Frozen Meals

Perhaps you saw this editorial in the Daily Star today. In addition to being over the top, it's inaccurate and misguided. Here's the letter I wrote I response:

I'm an Otsego County Rep and a member of the Health and Education Committee, chaired by Don Lindberg. I also agreed to moving to frozen meals for older citizens who receive senior meals. If you had sent a reporter to our committee meeting yesterday (Jan. 17), you would have saved yourself some embarrassment.

“Asinine” is a strong word, especially when you have not assembled the facts. About 11,000 Otsego county citizens are over 65; about 450 of them – about 4% - receive senior meals. So we did not “betray our senior citizens.” Of those 450, about 150 have been getting frozen meals for a number of years, most since 2009. Only seniors in the Rt. 7/Rt.28 corridors (and some around Cherry Valley) have been getting daily hot meals since then. Seniors on the frozen meal plan have expressed great satisfaction with the frozen meals in anonymous surveys. And the Office of the Aging Advisory Council, representing seniors from all over the county, approved the move to all frozen meals – and got called “asinine” for their efforts.

Non-mandated programs like the senior meals face cuts year after year, especially from those who feel that not raising taxes is the greatest of all goods. We managed the save the program itself by moving to frozen meals, and we did not have to close any of the congregate meal sites. Other counties have chosen to simply leave isolated parts of the county out altogether, since a hot meal must be delivered within two hours of being produced, or it must be thrown away.

We still bring meals to Otsego County seniors who need them, and we don't have to. I think that's quite an accomplishment.

The editorial was especially cruel to County Rep Keith McCarthy, who made a strong case to keep the hot meal delivery, and who was the only Rep who did not vote to approve the switch to frozen meals. In other words, he agreed with the Star, but they flayed him anyway. This kind of attack was unnecessary and, frankly, bewildering.

At almost every Board and committee meeting, we work hard to make the right decisions about this kind of thing. It is important that journalists covering our work actually gather information before blasting away, pro or con.

Seward II

As you have no doubt read, the second annual Economic Summit, again hosted primarily by State Senator James Seward, took place Thursday morning in the big auditorium at Foothills. About 175 of us spent four hours learning some of the finer points of economic development. One thing I learned is that economic development is, apparently, done – or at least taught – in the wider world by white males. Just sayin'.

The Star article did a pretty good job of describing the program, and the message was clear and consistent through four hours of speakers. There are about 20,000 economic development entities in the US, and maybe 500 projects with over 100 jobs looking for a site each year. Talk about competitive. There are lots more smaller projects, but not near enough to go around. The morning was about how to get on the list, and stay on it.

My summary:

• You need to have your sites shovel-ready. This means that you've arranged things so that the new company can come in and complete their facility in one building season. Since permits often take longer than that, all the work with the permitting and regulatory agencies has to be done before anyone even shows up to look at your site. No site in Otsego County is shovel-ready, and so right at this moment, no site in Otsego County can get on a list. Pony Farm is close, because it was shovel-ready at one time, but permits need to be updated, and regulations have changed, so work needs to be done. The Richfield Springs Industrial Park won't have water until the town and village agree on a water district, which they haven't been able to do in the past (agree, that is).
• You need a strategic plan. What are your assets? How can they be leveraged into an attractive site? Which assets do we need to protect? What business sectors do our assets fit best with? How will the municipalities work together to make this happen? Etc.
• We can't do it alone. We need to collaborate with regional development bodies, and statewide as well. We need to include the private sector. We need to know people, and they need to know us. Much of the morning was spent describing the opportunities in the high tech sector, especially nano-tech. Those projects are all associated with a SUNY facility, and we need to begin collaborating with them on a much higher level.
• We need one person to call. Anyone interested in a site in our area will not call around, and right now, that's what it takes in Otsego County. The IDA, the OCDC, the County Board, the County Department of Economic Development, the Mayor's office, private real estate agents, and lots of other individuals and organizations are busy trying to promote Otsego County. It doesn't work that way, apparently: we need one person, one phone number. That's not impossible, but we need to do it.
• You need fiber-optic broadband capability, if you're looking for the high-tech sector.

Lots of work to do, but it's becoming clearer, and that's half the battle. I've asked to be on the smaller group that Senator Seward is creating, tasked with taking what we know and moving forward. More to come.

Vote!

As I said here, two years ago, “Let's go down to the Foothills and vote. Everybody wins when people vote.”

As I said in my constituent letter, it's easy to stay home this time, with three of the four County Board candidates in the City unopposed. That would be a mistake. The Treasurer race is about as important as it gets, and it's important to many (perhaps most) of us on the Board that Dan Crowell be returned to a job he has done well. The Treasurer does a whole lot more than count beans – he's the county leader in fiscal planning, policy and responsibility. He needs to be an outstanding communicator and an exceptional teacher. Dan has done all those things, and he needs to continue doing them.

Will he be called up again by the Army? Noone knows. But if he is, Russ Bachman will fill in for him in the same way he has for much of 2013. Russ knows what he's doing and is not afraid to communicate his ideas and opinions, even if they're not popular. Either way, we get solid, experienced, responsive and responsible fiscal management at a time when we can do with nothing less.

All city wards vote from 6AM to 9PM in the Foothills atrium.  Remind your friends!

Ingraffea Video

A while ago, I promised you a link to the video of Dr. Anthony Ingraffea's presentation at Foothills last May.  It wasn't available to the general public until recently, apparently, but now it is.

It's worth the time to watch it all - not the same old stuff.  With some ideas for alternatives. 

Enhancing the Future

There's predicting thefuture, and then there's enhancing it.

You may know that I am pretty intently focused on comprehensive planning as a way of making progress in areas we think are important. Here's a way to do that: the Department of Health's 'Otsego County Health Priorities Survey.' Help us* decide where to put our resources by telling us what areas you think are most important.

So click the link and learn about health issues in Otsego County, and then tell us which ones should have priority. The results have a direct effect on policy.

Thanks!

* - I say 'we' and 'us' because the Department of Health is overseen by the Health and Education Committee, of which I am a member.

Predicting the Future

It's budget time again, and assembling any budget is an exercise in predicting the future. In Otsego County, the future – specifically, 2014 – will present some interesting changes, which will make our budget-making task both easier and harder.

The 'easier' part is that we'll be seeing some one-time revenues, and we'll see some major costs disappear permanently. The disappearing costs will disappear when the Manor is sold; we're hoping that this happens during 2014. The process is moving well, and this may come to pass. We will spend about five million dollars on the Manor this year – that's above and beyond all reimbursements the Manor receives from Medicaid, Medicare, private pay, etc. They are taxpayer dollars subsidizing the Manor, and next year it will probably cost more.

We won't save the whole five million-plus next year; just the part of it we would have spent after the day that it is transferred to the new owner. In addition, there will be savings from services the county provides – building maintenance, payroll, IT – which won't need to be provided any more. There will be some legacy costs – health insurance for retirees, interest on the bonds, for instance – but the fiscal difference will be enormous.

Interestingly, the actual payment we receive for the Manor will not have as massive an effect on the budget as we might think. At the end of 2014, we will owe a little more than 15 million dollars on the original bonds that funded the Manor – our mortgage, so to speak. No matter how much we sell the Manor for, we will be required to put that 15 million-plus into escrow, and we will pay the yearly principal from that fund, until 2021, when we can pay it all off if we desire. Until then, we'll pay the interest from the general fund. If we sell the Manor for more than what we owe, that excess is ours to put into the financial system. But we're not planning for that, because it is too soon to estimate what we might get when the Manor is sold.

The one-time payments involve MOSA. When MOSA is dissolved, the assets will be split up. Otsego County will, by agreement, get 40% of the liquid assets (things like equipment and real estate will probably be distributed by common sense, rather than percentage). Depending on how we progress with solid waste in our County, this money may or may not have a significant effect on our finances next year.

The 'harder' part, of course, is that we don't know how any of this will shake out. The current version of the budget does not reflect any of this: revenue projections don't include the MOSA money, and the expense side includes the whole-year cost of the Manor. However, Acting Treasurer Russ Bachman has recommended that we essentially skip the grueling work of cutting positions and services to get to the point where we're under the tax cap (1.66% this year, not 2%) and have about 16% of the budget in the fund balance. He's willing to move some money from the fund balance to make up the current deficit (which changes every day as adjustments are made), assuming that, because of the Manor and MOSA issues, we'll have a surplus at the end of next year.

That's a risky approach, and the Board is mulling it over; in some ways, it sounds like magic. And the NYS Comptroller's office, which is measuring the fiscal stress of municipalities, will take notice of this reduction in the fund balance, because that's the kind of thing they take notice of. However, if everything works out, this will be a very temporary thing, and all will be well at the end of 2014.

If everything works out. Even though the vectors of unpredictability are generally good, it's making me a little uneasy to predict the future with these loose cannons involved. Sometimes, unremitting bad news can be comforting, because it's so predictable. 

UPDATE:  After I finished this post, I went over to the Daily Star site and read this article about Treasurer Russ Bachman's suggestions.  Nothing much to add to this, except that the raises for the non-unionized managerial and confidential staff (M&C) will be more controversial than dipping into the fund balance.  I'm for it - they haven't had a raise in years - but I have to be a little more convinced that the money is - and will be - there.  We'll see. 

More MOSA, Again

This is a somewhat ignorant and borderline-hysterical editorial from the Daily Star, suggesting that, as its title pronounces, “post-MOSA planning is long overdue.”

The story of Otsego County and post-MOSA planning is long and complicated.  I'm going to try to sum it up concisely. A couple of years ago, the Board passed a resolution signalling its intent to shape a public/private system to address solid waste. That was quite a while ago.  This resolution makes it clear that conversations and research had been going on a long time previous to the time when this resolution was developed. In fact, that direction was the recommendation of Hans Arnold, our consultant on solid waste. The Board had engaged Mr. Arnold to help us with – all those many years ago - “post-MOSA planning," among other solid waste issues.

If the decision had been to let the private sector take over the solid waste system, then there would have been little need for planning: we'd just let the biggest dog sweep in, put the locals out of business, and enjoy their monopoly. This is an approach that I'm especially unwilling to see come to pass, and apparently the majority of the Board agrees with me (or did, when the resolution is passed).

The demise of MOSA has been long and unnecessarily painful, mostly due to the intransigence of MOSA itself and, to a lesser extent, Schoharie County. And Montgomery County only recently truly came on board for an clean and equitable result. Otsego County – really, Board Chair Cathy Clark and Representatives Linda Rowinski, James Powers and Keith McCarty, with the invaluable assistance of Planning Directors Terry Bliss and Karen Sullivan – has taken the lead from the beginning, working hard to find the path toward a new and better way to handle our trash.

Even so, it was only recently – with the last couple of months – that progress in defining the end of MOSA has been made. Right now, things seem to be falling quickly into place, with all three counties (finally) working together. Before this point, more detailed planning was impossible, because we didn't have any idea of what the post-MOSA environment would look like. For instance, Otsego County did not know if we would end up with the two transfer stations (in Cooperstown and Oneonta), and even if we did, whether we'd retain any of the equipment and machinery associated with those stations.

The New York State Legislature has to pass a law allowing the Authority (which the Legislature created) to be dissolved – and this hasn't been done very often, at least in recent history. Apparently, folks from all over the state are watching our progress, as we invent a new way to deconstruct an Authority which has been established by the Legislature. This job isn't easy.

And post-MOSA planning – meaning long, intense conversations among people who have a history with MOSA and solid waste – continues, as it has for a number of years. We still retain Hans Arnold as our consultant; in fact, in a three-hour meeting yesterday that was mostly about post-MOSA planning, the Solid Waste/Environmental Concerns Committee recommended extending his contract (here's a link to the minutes of all the SW/EC meetings this year). Options are being developed and considered, now that we have a better idea what we'll be working with. We are building this rocket ship as it is taking off, and believe me, we're working hard on the post-landing plan.

We All Need to Get Out and Vote

How much difference a month can make!

The 'expensive blitzkreig' I mentioned in the previous post, which caused all thousand-plus signatures on Russ Bachman's petitions to be examined under a microscope (unprecedented in recent history), resulted in enough disallowed signatures that Russ will not be able to run at all. You probably read about this in the Star.

And so Dan Crowell has reorganized his plans for the future again, and has agreed to run for the seat he's held for four years. He has no control over when, or if, he is ever called up again for military training; he has been engaged in special-ops training, and the security clearance for that kind of thing can take any amount of time, including years. That's why he had to leave on relatively short notice in February.

Dan is tremendously able Treasurer. He's not only fully qualified to fulfill the job description, he is also an articulate and committed teacher. This quality is essential because we, the County Reps, are not qualified to fulfill his job description. The County financial system and budget processes are unbelievably complex and convoluted, and it's very important that decisions made at every point be made responsibly by a fully informed Board. In my time on the Board, Dan has led us through these processes clearly and carefully. He has been available for consultation on any County financial matter, and has worked energetically to streamline systems and move managers and legislators toward a more long-term, responsible view of County services. “Hometown Oneonta” did a good job recently of describing his work as Treasurer, in an almost-endorsement (I'd link to it, but their website is a mess).

So it's still as important as ever to get out and vote. It's important for Dan to remain the Treasurer of Otsego County, because noone has done as good a job as he has for a very long time. Although the County is in good fiscal condition, times are still very tough and the work of planning for the future in a wise and responsible manner is essential. I, for one, want it to be Dan that helps us move through this time to a (hopefully) more prosperous future.

Treasurer

Dan Crowell is the County Treasurer, of course, and you've probably read about his deployment and the confusion regarding his decision not to run for re-election.

Dan is a captain in the National Guard, and his unit was deployed for six months of training in North Carolina at the beginning of February. Russ Bachman, former fiscal manager of the Meadows (the county's nursing home before the Manor was built), has been filling in for him, full time, as interim Treasurer.

We all passed petitions for Dan's reelection as a Democrat in June/July, since he hadn't returned yet. For reasons I'm not clear on, Dan's decision not to run again (because of increased active-duty obligations) did not come until shortly after it was too late to withdraw from the ballot.

So Dan will be on the ballot this Election Day, regardless of what happens. However, the next Treasurer of Otsego County will be someone else, and how he is chosen still seems to be up in the air.

The Democrats in Otsego County are fully behind Russ Bachman, who is running a strong campaign. Many Republicans, including some on the Board of Representatives, also support him. Because Russ had no reason to run when the designating petitions (for a place on the Democratic/Republican tickets) were being signed, he cannot be on either of those ballot lines. We circulated more petitions during the independent petition drive (July/August). This is when most candidates work to get themselves on a second line on the ballot (my second line will be Sustainable Otsego). Russ will be on an independent line.

So far, so good. We have a very strong candidate, with whom most of the Board is comfortable. If this were all there were, our job would simply be to encourage voters to vote for Russ, and not for Dan.

However, the Otsego County Republican Committee had a different idea. They have lined up behind Cooperstown Village Treasurer Edward Keator Jr., and assisted him in a countywide petition drive to get him on an independent line, as well. Again, so far, so good: everyone should have a chance to run for office.

However, the Republicans have mounted an expensive blitzkreig on Russ's petition signatures, scrutinizing – for the first time in living memory – every signature in a county-wide race. Recently, the Board of Elections completed its judgement in this regard, and declared that Russ had enough valid signatures to run. But the Republicans have taken the issue to court, hiring lawyers to argue, it seems to me, that the will of the people – as articulated by a sufficient number of citizen signatures validated by a bi-partisan Board of Elections – is somehow unfair to the other candidate. To argue, it seems, that the only fair way to elect a Treasurer is for no one else to be allowed to run against Keator.

This massively expensive process has just started and it looks to be a long and unpleasant one. When it's done, there will be a two-man race (Dan Crowell vs. Keator) or a three-man race (adding Russ). If Dan is elected, and declines the position, the Board is able to appoint a interim Treasurer (as they did with Russ), in this case, until the next election. There's a good chance that the Board will use that vote to retain Russ, who we have worked well with since he started.

So here's the take-away: VOTE. Three of the four City Reps, including me, are unopposed, and that tends to stifle turnout in an off-year election. However, this year, it really is important to cast your ballot, because the race for Treasurer is a real race, and makes a difference. Russ Bachman knows how to do the job, and knows how to work with the Board, and it would be a shame if he weren't allowed to continue a job well-done.

Update on the Manor

Just a short update on what's going on at the Manor.

As you probably know, the Manor's administrator, Ed Marchi, resigned this summer to take on a similar job in a nursing home in Schenectady County. Larry Di Cesare, a licensed Nursing Home Adminstrator , was hired on a part-time basis soon after. State law requires that someone with that license supervise the facility, although it does not require a full-time administrator. Given the short time that Otsego County will be responsible for the Manor, a part-time administrator was a good option. In addition, and unrelated to Marchi's departure, the Manor Committee had been discussing the position of fiscal manager for the Manor, a position which had been vacant for some time and, given the increasing complexities of Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, and other financial pressures, needed to be filled. Internal promotions of (very competent) long-term staff, including Maureen Imperato, named as full-time Supervising Acting Administrator in July, were accomplished in a relatively short time.

Still with me? It got more complicated at the end of July, when Mr. Di Cesare had to take a leave – six months, unpaid – for a truly serious family medical emergency. This happened only a few days after Mr. Di Cesare started as part-time administrator. Subsequently, the Manor Committee appointed Kurt Apthorpe to serve as Interim Administrator-of-Record, the position Mr. Di Cesare had been hired for. So far, that is how it stands at the Manor.

Response to the Manor sale RFP (request for proposals) has been encouraging; so far, the LDC has received nine letters of intent from interested parties. This kind of letter is kind of a place holder; it does not obligate the organization to actually submit a bid for the facility. But it is good news that so many nursing home operators – including the Bassett organization – have expressed interest.

A Long, Interesting Summer

It's been quite a while between posts, I see.  I've had a long, interesting and very busy summer.  Sorry to be out of touch, at least through the medium of this blog.  I'm working on a number of posts and will have them up in the next week or so.

As Promised, More on Newman

I make no claim to understand the details of tax policy, PILOTs, or economic development in a rural region. However, the PILOT negotiated for the Newman Hillside Commons up above Blodgett Drive still doesn't make sense to me.

I understand that industries choose sites for facilities wherever the environment is most conducive to profit, and tax breaks go a long way to create that environment. And I understand that the IDA is legally empowered to negotiate tax breaks. So far, so good.

Here are the things I don't understand:

• Why Newman needed a massive PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes, or a tax break) to site a very specialized facility next to the already-specialized facility (SUNY Oneonta) it was specifically designed to serve. Sure, without a big enough tax break, they could go to Delhi instead, but – please. Delhi is much smaller, and, really – they could do both. Would they really give up on SUNY Oneonta forever if the PILOT was smaller?
• Why was the PILOT so big? A PILOT is a gift, tribute provided to a large corporation which is going generate profits by building a facility in your town. The Newman project will be particularly profitable. Again, were they going to walk away from all that because the PILOT was too small?
• According to the Newman representative, the project will create six (6) permanent jobs. Are six jobs (three which may not be local) worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax breaks?
• Does anyone else get their back up when they hear the phrase, “Well, that's the way it's always done”?
• Why did the IDA give the City the authority to negotiate the whole deal? The answer provided by our Economic Development Department is that the IDA generally gives the negotiating authority to the municipality which is affected by the construction and the resulting facility. So far so good, except for one effect: taxes. As a result of the negotiation, done only by the City, the school district and the County lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes; their share of the PILOT was 68%. That's a pretty big effect. As a County Representative, I'm a little unhappy – OK, a lot unhappy – that I knew nothing about this until it was a done deal.
• Why did the IDA vote unanimously to approve the deal after a two-hour-plus public hearing during which they heard almost unanimous opposition to the PILOT and to the project itself? Why didn't they consider renegotiating the deal? What in the world was the public hearing for?
• Why wasn't there an economic impact statement? Hundreds of students will live in the project when it's done – where will they come from? Unless it's filled with the overflow from an growing student body (which noone was able to show was the case, least of all the SUNY Oneonta administration), it will come from the student rentals in the City. Given the lack of an effective plan to encourage transition of center city houses to single-family occupancy, it's hard to think of a way that this can't have a negative impact on the neighborhoods I represent.

When I first saw those yellow yard signs protesting the development, I rolled my eyes and said, “Oh, please.” I've come to understand the problems, however, and I haven't heard the solutions. I agree with Celeste Brown Thomas of Hudson Street, who, after showing how this project could – but doesn't – reverse the school district's continued staff cuts, said: “Negotiate a better deal.”

Too late.

Even More MOSA

As MOSA begins its long slide into oblivion, after Montgomery County's decision to remove itself from the Authority at the end of the agreement next year, the County Board continues to look at possibilities for a post-MOSA landscape in Otsego County. To sum up:

• The end of MOSA should result in the distribution of assets among the three counties.
• The Northern (Cooperstown) and Southern (Oneonta) transfer stations should revert to Otsego County ownership.
• Nothing in the law requires Otsego County to be in the solid waste business in any way.
• There are no landfills in Otsego County (or, really, even very close to Otsego County).

So the easiest and cheapest (for the County's budget) solution, post-MOSA, would be to sell the transfer stations to a private hauler and wash our hands of the whole situation. A reasonable scenario would be that the largest (by far) hauler in the area, Casella Waste Systems, Inc., would buy the transfer stations and use their economy-of-scale advantage to consolidate trash at the stations and make regular trips with large trucks to distant landfills. Casella owns 13 landfills in the northeast; the nearest one is just outside Ithaca.

Being a private corporation, whose one and only purpose is to maximize profits, Casella would be strongly motivated to put smaller haulers out of business, either by restricting access to the transfer stations, or by setting a fee structure for use of the stations which would be unsustainable for a smaller company.

Russ Smith, of Smith Disposal, came to the Solid Waste and Environmental Concerns (SWEC) Committee last week, and painted pretty much the same picture. Smith is one of the biggest haulers in Otsego County, but not close to being in the same league as Casella. Smith argued for a new contract with MOSA, because the result of an unrestricted market would be the demise of operations like his, and the loss of local jobs.

I'm going to be contacting some other local haulers this summer and asking them how they look at the post-MOSA picture. I'll let you know. Until then, I'll continue to attend the SWEC meetings, and enjoy the coffee and donuts they always seem to have – courtesy of the Casella Waste Systems representative, who attends every meeting.

Economic Development in Oneonta?

The Newman Hillside Commons project is in our district, so I've tried to keep track of events. The Commons will be a high-rent, privately owned dorm complex adjacent to the SUNY Oneonta campus, up near the top of Blodgett Road.

I have a lot of concerns about this project. I began thinking that I didn't know enough about the underlying systems to weigh in, but as I've learned – or not learned, in some cases – I'm increasingly unhappy about it.

First and foremost on the minds of District residents, I'm sure, is the question of our single-family houses which have been converted to student rentals. Most of us live within a block or so of one or more of these houses. I have one next to me and one across the street; they have always been good neighbors, probably because the owners invest time and money in the facilities and make it clear what kind of neighbors their renters need to be. Others haven't had good experiences, but worst than that, of course, is the effect of a vacant house on a neighborhood.

There are some important data missing in this particular conversation: is there, or is there not, a shortage of student housing either on or off campus in Oneonta? Neither side has presented any compelling evidence. There are, apparently, empty dorm rooms on campus; there are clearly empty rental houses in town. So where will the hundreds of Hillside Commons tenants come from? City landlords say they'll come from their rental houses, which will then join the ranks of the vacant. Proponents of the project point to SUNY Oneonta's growth over the last few years, and seem to leave it to that (even though SUNY Oneonta has no plans to expand). At the end of the day, the question of where the tenants will come from remains unanswered.

We've all seen projects like this: big money comes to small town, meets a market need, completely disrupts the current market, and sends the revenue out of town. We might call it the Wal-Mart effect. Not only is there no concern for, or acknowledgment of, the impact on existing businesses, services and quality of life, there is an entire language developed to divert the conversation from those disturbing topics which could delay the project if they had to be answered.

So the question remains unanswered. A related question, raised during the public hearing regarding Hillside Commons, also remains unanswered: Why wasn't there an economic impact study? Given that it will create few permanent jobs (six, according to the Newman representative, and perhaps only three of them local), why should we jump right into this without knowing if it will do more harm than good?

The answer that Mayor Miller and all but one of the Common Council will give us is that it will substantially increase tax revenues for the city, school district and county. More on this issue, which is also more complex than it seems, in a future post; this one has gone on too long already.

Election Season Already

It's been a while since the last post, I know. Some things are brewing, others are history. MOSA and economic development are the hot topics at the moment, and there is much to come on both fronts. I hope to have more to say about both soon.

Right now, a lot of effort is being directed at the November election. Campaigns are being planned, parties are maneuvering for position, candidates are hitting the bricks. All 14 County Representatives are up for election, as they are every two years. As far as I know, I will have no Republican opponent; someone may choose to run on a third party line.

I've been out on the bricks myself, collecting signatures on the petition which will allow me to run on the Democratic ticket. As in the past, I have enjoyed chatting with those of you whose doors I have knocked on, and I really appreciate your interest in the process of democratic governing, and in the issues facing Otsego County specifically.

I needed 34 signatures on my petition for inclusion on the Democratic ticket; I got over 50, partly because it's always nice to have more than you need in case you make a mistake, and partly because I enjoyed getting out and meeting you again. I'll be out collecting signatures again this month, as I have been endorsed by Sustainable Otsego, and will be running on their ticket as well as the Democratic ticket.

Sustainable Otsego (SO) isn't a political party; it's a grassroots organization dedicated to sustainable practices in all areas of life. It's been a leader in the anti-fracking movement in this region. In 2011, SO became certified to endorse candidates for office, and currently it is endorsing five County Representative candidates, including myself.

I certainly agree with most of what SO stands for; I believe that sustainability is the right choice not only for the environment, but for many other facets of our lives: economics, food, healthcare, transportation, energy policy, etc. In addition, a sustainable approach may be absolutely necessary in the longer term, as climate change and diminishing hydrocarbon reserves force us into difficult choices.

Speaking of the long term, one of the things I especially appreciate about SO is that they – actually, we – have developed a platform for Otsego County candidates to run on. This puts them out ahead of the Republicans, who have no platform, and the Democrats, who are working on one. Here it is:

A TEN POINT PLAN FOR OTSEGO COUNTY   

• Support Home Rule to protect our communities and the rural lifestyle of Otsego County.
• Promote farm-to-market agriculture.
• Preserve Otsego County's pure water, our most important asset, for residents, businesses, and agriculture.
• Find low-interest credit for local businesses and homeowners.
• Aim at net zero-energy practices and renewables to save money and reduce greenhouse gases.
• Explore joining scores of other NYS communities who have municipalized their electric grids to lower costs for homeowners and businesses. 
• Bring a state-of-the-art broadband internet system to everyone in Otsego County. 
• Establish a county-wide sustainable comprehensive plan. 
• Ensure that local tax policies do not increase income inequality. 
• Support a sustainable Town of Oneonta Southside Municipal Water Project to increase business and tax revenues.

You can read a lot more about SO and sustainability in general at their website: sustainableotsego.org

What Will Work?

As you are no doubt aware, economic development consultant Sandy Mathes spoke with the Board of Reps last Wednesday about economic development in general, and developing Otsego County in particular. He repeated his message to business leaders in Oneonta a few days later, and the Daily Star summarized it here.

I found some of his thoughts compelling – actually, most of them – and any concerns about his message that I had were the result of my reluctance to government jumping into an alliance with business, to the benefit of the latter. I don't believe that government exists to serve business (“The business of America is business”), but to serve the people. Sometimes serving business achieves this goal, and sometimes it leads us further from it. Also – I'm a little concerned about this, but I'm not exactly sure why.

Overall, Mr. Mathes told us that we need to market ourselves wisely, consistently and aggressively. Can't argue with that. He also, when asked, emphasized that long-term planning and prioritization was crucial. First the towns, villages and city: then the County should assess those plans, see what commonalities they have, see who wants to opt into aggressive economic marketing and who doesn't, and then create a county plan designed to take everyone into consideration.

A comprehensive plan like this – a long-term, time- and energy-intensive process, involving everyone with a stake in our county's future – has long been a goal of mine. I think it's essential for any organization to know what its priorities are, and what goals it's pursuing. When that organization represents citizens, it's doubly important. There's not going to be any substitute for aggressive marketing if we really want to address economic development, but if we don't have general agreement about what that means, and where we want to go with it, we'll be tripping over each other from the very beginning, and we won't get anywhere.

Tax-Free NY

I just returned from a presentation by Robert Megna, Director of the New York State Division of Budget, at SUCO's Morris Hall. He was here to present the Governor's Tax-Free NY initiative, an attempt to create new jobs by carving out tax-free zones within or adjacent to SUNY facilities statewide (this includes community colleges). The idea is that any business that was new, or expanding, or diversifying, and was thereby creating new jobs, could locate on or near a SUNY facility and enjoy ten tax-free years. In the words of the Governor's press release: 

Tax-Free NY will entice companies to bring their ventures to Upstate New York by offering new businesses the opportunity to operate completely tax-free – including no income tax for employees, no sales, property or business tax – while also partnering with the world-class higher education institutions in the SUNY system. 

That's a pretty good deal. The idea behind it is that companies can take advantage of the proximity to a SUNY campus. This, the thinking goes, would be beneficial in a number of different ways, but especially in that there would be easy access to a well-educated workforce. Each campus would establish their own plan to implement this program, and would choose companies to participate based on this plan. Retail and financial product companies, according to Mr. Megna, were probably not ideal for this plan.

There is much more to come on this. There are lots of questions, of course. Companies can locate on campus or 'adjacent land,' this phrase does not, apparently, mean what you think it means: 'adjacent' can mean one or two miles away (for instance, downtown Oneonta). 'Adjacent' land that these companies occupy becomes state land, and is taken off local (for instance, city and county) tax rolls.

Initially, this sounds like a kind of inverse unfunded mandate for city and county:  instead of requiring us to spend more, it requires us to raise less revenue. When I asked Mr. Megna how the affected localities would join in the process and have a say regarding their lost revenue, he didn't, frankly, think that this was a very important issue. Of course, if the program is wildly successful, and incubates great economic growth, it won't matter. 

Mr. Megna used the old Empire Zone process as an example of an economic stimuls plan that didn't work (it was too easy to game the system: companies could benefit from the tax break but not create any economic benefit), and, on a number of occasions, noted that the Tax-Free NY planners had learned from the Empire Zones's mistakes.

Let's hope we're not listening to another presentation, in another ten years, about a new plan that has learned from the mistakes of Tax-Free NY.

It's A Different World

I've been thinking about economic development lately, since Carolyn Lewis, our Economic Development department head, gave her notice last month. There's general agreement that, as we look for a replacement for Carolyn, that we need to take a much more aggressive and collaborative – and expensive – approach to economic development in Otsego County. Carolyn agrees, and has made some suggestions for the Board to consider, going forward.

I'll have more to say on this soon, probably in posts about Sandy Mathes's presentation on Wednesday, and the Governor's 'Tax-Free NY' proposal, which eliminates many taxes for new jobs created on or 'adjacent to' SUNY facilities. 

But all this (as well as graduation season) got me thinking about my older son, who has almost finished a bachelor's degree at a good private school in NY. One semester before graduation (he was scheduled to graduate this December) with a degree in Computer Science, he left school and took a job in San Francisco, as the first employee of a well-funded internet startup. He's making about what I made when I was first promoted to district-wide adminstrator. 

He's got a list of idols – role models – in his field, as most of us have had at one time or another. What's interesting about this list is most of the names on it – starting with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs – never finished college. The guy he's working for – the guy who founded the company and secured the funding – is 20 years old and did not finish college. The same is true about the many successful, busy, happy geeks he has run into in the month since he's been there.

So we have a huge, successful, vibrant, creative, entrepreneurial subculture creating great wealth and changing the culture of the world with tecnology, and many (most?) of them did not do what, for generations, we have assumed you had to do to create world-changing technology.

How does that inform us when we start to ask about economic development in Otsego County? The Governor has connected job growth in New York to the SUNY system, and he may be right (more on that soon). But are we making any purposeful forays into the (admittedly unfamiliar) world of 21^st century technology, where the rules we've used for centuries have been left behind? The world has changed, friends. We need to change with it or be left behind. Dylan was right: “He who isn't busy being born is busy dyin'.”

Ingraffea on Fracking

If you weren't at the Foohills production center on Thursday night to listen to Dr. Anthony Ingraffea talk about methane gas, you were, apparently, the only one. Everyone else was there – the house was packed, standing room only. It was a fact-dense, but user-friendly presentation with slides that lasted a little over an hour, followed by Q&A. He began with data and pictures describing what kind of well density is necessary to profitably exploit the Marcellus or Utica shales (very dense, with sprawling well-head infrastructure); then he laid out the data regarding pipe leakage in wells, and gas leakage during drilling and transport (about 5%-8%), thus putting to rest the 'clean energy' myth, especially considering that methane is dozens of times more effective in trapping heat in the earth's atmosphere than carbon dioxide. He ended with a proposal, which his team will present to Governor Cuomo whenever the Governor has a moment, setting forth a plan to move energy production in New York State away from hydrocarbons and toward renewables, perhaps reaching 100% clean energy production in 30 years.


Sound crazy, this last bit? As crazy as the billions-of-dollars infrastructure explosion and large-scale exploitation of the environment and the political process necessary to get only 20% of the methane out of the Marcellus in a profitable manner? The more I learn what it takes to do the latter, the more I think the former is the rational choice.


Anyway, if you did miss the event, it was recorded, and I'm working on getting a link up here on the blog. Until then, you can watch Dr. Ingraffea's presentations on YouTube: just type 'Dr. Anthony Ingraffea' in the YouTube search bar, and take your pick.  Here's one I've watched to get you started.



By the way, I'd love to includ a link to the Daily Star's article about the presentation... but there wasn't one (online, at least). Where were you guys?

MOSA Future

Actually, there's no future for MOSA, at least in Otsego County; it seems that that bridge has been burned. But what's the future of solid waste disposal in Otsego County?

There are a number of suggestions regarding how to extract ourselves cleanly, and without unnecessary expense. Simply asking for a re-do, or taking MOSA to court without objective evidence of the true value of the properties, don't seem like good alternatives. The former has already been done, and MOSA has been particularly unresponsive. The latter will be expensive and uncertain – and Otsego County will, essentially, be paying 40% of MOSA's court costs, as well as all of ours. There may be a way to let the free market determine the properties' value; more to come, if that turns out to be a fruitful avenue of investigation.

More important than all this, at least in the long run, is the question of whether Otsego County should be in the trash business at all. There are those on the Board who answer this with an emphatic “No!,” and those who feel that leaving it all to the free market would encourage monopoly and put a lot of local trash haulers out of business.

A year or so ago, the Board indicated its interest in pursuing a combined public/private approach, where the County retained some control over the transfer station and established fees which leveled the playing field. If this were the result, fees would be designed so that the County would break even. Our consultant in this area, Hans Arnold, has told us that this approach would be economically feasible.

He has also said, when I asked him, that he didn't think that completely privatizing solid waste disposal in Otsego County would mean the loss of any jobs or the demise of any small businesses. But there was a mighty long pause before that answer.


So that's where we are at the moment. We actually have to look at all the options, talk about them, and decide relatively soon, so that we can proceed with the complex process of extracting ourselves from MOSA and replacing it with something – or nothing.

Karen Sullivan, the Director of the Planning Department, will be preparing a training for those of us who don't have extensive knowledge and experience in this area. I'll pass on what I learn, and, as always, please let me know what you're thinking.

“Our Community Salutes”

The Board met in regular session today, primarily to approve the membership of the LDC that is tasked with selling the Manor. One other piece of business was conducted: we approved a resolution to join municipalities across New York State in proclaiming May 18, 2013, as “Our Community Salutes Day” in Otsego County. This designation honors High School graduates who have enlisted in the armed forces.


The resolution itself is full of high-flung language, asserting that they are “patriots” and speaking of “the selflessness and courage they are demonstrating in the defense of their country.”


I've spent the best part of 40 years working in the public education system and a whole lot of that time was spent working with High School students (and their families) who, for many reasons, were not going to get to go to college when they graduated. Many of these kids pursue acceptance in the military in the same way that valedictorians pursue acceptance at Harvard – and I think these kids may get the better deal. The structure, training and travel they'll experience will certainly have a substantially positive effect on their lives.


So I joined the Board in extending my “support, gratitude and best wishes,” and I do wish them all the best. And I also wish all the best to those who won't have days to honor them.


I've never quite understood our need to focus all our patriotic attention on those who serve in the military. Patriotism is more than preparing for, and fighting wars. There are millions of other Americans (including graduating High School students) who serve their country in other ways, making the country strong and resilient – a better, safer, healthier place to live. Law officers and emergency service personnel come immediately to mind. Their jobs are always as dangerous, and often more dangerous, and they serve selflessly and honorably. Teachers and nurses also serve serve their country, and have a significant effect on the lives of those Americans – young and old, sick and well – who they serve. The list can go on: people who devote their lives to service of some sort, in jobs that are hard and demanding and often thankless, and don't make them rich.


So Godspeed and God bless, to those kids heading off to the military this summer, and thank you. And also to all the others who look forward to a career in service to their country.

MOSA Past and Present

It seems that the next big challenge for the County Board is going to be the series of decisions that have to be made about MOSA, the regional solid waste authority, named for its three county members: Madison, Otsego and Schoharie.

Otsego County has been trying to extract itself from MOSA since before I came on the Board, mostly, as I understand, because the contract which binds the counties together requires that each provide a fixed tonnage of trash (GAT, or guaranteed annual tonnage) to the MOSA landfills in Montgomery County. If a county does not achieve its GAT at the end of the year, it pays a fee commensurate with its shortfall; this is why you get a solid waste user fee most years – to pay the GAT shortfall.

Trash tonnage, it seems, has not lived up to expectations, at least in Otsego County. In addition, those who are informed about these things assert that there are many haulers who are not bringing their trash to the MOSA landfill, for economic reasons. This is illegal, as a result of Otsego County's membership in MOSA, but it's hard for landfill operators to determine where a particular load of trash came from. And it's not in the interests of an out-of-MOSA landfill operator to turn away a paying load of trash because it came from the wrong county. Thus, the GAT remains unfulfilled year after year.

The economics of solid waste disposal are complicated and I don't intend to lay them out in detail (at this point, I probable couldn't, anyway). Long ago, when sanitation (or lack of it) was a major health issue, local governments became involved for the good of all. Today, it's not necessary, and in New York State, no local municipality of any type is required to be in the solid waste business (although every municipality is required to have a law regarding separation of recyclables). MOSA made sense decades ago, when it was established, but it doesn't now. 

To add to the confusion, the MOSA administration has been completely unwilling to cooperate in Otsego County's extraction. Our county owns 40% of MOSA, and so is entitled to that proportion of the assets. MOSA took a year and a half to do an appraisal – an epic feat of foot-dragging – and then apparently over-valued the two transfer stations in Otsego County (Oneonta and Cooperstown). Since these two facilities would revert to Otsego County once we left MOSA, their value would be subtracted from the full cash value of MOSA, so it's to MOSA's advantage to over-value them.

And finally, the MOSA agreement which binds the three counties together in the regional authority expires on April 30, 2014. If there's one thing that the Board seems to agree with, it's that Otsego County will be out of MOSA on May 1, 2014, if we can't get out before. And what then?

This post is long enough; I'll comment about the possible future(s) of solid waste in Otsego County soon.

Home Rule

Fracking is a highly political issue, as is any issue that involves a conflict between economic and environmental forces, and in case we've forgotten that, the NY Court of Appeals recently upheld the home-rule actions of the Town of Middlefield, here in Otsego County, and Dryden, between Cortland and Ithaca. As I understand the court system, the only way to change this decision would be to appeal to the US Supreme Court.

So municipalities (in New York State, at least), have the power to decide what kind of industry they will allow within their boundaries. Sounds like a simple position, and it certainly makes sense, but politics does funny things to sense. You may remember the County Board vote supporting home rule last year, when a large minority of the Board voted against the ability to choose for ourselves. 

But now that there's some stability to the notion of home rule here in NY, the rules, so to speak, change. Some have argued that the decision gives Governor Cuomo some political breathing room to approve fracking, ending the years-long statewide moratorium, since municipalities now have the right to decide otherwise.  Others suggest that the gas industry will be less willing to develop drilling strategies in an region that is a checkerboard of differing regulations.  The decision will certainly take some of the pressure off state regulators who, if the NY experience is anything like other states, will not be given the resources to ensure any kind of quality oversight.

I think it's a win for democracy – the kind of democracy that most of us participate in and feel comfortable with: local government. Neighbors and fellow-townspeople will get together to decide what's best for them. They'll know their town, and take their local knowledge into account. They can change their mind if they want. 

Gas and oil companies will survive and flourish, regardless. I have little patience for the argument that we can't make it more difficult for corporations to do their jobs. Inflexible companies will wither, and resilient companies will make adjustments and succeed – just as they have for centuries. Under no conditions is it acceptable to relinquish our autonomy in order to protect the profits of ultra-wealthy international corporations.

The LDC Vote

Today at the Board Meeting, the Board voted to establish a Local Development Corporation and transfer the ownership of the Manor to that organization. The County retains a firm grip on the finances and operation of the Manor, and the LDC's sole purpose is to sell it to... well, we hope to the bidder who represents the highest quality of care in their current facilities.

I offered an amendment to the resolution which separated the creation of the LDC (which would remain in the resolution) and the transfer of the Manor (which would be struck from the resolution). There was a fair amount of debate on this amendment, but it failed, with only John Kosmer and myself voting for it.

I had originally argued that the LDC's mission should include submitting their final choice to the Board for a vote (before the Department of Health process started), so the Board could take responsibility for the choice, like many of us had promised to do. It turns out, according to County Attorney Ellen Coccoma, that this process would trip us into a 215 situation – it would be seen as Board action to sell the Manor, and as such we would have to sell to the highest bidder, full stop.

I'm still not convinced that the 'highest responsible bidder' means what many think it means – 'responsible' equalling 'able to pay' – but I had to go with our attorney's advice, given the time constraints.

The amendment that I did offer – separating the creation of the LDC from the transfer – was an attempt to do the same thing: to allow the Board to vote on the LDC's final choice of buyer. I offered the amendment for two reasons. First, as you know, I'm concerned about the Board giving up its right to take responsibility for the final sale. This would allow the Board to transfer the Manor to the LDC for sale after the successful bidder had proven that it had a high-quality track record. Second, I thought that we needed to have a public debate on this, if for no other reason than to honor those members of the public who have spent as many months working on this issue as we have. I think it's important to note that in all the public comment sessions and public hearings on this issue, only an infinitesimal percentage of those who participated were in favor of the sale and/or the LDC. The LDC/transfer separation was a legitimate solution offered by many of the public, and today it got a hearing.

The final vote on the full resolution was 11-3, with Keith McCarty, John Kosmer and myself voting against. I think we need to sell the Manor – there are no alternatives left, it seems – but I am unhappy with the LDC process, especially the fact that it takes the responsibility from those of us who were elected to exercise that responsibility.

Welcome!

Welcome to all who found their way here through my recent constituent mailing.  This is my primary method of communicating with all of you.  I hope you'll browse my thoughts and actions on the Board through these blog posts, and leave comments when you have something to say.  I take comments very seriously, and I'll respond to as many as possible. 

Of course, you can also contact me at the e-mail address link at the top right of the blog.

Hope to hear from you!

LDC Solution Suggestion

I've been reading a lot of detail about the legalities of LDCs lately, as they relate to how the Board will handle the sale of the Manor. It'll all be over, one way or another, on Wednesday, and I've still got the same concerns about this path as I did when I last wrote about it.

However, I've got a partial solution. It turns out that the Board can write anything it wants into the LDC's establishing document. It can configure the Corporation, and its relationship to the Board, any way it wants.

So – what if the LDC's mission was to write and distribute the RFP (request for proposals), vet the bidders, and make a choice among them – and then present that choice to the Board, which will make the final decision?

Harris-Beach has argued against the Board making the final decision regarding the successful bidder, mostly because, in politics, things change. Every Board member is running in November, and we already have two members who are not seeking reelection. We could have a whole new approach come January 1, 2014. 

This is a valid point. However, real democracy is often messy and complicated, and, if we're doing it right, change is actually a reflection of the will of the people. But even more important, the timeline for this sale suggests that a successful bidder will be chosen well before December. After that, the bidder will have to be approved by the NYS Department of Health. That could take a year or more. But the Board approval that I'm suggesting would take place after the LDC has settled on a successful bidder, but before that bidder begins the DoH process.

At this moment in time, a majority of the Board is willing to hand off the Manor decision to an LDC. Why wouldn't we be willing to affirm that decision – and take responsibility for it – with one vote?

Head Start in Oneonta

You've probably heard about the sequester cuts in funding to Opportunities for Otsego for Head Start, which it administers. The news made the front page of the Star, above the fold.  Head Start money doesn't go through the County (as much Federal money does), so I'm just a spectator to this tragedy. Job losses, families in unnecessary turmoil.

I'm also a citizen of a democracy, so I wrote our Senators and Congressman. Here's what I wrote:

My anger and frustration with the sequester came to a head yesterday when I discovered that, due to the reduction in Federal grants funding Head Start, Oneonta Head Start will have to lay off eight people, and deny day care service to thirty two families, starting on July 1.

My wife and I have worked with Head Start, in a number of ways, for decades. These are people who work hard for pitifully low wages, and do a lot of good for a lot of kids. For the most part, these folks are holding on the best they can, economically. Those who are laid off will struggle with unemployment, and many of those families will fall (or be pushed?) into poverty. The families who depended on the high-quality day care will have their lives transformed, and not in a good way. There is no job-creating going on here – just the opposite.

Congress and the Administration created the sequester with the thought that fear of the consequences of really draconian and irrational cuts would motivate them to cut a deal to avoid the pain. The truth is, the sequester is designed to focus the pain on the most vulnerable, the least resilient, the least able to adapt and adjust.

This is not the way we serve our constituents.  Please exhibit the courage and leadership necessary to right this wrong.

I sent that off on Wednesday; today I read that Congress has manged to find a way to lessen the impact of the sequester on themselves and other middle and upper class Americans. This morning, I wrote to our representatives again:

You have found a way to shuffle sequestered funds in the Transportation Department so that Senators and Congressmen, and other middle and upper class Americans, don't have to wait as long at the airport.

Now it's time to find the same flexibility in the Department of Health and Human Services so that the Oneonta Head Start doesn't have to lay of 8 people and leave 32 families without daycare starting July 1.

It's important for you to understand that, here in the real world, extraordinary action on the behalf of the privileged and lack of action on behalf of the vulnerable and disadvantaged looks just like that.

Please do the right thing.

If you have a moment, please get involved. As usual, many voices can make it work right.

Centralizing Processes

This probably takes the prize as the most boring title of any of my blog posts. I'll be brief and, I hope, concise.

I've been able to attend the regular meetings of a lot of different committees in the last few months (in addition to the ones I am assigned to). On a number of occasions, there has been discussion of applying processes and procedures in a consistent manner; usually the conversation came up because, somewhere, they were not. There are rules and structures that govern most of what we do, from providing services to holding meetings to personnel issues to use of County funds to grant applications, and a hundred other processes that cost us money, time and effort when they're not done right.

I'm a former administrator, so I understand that we're all human, and that dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's can be a frantic and crazy-making burden, and that, frankly, sometimes an organization works better when you've found a way around some of the less useful rules and processes.

However, an organization – and especially a municipality – works much better, with much less waste, (and fewer lawsuits) when there is someone responsible for seeing that all (or at least most) of the details are done right all the way through the organization. In Otsego County, it seems that this is not, often, the case. Department heads need to be experts at everything, not just their department's functioning, and that's not fair, because that's not what they were hired for.

This is all in support of the concept of a County Manager, who would be responsible for all these systems which are not central to the mission of each department, but must be done right. For these reasons alone, a County Manager's work could very well pay for the position. And the County would be more effective in doing the work it's responsible for.

More on this as time goes on.