mcintosh
Mount Tremper, NY

Dear Editor,
I read with interest Brian Power’s signed editorial in the February 16th issue of the Olive Press. To my mind, it makes a positive contribution to the controversy over the Belleayre Resort and I thank you for it.
Other than a few factual errors in your comments, the idea of good-faith negotiations is right on target and Crossroads Ventures is ready to enter into them at any time.
We would not enter into such negotiations with an all-or-nothing attitude. Our goal would be quite simple: to achieve agreement on a plan that would meet the minimal needs of all concerned. Our only proviso is that the plan must be economically viable and must allow the overall venture to make a significant contribution to the prosperity and betterment of the Shandaken-Middletown region and its citizens. That was our original intent and it remains so. All of our investors have maintained homes here for many years and we have a very definite personal stake in the region – whether or not some our more cynical critics believe that.
I know you and others have from time to time pooh-poohed our more altruistic motivations and I regret that distrust. But we have already committed ourselves in writing to contributing one-third of our profits to improvements and public service projects in Shandaken and Middletown. We are also serious about the need for several hundred full-time and part-time employees to whom we’ll offer good pay and, in the case of our 542 full-time employees, health and retirement benefits.
Most of these people will come from the area centered around the intersection of Ulster, Greene and Delaware counties. In fact, we fully expect that over 95% of our workforce will be staffed by people who already live here. A survey by a nationally-recognized labor research company completed for Ulster County a few years ago concluded that the total potential workforce in the commuting area numbered over 138,000 and over 19,000 of them would be interested in changing jobs in a jiffy if offered $12 or more per hour. As a result, we expect most of our work force will continue living right where they are, thus avoiding problems with housing or adding any significant number of children to the school systems. In addition, we expect that many of our seasonal employees will be people who now work at the Belleayre Ski Center only in the winter-time.
By the way, 60% of our many workers will make a good deal more than $12 an hour.
As for taxes, you are misinformed. None of my ventures have received what you imply are sweetheart deals. There is a standard formula for new ventures in New York State which allows for PILOT taxation (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) that starts at 50% of assessed value and increases by 5% annually over ten years when the property reaches full valuation. If we build a resort whose market value is $300 million and assume the current equalization and tax rates will continue we would pay $3,150,000 annually for starters rising to $6,300,000 annually at the end of ten years. As Yogi says, you can do the math.
In addition, we will be paying about $1 million dollars a year to the county through the newly enacted hotel room tax.
Beyond that, the Belleayre Resort, as presently conceived, would inject roughly $41 million a year into the local economy – new customers for local businesses and cultural activities, new employment and entrepreneurial opportunities, sales taxes, purchases in the area, plus jobs and materials purchases during the construction phase that’s projected to last over five years. These are not just our figures. They are based on standard multiples of revenue-producing properties.
I appreciate your public stand in favor of negotiations rather than taking a hard-and-fast advocacy position for one proposal or another. To my mind, one of the highest callings of the newspaper profession is taking a leadership role for civic betterment. All I need now is people on the other side who are willing to come to the table and talk in good faith.
Dean Gitter,
Mount Tremper, NY
Editor’s Note... We've done the math. We stand by our figures and cite as their source the information in the public record provided by Mr. Gitter's company.

Dear Editor,
Although we agreed with much of what the editor of the Olive Press wrote in his most recent issue regarding the Belleayre Resort development, we couldn’t disagree more with his musing that homes might be built on the eastern side of the project instead of the proposed resort.
Such a notion, although well intended, is completely inconsistent with the recent 166 page ruling by the State Administrative Law Judge. What’s more, it makes no sense from either an environmental or quality of life standpoint for the residents of the Catskills.
Following extensive hearings and with testimony from all sides in the dispute, Judge Richard Wissler ruled that 12 major issues were not sufficiently resolved by the developer and warranted adjudicatory hearings and possible modification of the project in order to satisfy state law. The majority of those issues are specific to the eastern side of the project.
Development on the east side presents insurmountable hurdles for many reasons. Construction would be atop very steep slopes, some even steeper than the Belleayre Mountain ski slopes, down which rainwater, mud and detritus would drain. Because the developer plans to clear 25 acres of forest at one time, (although the state recommendation is 5 acres at a time), there are grave concerns about storm-water run-off, which the developer claims would be “controlled” by temporary detention basins sized for the “design ten-year storm” (six inches of precipitation in 24 hours). In that regard it is worth noting that we have had two 100-year storms in the past nine years at this location.
The Judge expressed concern for several water-related issues pertaining to the east side. He questioned if the available groundwater supply will be adequate and he noted the potential de-watering of surface waters, in particular Birch Creek, which drains the eastern side of the project.
In addition, any sort of construction on the east side would jeopardize world-class trout streams. The eastern side drains to the Birch Creek and Lost Clove Brooks, which are tributaries to the Esopus River that maintain breeding populations of trout—including rainbows as well as feral browns and brook trout. The Esopus is already classified as “impaired” by state and federal standards due to turbidity. To make matters worse, the Ashokan Reservoir, the ultimate destination of the waters flowing from the eastern site, is a terminal reservoir for downstate water consumers and must remain protected as the primary unfiltered water source for 9 million people.
The Judge pointed to discrepancies between the developer’s modeling results and observations in the field, and he noted that a model for predicting water runoff was misapplied on the steeper eastern side. The Judge also questioned whether or not baseline hydrological conditions were adequately considered in the developer’s analysis including the role of wetlands, groundwater seeps, sensitive streambed features in Birch Creek and even sensitive soils offsite, which may be impacted during heavy rain events. He was also very concerned about pollutant impacts on the local water bodies, in particular the Esopus Creek.
Finally, any kind of building on the east side would endanger some of the crown jewels of the State’s Catskill Forest Preserve. The land there is adjacent to the largest tract of constitutionally protected Wilderness in the Catskill Park, the Big Indian and Slide Mountain Wilderness areas. It acts as a buffer to this Wilderness and if clear cut, will act as a conduit for invasive flora and fauna and will over time, result in the overall decline of the ecological health of the nearby Forest Preserve. The Judge expressed concerns about the visual impacts from the Forest Preserve, not just from trails, but from anywhere on the forest preserve a hiker or camper may be. He also concluded that the developer did not adequately address noise impacts on the Wilderness areas of the east side and cited several documents produced by the DEC, including the Land Use Master Plan and the Public Access Plan, and he quoted the State constitution’s Article 14, all of which support his view that no large development on private lands near Wilderness should degrade it.
As for economics, experts testified at the State Issues Conference that the project, as currently proposed, is an economically risky venture and that a much smaller, economically viable project would be preferable from an investment perspective. Furthermore, building on inappropriate sites like the east side of this project, is a primary cause of increased service demand from local governments, not to mention increased flooding mitigation and recovery costs, all of which serve to dramatically increase the costs to the town and county, and ultimately, to taxpayers.
In summary, no kind of construction at all belongs on the east side of the Belleayre Resort - because of its location, topography, and ecological significance –it is simply not suited for development. If the developer wants to act in good faith for our community, he might start by doing away with the east side of the project as Congressman Hinchey wisely suggested (and the developer discounted out of hand) because neither science, nor the law, nor common sense will support it.
Tom Alworth, Spokesperson
Catskill Preservation Coalition (CPC)

Dear Editor,
The second [and last] term of our Presidents is always the more interesting, stressful and mystifying as opposed to their first term for whatever reason. The current "lame duck" president is no different in that he seems to be in a frenzy to install a foreign government owned company as the operator of six shipping ports located in these United States. The company is Dubai Ports of Dubai, UAE [United Arab Emirates] a geographically insignificant spot on the map but a large player in terrorism [two from UAE at the Twin Towers], laundering international money, working all three sides of the street and other games of intrigue.
I have a number of reasons why this "gift" should not be given to them, much less offered. My primary objection is based on my many years of military service. Let me describe a scene in a barracks, a messhall or on the streets of Baghdad. Three, four or more U.S. soldiers have heard for the first or third time that an arab [read Moslem] country is going to be running six major US ports on the East and Gulf coast at the invitation of the Bush administration. They look at each other in total amazement for a few seconds when one remarks, "what the #*$@ are we doing here risking our lives day and night when the Commander in Chief is giving away the store"? Another chimes in with, "my wife and kids are in more danger than we are if these people are going to control "what comes in and what goes out". What or who comes in is the "fly in the ointment". But the conversation is not about the mechanics of the port operations but rather the idea that we are being "spit in our faces". If anyone thinks that morale is at the end of the list of necessaries or somewhere in between for warriors to go into battle with, think again.
This Commander in Chief has taken on that role in such a way that he really believes he knows more than his Geneals. When Chief of [Army] Staff Shinseki spoke for more troops before going to Iraq he was dismissed via retirement. General Powell as Secretary of State advised that our troop strength should be increased for our adventure into Iraq [based on his input as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs prior to Kuwait]. WWII saw a "head of state" that ignored his generals and ended with suicide.
Then we have the real situation of who is a more a patriotic person in whatever setting; the American longshoreman or the UAE supervision and management team? The American longshoremen have thier connections and the UAE folks have their alliances. In this situation I'll go with the American longshoremen with their supervisors/managers. Certainly many of the current personnel would remain there with "Dubai Ports", but many new faces [with many adverse or subversive ideas] would be walking in and out of our shipping portals.
Now we look at the US Congress and the spectical of Peter King and Charles Schumer in the same photo op? Bill Frist and madam Hillary on the "same page"? "There's something rotten in the US" to use a metaphor.
And don't forget that when a "bar-room" dancer [a talent], ball team owner [a gift], former Governor [with luck], finally President [a mistake] prepares for retirement he wants to go out with a full "suitcase". They all do it but with a bit more grace and consideration. "Finesse" de jour.
Moral / immoral? Race? Culture? Religion? Nationality? ACLU? Who cares? "It's the security, stupid"!
Remember our most precious resource; our youth. And many of those youth are at this moment amazed, stupified, betrayed and disappointed as they serve in our Military doing what they volunteered to do. Does anyone believe that the new Iraqi government will "farm out" the port of Basra to the UAE? Go figger.
Glenn T. Anderson
Olivebridge, NY

Dear Editor,
A public hearing on dam safety was held this past Thursday (yesterday) at Schenectady Community College. State Assemblypersons Paul Tonko, RoAnn DeStito, Thomas DiNapoli, Kevin Cahill, and Aileen Gunther comprised the hearing panel. Individuals providing testimony included Congressman Mike McNulty, DEC Commissioner Denise Sheehan and others from her staff, DEP Commissioner Emily Lloyd and others from her staff, SEMO Deputy Director Thomas Fargione, Susan Savage - Chair of the Schenectady County Legislature, Mike Berardi - Legislator in the Ulster County Legislature, and several others from Schenectady County, Schoharie County, and Sullivan County.
I was particularly interested in the fact that there appeared to be only the three of us from Ulster County. Indeed, most of the information related to the Gilboa Dam and the possible effects towards the north of a breach in that dam However, Assemblyman Cahill
was very focused in his questioning on the effects to the south of continued releases through the Tunnel at Allaben and how the overflows into the Esopus affected the area both above the Ashokan Reservoir and below the Ashokan Reservoir. The concern towards the north is in regards to an actual failure of the dam, while the concern towards the south is in regards to the activities being taken to mitigate a possible failure of the dam. To the north, the effect is on the population living along the Schoharie and the Mohawk, while to the south, the effect is on the population living along the Esopus.
The hearing discussion provided greater definition of the lines of regulation and authority related to upkeep and maintenance, inspections, record-keeping, and the permitting process. One question to which I heard possible answers concerned the hierarchy of authority between the DEC and the DEP. Questions arose on whether there should be more regulatory requirements; does the DEC have enough authority; should more be done legislatively?
An important statement was made that these dams are dams for containment reservoirs; they are not dams for flood control. A line of questioning by Assemblyman Cahill related to possible future reconstruction of dams. He asked whether the DEC will recommend that dams be modified in the future to prevent or to ameliorate floods — that is, to make them into flood control dams. DEC Commissioner Sheehan replied that, when considering possible reconstruction, they will look at all dams in terms of flooding, and address first what other forms of mitigation are possible before considering reconstruction. I believe that her measured response was appropriate, at least as it pertains to our situation with the overflowing and possible flooding along the Esopus south of the Ashokan Reservoir. There are actions that can be taken in the near term to relieve or attenuate some circumstances; however, it is the long-term look that also needs attention. Ifpeople have built in the flood plain, how can communities deal with that? The answer may be not necessarily through state regulation, but rather through community planning. This speaks to the issue of safety in where one builds one’s home. This is not just a DEC/DEP issue; it is also a community planning issue. Yes, this is a long-term look at and response to flood impact.
In a current emergency, it is necessary to have a much shorter term response. The weakness demonstrated in the Gilboa Dam has been very much a learning experience by the various agencies responsible for the integrity or soundness of these structures — the integrity of construction, inspections, permitting, and maintenance. The emergency management teams have had an opportunity to see where some of the loose ends exist during a time when we have only a “possibility” of a disaster, not an actual one.
This was an important (and missed) opportunity for more individuals from the Ulster County Legislature and the Towns along the Esopus to learn directly from the involved agencies how each of them sees, and acts on, its obligations and authority and how all are attempting to work together to develop a rapid response to emergencies, but before that, to try to mitigate the actual problem with the Gilboa Dam.
Helen K Chase, Town Councilman
Town of Olive