Council urged to move forward with battery plans

 Town council members are weighing a balancing test which, if passed, will allow county officials to ignore local zoning as they build a battery storage facility near the incipient emergency services center alongside the Thruway, on the old Plesser property along Paradies Lane.

Several meeting attendees urged the test to be deemed passed. Arguments included updates to the state fire code to address battery concerns, the need for storage to support expanding renewable sources of energy, and the amount of time it will take to get this project completed after the balancing test is considered.

Council member Sean O'Sullivan was dissatisfied with the plans provided for review, and others respected O'Sullivan's experience reviewing such paperwork. At the Nov. 5 meeting appeared Paul Williams, on behalf of Key Capture Energy, the corporation contracted to build the facility.

There will be a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes scheme sought out, but Williams said that there has been a request to county industrial development agency board members to get buy-in from town and county officials.

"Well, that's refreshing," remarked Supervisor Rogers, a longstanding critic of these schemes for that particular reason.

IDA plans most significantly impact property tax, but that's not a factor for county-owned land. Sales and other tax breaks can also be offered.

There is no zoning for battery plants in the town, which would make local review challenging at best. Council member Brown was eager to move forward at this meeting, but town attorney Will Frank thought it premature to make a decision without first agreeing that this would be classified as a type 2 action under the state's environmental quality review act, and thus not require further review.

Brown floated the idea that it might be considered an unlisted action in regard to town review, but having two different designations is not possible under state law. Finally it was agreed that simply reviewing the environmental assessment form should give the needed answers. The hearing was continued to Nov. 18, and this might be put to bed on that date.

 

In wake of latest Nearpass report, council takes further action against officers

Town council members are redoubling efforts to discipline two police officers who have each been on administrative leave for over a year, following a number of twists and turns in their cases. Jerome Milton was believed to have stalked an ex-girlfriend, culminating in writing a fraudulent ticket for the woman's new beau; a jury found Milton not guilty over the summer. Channon James has been accused of sleeping on the job, among other infractions, but an arbitrator tossed that case out.

These two cases have been held up as evidence that the police chief, Matthew Sutton, is targeting officers of color for stronger discipline. Behind the scenes, that tension mounted in prior years when two council members accused the chief of racial bias, and were in turn hit with a complaint that they were the ones profiling a white man. The first report prepared by attorney Kate Nearpass found those accusations baseless. At the beginning of this year, council members commissioned a second investigation to determine if Sutton targeted those two officers due to the color of their skin. While Nearpass pointed out issues with the departmental culture, the attorney was unable to establish that race was the deciding factor. That's largely because examples of white officers getting a slap on the wrist for similar misdeeds all took place under prior police chiefs. Sutton could just be taking the job of enforcing rules more seriously, and these two were the first caught up in that.

Many residents aren't buying that explanation. They want to know why James and Milton remain on administrative leave months after their cases concluded, each in the officer's favor. The cost of paying these two not to work is mounting for taxpayers, and the consequences for each of their careers is also adding up. At the Nov. 5 police commission and town council meetings, residents got some answers.

For one, this newest Nearpass report will be released in all its redacted glory. Only the executive summary was put out up until now. It will first be reviewed to take out references to individuals and legal actions.

What was more of a shocker was a unanimous decision to pursue disciplinary charges, with consequences up to and included termination, based on the reports received.

Supervisor Rogers made that motion and, after explaining to council member Brown that there was no need to vote on leaving the executive session in which this was discussed, it was approved by all present, along with Lauren McPadden, who attended virtually.

"I'm disappointed in all six of you," said Edgar Rodriguez, referring to the five elected officials and the appointed deputy supervisor. The former council member said that this current cohort has been manipulated by Sutton. "Many of us were hoping you'd put an end to this" by removing Sutton as chief.

A former commissioner, Diana Francis warned, "I don't think this matter is over," noting that it appears "clear that African American officers were qualified," but that in hiring Tyler Pece as sergeant rather than promoting Milton, the civil service list was bypassed. Francis also recounted declining an invitation by Rob Lucchesi, the prior chief, to sit down with stakeholders about an unspecified issue, which Francis now believes are these allegations of racism. The former commissioner expressed relief for not legitimizing this process by becoming involved.

Kari Bunce, another former police commissioner, thinks that this is prolonging disputes that appeared to have clear resolution: an arbitrated decision for James, and "judicial resolution" for Milton. The fact that this was not the end is "concerning," both for trust in the agency and the cost to taxpayers. Bunce encouraged council members to "step back" and "reassess" their positions—which, it should be noted, as based on information that has not been released publicly.

Tara, who did not provide a second name, is "even more disgusted now," and said that this decision is evidence of institutional racism. Council members were encouraged by Tara not to be scared to confront this issue.

"No one is more blind than those who will not see," said Maggie Veve. 

 

Consolidation creeps closer

 

As the first vote on the fate of the village in over a generation approaches, final preparations are coming into place and voters are going to have to sit with the information they have as they make their decision.

Several public sessions are planned:

• Oct. 13, 2 p.m., Woodland Pond
• Oct. 20, 6 p.m., Lecture Center 108, SUNY New Paltz
• Oct. 22, 6:30 p.m., community center
• Oct. 20, 4 p.m., Van Den Berg Hall, SUNY New Paltz

Post cards a "situation"

Mayor Alex Wojcik reported at the Oct. 7 village board meeting that the promise of post cards has become complicated. Trustees had committed to spending $1,000, believed to be half of the total cost to send an informational piece out to all residents, but it seems that delivering to all addresses in the more rural outer parts of the town will be much more expensive. The total, as reported to Wojcik by the deputy supervisor, will be $4,361.03. Trustees have declined to pay half of that total bill on the recommendation of the village treasurer, who advised that $83,323.69 has already been spent on consolidation. Instead, they are committing to getting post cards out to village residents directly.

Trustee Allen Ross, a supporter of consolidation, agreed with that assessment but appeared torn. "The problem is that I am using words like 'we' or 'they,'" Ross said, and that's a dichotomy the trustee feels would disappear if the village layer of government were to be folded into the town. However, Ross recognized that trustees must represent their own constituents, and that paying the additional posted to reach residents outside beyond that remit was not appropriate.

The NYCOM position

Wojcik also read from an opinion prepared through the New York Conference of Mayors, which while linked in the agenda, was not accessible to without authorization. According to the mayor's recounting, the opinion suggests that consolidating governments with similar population bases—such as two rural populations, or two more dense areas—would be more likely to be a smooth process.

"That's the United States," said Ross, who rejected the suggestion that that made it a bad idea. Among the examples Ross offered was being able to have a voice in things that impact the viewshed from the village, or the urbanization of the downtown, for those who do not live in those particular areas. Moreover, Ross noted that given the concentration of residents in what's now the village, it appears unlikely that their democratic voice would be silenced if only one government ruled the community.

To Wojcik, the density of the village makes services like water and sewer possible, and that's why the village exists. Ross countered that the town has millions of dollars that had been held in fund balance, and that money might be more equitably distributed throughout the community without the us-or-them mentality imposed by the presence of two governments.

Funding

Supervisor Rogers has frequently spoken about "counterintuitive funding models" that exist when there's a village in a town. Wojcik has raised some of these to support the preservation of the village. While state grants to improve leaking sewer lines rely on the income levels in census tracts—because they draw on federal money—not all grants use the same formula, the mayor explained. Some funding relies on the independence of the village as an impoverished jurisdiction, and the mayor anticipates that if the village goes away, some sources of money do as well.

The labor question

Village employees are worried about the future, and that's been enough of an argument for many to plan to vote against consolidation. Union members have rejected it formally, and employees who have spoken on condition of anonymity have expressed a lack of confidence that Rogers will come through with a promised contract that preserves everything they now have under a new government. As has been noted many times, there's a lot that must be trusted to future town leaders to ensure should consolidation occur.

However, the supervisor is working toward negotiating a contract that captures the best features of the current town and village agreements. When asked for comment, Rogers acknowledged having said in the past that this would be needed for this vote to happen at all. It's too late to stop the vote now, but the supervisor did say that if such an agreement is not reached, then Rogers would no longer support consolidating the governments.

Another issue that lingers, though, is that of shop leadership. On the public works side, employees have been under a single appointed superintendent for decades, and would be moving to a structure overseen by someone who is elected—and may or may not be good at managing. Rogers has indicated that eliminating the elected highway superintendent could have been included in this plan, but was left out to minimize its complexity.

Financial and administrative employees in the village are now overseen by a clerk-treasurer who gets high marks all around, and who will likely retire. The town's comptroller continues to operate under a cloud, as having worked on the town board to create that as a civil service position, resign to take the job, only to fail the test. It was then restructured not to be a civil service job at all in order to retain the same person.

Village employees of all stripes appear uneasy with who they might be working for after consolidation.

Fire control

The consolidation plan calls for the existing fire company to be transformed into an entity that would handle fire management contracts, much like is done with the rescue squad. The fire chief has said that the decision was made not to evaluate that proposal unless consolidation is a sure thing, because it's going to result in high legal bills that taxpayers aren't going to cover. Voters will have to make their decision without any outside experts weighing in on this question.

a new news plan

This blog has been inactive for a dozen years, for the simple fact that I, its creator and primary author, have been writing for New Paltz Times and its successor, Hudson Valley One, covering important meetings and helping residents know what's happening in the community instead of sharing my own opinions.

It's not easy to get anyone to buy a paper these days, and the folks at Ulster Publishing are always looking for more ideas to make their publications more appealing to the paying public.  There has long been an idea that covering local meetings isn't very important, and recently my assignments have pulled me away from that beat.  I will continue to write for Hudson Valley One, but that doesn't mean I agree with that assessment.

For that reason I am dusting off this blog as a temporary place to provide coverage of stories that are important to those in New Paltz, including the upcoming vote on consolidation.  For the moment, this is what to expect:

1. I will be applying journalistic standards as best I can, mindful that without an editor it might not be as polished.  This means focusing on what others say or write, and facts that can be confirmed, rather than deliberately injecting my own viewpoint.
2. Comments will, for now, be open, and welcome.  The amount of readers is going to help determine if this experiment continues, and in what form.  Comments are one way to help gauge that.
3. If there is enough interest, a new site will be launched to cover topics that are not being addressed in Hudson Valley One.  It will be designed to complement our local paper, not compete with it.
4. A local news site requires time and money, and will only succeed if readers are willing to contribute money.  What form that takes will be determined at a later date.

 Thank you for your interest.

Let's talk money

It's nice to see an actual debate taking place over the mayoral salary. It was intellectually dishonest for the current mayor to give himself a significant raise in his first budget, expecting the fact that Trustee Rhoads made the suggestion to square the fact that he never mentioned it during his campaign. It was reprehensible for the board to reverse that raise in a surprise action late at night, which no one believed was not orchestrated (even the people who thought the raise a year earlier wasn't).

Having this conversation in public is a good idea. We all should know who is advocating because they like or dislike the current mayor, and whose arguments are rooted in a concern for the village.

You know what else would be good for political discourse? Not asking the Chamber of Commerce to moderate candidate events. They need to work with whoever wins, so they weed out questions that really need to be asked -- like whether a candidate is planning on budgeting a raise, or how one's personal relationship with another candidate might translate if they both shall win.

If we can't get our local paper to take on this task, how about the League of Women Voters?

Polemic

Leading up to last night's Democratic caucus in New Paltz, I read so many polemics that I had to look the word it up make sure it really meant what I thought it did.  It did.  These attacks were lobbed at candidates I support, candidates I don't support, candidates I don't give a hoot about either way, and anyone perceived as having an opinion about anything, which could be inferred by as small an action as clicking a "like" button on Facebook.

This kind of communication accomplishes nothing of real value, of course.  In a community of this size, the people attacked regularly run into their attackers at My Market or Health-Carrot-Nutrition, making for awkward avoidance schemes.  Even if your candidates of choice win in an election, the wounds fester and lead to vengeance candidates being launched against them.

I am irritated to the point of ranting about this sort of thing, which any thoughtful person knows is a sure sign that I am as guilty as any of those there idiots.  It's irritating mostly because the people launching the attacks are desperate to shunt others into, well, "the other."  Two years ago some guy from Gardiner decided, based on my party registration alone, that I am a tool of planet-destroying evil, and still has no clue that I am a dirt-worshiping environmentalist who cares more about the environment than the majority of the present New Paltz Town Council.  He had to make me into the "other" because recognizing that people are complex makes polemics, and politics, harder.

What I'm waiting for is to be labeled part of the "Jason West cult" because I have, twice now, ripped into village board members known and unknown for nasty attacks.  Anyone who has mentioned the man's name around me in the last two years would quickly be disabused of that notion, or would be if their attack-mode brains could process more options than "yes" and "no."

I'm not the only target, and really I'm one of the least targets, but I'm an expert on me, so I'm the best example I have.  Of course, I spend less time pondering the impact of my words on others, so right now I'm going to rattle off a few thoughts that are decidedly not attacks.

• Tom Nyquist has busted his butt making the bird sanctuary a gem.  If you haven't visited, you should.
• I met Steve Auerbach for the first time last night.  He is thoughtful, well-spoken, and polite.
• Bill Mulcahy draws political cartoons better than anyone in New Paltz, and expresses his views brilliantly in that format.  The New Paltz Times should pay him to do so.
• If ever there is a serious threat to the environment, Susan Zimet is the kind of person I want in the trenches, because when there are battles and enemies and someone else calling the shots, no one can compare.
• Jason West's knowledge of history and law should be cherished for the treasure they are.
• Hector Rodriguez is an excellent parliamentarian.

Maybe we make out our neighbors to be pure evil because we feel bad voting against them otherwise, but we're grown-ups, and we live together.  Lying and polarizing is a short-term solution that makes for long-term problems.  Gossip and whisper campaigns are just as bad.  We need to recognize that all of our neighbors add something good to our community, and we need to be willing to look those neighbors in the eye and acknowledge when we don't agree.  

On Facebook, in the letters column, we are willing to speak our minds, but then we pretend that these aren't real life, and that those opinions we share have no impact.  They do.  If we would not say something to a person directly, we should not be typing it in a private email, or a public posting, or saying it to other people while clustered in the corner of our favorite wine bar.

New Paltz is a microcosm of this great nation of ours.  Let's try to remember that our community is filled with good, and that writing polemics is the very core of evil.

Mayor West discloses he's bipolar . . . but to whom?

An article in the Times Herald-Record sports the ambiguous headline West discloses he suffers from bipolar disorder, which has caused several reactions of heartwarming support for his courageous admission around social media.  However, things are not what they seem.  The article states:

West sent an email to Village Board members Thursday, saying that he was diagnosed with the disorder in 2011.

He did not send an email to reporter Jeremiah Horrigan, nor did he post this information to Facebook, nor did he write a letter to the New Paltz Times.  What he did was explain to village board members why he was taking a leave of absence.

And somebody on that board shared the email with a reporter.

My feuds with Jason West are by no means private; he has been a real jerk to me without good reason, and he and I will never, ever be friends.  But this was a very low blow, and it offends me to the core.  I may not like the guy, but I like injustice a whole lot less.  That's why I scolded the village board for cutting his salary, even though I was offended by his raise.  That's why, when trustee Sally Rhoads whispered to me before that village board meeting that West had worked against my wife and I getting our sewer back, I dismissed it as the petty politics it was.  (I'm actually sure she was telling the truth, but Mrs. Rhoads is a strong woman, and if she'd cared about my family's welfare rather than its value as a political pawn, she could have overcome his resistance.)

We live in an purportedly enlightened society, but not so enlightened that some board member didn't think that the mayor having a mental illness would be news.  Point of fact, it's none of our damned business what the man struggles with; he can either do the job or he can't, and we get once chance every four years to evaluate our opinion on the matter.

As someone who has struggled with clinical depression for most of my life, I know that people are going to look at him differently.  He will see it, even if the people doing it don't.  We have a tendency to overcompensate when we don't understand a disability, which any chronic illness is, and it's even worse if that disability is invisible.

Bipolar disorder can well explain someone being a mind-blowingly rude jerk, just like depression can.  I've certainly ostracized my share of people when my chemistry is out of whack, but it's still my responsibility, and if I want to mend those bridges, I still need to do it the hard way.  Being bipolar doesn't excuse West for bad behavior, but it sure as hell isn't an excuse to treat him like crap, either.

I sincerely hope I didn't vote for the lowlife who told the press about this, but with my voting record, I probably did.