It has been a long fight, but we’ve got one more presentation to make; and a large show of support would make the ZBA think twice before rubber-stamping this.
Since the last meeting, we have appealed to the City Council — each commissioner and each deputy. We’ve asked them to do whatever they can to stop this. We heard some encouraging words. But we have no idea if anything has come of it. So, we’re headed into what is likely going to be the final battle on this.
Please come to the meeting! You can make all the difference, especially if you make a comment!
The agenda is here (as of now we are last in the order):
-We do not oppose Mr. Witt per se, or that he should develop this property.
-We all agree that the existing building is an eyesore and should be replaced
-But, first and foremost, we contend that this multi-family proposal (he is asking to build 7 homes as “condominiums” on one non-divided lot) requires a USE variance, as multi-family is not allowed in our zoning district (UR-3)
-And, at the same time, we are opposed to the massive scale of the AREA variances he is requesting and of the project as currently designed.
-We feel that the current design and density of the proposal and the number and size of the proposed homes are out of character with this historic neighborhood.
-We want a revised more reasonable proposal MORE IN LINE WITH OUR ZONING LAWS.
A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT POINTS TO STRESS:
*In 2013, Mr. Witt was granted the same variances he is re-applying for now (the variances lapsed, so he has to re-apply). He and the board have leaned heavily into “well, we passed this before, so let’s do it again”. However, in 2013 we were dumbstruck when the board granted approval. We feel they made a bad decision. Today is a new day, a new application, and a chance for the board to look more closely at the massive variances Mr. Witt is asking for.
*We do not oppose Mr. Witt per se, or that he should build on this parcel. We are opposed to the mass and scale of the proposal and want our zoning laws to be enforced.
*We agree the old building should be replaced, but that is not reason to grant these massive variances and allow this project to depart radically from zoning. A reasonable project would still accomplish the goal of replacing the old building.
*We are NOT at odds with the few neighbors who have supported this project based on their desire to see the old building gone. We just want it to be replaced by something reasonable. The developer is counting on our fear of “getting nothing” if we don’t allow “everything”.
*Witt has stated that he will sell these homes for $700,000 to $1,500,000. He has also stated that in order to make a profit he has to build and sell seven. We believe that a reasonable proposal of five homes could certainly still be profitable for him.
*Our aim is to make the Zoning Board require Mr. Witt to come back with a more reasonable proposal, more in line with the zoning laws that were intended to protect us from projects like this.
THE 5 CRITERIA THE BOARD CONSIDERS (and some of our possible answers):
WHETHER THE BENEFITS SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE ACHIEVED BY ANY OTHER MEANS.
The core benefit to the city and neighborhood is eliminating the current structure. This can be accomplished by building fewer homes and requiring minimal area variances. Whether or not this is as economically advantageous to Mr. Witt is not a zoning issue.
WHETHER GRANTING THE VARIANCES WILL PRODUCE AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR A DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES.
These huge, tightly packed-in homes are out of character with this historic neighborhood. The square footage of the proposed homes is clearly greater than the existing surrounding homes, in some cases double and triple. Rather than creating privacy as claimed, this proposal produces a walled environment, which separates the new homes from less expensive housing next door.
WHETHER THE VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL.
It is blatantly inaccurate to describe this project as minimal. All the variances being requested (variances listed below) by the applicant are very substantial.
WHETHER THE VARIANCE WILL HAVE ADVERSE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT.
WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF-CREATED.
The difficulty was self-created by the developer by asking for too much.
OVERVIEW – IN A NUTSHELL
-One home is allowed on this lot, or five, if the property is subdivided. But space would be needed to accommodate an access road, so four homes seem more likely if the proper route, in line with zoning, were taken.
-Witt is asking to NOT subdivide yet be allowed seven buildings instead of one (a massive departure from zoning).
-He is calling them “individual condominiums”. He needs the land to be commonly owned, since, if not subdivided, who would own the property?
-Each home will be selling for between $700,000 and $1.5 million
-Our zoning allows 30% of the parcel to be covered by buildings. He wants to be allowed to cover 46% (a 52% increase from what is allowed).
-By not being required to subdivide and calling these “condominiums” he relieves himself of the setback and maximum coverage requirements of our zoning laws and can arrange the seven buildings any way he wants, tightly packing them in.
-On the north side of the parcel he is required by zoning to leave 25 feet between the backs of his buildings and the adjoining properties. He wants to be allowed to reduce that requirement to only six feet. The backs of these 32 foot high buildings would be virtually on, and towering over, the property line, with no room for buffer or trees. All existing trees would be cut down.
-These buildings will be large (see below), and out of character with the neighborhood.
-As of yet, Mr. Witt has not made any concessions or compromises to his plans. He has stated that if he is not allowed the full extent of what he is asking, this project would not be profitable enough for him. We feel this is a false claim – that he could certainly make a profit with a more reasonable project, more in line with zoning.
SIZE OF THE PROPOSED HOMES
So far there are no actual measurements per unit, only Witt’s very generalized predictions.
The (rounded) square footage (reflecting all living space – not just footprint) of some of the existing houses on Jumel are: 1400, 900, 1200, 1300, 1500, 1200, 1500, 1900, 1600, 2000.
Witt’s footprints (footprint=first floor only) are: 2,449, 1357, 1472, 2099, 2739, 2340, 2070. A guess-timate of second stories would lead us to predict Witt’s proposed homes to be clearly larger — and possibly double or more — than most of the other existing houses on the street. Even his footprints alone are larger than the full square footage of a good number of the surrounding homes. From his rendering of the facades it looks as if the homes will also have a third story (see attached pdf).
“AREA” VARIANCES WITT IS REQUESTING
1) The maximum building coverage allowed on this lot is 30%. The applicant is asking to be allowed to cover 46%, or 52% more than what is allowed. Granting this request would be a massive increase from what is allowed by zoning.
2) The applicant is asking for maximum principal buildings on one lot to be increased from one to seven, a 600% increase. Only five single-family units are allowed by law on this property — BUT ONLY after the property is subdivided. Why is this property not being subdivided? To go from one to seven houses is a massive increase.
3) The rear yard setback required for each unit is 25 feet. The applicant is asking that this requirement be eliminated by 100% for five units, going from the 25 feet required to zero (0) feet. For the remaining two units he is asking for a 76% reduction in the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 6 feet.
4) The front yard setback required for the two front units is 10 feet. The applicant is asking for only a one (1) foot setback, a 90% reduction in the front yard. The applicant claims that this is so “our (2) front porches [can] be placed on the unit.” However, his drawings show that he is not proposing porches, only overhangs.
5) The fence height allowed in this UR-3 residential area is six feet. The applicant is asking for an eight-foot fence, a 33% increase in height over what is allowed. Why is this necessary only for this development? Is the applicant trying to exclude the rest of the neighborhood? A fence this high would create an exclusive walled enclave shutting out the existing neighborhood.
According to the Times Union the Mayor’s Charter Review Commission met last Tuesday, took their oaths of office, and set a regular meeting schedule. Apparently the Mayor has added two more members to the Commission for a total of 14. The newest appointments are:
Minita Sanghvi: Ms. Sanghvi is an assistant professor of marketing management and business at Skidmore College with a specialty in “Political Marketing.”
Ann Bullock: Ms. Bullock is a local attorney. She was appointed by Mayor Yepsen to the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority,
The Commission decided at this meeting to meet regularly at 7PM every second and fourth Tuesday of the month in the City Hall Chambers. Their next meeting will be June 28th.
Although a time and place for future meetings has now been publicly announced I did not recall seeing any notice of this first meeting of the Commission. I emailed the Mayor and inquired as to when notice of this meeting was given.
The Mayor replied indicating that she had “referred to the meeting” at the last City Council meeting. Unfortunately a review of the video and minutes of that Council meeting indicate that there was no announcement of when and where this first organizing meeting of the Charter Commission would occur. Even if the Mayor had indeed made such an announcement, it would not have fulfilled the requirements of the Open Meeting law. While the Commission has thus gotten off to a bit of a rocky start the Mayor has indicated that the live stream and minutes of this meeting will be on the city’s website and all meetings of the Commission will be open to the public and live streamed [Note: As of this morning, Saturday June 18 this archive was not on the city’s web site].
An update on the Charter Review Commission is on the Mayor’s agenda for Tuesday night’s City Council meeting.
The casino at Aqueduct Race Track. Revenue streams from VLTs there are used by NYRA for capital improvements, operating expenses, purses and breeder awards
Disclosure: I was fired as President and CEO, along with our general counsel, from the New York Racing Association on May 4, 2012, by the NYRA board after NYRA was alleged by the State Racing and Wagering Board to have knowingly overcharged our betting customers 1 percent on all exotic wagers. At the time and to this day, I have continued to assert my innocence regarding this allegation.
Shortly after my termination from NYRA, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo took control of NYRA, announcing that he was creating a new board. As reported by Joe Drape in the New York Times on May 22, 2012: “Racing in New York will now be overseen by a board dominated by appointees of the governor and senior state legislators. But Mr. Cuomo stressed that the state takeover was designed to be short-lived, and last no longer than three years. ‘We know that the long term this is not a venture for government to run,’ Mr. Cuomo said.”
It has now been over four years since that announcement, but last Wednesday (June 8), according to an article written by Tom Precious in The Blood-Horse: “The New York Racing Association would be returned to private hands, though with a tiny leash from the state government that has controlled its operation over the past four years, according to legislation proposed June 8 by Gov. Andrew Cuomo.”
Deeply saddened
The article went on to say: “The bill’s introduction also comes a day after Saratoga Springs’ John Hendrickson resigned as Cuomo’s special adviser to the NYRA board; Hendrickson said Cuomo did not take his advice, did not listen to him and was poised to take measures – including the VLT payment reduction in the new bill – that are hurting the state’s Thoroughbred racing industry.”
Anyone at all familiar with racing in New York had to be deeply saddened by this development.
It is not my intention here to write about the past, present or future of the NYRA franchise. However, I think that it is very important to review the public records regarding the NYRA 25-year franchise renewal. It is important to note that all the information contained in this article came from documents available to the general public.
NYRA went through a protracted process in securing a new 25-year franchise to run Aqueduct Race Track, Belmont Park and Saratoga Race Course and to receive contractual payments from Aqueduct video lottery terminals (VLTs) for the term of the franchise.
Installation of the VLT facility
During this period, on November 2, 2006, NYRA filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to stabilize and protect its business pending the completion and implementation of the VLT facility. The debtor, NYRA, continued to manage its properties and operate as a debtor in possession, in accordance with sections 1107 and 1108 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code.
On September 4, 2007, a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) was signed by Governor Eliot Spitzer, representing the State of New York, awarding NYRA a 30-year franchise (later reduced to 25 years in the legislation) to run Thoroughbred racing at its three tracks, and for NYRA to receive Aqueduct VLT revenues for capital expenses, operating expenses, purses and breeder awards, and other financial considerations, in exchange for NYRA’s agreement to relinquish any present or future rights with respect to ownership of the three racetracks.
This MOU was contingent upon legislative approval.
The Senate Majority Leader at that time was Joseph Bruno, and he was critical of the Spitzer MOU and announced three State Senate public hearings to be held in September and October 2007 to review a number of aspects of the plan.
The hearings and discussions went forward, and on February 13, 2008, the New York legislature approved legislation awarding NYRA a new 25-year franchise to operate its three tracks, allowing installation of a VLT facility at Aqueduct and conveying ownership of the three racetracks to New York State.
Agreements to be negotiated
The payments to NYRA and the racing industry were set as a percentage of the net win of the Aqueduct gaming facility. Under the legislation, NYRA was to receive 4 percent for capital expenses, 3 percent for operating expenses, 6½ percent, increasing to 7½ percent in the third year, for NYRA purses and 1 percent, increasing to 1½ percent in the third year, for breeder awards. No caps or limits were set on these payments. A Federal Bankruptcy Court hearing to seek approval of the NYRA reorganization plan was set for that March.
On April 28, 2008, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court approved the NYRA reorganization plan. Here is a link to that publicly available NYRA confirmation plan.
The final approval by the Bankruptcy Court of the NYRA reorganization plan was contingent upon NYRA negotiating a series of agreements with the State. These agreements included:
A settlement agreement with the State regarding the transfer of the NYRA land to the State and other outstanding disputes;
A franchise agreement that would contractually bind NYRA and the State to the terms in the franchise legislation;
Individual lease agreements for each track regarding financial terms and approved uses of the properties. Each of these agreements that was subsequently negotiated includes the specific percentages that NYRA would receive from the Aqueduct VLT operation for capital expenses, operating expenses, purses and breeder awards, as noted in the legislation for the term of the franchise.
It was essential that NYRA secure the terms of the legislation with contractual obligations on behalf of the State of New York both to conform to the bankruptcy reorganization plan and to have secure legal protection for the Aqueduct VLT payments.
Bankruptcy reorganization plan
It is important to note that NYRA’s legal team negotiated directly with legal staff from all major state government entities. The bankruptcy court had requested that these negotiated agreements with the State be finalized by June 30, but the complexity of the issues and the number of negotiating parties resulted in the negotiations continuing throughout the summer.
On September 12, 2008, NYRA emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy under a plan of reorganization reliant upon a new 25-year state franchise and secure revenue streams from VLTs at Aqueduct for capital improvements, operating expenses, purses and breeder awards.
Under the franchise agreement and the related contracts negotiated between NYRA and the State, NYRA deeded the three racetracks to the State in consideration for the operating expenses, capital expenditure, purses and breeder awards and other financial considerations.
Fast forward to where we are today.
In recent weeks, two Saratoga organizations, Concerned Citizens of Saratoga and the Saratoga Race Course Local Advisory Board, which was created by the 2008 franchise agreement to act as a liaison between NYRA and the Saratoga community, spoke out about their concerns about the State’s privatization plan for NYRA and its impact on New York racing and the Saratoga community.
Serious threat to racing and breeding
However, what concerned me most in the June 8 Tom Precious Blood-Horse article mentioned above was the suggestion from some unidentified “sources” that some reduction in payments to NYRA from Aqueduct VLTs for capital and operating expenses would be instituted. Further, NYRA would be required to seek an annual state appropriation approved by the legislature for capital expenses.
This is a far cry from the contract negotiated with the State and approved in the bankruptcy reorganization plan. This is a very serious threat to the future of Thoroughbred racing and breeding in New York.
There were some brilliant legal minds working on the NYRA bankruptcy to make certain that the contracts and obligations of the State for Aqueduct VLT monies would be unencumbered and not reduced for the term of the 25-year franchise. While the State took control of the NYRA board in May 2012, there currently are six NYRA board members, including the former chairman and two former vice chairmen, that were serving on the previous NYRA board. They most certainly are well informed regarding the existing contracts for Aqueduct VLT payments to NYRA, and equally well informed of their fiduciary responsibilities as NYRA board members.
Reporting on performance standards
One further point about the use of VLT distributions paid to NYRA: under the NYRA franchise contract, there are numerous performance standards that NYRA reports on annually to the Franchise Oversight Board (FOB), and the FOB is required to formally review the compliance with these performance standards every four years.
The standards include conditions relating to racing dates, NY state-bred races, stalls, jockey and equine safety, CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) requirements, backstretch environment, Saratoga training, handle and attendance, purse accountability, expenses and community interaction.
As a careful observer of racing jurisdictions, the issue that is consistently discussed by NY State administration officials and regulators is that “NYRA needs to be profitable before accounting for VLT distributions”. Nowhere in the NYRA performance standards is there any reference to NYRA’s use of VLT distributions, nor is there any mention anywhere else in the franchise or settlement agreements regarding this point.
The NY State legislature is scheduled to adjourn its spring-summer session tomorrow (June 16). Whatever happens this week regarding the NYRA franchise, the issue of ongoing and full payments to NYRA, horsemen and breeders from the Aqueduct VLTs needs to be properly and legally resolved.
Forester Jeff Wiegert, of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, removes emerald ash borer larvae from an ash tree at Esopus Bend Nature Preserve in Saugerties, N.Y. in this 2011 photo. ap file photo
Posted: 06/13/16, 2:07 PM EDT | Updated: 2 days ago
SARATOGA SPRINGS >> An invasive insect that devastates certain hardwood trees and threatens the upstate New York economy has been detected in Saratoga County.
The emerald ash borer has been identified in Waterford and Ballston Lake, the state Department of Environmental Conservation says.
The small green beetle feasts on ash trees that are used to make handles for many wooden tools, and major league baseball bats manufactured by Rawlings in Dolgeville, Herkimer County.
Since late 2014, the number of New York state counties with infestations has grown from 22 to 34.
“DEC continues to survey for emerald ash borer within the state to notify municipalities and private landowners of new detections or expansions of existing infestations,” said Basil Seggos, acting DEC commissioner.
The insect was verified in Waterford after a landowner contacted officials to report its discovery.
In Ballston Lake, the pest was confirmed through ongoing monitoring efforts.
The green-colored beetle originated in Asia, but has devastated many neighborhoods in addition to woodlands since arriving in the U.S. It has previously been detected in Troy, Watervliet, Albany and Colonie.
In January 2015, the Capital District Emerald Ash Borer Task Force held its first-ever meeting in an attempt to tackle the problem.
Urban and suburban communities are particularly at risk because ash is a common street and park tree. Green ash, in particular, has been widely planted as an ornamental tree in yards. Locating infested sites early can significantly delay the loss of ash trees and decrease the subsequent costs for their removal and replacement.
Damage is caused by the larvae that feed just below the ash tree’s bark. The tunnels they create disrupt water and nutrient transport, causing branches and eventually the entire tree to die.
Dead ash trees deteriorate quickly and fall unpredictably, creating significant liability issues with pedestrians.
Adult beetles leave distinctive D-shaped exit holes in the outer bark of the branches and the trunk. Other signs of infestation include tree canopy dieback, splits in the bark and extensive sprouting from the roots and trunk. Infested trees may also exhibit woodpecker damage from larvae extraction.
Moving firewood is one of the main ways the insect spreads. The DEC prohibits the movement of firewood more than 50 miles from its source.
Quarantine regulations also prohibit the movement of ash wood out of “restrictive zones” in order to delay the emerald ash borer’s spread to uninfested areas.
When infestations are found outside of restrictive zones, DEC recommends that infested wood be kept local or destroyed to avoid spreading the beetle to new areas.
DEC urges residents and municipalities to inspect ash trees for signs of infestation. Homeowners and municipalities can contact the nearest DEC forestry office for technical assistance and management recommendations.
Management options include treating healthy trees with insecticide and removing stressed trees that may attract the insect.
Forest landowners can request a DEC forester visit their woodlot and develop a free Forest Stewardship Plan. This plan would address the landowner’s objectives and discuss how the arrival or proximity of the emerald ash borer could impact the owner’s forest resources. Forest owners can schedule a site visit by contacting their local DEC Forestry office (http://www.dec.ny.gov/about/27790.html).
To learn more about the insect as well as efforts to reduce its negative impact and save trees, visit DEC’s website at http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7253.html.
For more information about the Capital District Emerald Ash Borer Task Force call (518) 402-9420.
Angelo Mazzone and Tom Newkirk: Partners At Saratoga National Golf Course
[Note: As Angelo Mazzone opens yet another venue a former employee of his restaurant Prime at Saratoga National Golf Course is suing him saying Mazzone illegally withheld tips and failed to pay overtime wages. Lawyers are seeking class action status saying there are at least 50 others who were treated similarly. See this blog’s May 4 posting of a Gazette article on this issue.]
New seafood restaurant to open in Saratoga Springs
Posted: 06/13/16, 4:02 PM EDT | Updated: 2 days ago
Lake Ave. in downtown Saratoga Springs. LAUREN HALLIGAN – LHALLIGAN@DIGITALFIRSTMEDIA.COM
SARATOGA SPRINGS >> Seafood is coming to the Spa City, with the upcoming opening of new restaurant Fish at 30 Lake.
The eighth Capital Region restaurant owned and operated by Mazzone Hospitality, Fish at 30 Lake is expected to open to the public on Saturday, June 18 at its 30 Lake Avenue location in downtown Saratoga Springs, inside the Grand Pavilion Hotel building at the corner of Lake Avenue and Pavilion Place.
The restaurant held a special event on Monday in advance of its grand opening. Instead of a ribbon cutting, this celebration included an inaugural oyster shucking in honor of the new restaurant’s raw bar.
Additionally, Fish at 30 Lake will offer seafood, hardwood grilled fish and pizza, and plates to share.
All menu items will feature an emphasis on locality and freshness, promising fish caught no earlier than the day before it is served. One of the restaurant’s mottos is “Ocean to Plate,” as displayed on the dining room wall. “Fish at 30 Lake will bring seafood into this area, and we’re only going to be serving seafood that was caught yesterday,” explained Angelo Mazzone, owner of Mazzone Hospitality, at the event.
Fish at 30 Lake will also include a mixologist led bar program with hand-crafted cocktails, local spirits and an approachable wine list.
The restaurant’s newly renovated interior features natural touches of reclaimed wood and industrial influences, including a hand-crafted wine cabinet and a large mural painted by a local artist.
“When we began designing plans for this space it was our main goal to create a comfortable atmosphere with the same quality we are known for at Mazzone hospitality. We also wanted this concept to be different from our existing restaurants, and unlike anything in Saratoga Springs,” Mazzone said at Monday’s event. “I look around at this space today, I can certainly say that that we’ve accomplished that goal,” he continued, noting that it’s one of his company’s nicest restaurants.
Mazzone Hospitality chief operating officer and Partner Mark Delos and corporate executive chef William Brown will oversee the new venture, along with Saratoga Springs restaurateur Ron Farber, who recently joined the Mazzone Hospitality team as a restaurant specialist.
In addition to the food and decor, Mazzone mentioned that the timing of the restaurant opening is great, too. “We could not think of a better time to open a restaurant here in downtown Saratoga Springs, just as summer tourist starts to heat up,” Mazzone said.
Saratoga Springs Mayor Joanne Yepsen said, “Angelo has a special talent of filling a niche that is missing, and we have been missing good seafood and fresh seafood in Saratoga Springs for a long time.”
“We have come to feel like saratoga Springs has something very special, and I talk about building community, but I also talk about the plethora of assets that make our community so great. And this is going to add to that group of restaurants and dining experiences and tourism attractions like no other,” the mayor continued, calling Fish at 30 Lake, “bound to be a huge success.”
[From Left to Right beginning with Assembly Woman Carrie Woerner (in Lime), Mayor Joanne Yepsen, and Senator Kathy Marchione.
Senator Kathleen Marchione also attended Monday’s event to congratulate Mazzone and his team on their new venture with a certificate of recognition from the Senate. Speaking of Mazzone’s reputation at his several other area restaurants, Marchione said, “The food is amazing, the service is terrific, and it’s just the place you want to be when you get a special night out.”
New York State Assemblywoman Carrie Woerner agreed.
“Your standards for hospitality, for cuisine are just really top notch and exactly what we need in Saratoga Springs. And this concept of fish out of the ocean yesterday, on the plate today is tremendous,” she said wishing Mazzone the best of luck. “I know that you will add to our city as we start the summer season, and I suspect your doors will be mobbed.”
Mazzone and the local officials joined after their remarks for a ceremonial oyster shucking, which comically proved to be a difficult task for some.
Fish at 30 Lake will officially open to the public on Saturday, June 18. The restaurant will open at 2 p.m. daily for light fare and cocktails, with dinner service beginning at 5:30 p.m. Dinner service will begin at 3 p.m. on Sundays.
Reservations will be accepted beginning Monday, June 20. Fish at 30 Lake will have 80 indoor seats and 40 outdoor seats.
Fish at 30 Lake is expected to complement the numerous Mazzone Hospitality properties in the greater Capital Region, including Prime at Saratoga National, an upscale steakhouse located on the grounds of Saratoga National Golf Club. Mazzone Hospitality also oversees catering operations at the Hall of Springs in the Saratoga Spa State Park and Fasig-Tipton Sales Pavilion on East Avenue, amongst other venues in the immediate area.
Curious about solar for your home or business?Want solar but stymied by wrong roof, too much shade, historic district, etc.?
Two highly qualified solar experts will answer basic questions to help you consider your solar options like whether buying or leasing a system is best for you, how to select an installer, and what the risks and rewards of a solar array are. In addition, if onsite solar isn’t an option for a home or business owner, hear about a local community solar project that would enable residents to generate solar energy in a community “solar garden” and on future plans for Saratoga Springs to provide solar options to city residents.
WHAT: Solar 101 Informational Workshop WHEN: Monday, June 27, 2016, 6:30 PM – 8:00 PM WHERE: H. Dutcher Community Room, Saratoga Springs Public Library, 49 Henry Street, Saratoga Springs, NY Who: City of Saratoga Springs Climate Smart Task Force and Sustainable Saratoga
The Mayor will be offering welcoming remarks. Guest speakers include Olya Prevo-White and Dennis Phayre. Both are exceptionally experienced in solar energy installation and project development. Olya is a NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional and a solar project manager with CT Male. In 2009, Olya assisted Saratoga Springs residents Carol and Otis Maxwell install the first solar installation on a Victorian home in the heart of the historic district. Dennis is a solar energy specialist and project manager for EnterSolar and is currently working on the construction of the first Shared Renewables community solar project in New York State. In addition, Commissioner Michele Madigan will discuss Community Solar in Saratoga Springs. For more information about the event, please feel free to contact Tina Carton at 518-587-3550, ext. 2534 or Tina.Carton@saratoga-springs.org. No registration required.
A very generous and very well deserved article on Ken Bollerud as he retires from his long held position as chairman of the board of the Saratoga Springs Public Library.
The city had a very modest library in the building that now serves as the city’s arts center. There were many players involved in expanding our library into what it is today. That was because Mr. Bollerud and the late librarian, Harry Dutcher did an extraordinary job in mobilizing the community to make the project happen. The soft spoken Mr. Bollerud was an essential part of that endeavor. Since then he has tirelessly worked to improve and strengthen our wonderful library.
Saratoga Springs library board president bids farewell
Kenneth Bollerud is shown inside the Saratoga Springs Public Library. Travis Clark — tclark@digitalfirstmedia.com
Posted: 06/13/16, 4:30 PM EDT | Updated: 1 day ago
SARATOGA SPRINGS >> Kenneth Bollerud is often described as modest by his friends and colleagues, and they might be right. In fact, when Bollerud was asked about himself, the topic would always circle back to a story detailing the history of the Saratoga Springs Public Library.
It’s a testament to just how passionate Bollerud is about the building and its community. Serving on the library’s board for more than 35 years, he is set to step down from his position as the board’s president on June 30. Those within the library and the Saratoga Springs community say they are sad to see him go.
“It’s like we’re losing our father figure,” said library account clerk Marjorie Johnson.
Bollerud is a respected and loved member of the Saratoga Springs community, and while it may seem like he’s always been a part of a lot of people’s lives, he isn’t originally from Saratoga. Born and raised in Wisconsin, Bollerud joined the Peace Corps upon graduating from college and taught for three years in the Phillipines.
When he returned, Bollerud attended a job fair in New York City where he was interviewed for a job teaching near Utica. Here, he met his now wife and they decided to attend the University at Albany to acquire Master’s degrees. Bollerud would go on to teach at Shenendehowa High School where he stayed until he retired in 2004.
Bollerud was passionate about matters of the library even before he was on the board. One day, he wrote a letter to the editor concerning the library’s funding and received a call asking him to run for the library board as there was an opening.
Bollerud recalls being told that the position “wouldn’t require much.” On the contrary, he’s “too busy to talk about himself,” and for the last 35 years, he has been a significant addition to the library’s family. It has been a major part of his own life.
“He comes to all of the important events at the library, there’s always a presence and I think everyone feels like he’s one of us,” said Leslie Novver, retired children’s librarian.
Bollerud is a recipient of several awards, including being named the Southern Adirondack Library System’s Trustee of the Year, the Saratoga Springs Rotary’s Senior Citizen’s Award and last year’s Friends of the Saratoga Springs Library H. Dunham Hunt Award.
Bollerud said that it is his time to step down and for someone else to come in. However, he doesn’t believe in term limits: as long as the person is doing a good job, he said they should stay as long as they want.
It is evident that the community and library staff believes Bollerud has done a fantastic job, even though he’s too modest (or busy) to admit it himself.
Posted: 06/13/16, 4:58 PM EDT | Updated: 1 day ago
SARATOGA SPRINGS >> Pitney Meadows Community Farm, Inc. will unveil a special plan and vision for Pitney Farm, the only farm in the city of Saratoga Springs, on June 26 with a dinner event at the farm site.
The event is intended to engage the community and raise awareness for preserving the farm with the ultimate goal to transform it into a community farm.
Pitney Farm has been active since the 1800s. In the 1930s, it was an airport, but still acted as a farm. The 160 acre farm is now leased by Thomas Poultry Farm and is used to grow corn. Farmers Sandy and Paul Arnold and Michael Kilpatrick have a much grander vision for it, though, and are spearheading this effort to grow the farm into an educational resource for young farmers.
“The average age of a farmer is 57,” Paul Arnold said, adding that it keeps going up. The Arnolds and William and Kathy Pitney want to see Pitney Farm have a more active role in shaping future farmers in the Saratoga Springs community and have a five-year plan with a $15 million budget to turn the farm into a vibrant resource for the city.
“If you don’t have the money you can’t really build it,” said Sandy Arnold. “This first year is acquisition. We’ll have hopefully acquired it by the end of the year and then in the spring we will start with projects.”
Any proceeds from the community engagement event will go toward this goal and the Arnolds and Pitneys expect to see at least 200 people coming out in support.
In a press release, Paul Arnold said that the community farm will be “an amazing nonprofit, community-supported urban farm resource center that will be one of its kind across the U.S.”
The ultimate goal is to be the “face of agriculture” according to Paul Arnold. Sandy added that the project will be very educational based.
“Following up on Saratoga PLAN’s efforts, the city of Saratoga Springs is developing the conservation easement on the farm with the farmers and pro bono site plan development from the LA Group,” Sandy Arnold said in a statement.
Earlier this year, Saratoga PLAN decided not to purchase the land, citing that the farm owner’s vision did not match theirs. The group had originally planned to transform the farm into a regional agricultural hub and protect it form development.
The event starts at 5 p.m. on June 26 and includes a cash bar and buffet dinner.
At the June 7th Council meeting Mayor Yepsen announced the membership of a new charter review commission she is establishing. She noted that the list is “still growing” so she may be making more appointments.
This is a list of the members so far and who designated them:
Matt Jones –– Lawyer Specializing in Land Use Issues– Selected by Commissioner Scirocco
Elio DelSette –– Past President of Musicians Union, head of the Civil Service Commission and I believe served on at least two past charter revision commissions once I think as Chairman– Selected by Commissioner Madigan.
Robert Kuczynski –– Son of Hank Kuczynski. Hank was Mayor Ken Klotz’s deputy– Selected by Commissioner Franck
B.K. Keramati –– Former GE engineer, he ran for the NYS Assembly as a Democrat and lost several years ago– Selected by Commissioner Mathiesen
The following were selected by Mayor Yepsen:
Gordon Boyd – Established and ran an energy consulting business, ran for mayor several years ago, was most recently an official with the Independence Party, was active with the Saratoga PAC
Jeff Altamari –A retired energy executive, he served as the Mayor’s treasurer in her last campaign
Barbara Thomas – Long time past president of the Saratoga Springs League of Women Voters
Robert Turner – Professor of Political Science at Skidmore.
Laura Chodos –Long time Yepsen supporter and past member of the New York State Board of Regents
Beth Wurtmann – Was a television news reporter at one time. Is something called a Fellow For Communications with the Regents Research Fund, affiliated with the New York State Education Department
Pat Kane –Works with a publishing company. Was campaign manager for Mat McCabe when he ran for Finance. Was a leader in the last unsuccessful campaign to rewrite the charter to end the commission form of government and replace it with a city manger form.
Mike Los – – He works for Congress Park Capital which deals in financial services
There is no question that Joanne Yepsen has an enthusiastic vision of mobilizing people into committees that will take on the many tasks that she thinks would make the city better. The problem is that just establishing committees in and of itself is not always the best way to achieve things.
The last successful charter revision was done when Ken Klotz was Mayor. The committee’s mission was simply to clean up the charter that had all kinds of archaic items that were either no longer relevant or that were in conflict with other provisions or state law. They also added some new provisions for offices and for procedures to address other problems they identified.
It took this group eighteen months to complete their work. It took them many months just to thoroughly educate themselves regarding the charter as it existed then.
My own experience in both government and business tells me that this current project has structural problems from the beginning.
First of all it has no specific charge. These committees can either be directed to make revisions in the current charter, as was the case with Mayor Klotz’s committee, or the committee can be charged with replacing our current commission form with an entirely new form of government as was the case when Ray Watkin was Mayor. Mayor Yepsen has at this point not given her committee a direction. Some of the appointees on this committee feel passionately that we need a whole new form of government. Others have a history of supporting the existing commission form.
Complicating the situation even more, without naming individuals, this committee has some very strong personalities on it that have not always played well together. Worse is the size of the committee. As noted earlier, the Mayor has indicated that she may be adding even more people to the committee. It is my experience that the larger the committee the more time it takes to transact even the most menial of tasks. The larger the committee, the more difficult it is to have problematic personalities learn to work together. Big committees are in general a cumbersome and not usually a very successful way to do business.
So as it stands now it appears that the committee has no clear mission. It has no chair. It has no budget. It has no staff. It has no time table. It remains unknown how much in the way of money and resources the Mayor and the Council will provide this group.
Were they to come up with a plan to abolish the commission government and replace it with a strong mayor and a council or city manager form (which a number of Yepsen’s appointees on this committee have worked hard for in the past) they would need to come up with new administrative positions to manage the city’s business and with a way to transition from the old form of government to the new as well as a realistic assessment of the cost of the transition and the new proposal. This is truly a Herculean project.
Let me be clear, I am open to considering a change in our form of government. I am just skeptical of the idea that you just bring diverse people together and they make magic.
Well, your dedicated blogger has been forced by his own folly to eat crow once again and this dish was no improvement over my last repast.
Lake Lonely is a precious gem. This is a rather long post but it is worth time to read it through. The most important part of this post is the section written by Blue R. Neils at the bottom of the post. I urge the readers of this blog to take the time to read it. While the issues are technical, Mr. Neils does a great job at making them understandable for those of us who struggled in our science courses.
Several days following my posting on Lake Lonely I received a call from T. Zealie Van Raalte. Mr. Van Raalte is the President of the Lake Lonely Improvement Association (LLIA).
He explained to me that the area that appears to look like an algae bloom is in fact a major infestation of water chestnuts.
Here is some background from the Cornell University Cooperative Extension website on this troublesome plant:
Rendering Of European Water Chestnut
If a shoreline property owner in New York or the Northeast complains to you about their water chestnut problem, don’t think they are talking about Chinese takeout. The European water chestnut (scientific name Trapa natans, or T. natans), an invasive aquatic plant released inadvertently into waters of the Northeast in the late 1800s, is slowly but inexorably spreading throughout New York State, clogging waterways, lakes and ponds and altering aquatic habitats.
It must be pointed out that this plant species is not the same as the water chestnut which can be purchased in cans at the supermarket. The fruits of T. natans, however, are used as a source of food in Asia and have been utilized for their medicinal (and claimed) magical properties…
Ecological Impact
Water chestnut has become a significant environmental nuisance throughout much of its range, particularly in the Hudson, Connecticut and Potomac Rivers, and in Lake Champlain. The plant can form nearly impenetrable floating mats of vegetation. These mats create a hazard for boaters and other water recreators. The density of the mats can severely limit light penetration into the water and reduce or eliminate the growth of native aquatic plants beneath the canopy. The reduced plant growth combined with the decomposition of the water chestnut plants which die back each year can result in reduced levels of dissolved oxygen in the water, impact other aquatic organisms, and potentially lead to fish kills. The rapid and abundant growth of water chestnut can also out-compete both submerged and emergent native aquatic vegetation.[my emphasis added]
The bad news is how hard it is to control this weed. More from the website:
Large infestations usually require the use of mechanical harvesters or the application of aquatic herbicides. Regardless of treatment type, it should ideally take place before the fruit has ripened and dropped to the bottom forming a long-term seed bank. Because of the potential of unintentional spread of floating plant parts offsite, mechanical harvesting should be undertaken only by trained and certified equipment operators. Since water chestnut overwinters entirely by seeds that may remain viable in the sediment for up to 12 years, repeated annual control is critical to deplete the seed bank. Treatment generally is needed for five to twelve years to ensure complete eradication and can be very expensive… [my emphasis added]
Mr. Van Raalte indicated that there is an issue with algae growth but it is being controlled by applying a chemical that utilizes copper sulfate to retard the algae growth.
To the credit of Saratoga National Golf Course, they donated a harvester to help control the water chestnuts and have contributed to the cost of the eradication. As it happens, Tom Newkirk, one of the principle owners of Saratoga National Golf Course is a neighbor of Mr. Van Raalte and both live on the shores of Lake Lonely.
PLAN has also been a partner in trying to protect the lake. At one point they recruited volunteers to hand pull the weeds (what a job that must have been).
The War On Weeds
SNGC Harvester In Action
Mr. Van Raalte emailed the following status report:
The Harvester was out in the lake starting last week and has been operating as you noted this week. It’s an extremely slow process. On a good day about 14 loads of water chestnuts can be “harvested”. It was necessary to wait until the plants grew to the point that the harvester equipment could get a good grip to pull out the plants. In addition, the fact that the lake’s water level is relatively low makes it difficult to operate in parts of the impacted area. This year marks the third year of operating the SNGC’s harvester (in addition to the previous two years of hiring a third party with their equipment) and we are optimistic that progress in our fight to control/eliminate the proliferation of water chestnuts in Lake Lonely is working.
The War On Algae
This is from Mr. Van Raalte on the algae situation:
Copper Sulfate has long been recognized by the DEC as an effective aquatic herbicide to control algae bloom. The pesticide product must be registered and accepted by NYS as per label indications. I believe that it was initially recommended by our Certified Pesticide Licensed Applicator although the initial decision predates my involvement.
The Lake Lonely improvement has applied and been granted an Algicide Employment Permit from the DEC for a series of permits valid for five year periods(renewal yearly) for at least the last 15 years years. The permit requires that a Certified Pesticide Applicator must perform the treatment and that proper notice be given to the riparian owners.
In another email from Mr. Van Raalte he offered the following:
With the warmer weather we begin to see visible signs of algae bloom in various scattered locations. In fact this year I received calls from neighbor’s in early March as to their concerns for algae bloom along their shorelines. This was unusual for that time of the year but likely due to our mild winter. I seem to recall that it was also reported that Loughberry lake had experienced algae bloom as well.
It is unclear what the source of the algae problem is. Mr. Van Raalte and I both agreed that Lake Lonely would benefit from a thoughtful water quality testing program to monitor both Saratoga National Golf Course and the outflow from Spring Brook which contains the runoff from the City of Saratoga Springs.
Still as the piece below by Blue R. Neils indicates, the problem of algae may have to do with the historical abuse of this body of water going way back in the history of our city when issues of water quality were simply not on people’s radar.
A More Detailed History And Review Of Lake Lonely
One of the readers of my blog directed me to Blue R. Neils. Mr. Neils is the program director for the Intermunicipal Stormwater Management Program and chairs the Saratoga County Water Quality Coordinating Committee. All of this is part of our county’s Cooperative Extension program.
It is impossible to overstate the great people who work at our Cooperative Extension program and the work that they do. These people’s commitment to service represents the highest standards in the public sector. Bill Schwerd, the current director, is both a caring individual and an excellent manager. I am going to exploit my role as blogger to also note that the late Al Lounsbury, who preceded Bill was the finest public official I had the pleasure to work with during the sixteen years I was the head of the Saratoga County EOC.
In that tradition, Mr. Neils took the time to write this terrific piece on the lake:
John,
OK…now I think I understand the situation better. Thank you for the link…and the post RE: Lake Lonely’s water quality and the Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS). I am glad to see some recognition of the issue. I made contact with Zealie VanRaalte –President of the Lake Lonely Owners Association (LLOA)- in August of 2014. Myself, Zealie, and Alan Richer (President of the Saratoga Lake Assoc./SLA) met to discuss what you (erroneously, I’m afraid) deemed an algal bloom in Lake Lonely (LL), but (as you now know) in reality is a “patch” of Water Chestnut. For my part, I have mapped the extent of the bed w/ a GPS in hopes of tracking the efficacy of the controls through time.
Water Chestnut (Trapa natans) is an AIS originally from Europe, Asia and Africa. The means of its introduction to the continental U.S. is not precisely known but the first documented ID of the plant was made in MA in 1859. Currently, T. natans has been found as far away as Arizona, but, the largest impact-area of the species is still here in the East…with the Hudson R. Basins (Upper, where we live + Lower; more so the Lower) being one of the most highly-impacted. The National Park Service (NPS) has a good article with the highlights of the species here: https://www.nps.gov/plants/alien/pubs/midatlantic/trna.htm and there is a more in-depth article by my organization (Cornell University and Sea Grant), more focused on T. natans impact upon New York State here: http://nyis.info/?action=invasive_detail&id=39
At this point, its distribution is being accelerated by human behavior, like many AIS – it can be spread by watercraft. To wit, an unsuspecting vessel/boater (commercial or recreational) picks up a portion/s of an AIS in one waterbody (lake or pond) or river segment and then travels to another waterbody or river segment where it is redeposited, typically occurring because the owner did not follow 3 simple steps that ALL boaters should follow after boating in a waterbody or river with AIS present…
1) clean the vessel (trailer, hull, bilge, wells, etc.) completely;
2) drain the vessel (hull, bilge, wells) completely; and
3) dry the vessel (and trailer) completely…before the next put-in or voyage.
Zealie and the Lake Lonely Owners Association (LLOA) have been working with Saratoga PLAN (Preserving Land and Nature) and the Saratoga National Golf Course (SNGC) to do both manual and mechanical “pulls” of the Lake Lonely Water Chestnut in an effort to control the plant. Saratoga PLAN has organized/sponsored volunteers to conduct manual “pulls” of the noxious weed…this involves folks (volunteers) wading into the affected area and literally pulling the plants out of the lake-bottom. And, the LLOA has also secured the use of the SNGC’s small mini-harvester –very similar to the large weed harvesters used by the Saratoga Lake Protection and Improvement District (SLPID) to harvest Eurasian Milfoil in Saratoga Lake, only about ½ the size – to also, mechanically, harvest the WC that is dominating the northwestern “bay” of Lake Lonely…as you rightly point out in the aerial images. In fact, as I drove out and around LL yesterday, before returning your call, the mini-harvester was indeed out there on LL “mowing” the WC bed.
So far as anyone knows the only effective “control” of the species is this method…physical removal of the plants. Water Chestnut is an annual plant, meaning it propagates by seed only, so pulling the plants before the seeds can mature will cut the life-cycle of the plant, generationally. But there are some difficulties there as well. The “harvesting” of the WC must be complete –meaning 100% of each plant has to be removed for total control/extirpation. It is critical that, when harvesting the plants, all of the plant and root be removed and captured so that no “rosettes” remain as each rosette can produce up to 20 seeds. Also, the timing of harvests is crucial as well. Plants must be pulled before August, when the mature seeds drop from the plant. The WC’s seed itself also presents a significant challenge too…number one, it is armored – meaning it has an extremely tough skin and is literally armed with spikes; number two, the seeds themselves can lay dormant, but 100% viable, for over a decade awaiting a time when conditions for germination are right/proper/suitable; number three, the rosettes with seeds “aboard” can float…sometimes vast distances, riding the dominant currents or, as has also been observed, entangled in the plumage of migratory waterfowl.
I would also like to share that, when the seeds are brown-black and floating on the water’s surface, they are no longer viable, meaning those seeds will not form new plants. However, they can be a personal hazard, if you happen to like barefoot walks at the water’s edge and don’t see them. The hardened “nut-like” nature of the seed, and its 4 prominent spines have been known to cause very painful injuries to those unfortunate souls (soles?) that happen upon them.
Now, I recall that you’d mentioned the local anglers complaining of the decline of LL as a fishery, in recent years. The WC may play a role in that decline. Read the article (link) above…but, WC prefers nutrient-rich (nitrogen and/or phosphorus; more on this below) freshwater bodies and is notoriously noxious for 2 reasons:
One, it has a terrible habit of forming very dense, floating “mats” of foliage, blocking nearly all the sunlight’s penetration into the water column. This has the direct, anti-competitive, negative effect on the native species found in the area of the WC bed because they (natives) are adapted for a site where sunlight is readily available. And, as the aquatic insects, animals and birds that rely on those native plants for browse/food or use them for cover/habitat are then robbed of either or both… the result is a reduction of Lake Lonely’s suitability as habitat for those species and the survivability of those species in that habitat.
Two, it ALSO has the really nasty habit of significantly reducing the dissolved oxygen (DO) of the water which, likewise, has a significant impact on the native freshwater flora and fauna; further reducing LL’s suitability and the survivability of these species (plants, insects, fish, etc.). In our part of the world most freshwater bodies are rich in DO and so the native species have adapted to that condition. Significant (or even sometimes relatively small) reductions in DO can have immediate and (sometimes) ever-lasting reductions or outright eliminations of certain species from waterbodies that were once rich in DO.
And now for the last bit of information I can/will impart to you in this email…the “nutrient rich” thing. Once upon a time, Spring Run (no “Brook”, fyi) was essentially the open sewer of the City (then Village) of Saratoga Springs. Meaning all plumbed sanitary waste water and stormwater were discharged directly to Spring Run. Through time though this was corrected (a bit) when the City constructed a Combined Sewer (sanitary and storm), but, Spring Run was retained as the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO). So, when it would rain and the Combined Sewer became overwhelmed by the volumes of sanitary waste- and storm-waters flowing into/through the pipes, the excess (100% untreated) would be discharged to Spring Run. Then, most-recently, the City, under an Order from NYSDEC, separated the Combined Sewer into its component-parts, to counter the decline in the water quality of Saratoga Lake, so that the Sanitary Waste water flowed to the treatment plant in Mechanicville and the Stormwater flowed to Spring Run and the other natural waterways and wetlands found throughout the City. And so, because for so many years untreated sanitary waste water and untreated stormwater flowed into Spring Run…and eventually Lake Lonely…LL and its primary tributaries (Spring Run and Bog Meadow Brook) have been listed as “Impaired” by the NYSDEC, meaning that the waterbodies can no longer support their primary designated use (in LL’s case as a Class A waterbody, suitable for primary, secondary contact/recreation, as a fishery, and (most importantly) as a source of drinking water. The pollutant/s causing the impairment, you ask? Phosphorus (that’s the nutrient-rich nutrient), Oxygen Demand (low DO), and Pathogens (bacteria; E. coli, fecal coliform, etc.). You can find the latest official (2014) NYSDEC 303(d) List of Impaired Waters here: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/31290.html –the 2016 is also out, but, not finalized/officially adopted.
These days sanitary/urban waste-water/sewers have been removed as causal, on that List, because of the full execution of the Combined Sewer Separation…now the impairments’ source is listed as Municipal Stormwater/Urban Runoff, but, the imprint of over a century of using Lake Lonely and Spring Run as a cesspool has not entirely vanished. Hey, we live and (hopefully) we learn as a species, why/when/how not to crap in our own yard…eventually. And so, that is the focus of the City’s current efforts, aided in part by my office/program…to manage the urban runoff/stormwater to reduce pollutants found therein to the maximum extent practicable. To read more about SW as an issue go to: www.saratogastormwater.org that is our program’s website…it is a little out of date, but all of the information is still accurate and true.
OK…I think I’ve covered enough ground/said enough for now. If you have any questions or wish to speak more on the topic of Lake Lonely or AIS (sadly, T. natans is only 1 among dozens of AIS our waters are effected by) or the Stormwater issue or water quality issues in Saratoga County I’d be happy to do so, any time. Thanks again for reaching out, John.
Best regards,
Blue
I am Cc’ing Alan Richer, Zealie V, the Saratoga County Water Quality Coordinating Committee, and Laurel Gailor (CCE/PRISM Regional Coordinator) in the interests of full disclosure and engagement. BRN
Blue R. Neils, CPESC, CPMSM I~SWM Program Coordinator Saratoga County/Cornell Cooperative Extension Intermunicipal Stormwater Management Program
Chair, Saratoga County Water Quality Coordinating Committee 50 West High Street Ballston Spa, New York 12020 518-885-8995 ext.224 518-885-9078 fax brn5@cornell.edu
According to Mr. Van Raalte, overall, Lake Lonely is currently in pretty good shape. One of the members of his group submitted a water sample to Penn State with the following results.
As further proof of the success of LLIA in managing the lake he furnished me with this picture of one of his sons holding a fish called a pike (toothy critters).
Mr. Van Raalte’s son with casual aquaintance
Water is a precious and finite resource. Wise stewardship of this resource can be a complicated issue. Lake Lonely is fortunate to have the oversight of both the public sector and private individuals to address the challenges of keeping this body of water healthy.
Saratoga Springs Politics 