Guess Who's Back?

            The CWT is distinct from the Catskill Watershed Corporation, , following the 1997 Memorandum of Agreement brokered by New York Governor George Pataki between New York City and the Coalition for Watershed Towns, which had been formed by town supervisors from throughout the New York City watershed as a means of fighting New York over its proposed watershed regulations on a legal basis in 1995. The CWT has continued under the direction of former CWC board member Pat Meehan for the last eight years, holding monthly meetings and occasionally providing larger support to Catskills towns facing issues bigger than they feel they can handle alone. To date, that has included chiming in on the 5-year reassessment of the MOA three years ago, and a lot of advice that has not beget action.
            According to Meehan, Gitter met with Coalition directors in an unpublicized meeting in the Delaware County village of Margaretville last Friday, May 14. On Monday, May 17, the Coalition then passed resolutions in support of the project, and said they would ratchet up their ongoing dialogue with New York City Department of Environmental Protection officials by threatening lawsuits and trying to bring the Governor's office in to mediate a compromise that would allow developments such as Gitter's in the Catskills.
            The Coalition was referring to official comments submitted by the City DEP to the state Department of Environmental Conservation for consideration in an official Issues Conference, which will determine areas for adjudication over the coming months, as well as to unofficial statements made by DEP Commissioner Christopher Ward that he could not see the city ever permitting Gitter's project as presently proposed.
            They also referred, at their official monthly meeting at CWC headquarters, to similar comments from the federal Environmental Protection Agency as "overstepping bounds" and promised to censure the federal government for stepping on "Home Rule" as well.
            "It's our part to provide a counterweight to all the environmental groups that have lined up with the City and EPA against this project," CWT attorney Jeff Baker said of the need for "drastic moves," and referring to a Coalition of 11 national, state and local environmental groups that has formed to seek full party status at the upcoming hearings.
            Membership in the project-specific Catskill Preservation Coalition are  the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, Trout Unlimited, Theodore Gordon Flyfishers Inc., Hudson Riverkeeper, Friends of Catskill Park, Zen Environmental Studies Institute, Inc., the New York Public Interest Group (NYPIRG), Catskill Heritage Alliance, the Pine Hill Water District Coalition, and the Catskill Center.
            The Issues Conference everyone is referring to begins May 25 with discussion of procedural matters, wastewater issues and mining permit issues; continues on May 26 with site visits by Administrative Law Judge Richard Wissler and his staff; and finishes its first round on May 27 with discussion of traffic issues. The conference continues on June 8 with discussion of visual and noise impacts; talk about community character issues and alternatives to Gitter's plans on June 9, and discussion of possible impacts to the Catskill Forest Preserve, wildlife and habitat, and general forest conditions on June 10 and 11. The current round of conferencing is currently set to finish up June 23 to 25, with discussion topics currently scheduled to include various water issues.
            All conference dates and scheduling is open to change, and many feel the entire process could be extended into the summer.
            Last week, Gitter and his consultants submitted hundreds of pages of new Draft Environmental Impact Statement material answering problems raised by the City DEP and other agencies to date, causing considerable concern from project opponents who claimed that they were changing the playing field mid=game.
            But the environmental Coalition's attorney, Marc Gerstman, said this week that such moves are simply "par for the course." "Projects evolve," he added, saying he had sent on the changes for review immediately.
            Meehan, long-time supervisor of the Greene County town of Windham, said that he had recently held a meeting with Ward to go over issues including a long list of brewing complaints from the last few years, as well as the Belleayre Resort project. Those included DEP policing jurisdiction, which Meehan said both parties would take to the courts to decide; city land acquisition policies, which he felt were resulting in the DEP buying too much; hunting and snowmobiling rights on city lands, which he doesn't feel New York appreciates as "an historic use;" and a whole set of issues brought up in private calls from Gitter and his staff to Coalition members.
            The latter were reflected in the resolution passed Monday night, which read, in part'
            "Whereas portions of the DEP comments on the Crossroads Ventures DEIS on the Belleayre Resort are beyond the original scope of the DEIS, unreasonable by insisting the project eliminate all golf courses which are the major component of the project, and are an infringement on the authority of local municipal comprehensive plans, regulations and their consideration in relationship to SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) and therefore a direct attack on Home Rule; and whereas the DEP comments also represent an emerging pattern of economic development restrictions by: inaccurately asserting that the 1997 Watershed Regulations prohibit post-development water quantity and quality loadings from exceeding pre-development levels; by further falsely asseting that the MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) sought to prevent growth 'on steep slopes or at locations outside of population centers on large tracts of undeveloped land with mature forests;' and by exaggerating the environmental significance of potential additional growth from the project; and whereas these actions are a threat to the intended spirit of the MOA whereby water quality protection and economic development 'are not inconsistent'' Now, therefore be it resolved, that the Coalition of Watershed Towns gives notice of its opposition of the DEP DEIS comments that use the SEQRA process and non-water quality-related issues to impede development and considers this a serious breach of the intent of our partnership and a continued obstruction to economic development."
            Further comments ask the state DEC to reject all of the DEP's comments for overreaching.
            Asked whether the CWT was serious about suing New York City over the Belleayre Project, Meehan spoke about there being many issues and added that the subject was discussed at the "executive session" attended by Gitter on May 14.
            "It's how we got where we are today," said Meehan.
            "We haven't seen what they passed yet," said City DEP spokesman Ian Michaels on Tuesday. "However, we would be hardpressed to understand what their concerns might be. We are fulfilling our responsibilities under the MOA and to half the people in the state."
            Calls to Gitter went unanswered.
            Olive supervisor Berndt Leifeld, the only official Ulster County representative at both meetings (Shandaken supervisor Bob Cross Jr. having no official role in the CWT as of now), questioned whether fighting the City, and by extension the federal EPA, might not break the Golden Egg that's brought millions in economic development funds to the region in recent years. He also asked if it wouldn't be prudent to allow individual towns to discuss the resolution before passing it, noting that his home, and neighboring Woodstock, would likely go against such a move.
            In the final round, Leifeld went along with the rest of the CWT on both the resolution and the move to apply for party status, even though the deadline had passed a month ago. Baker said he would argue that the CWT could not have known it would need to be involved until the City's comments were released the day before the deadline.
            "Well, you don't look all that enthusiastic," Meehan said to the Coalition board at meeting's close. "Let's all see if we have some fight left in us now'"

  Cleaning Elections...

          Perhaps not so oddly, Irene Miller of New York Citizens for Clean Elections (NYCCE) used the same 'pie in the sky' metaphor in referring to the bill when she later spoke of weaning office-seekers from the corrupting influence of tit-for-tat campaign donations. The phrase, which originated in the lines of a song by early 20th Century folksinger and labor organizer Joe Hill ("Work and pray, live on hay/You'll get pie in the sky when you die"), may have become a cliche for "unattainable dream" but Miller, who had a hand in getting a copy of the bill to Leifeld and other political leaders in New York, firmly believes otherwise.
            "It really is happening," Miller observed of the relatively simple idea of providing campaign funds to those who'd care to run for office on the basis of their ideas and abilities rather than the amounts of money they can raise. It's a voluntary system wherein the acceptance of public means you cannot use any private money at all- even your own. "Five states have already passed these kinds of bills and the plan is to have it happen on the state level in various states. Once there's enough momentum going in the states, we can get them to pass the one that's already been introduced in the U.S. Congress."
            Support in the House and the Senate was growing rapidly after it was introduced in the latter by the late Paul Wellstone but eroded after his sudden death. The hope is that a grassroots groundswell at the state level will revive interest in leveling the financial playing field for aspirants to leadership. Miller's organization is part of a national movement of local organizations affiliated through an umbrella group called Public Campaign that was founded in 1996 in Washington, D.C.
            Before NYCCE was formed two years ago, Miller was active in New York City where, in 1997, Citizens' Action of New York collected more than double the
required amount of signatures to get a Clean Money referendum on the ballot. Mayor Giuliani countered by exercising his prerogative to introduce Charter Amendment on the separate issue of campaign financing reform - which knocked the Clean Money proposal off the ballot. Such "campaign reform" bills, which change scarcely anything on the Big Money-Big Power front, have thus far been a successful strategy against grassroots efforts.
            "Otherwise, New York City, today, would have full public funding for candidates who refuse private funding," Miller noted. "The idea, at the time, was to have it happen in New York City before going after Albany but the Mayor defused us."
            Strong bills, covering all state offices, have been passed in Maine and Arizona, Miller notes, while North Carolina, New Mexico and Vermont have partial Clean Money options for their legislatures. Massachusetts dropped their bill, she adds, because too weak a funding mechanism was written into it to prevent the legislature from refusing to publicly fund candidates.
            In a video NYCCE is circulating to elected officials, Bill Moyers speaks with officials who have used the Clean Money system for two election cycles and finds it is working even better than expected.
            Quite a few CM candidates ran in 2000 and a majority of them won, Miller observes. The numbers doubled in 2002 and ex-incumbents who had opposed it while in office tried the new system and swore they would never go back to the old one. Embracing the logic of "he who spends the most, owes the most," they relished the freedom from begging contributions and the release to serve the will of the voters rather than the lobbyists.
            "It's going along faster than I thought it would," Miller enthused. "We have chapters in Woodstock, Rensselaerville and New Paltz who work with other organizations statewide. All three of those towns have passed resolutions of support, as have Schenectady, Tompkins County, Ithaca and Saugerties.
Workshops are pending in Esopus, Berne, Marbletown, Rosendale and other towns."
            "We are totally grassroots because we get very little help from the mainstream media," (who fatten their coffers with hundreds of millions in campaign advertizing funds each election cycle), she said. "The Freeman and some other papers have covered some of our activities but the big media pattern all over the country is to ignore us."
            Miller said Leifeld was attentive and receptive and that the resolutions help because they come from representatives of the people. It's not a 'pie in the sky' thing but definitely do-able, she insists. It is a foundation for taking back the representation lost to the interests of massive corporations and volunteers to help it along are welcome.
            "It is, to me, the fundamental reason we are in such terrible straits with our health care system, the environment, the educational system and everything else that we, as citizens, want but are deprived of by money lobbies," she said. "It's a matter of educating the public and galvanizing
opinion for a massive campaign to make sure legislators in Albany are aware of how much this is wanted by the voters.
            In the N.Y. Assembly, the Clean Money bill is numbered A3453A and the same bill is designated 3440A in the NYS Senate. NYCCE's new website is under development at NYCCE.org and contains links to other organizations throughout the state and the country.

Budget Defeated!

At the high school on Tuesday, a clutch of West Hurley parents, who will be losing their school in the coming year, was gleeful at the outcome of the day's voting.
Town by town, the proposed budget received 188 yes votes versus 353 nays in Shandaken, 304 yeses to 696 nays in Olive, 379 yeas versus 449 nays in Woodstock, and 319 yeses against 529 nos in West Hurley.
The specter of the large parcel issue drew a much larger-than-usual electorate in Olive this year. The proposed closing of the West Hurley had a similar effect on voting turnout in that part of the district.
"It's a big mistake for people to vote down a budget as an expression of dissatisfaction with the board because it only hurts the students,"said retiring Superintendent Hal Rowe, who finishes his years of work at Onteora on July 1.
Budgets also went down in 2000 and 2001.
                        The budget recommended by the school board and administrators represented a projected average tax increase estimated at nine percent. Cost increases came from hikes in required contributions to employee retirement funds, whose investments are performing poorly due to last year's stock market decline; rising health insurance costs; contracted staff salary increases; and the need to restore repairs and upgrades cut from last year's budget. Augmenting the financial stress, Governor Pataki has recommended adding only $12,000 to the state aid package, as compared to last year's increase of almost $1 million, while state mandates for special education and standardized test performance also go up. The closing of the West Hurley school is estimated to save a total of $781,000, although parents at the budget hearing noted that $200,000 of that amount, accounting for the salaries of four teachers, will be eliminated due to the elementary enrollment decline in any case.
            The alternative budget with a lesser increase of 4.3 percent eliminates the same items as the six percent budget, as well as cuts in academic intervention for students in danger of failing, elementary summer school, afterschool programs, and field trips.
            If both budgets are defeated by voters, the district will be forced to a contingency budget with a maximum increase of 2.76 percent. In addition to the cuts listed above, probable reductions will include the middle school assistant principal, more remedial programs, the high school G.E.D. program, sports, the enhanced nutritional lunch program, maintenance and secretarial staff, and all equipment purchases.
            Recent school board meetings have been stormy, with a group of West Hurley parents repeatedly accusing the board and administrators of mismanaging the district and spending excessive amounts in per-pupil costs, particularly in the area of special education, which is slated to go up by 12.8 percent or almost $1 million. Business administrator Chuck Snyder has promised to present, in June, a detailed comparison of Onteora budget figures with those of nearby districts.
            As her qualifications, Carey had cited six years' experience on the school board, participation in the Woodstock PTA and shared decision-making teams, and her previous work as a teacher.
            New school boardmemberDavid Patterson said he had combed the budget and come up with $1.2 million in cuts that would allow the West Hurley school to remain open without eliminating any programs. With the drop in enrollments, he suggested that fewer administrators would be needed, and he questioned line items that referred to textbooks for West Hurley students and for directors of secondary and elementary education.
            Patterson, a father of seven, is a communications products salesman who has spoken out against the closing of the West Hurley school and has accused the administration of fiscal mismanagement and poor communication with the public and with staff. His goals are to make sure the consolidation of elementary schools is properly handled, institute long-range planning, and repair divisions in the community.