Home - Editorial - POV - Masthead - Contact The Olive Press

 

EDITORIAL

An Alternate Reality Sets In
            The proposed Belleayre Resort has suffered a major setback. Whether it means an end to the project or not is too early to know. But to those who've been saying they believe in the review process, well, this is the process, whether we like the way it's turned or we don't. 
            So what happened? It comes down to two things: the science and the politics. On the science, Crossroads knew from day 1 exactly what they had to do to meet all state laws and DEP regulations for the project; nobody changed the rules on them. They promised that what they proposed would prove a model of environmental responsibility, and that the quality of the city's water wouldn't be threatened. They presented what they said was one of the best Environmental Impact Statements ever submitted to the state. But what they delivered now appears to be something less than what was needed, and not just a bit less. Because for all the money that's been spent on it, the problems with the DEIS are undeniably massive.
            Examples: The project's entire stormwater plan is based on a model its author says is designed for urban environments and should never have been used at all. Annual rainfall used to calculate runoff is based on data from Haines Falls, NY at 32 inches per year, instead of Belleayre Mountain itself, at 47 inches, or nearby Slide Mountain at 62 inches. Pesticide dispersal projections for the golf courses are modeled on 2 + feet of topsoil : actual plans call for using only 6 inches of it. Crossroads says adequate water is available for the project: no hydrological studies support this, and experts from both Trout Unlimited and other groups are prepared to testify that pumping for the resort will drain existing wells in Pine Hill and Big Indian, draw down the streams and irrevocably degrade or destroy the fisheries. These are just a few of literally dozens of major problems identified, from traffic undercounts to fiscal shortfalls for the impacted towns, from housing shortages to noise and construction issues, and from soil erosion to community character impacts.  
            While the city's response to the DEIS does make the document seem replete with errors that skew statistical data in the developer's favor and fail to provide critical information, DEP's wasn't the only report submitted that reads that way; there were two others equally technical and equally critical. New York State's Watershed Attorney General submitted a massive set of comments that are scientifically every bit as devastating to the developer as the City's objections. And the coalition of six local and five regional and national groups that filed for party status did so with a substantive critique of about 20 major issues, including some related to the project's SEQRA process itself. After an "issues conference" to determine legal standing of the parties are the adjudicatory hearings, a formal trial to substantiate or refute the developer's claims and conclusions, and form the factual basis for the state's eventual decisions.  
            Then there are the political issues, starting with the fact that there is no statewide constituency for the project, whereas there is one for the quality of the drinking water for half the state's population. Governor Pataki's hosting the Republican convention this summer; we think he still wants to be President one day and apart from being pro-choice, his best hope of electability is a decent environmental record which the approval of this project would jeopardize. We predict that whatever happens in the SEQRA process and with or without future modifications to the project, no decision to green-light the Belleayre Resort will be made while Pataki is in office.
            Within the watershed, however, the usual voices of overreaction have already been heard from on these events, complete with theatrical language like the city's trying to "depopulate the Catskills," and threats to withdraw from the MOA. We don't believe the watershed communities stand to benefit from doing that, any more than we believe they actually would do it over this issue on which no positive consensus exists amongst the watershed towns, and 1,200 people showed up at local public hearings to speak 8 to1 against the project. Under these circumstances we'd be surprised if the Coalition of Watershed Towns chose to risk its own significant credibility defending the work of Crossroads' scientists against the state's, the city's, and scores of independent experts from around the country. Given the specific, technical problems in the DEIS, we hope the Coalition won't be building a bonfire over this with the watershed's political capital, which we desperately need to hang onto. 
            DEP may have crossed a policy line it shouldn't have in suggesting that large new developments may be inherently inappropriate under the MOA. While the city's entitled to their opinion on that subject, the MOA is a regulatory document, not a planning tool. Yes, the MOA has its problems; it's massively under-funded for one thing, but asserting that the solutions include declaring war against the city just doesn't make sense. Because if the MOA were to disappear tomorrow -and it isn't going to - nothing at all would change with respect to the regulations all of us in the watershed live under. The only things that would change would be our prospects for better, fairer compensation, and a decent problem-solving relationship with them.
            If DEP has effectively killed the Belleayre Resort project  - and we don't know that it has -  it will have done so on the one and only legitimate basis it has for doing so: its legal responsibility to protect the City's water supply. If Crossroads has failed in presenting its case for doing that adequately, there's no one to blame but themselves. Firing off salvos at DEP, the State Attorney General's office, or the Catskill Preservation Coalition is just a distraction at this point. With the project's issues conference just weeks away, Crossroads needs to determine its willingness to rethink the project, verify its financing commitments, and decide whether its approach to the future might include a significantly rescaled version of its initial plans. That would be the kind of news we hope to be able to report... though only the coming months will tell.