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

 

Follow Up on the News

Legislative Failure

"Last Wednesday, on August 3rd, we (in the Ulster County Legislature) had a caucus and packets of information were given out as to what resolutions we would be voting on in the August 11th session," said Peter Kraft, one of the legislators who stopped the misdirection play. "At that time, (legislators) Michael Stock, Brian Shapiro and Glenn Noonan submitted the Large Parcel (option) because the New York State Office of Real Property Services (ORPS) had designated the (Ashokan) Reservoir a ‘large parcel’ and also established the equalization (tax) rate."
The formality of that designation is required before the county can apply the law which, in this rather singular case (since Ulster has been the only county in the state to use the option), divides the tax revenue from the Ashokan Reservoir in Olive and Hurley amongst other towns in the county. Residents of Olive who consider the law a swindle have formed a group to oppose it called Olive Matters (OM) and attended meetings of the legislature in recent months to voice their objections.
Kraft related that as lobbying efforts against Resolution 244, on his part and other representatives of District 3 (representing Hurley, Marbletown and Olive), continued after August 3rd, it became evident that some legislators would be absent for the vote. He observed that new packets were distributed at a 6pm caucus prior to the 7pm meeting in which the Large Parcel issue was as missing as some of the qualified voters.
"Apparently, Brian Shapiro had requested Resolution 244 be removed so that public information meetings could be held," Kraft said with a edge of restrained irony springing from the fact that Shapiro, Stock and Noonan have been denying requests from District 3 representatives for just such a meeting since March.
"Majority leader Mike Stock runs the overall county agenda and he is also a prime mover of the Large Parcel Law in the Republican caucus," said District 3 legislator Robert Parete days before the vote. "So, if his caucus follows his advice, the law will be adopted once again this year."
Parete, who said that Stock had personally promised him an informational meeting in the Spring but never delivered, felt that an open airing of the facts and documents would sway a close vote into Olive’s favor.
"I went to an OM meeting last month and those folks alone, with all they know of this law, could demonstrate how wrong it is," Parete said. "It’s going to come down to a political decision- which you would want to be an educated decision."
When the Large Parcel sponsors suddenly wanted to postpone the vote to schedule an informational meeting, Parete, Kraft and other opponents of the law realized that their adversaries had taken a head-count and saw their side short of votes.
"By rule, you cannot pull a resolution unless all sponsors agree and Hector Rodriguez (a Democrat from New Paltz who serves on the General Services Committee which sponsored 244) was not consulted and did not agree with its removal," said Kraft. "So, consequently, Mike Stock, who was acting chairman because Rich Gerentine was absent, asked the attorney for an opinion."
Although the county attorney thought it was permissible to yank the item, the Democratic minority lawyer felt that would violate the Supreme Court "one man-one vote" ruling and the first vote of the evening overwhelmingly overturned the county lawyer’s opinion. The resolution, then renumbered 245, was voted on and split the vote 14-13 with 17 votes needed for adoption. Kraft’s own head count calculated a probable 17-16 defeat of the law with all members present.
The law can rise from the dead if anyone who voted ‘no’ chooses to re-introduce it, Kraft observed and urged a cautious optimism.
"But I think it’s behind us," he added. "When I spoke to ORPS as to why no other county had implemented the law, they specifically said ‘if there’s no juice in the lemon, why squeeze it?’ Their point is- if there’s no upside gain for it, why would you want to stir all this trouble up over pennies (gained per thousand of assessment for other county towns)?"

WHY INDEED?
Why ORPS has included economically stable reservoirs in the same package as large industrial properties subject to erratic valuations since deregulation of the energy industry in the 1990s is a question which officials in Olive have been asking since they first heard that the state had passed a large parcel law. These same officials bemoan the fact that their state representatives never afforded the town an informational meeting about the law before its passage two years ago.
Senator William Larkin, the Large Parcel law’s original sponsor, sent letters to representatives of Olive and Governor Pataki affirming his view that the law should not include municipal reservoirs. When these were read to District 4 (Saugerties, Ulster and Kingston) legislator Robert Aiello days before the vote, he expressed astonishment that he had never heard this perspective before; a reaction which underlines the lack of information available to voters before last year’s vote. This time around Aiello joined Bernardi, Cummings, Donaldson, Feldman, Kraft, Loughran, Parete, Parete, Provenzano, Roberti, Stoeckeler and Zimet in a non-partisan rejection of the law.
Robert Tischler, an attorney and a member of OM, received his own letter from Senator Larkin, dated July 20, 2005. He points out that, in the letter, Larkin reiterates that the law was "enacted
with a provision that its terms could only be enacted if the local municipality elected to utilize its provisions." However, although a statement that all municipalities involved had to agree on the option was in the package of the bill voted on by the state legislature, no such phrase appears in the wording of the law itself.
Some OM members perceive in his letters a desire on Larkin’s part to re-insert Home Rule into the law, alongside a quiet reluctance to initiate the motion himself.
"It was really a mistake," Tischler said. "Certainly Larkin made it clear in the letter to (Pataki aide) Smith that the law was never intended to apply to a reservoir and the Ashokan Reservoir is certainly not something that swings in value from year to year. So, I think it was really a mistake that people took advantage of- all of our Woodstock friends, our school board, the county, all took advantage of that mistake."
While Tischler tends to blame the Office of Real Properties Services for their "mistake" in choosing what kind of property constitutes a large parcel, other OM members see a deeper design in the choices. The ORPS decision to include municipal water supplies in a system which approaches tax assessment of industrial parcels based upon their "marketability" rather than classifying them with a "speciality" resource status (as reservoirs were traditionally assessed before the Large Parcel Law), they point out, opens the door wide to privatization of the New York City water supply. They feel that, while an attempt to sell off the water supply during the Giuliani administration failed in 1995, the time for a new attempt would be ripe during a second Bloomberg term and that there are powerful corporate forces who see the Catskill system as an alluring target.


Full Republican Slate

“Turnout was light because we hadn’t known the county would be deciding on large parcel that night when we scheduled the caucus,” said former town councilwoman Cindy Johansen, the head of the currently-dormant town Republican Club who will be running for town supervisor on the GOP ticket this fall.
Nominated alongside Johansen was Peter Friedel for town justice, Chet Scofield for highway superintendent, Paula Minew for town council, and John Tisch for council.
Tisch, speaking before this past Tuesday’s August 16 school board meeting, said he had no idea he was going to be nominated for the GOP slot before the August 11 meeting, which he was unable to attend. He added that even though he was gathering signatures for an independent run for the same seat, he was as yet unsure whether he would indeed accept the Republican nomination.
“I have to sit down and do some strategizing,” he said.
Minew, who runs the Sunoco station in Boiceville, ran for town board unsuccessfully, two years ago, when Scofield, who owns Snyder’s Tavern in West Shokan, ran for the town highway top spot. Johansen also failed to win a council seat at the same time.
Although Johnson said that the current candidates have yet to discuss a platform for the November elections, when they will be facing a full slate of longterm Democratic incumbents, including Supervisor Berndt Leifeld, Councilpersons Helen Chase and Bruce LaMnda, Highway Superintendent Jimmy Fugel and Town Justice Vince Barringer, others in town said that there has been a growing groundswell of dissatisfaction with the way the current administration let the Large Parcel issue sneak up on the town despite warnings to accomplish a townwide reval, and use other means, to avoid it two, six and more years ago.
The GOP held a picnic barbecue in Davis Park with entertainment last weekend and are currently planning a strong showing on Olive Day in September.
We at the Olive Press have already started discussions with the League of Women Voters to present a full Meet The Candidates event, with debate, at some point in October.
Stay tuned.



Actual Tax Figures...

Should Large Parcel again be implemented, contrary to campaign pledges and public statements by four of the board’s seven members, Olive’s taxes would rise 9.66 percent for the coming school year, Hurley’s would go up 9.82 percent, Shandaken’s up 1.21 percent, and Woodstock’s would drop 1.70 percent.
The figures are based on a last-minute budget figure that includes last-minute revenue options that have yet to be okayed, and include either a 36.01% or 30.36% drop in the tax levy for those Marbletown taxpayers in the Onteora district, depending on whether Large Parcel is implemented or not, respectively; and either a 0.84 % or 9.74% hike in that portion of Lexington in the district, by the same equation.
The board has set aside next Monday, August 22 for a final public hearing and meeting on the subject, at which point they will vote to either implement, not implement, or make no decision on the Large Parcel law. The meeting will start at 7 p.m. at the High School cafeteria in Boiceville.
Public comments on the issue included statements from three Olive and three Woodstock board members, plus the Ulster County Legislature’s Majority Leader, Mike Stock, who said there is a strong likelihood the issue will be brought back to life on a county level before November, given that at least one legislature who voted against LP’s legislation last week is likely to request a re-vote.
Before the actual public hearing portion of the evening, which was kept to a shorter timetable than two weeks ago by Board President Dave Patterson, new trustee Maryjane Bernholz of Olive noted that the way in which Thornton had presented the budget figures and tax levy percentages seemed to place all responsibility for rises and drops on the Large Parcel issue, skewing the public’s perception away from the other variables involved in such matters.
Commentary included:
Olive councilman Bruce LaMonda noting that the Large Parcel bill was “totally discriminatory to small communities.
Olive supervisor Berndt Leifeld pointing out all that his town had done to avert tax inequities since he last he came before the school board two years before and asking that the board “please put this issue to rest for this year to let Olive do what it has to do.”
Woodstock Taxpayers’ Association organizer and former school board member Sam Mercer asking for equity, and the law’s reinstatement.
Woodstock supervisor Jeremy Wilber reminding the board of the dangers of flip-flopping on previous board decisions (“Will we be teaching Intelligent Design one year and not the next?), while asking for more board meetings in Woodstock (“After all, we do pay 35 percent of your school taxes.”
Before dropping his bombshell about re-introducing the Large Parcel issue in the county legislature, Stock suggested that if people really took issue with thelaw, “We should all take it to Albany.”
John Tisch asked what Woodstock would do if 8,042 of its acreage was submerged in a reservoir, then warned about the upcoming issue of a proposed Boiceville community septic system which “We would be paying for while all the rest of the district would be benefiting.”
Woodstock Councilman Gordon Wemp countered a Tisch assertion that the May board election served as a mandate, noting that it was the crowded field of candidates that was key to the new majority’s win.
Former board member John Hurld suggested the district should become its own taxing entity, with one tax equation for all in the district.
Woodstock Councilwoman Liz Simonson asked the board to look at a full history of tax payments and then figure out its long-term goal for such matters.
Olive Councilwoman Linda Burkhardt said that how Olive pays its tax bills is Olive’s business, and countered previous claims that the entire Large Parcel issue had been triggered by the town’s over-assessment of New York City’s Ashokan Reservoir property.
In other school business Tuesday night, the district’s new Transportation Supervisor, Maureen Stancage (formerly a dispatcher in the New Paltz school district) asked that she be given ample time to meet the demands of a new transportation safety audit requested by new trustee Cindy O’Connor and approved unanimously. She’d only been on the board six days, she noted, and needed time to get her systems up and running before tackling such an endeavor.
Similarly, an O’Connor request for a monthly Internal Claims Audit by new district auditor Monica Kim was countered by Superintendent Justine Winters, who pointed out that Kim had worked only two half days on the job so far and also needed time to adjust. O’Connor changed her request so that the board would get its first audit report in October.


A Jar Of Olives...

Last week we said good-bye to Peter Wittl, Olive’s one full-time police officer, who died much too young. More than a dozen people commented, “I just saw him yesterday, the day before he died.” Chances are hundreds more did. Peter was “out and about” stopping around town for coffee, riding the roads and waving to the citizens he knew, directing traffic and responding at a moment’s notice to any accident or incident. Everyone sensed that presence, that demeanor, that Pete was there if we needed him. He was our neighbor.
In Olive, “keeping up with the Joneses” means something different from its competitive upgrading of property. It means “keeping track of, keeping aware of” our neighbors. We are “our neighbor’s keeper” in Olive.
I, in fact, have two neighbors named David Jones to keep up with. One, the famous one in Olive, has a short stack of pancakes with real maple syrup with his eggs at the Pineview Bakery every Sunday. The other one, known elsewhere as singer David Bowie, is just as much a neighbor. Olive’s volunteer fire department and ambulance squad would respond just as quickly for both.
This column will be about neighbors. It will remind people of events coming up on the horizon such as the Republican Picnic at Davis Park on Saturday, August 13 and Olive Day at Davis Park on September 10. It will give information about people past and present. Did you know that Babe Ruth used to fish the Ashokan Reservoir with Barney Bachor and Ray Smith? Did you know that Lena Bachor had to create waders to fit the bambino’s girth by sewing a tire’s inner tube to the two legs of the rubber waders?
By now, my neighbors in Olive are breathing a sigh of tax relief knowing that the Alternate Large Parcel Option was defeated at the County level on August 11. What they may not know is the process. Since this was my first time as a spectator to this spectacle, I was amazed at how things get done there. Prior to the seven o’clock public meeting, the two political parties caucus separately. Items on the agenda get hashed over there before they get to a public forum. I believe that both sides, Republicans and Democrats, and opponents of and supporters of any issue, know prior to the public meeting how the votes will fly.
In this case, The Large Parcel Option was pulled from the agenda. Coincidentally, the resolution from Olive’s Town Board opposing this method was missing from the written list of correspondence. After an objection to “pulling” the resolution by some of the committee members, a motion to over-rule placed the decision back on the agenda. Many supporters of Large Parcel spoke to delay a vote saying that it would give more time to explore information. Opponents of Large Parcel wanted to vote since many Olivites and Olivians were present and had signed up to speak to the issue. Speakers focused on the intention of the bill according to letters written by Senator Larkin and stressed the Home Rule/Host Community right that has come up so often with casinos and developments. Supporters of Large Parcel claimed “fair and equal” taxation based on a two hundred thousand house being equal no matter where it is. The one moment of levity was the question posed by a down county legislator who asked, “Where do you find this two hundred thousand dollar house?” She went on to ask if you could buy comparable property in Olive and in New York City for four hundred thousand dollars. It allowed a few laughs on a very tense topic.
The vote went ahead with a “long vote call.” This means that each legislator gets to speak to the issue and vote audibly. It was interesting to me that the yes voters simply said “Yes” without eye contact to the audience which was seated to the right or left of the legislators. Those who voted no prefaced their vote. It was heartening to hear someone from New Paltz say that she would support Olive and that voting no was “ the right thing to do.” Legislator Donaldson, who first supported the Large Parcel, voted against it because Olive had taken steps to undertake a town wide reval.
When the final tally was taken, the vote was 14 for using the Large Parcel method and 13 against it. The audience was silent. There was an audible sigh. Then it was pronounced that the resolution had failed. Stunned, we looked from side to side wondering what had happened. Legislator Jeannette Provenzano noticed the confusion and angst and asked the acting chairman, Mike Stock, to please explain to the audience what just happened. Since the resolution needs to be passed by a majority vote, seventeen votes to support the resolution are needed. With six legislators absent, the Large Parcel Bill lacked three votes to pass. Would it have played out differently if all were present? All I know is that on this day, Olive earned some more breathing room to resolve this issue that will haunt us each and every year until it is found illegal or amended.
Since this is the first column, I invite my neighbors to share their stories with me, and I will share them with others in our community of Olivites and/or Olivians. Which is it?
You can email me at clamonda@hvc.rr.com