Saratoga Springs Politics

According to the Albany Business Review the owners of the Adelphi Hotel who are close to completing what must be the most expensive restoration in the history of the city ($28,000,000.00) have even bigger plans.  They are seeking to build what the ABR describes as “a second hotel with a spa and ‘resort-style pool’ on the land along Washington Avenue which includes the old parsonage at 23 Washington along with what appears to be the parking lot (19 Washington?).

 

 

The developers, Toby Milde and Adelphi Hotel Partners LLC say they are going to invest $14 million dollars to build a six story,  50 room hotel there.

The parsonage would be converted into what they describe as a “three-room presidential or bridal suite with an entertainment parlor on the first floor.”  This would be connected to the new hotel and through that into the Adelphi.

In the meantime, the Van Dam which abuts the Adelphi is going to be transformed into a 152 room hotel.  Earlier stories indicated it would be a Hotel Indigo property.

Just up the street on Washington is the Universal Preservation Hall being developed by Philip Morris, CEO of Proctors (Schenectady) for a measly $7,000,000.00 as an expanded entertainment venue.

This is going to be quite the intersection.

The Saratoga County League of Women Voters has a long and extraordinary history of serving our county regarding public policy issues and elections.  They have earned a reputation for scrupulous impartiality.  They have been tested on many occasions as they have become the established body to host the “candidate nights.”

In addition, they have taken on a kind of consumer reports function by studying a variety of controversial public policy issues and providing educational materials and events to share their findings.  People rightly look at recommendations from the League as an important resource in assessing community controversies.

The League handbook states under Guidelines for Presenting Differing Views of an Issue at a League of Women Voters Information Meeting: “When the League of Women Voters Study Committee has studied an issue and arrived at consensus (my emphasis), it is legitimate that we inform the public of our position and why we support the stand.  In such cases, it is not necessary to present opposition views.”

In April the League issued a position paper entitled “LWV Saratoga Position on Governance of Local Governments”.  The position paper vigorously argued that Saratoga County government needed professional management and advocated establishing an executive who would professionally manage the county.  Currently the county is managed by its legislature through subcommittees.  It also included the following text regarding the cities in Saratoga County:

The League of Women Voters of Saratoga County believes that Cities in this County should separate their administrative functions from their legislative functions by having a City Council that makes policy and laws and either an elected executive or an appointed administrator to carry out administrative functions. The League supports this separation of functions in order to have a strong centralized administration, to have clear lines of responsibility and to eliminate waste.

Several weeks ago the League announced that it would hold a public forum on the proposed Saratoga Springs city charter.  Three representatives from the Saratoga Springs Charter Commission would be the presenters.  No one opposing the adoption of the charter was included. The League leadership cited the position taken in April on separation of powers and the section of their handbook cited above as the justification for presenting a panel on the charter that included only those in favor of the change.

Jane Weihe, my wife and one of the leaders of SUCCESS, a group opposing the adoption of the proposed charter, contacted the League.  She pointed out that the proposed charter involved far more than the establishment of a city manager.  For example, in addition to the replacement of the current commissioners with council members who only have a legislative function, it established a mayor’s position with an increased salary and decreased responsibilities.  It revised the city attorney from a part time position to a full time position.  It changed the terms of the members of the council from two years to four years and it staggered their terms.  It established term limits for members of the council.  It established a controversial plan for how the transition would take place.  Many questions about what the new government would actually look like and what it would cost have been the subject of heated debate.

Jane would have had no problem with a one sided forum on the virtues of separating administrative from legislative functions in local governments as that was the position adopted by the League.  What she took grave exception to was that the League has never studied the proposed charter (it still may not be complete) let alone endorsed it and it was specifically this document that was to be the topic of the forum

A common definition of  “consensus” is unanimity.  I know for a fact that there are members of the League who vigorously oppose the adoption of the charter.  Not only has the League not formally taken a position on the charter, in light of the divisive nature of the issues it is extremely unlikely that they could adopt it by consensus.  [JK: Betty Gallagher, who was one of the founders of the League has indicated that the League’s definition of “consensus” does not require unanimity.]

The League seems to not have considered that it is quite possible to support the idea of a city manager but to disagree with other facets of the proposed charter and thus oppose its adoption.

I would note that the League has a stellar history statewide of taking strong exception to maneuvers by politicians who stretch rules to serve their goals.  It is hard to reconcile this record with the failure by the Saratoga County League to study and unanimously endorse the Saratoga Springs charter while putting on a panel consisting only of supporters of that charter.

My friend Barbara Thomas is one of the three people who head the League as a member of the Presidential Steering Committee.

I cannot think of a person in our city who has worked harder on social justice issues than Ms. Thomas.  She was on my board when I was the executive director of the Saratoga County Economic Opportunity Council.  For decades she worked for Planned Parenthood championing women’s rights to healthcare and abortion.  She has served for decades in a leadership position in the League of Women Voters.  If there is an issue of injustice, I can fully expect that Ms. Thomas will be there to fight to right it.

Last year Mayor Joanne Yepsen appointed Ms. Thomas to the Charter Review Commission. I was concerned earlier this year when she defended the Commission’s plan to hold a special election the day after Memorial Day week end to vote on the charter by claiming the voter turnout on that day would be higher than the turnout at the regular November election.

She has now been selected by the League to be part of the three member Charter Panel.  So Barbara chairs the League, is a member of the Charter Review Commission, and will be a panelist presenting the virtues of a new charter.

Following complaints by members of SUCCESS about the lack of balance on the proposed panel, the League emailed Jane.  They proposed that in addition to the panel made up of 3 charter commission members, they wanted someone opposed to the charter and someone in favor of the charter to each speak for 10 minutes.

After consulting with other members of her group, Jane declined the offer.  Three charter commission members were to be allotted an undetermined amount of time to state their case and in addition a member of the pro charter advocacy group It’s Time would be given another 10 minutes to make arguments for the adoption of the charter.  That would leave 10 minutes for one member of SUCCESS to put forward arguments against adoption. 4 to 1 and an unbalanced time allotment did not meet the standards the League has always met for presenting balanced information on controversial topics.

I am simply stunned by all of this.  There has been plenty of zealotry accompanying the controversy over the charter.  As I have documented on this blog, some rather questionable tactics have been used by good people whose judgment has been compromised.

I would have expected my friend Barbara, in spite of her role in crafting the charter, to insist as the League always has, that both sides of the issue be scrupulously balanced so that all the facts would come out

 Wherever one stands on the future of the proposed charter, I hope that you would share my concern that the League is tarnishing its extraordinary record and its credibility by violating the rules that are the essence of the trust they have earned over the years.

 

 

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of detection engine 16028 (20170904) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

I received an email from Pat Kane [See full text at end of this post] in response to a comment that was posted on the blog as part of the discussion of the city’s payroll system. A commenter had challenged Mr. Kane’s description of the time and personnel involved in doing payroll and noted that Florence Wheeler, the fulltime person who does payroll, had not been interviewed by the Charter Commission.

In response Mr. Kane wrote:

“Yes Christine G-brown [JK:She is the city director of finance] was interviewed and stated that she dedicates 2 days a week to payroll. Mrs Brown is the Director of Finance and highest paid employee in the Finance Department. She also started (sic) in the same interview that conflicts amounts (sic) the 5 Commissioner (sic) impacts 50% of her work days.”

These are quite serious allegations so I emailed back to Pat that I would need to confirm the comments he attributed to Ms. Gillmette-Brown with her.

Gillmet-Brown, a registered Republican, was originally hired by Democrat  Ken Klotz when he was Commissioner of Finance to serve as his Deputy.  When the city created the position of Director of Finance as a civil service position she was hired to do that job.  Since then she has served under Finance Commissioners from both parties.  One of the reasons I felt the need to confirm the comments attributed to her is that they seemed entirely out of character.  Ms. Gillmet-Brown has always maintained a very low profile.  She has done a superb job and, in the spirit of a civil service, has eschewed anything not directly involved with her work.  Mr. Kane, by publically referencing her comments, was involving Ms. Gillmett-Brown in a highly heated controversy. I felt this required making sure that he was accurately reporting her position.

Here is my correspondence with Mr. Kane:

On Aug 31, 2017, at 9:11 AM, John Kaufmann <> wrote:

Pat:

I want to confirm with the Director of Finance the statements you attribute to her before posting your comment.  Ms. Gillmette-Brown is on holiday so it will have to wait until Tuesday.

JK

---

On Aug 31, 2017, at 12:19 PM, Patrick Kane < > wrote:

John

I am happy have you check with her.That would be the right thing to do everyday.  I wish you would have called any of us to fact check Michele’s statements.

Many of the claims she made about the CRC were bogus.

Waiting until Next Tuesday is more suppression than fact checking.

She testified in front of The Sub Committee chaired by Matt Jones.

In the Music Hall. CRC members in attendance were Matt, me, Ann Bullock, Jeff A [JK:Altamari], and I believe Beth Wurtmann was in attendance.

Additionally, testimony Christine provided to us.

Her answer to us was that she spends two days a week on payroll.

She also stated that has to deal with the political bickering amongst departments and commissioners

I asked how much of your time is spent dealing with the bickering?

10%. NO

20% No

Higher? Yes

50%?  “that is accurate.”

We were  shocked that she would speak out like this knowing that she works for Michele.

But actually do not bother going through with the effort. You are posting many people’s submissions with obvious falsehoods and if my word is not good enough then so be it.

I will continue to monitor your blog to help supply facts.

But once again you censor my comments and let everyone else just fly through.

Best wishes

Pat

On Aug 31, 2017, at 12:27 PM, John Kaufmann < > wrote:

This comment and you are by no means the first for holding up a comment to fact check. —————————————————————————————————————————————–

From: Patrick Kane <pkane1@nycap.rr.com>

Date: August 31, 2017 at 12:47:32 PM EDT

To: John Kaufmann <john.kaufmann> Cc: Jeff Altamari < >, Gordon Boyd < > Subject: Re: Finance Director- John Kaufman 2

Selective at best not the general rule.

——————————————————————————-

I was able to get comments from two other people who were at the meeting Mr. Kane described: Commission member Matt Jones who chaired the meeting and, although she was on vacation, Ms. Gillmett-Brown also responded.

Mr. Jones told me that it had been quite some time since the interview and his memory was a little sketchy.  He was, however, quite sure that Ms. Gillmett-Brown had offered no percentages regarding how much time she spent dealing with political conflicts between commissioners and departments.  He observed that it would have been no revelation that such conflicts occurred, but that he would have remembered if she had  said that half of her work time was spent dealing with such disputes.

Noting again how long it had been since the meeting, he could not recall  the specifics of a discussion involving how much time Ms. Gillmett-Brown devoted to payroll.  He regretted that there was no recording of the meeting to which he could turn.

Ms. Gillmett-Brown, however, was quite emphatic that Mr. Kane’s account of her statements to the committee were untrue.  She asserted that half her time is not devoted to addressing problems related to conflicts between Commissioners.  She was also very clear that she does not spend two days a week on payroll.  She said she spends about thirty minutes.

She also noted that she waited a long time to be interviewed by the committee but her actual conversation with them lasted only about 5 minutes. She offered to return to meet with them again but they never contacted her.  Ms Gillmett-Brown is the Director of Finance and as such oversees the payroll system. She would have been one of the best people to give Charter Commission members an in depth look at how payroll is handled in city hall.

I have noted before in this blog that I appreciate Pat Kane’s dedication to the city.  He believes passionately that adopting the proposed charter will significantly reduce the cost of city government and  improve services.  Memory is a funny thing. I find it possible that Mr. Kane believes his description of Ms. Gillmett-Brown’s testimony.

Readers will have to make up their own minds as to what occurred in the interview.

---

[Pat Kane’s original comment]

My data about the county information came from 2 high ranking elected officials.

Let start with my comment about staff using two days each week. Yes Christine G-brown was interviewed and stated that she dedicates 2 days a week to payroll. Mrs Brown is the Director of Finance and highest paid employee in the Finance Department. She also started in the same interview that conflicts amounts the 5 Commissioner impacts 50% of her work days. [My emphasis added]
We attempted to interview as many tenured employees as possible. Most declined for fear of retribution in the workplace.

Saratoga County has eliminated paper checks. The county employees without checking accounts are giving a card similar to debit card for their pay.

Saratoga County government is a much larger organization and the officials I spoke with are very proud of the progress the county staff and employees have made to modernize their processes.

I believe that modernization will solve many of these issues in all departments.
You are right, the form of governance does not solve all of the issues. The important question is

Should a 50 million dollar operation be as efficient and effective as possible?
The current form of governmence has been in place for 102 years and for many of those years doing a good job.

But we can do better given the right circumstances.

The light bulb was not invented because the candle broke.
This not experimental surgery. This a proven solution to outdated governmental operations. 65% of cities our size using Council manager and the rest use strong Mayor.
Have a nice day.

I received the following description from Commissioner Michele Madigan regarding the city’s computerized accounting system with a focus on payroll. 

Members of the charter review commission have repeatedly asserted that the city’s payroll system is antiquated.  In fact, some members of the commission have even claimed that it is still done with pencils on paper.  Most recently, one of the commission’s members asserted in a post on this site  that “the city payroll system is antiquated… at least 500k can be saved by implementing a modern payroll process.” 

To an unsophisticated person like myself, their statements would make me believe that the city not only has no automated payroll functions but has no plans to address the lack of such accounting tools.

As someone who is a computer programmer and has worked on deployments involving payroll and time recording I can assure the readers of this blog that it is far, far more complex than one would assume. 

I would like to invite any members of the Charter Review Commission to submit a guest post to respond to Commissioner Madigan’s description of how payroll is done currently in the city.  It would be helpful if their response were as specific and detailed as possible explaining what is antiquated about the current system and what system they have in mind that would save the city at least $500,000.

---

According  to Section 4.3.1 of the current City Charter: “Accounting Systems: The Commissioner of Finance shall maintain and supervise the general accounting system for the City government and each of its offices, departments and entities in accordance with the uniform system of accounts prescribed by the State Comptroller…” As a result: The City of Saratoga Springs utilizes one of the most sophisticated financial management and accounting systems available on the market today – MUNIS – from Tyler Technologies has expertise in Financials, Revenue, Payroll &amp; HR, Citizen Services, and Human Capital Management. 

We are not antiquated, far from it; we have integrated MUNIS software modules into a structured departmental system that centralizes in the City Finance Office. We utilize state of the art technology to streamline all the various nuances of our 7 separate Union Contracts and our Non-Union Employee Contract – ensuring compliance within those individual contracts along with various Finance Policies and Procedures (as required under the current Charter and Commission Government Section 4.2.1 Finance Policy and Procedures Manual).  The City utilizes MUNIS Payroll functionality to manage Contract Improvements, Step and Longevity Increases, Accrual allotment and charges, and Employee Deductions (Health Insurance, Deferred Compensation, NYS Retirement Contributions, etc). At the same time we are interfacing Payroll Cost Accounting into our General Ledger every time we post a payroll. In addition the City uses MUNIS modules for Online Tax and Utility Billing, Tax Collections, Accounts Payable, Building Permits and Purchasing. It’s a sophisticated system.

 Additionally, the Finance Department is in the process of implementing a Time and Attendance system module.  Roll-out of the system has occurred in DPW and within our Police Department.   This project will take approximately 2 years from start to finish and included a detailed review by committee with representation from each department.

System implementations are expensive and take time.  We have invested years in our state-of-the-art MUNIS system. I’ve grown tired of the misinformation being peddled by members of the Charter Review Commission.  Vote yes or no to change the form of government, but please let’s have an honest assessment of this proposal and the costs associated with this new hybrid form of government (City Manager w/ a Strong Mayor).

Thank you,

Commissioner Michele Madigan

 

---

Commissioner of Finance Michele Madigan has written the following analysis of costs associated with the proposed charter. The charter which would change the Saratoga Springs city government from the current commission form to a city manager form will be on the ballot on November 7.

---

Commissioner Madigan:

Saratoga Springs voters will decide if we should change our form of government via the adoption of a new Charter this November. Our current commission form of government works extremely well for small cities, is quite democratic, and is often compared to parliamentary systems. Some medium-sized cities, such as Portland, OR, find that it works well for them.

Over the years bi-partisan City Councils have, through open and transparent public debate (sometimes contentious, as democracy tends to be), improved and enhanced services while maintaining one of the lowest property tax-rates of any city in NYS.  We have one of the most stellar municipal bond ratings in the country.  We have achieved the highest score of any city in NYS in our recent review by the NYS Comptroller.

Adoption of the proposed Charter, changing to a council-manager form of government, would require significant change management and will increase the costs of city government. Those who think it will lead to new day, a new beginning for the city haven’t been paying attention.

Proponents of change claim it will lead to savings. I am skeptical – as Finance Commissioner I am very familiar with the costs of city government, and their numbers don’t add up. Savings will allegedly come from the elimination of Deputy Commissioners. Ignore for the moment if this is feasible, and note that, according to Paragraph 8.09.B, the proposed charter lets the City Manager decide whether or not to eliminate Deputies. Assuming such savings seems imprudent. The costs of the required new City Manager, Assistant City Manager and an Internal Auditor or additional audit firm (an unnecessary expense given our size) will cost the City roughly as much as the 5 Deputies currently do. Absent a Deputy Finance Commissioner we would need to create and fill a civil service, union Director of Budget Operations position, which will certainly cost us more than the current Deputy Finance Commissioner. The proposed charter almost triples the Mayor’s annual salary while reducing the work required of that position. It also adds 2 additional salaried Council members. So where are these savings? The Charter Commission have said health insurance is a material area of savings; their arguments misrepresent the actual costs involved by assuming all Council members elect the most expensive coverage possible, which is not the case now and has not been the case in recent history, but even so they could be addressed in far less draconian manner than changing our form of government.

Proponents of this proposed charter claim it will create efficiencies by assigning job duties across City departments. This betrays a complete lack of knowledge of civil service and collective bargaining, while ignoring the monumental tasks and legal expenses of making this fantasy a reality. It is also based on a faulty premise. Job duties are specifically outlined and approved by the Civil Service Commission and the Council with an eye towards being as efficient as possible. Despite what you may hear from the Charter Commission, there is no duplication of effort across Departments, and we do not have employees sitting around doing nothing – far from it. Our Departments are streamlined; this is why our property tax rates are so low and so stable. The Commission continually states that we have 5 payroll departments, we have 1 and it sits in the Finance Department.  They state that the Fire Department should not plow their own driveway, but of course they should as they need to be ready at any given moment to respond to an emergency call. These are just a few examples of the unrealistic cost-saving claims made by the Charter Commission.

Regardless of the desirability of the proposed form of government relative to the current one, I am here to tell you that making this change – with this proposed charter – is not going to save the city and its taxpayers any money. It will increase costs. The next time you hear a proponent of change claim otherwise, please demand real concrete evidence as you make your decision before heading to the polls in November.

Citing family demands the long time chair of the Saratoga Springs Democratic Party, Charlie Brown, has announced his decision to step down.  He will remain a member of the party’s Executive Committee.

In accordance with the committee’s by-laws Courtney DeLeonardis, who  currently serves as vice chair, will assume the position as Chair.

Ms. DeLeonardis is a teacher.  She served on the city’s Ethics Board and is the wife of Vince DeLeonardis, the City Attorney.

 

Brendan Lyons reported more dubious stuff involving the Saratoga County Republicans in the August 13^th Times Union.  Apparently the town of Milton supervisor, Daniel Lewza, was accused of sexually harassing his secretary and the town settled for an undisclosed amount.  According to the story, the town went to great lengths to hide the complaint and subsequent settlement.   As if this was not enough, apparently the town paid for a “politically connected” attorney (among other things he is the husband of Assemblywoman Mary Beth Walsh) to investigate leaks to the media about the controversy.  This included sending letters to members of the town board warning them against disclosing the scandal.

Here is a link to the story: http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Town-hid-harassment-complaint-against-Milton-town-11748677.php

 

 

I received the following information concerning  Saratoga Springs sales tax  figures from Commissioner Madigan:

Earlier this month the New York State Comptroller released their semi-annual report on local sales tax, focused on the first six months of 2017. In this report, which was subsequently reported on by several local media outlets, it was noted that Saratoga Springs tax collections were down 5.9%, or approximately $319,000, year-over-year.

While the report was technically correct, I wanted to address some concerns expressed both in City Hall and in the media. In terms of sales tax distributions received by the city, we have indeed received 5.9% less than we did as of the same period last year. This reduction was unexpected, and I ask all City Council members to be mindful of this shortcoming as we budget for the remainder of 2017. That said, as discussed during the July 18^th Council meeting, the second quarter of 2017 was negatively impacted by over $545,000 of prior period adjustments wholly unrelated to 2017.

Had these adjustments been accounted for correctly when they occurred, meaning in 2016 and 2015, City sales tax collection would actually be up over 4% for the first half of 2017, rather than down almost 6%.

To support this analysis, we reached out to the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance to do a more detailed review of the City sales tax calculation. From June 2016 to May 2017, which is the most recent data available, the City collected $11.9 million from close to 13,000 businesses. As would be expected, the list of sales-tax-generating companies is fairly top heavy, with 92 businesses generating half the City’s annual total, and the top 20 companies accounting for almost 25%. This top 20 represent a diversified pool of industries including hospitality, retail, tech, construction, and automotive companies, and in total this group was up over 13% combined year-over-year. Additionally, of this top 20, 17 were in the top 20 last year. We believe this combination of strong growth and consistency at the top of the list reflects well on the overall economic health of the City, and bodes well for the future.

One sales tax-related article I wanted to mention specifically was in The Saratogian on August 4^th, in which the sales tax decrease was attributed by one resident to “low gas prices” and “reduced construction activity in the City” compared to surrounding areas. While gasoline prices remain relatively low historically, I will note that the average price per-gallon has been higher every month in 2017 when compared to the same period in 2016, per the U.S. Department of Energy.

In relation to the quote about City-wide construction activity, while we don’t get State data at an industry level, I would caution all outside observers from painting with too broad a brush. A deeper dive into the numbers showed us that some construction-related businesses were in fact down, while others were actually up year over year. Furthermore, the impact of construction on the City’s sales tax total is unclear, given the uncertainty around where a builder might purchase their raw materials.

What I can say is that based on all the information we have, the City of Saratoga Springs appears to be economically growing. Overall, the $11.9 million received from June 2016 to May 2017 was 4.4% greater than the amount received from June 2015 to May 2016.

 

To reference back to the initial Comptroller report, if you exclude the aforementioned prior period adjustments, City sales tax collection would be up 4.2% for the first half of 2017, which is better than the State-wide average (+3.4%) and stacks favorable against several nearby communities, including Albany (-1.5%), Washington (+0.7%), Warren (+1.6%), and Fulton (+2.4%).

Again, we’re aware of the negative impact of prior period adjustments on 2017 sales tax collections and we will budget accordingly, but overall we believe our analysis shows just how strong the City economy actually is. I’ll continue to update the Council as we receive future sales tax distributions and reports.

 

[JK:Another great story by Joseph Levy]

Even Bike Trails Can Be Paved With Good Intentions (Or Not)

By Joseph Levy

What may (or not) be this election season’s latest issue is officially known as the Geyser Road – Spa State Park Bicycle Pedestrian Trail. As currently proposed, the paved path would follow a route parallel to Geyser Road from the Milton town line, just east of Rowland Street, to the Avenue of Pines. At the western end, this would connect trails in the town of Milton, and beyond, to trails in the Saratoga Spa State Park at the eastern end. In turn, the latter would link to the existing and proposed Greenbelt trails encircling the city. The Spa Park trails were recently extended to the Railroad Run trail that begins in downtown Saratoga Springs, so that ultimately one would be able to travel by bike or foot between the outer districts and downtown on a safe byway, isolated from motor vehicle traffic.

At a hearing before the City Council on August 1st, residents spoke for and against the existing proposal, which has been in the works in various forms since 2005. Adding to the mix was a recent offer from the Slack Chemical Co. and its neighbor, beverage distributor Saratoga Eagle, both owners of wooded lands roughly three-quarters of a mile west of Geyser Road. They offered to donate land to the city for free so that the trail could wind through this otherwise vacant parcel, saving the city from acquiring land along the currently proposed right-of-away.

Although some conceptual maps were on display as part of project engineer Peter Faith’s opening presentation, one of the problems I had in evaluating the pros and cons was the absence of published maps delineating the various schemes. So, based on the presentation, I came up with the map below. The city’s current proposal is the Red Route and one concepts for the Slack/Eagle alternative is the Green Route.

The Red Route has been under consideration since 2005 and has a total budget of about $3 million, mostly funded by state and federal grants. In addition to the trail, these funds would improve the intersection of Geyser Road and Route 50, which the trail would cross to join the existing path, which continues parallel to the Avenue of the Pines. The nationwide financial crisis of 2008-2009 put this and many other infrastructure projects on the back burner for a few years, so along with the economic recovery, came the incentive to finish this trail, with a target of 2018.

In his presentation, Mr. Faith pointed out that the Slack/Eagle Green Route had numerous problems and was impractical for a number of reasons, including:

1. The Geyser Road bridge over the railway was recently rebuilt to include accommodation for pedestrians and bicycles on the north side. The alternate Green Route would require a new bridge, not only over the rail line, but over Geyser Creek, as well, pushing costs up another $1 million or so. This is to say nothing of the need for new engineering and environmental impact studies, especially since it’s been reported that the Karner Blue butterfly lives in these woods and that there’s a wide swath of wetlands in those lands, to boot.

2. The alternate proposal would still fail accomplish the primary goal of a continuous path from the Milton town line to the Spa State Park. Let me add that at twice the length of the Red Trail along Geyser Road, the cost of the Green Trail, including additional grading, paving, and a bridge or tunnel, would turn this into a $6 million project and push it back another three to five years.

While the hearing was specifically called to discuss the issue of eminent domain in pursuit of an unbroken right-of-way, many residents and one business owner from the Geyser Road area spoke in favor of the project. Currently, there is no continuous sidewalk along the road and the paved shoulder is too narrow for even a vehicle to pull over. Most speakers favored the major objective of providing a direct, safe pathway for biking and walking from the local neighborhoods to and from the Geyser Road Elementary School, the adjacent local park, the Spa State Park and, ultimately, downtown Saratoga. One resident pointed out that even if the alternate route were to be built, kids would still walk or bike down the much shorter (and much more dangerous) Geyser Road shoulder.

Although residents on the south side of Geyser Road generally favored the plan, Jack Pompay, one of the opponents who spoke at the hearing, lives on the north side of the road and, as shown on a chart presented by Mr. Faith, is one of four private  property owners whose land would be needed to complete the project. Mayor John Romano of Ballston Spa, which owns a nearby reservoir situated on a parcel with frontage on Geyser Road, raised several objections, as well.

To be perfectly clear, the city’s claim would be limited to frontage along the road, perhaps 8 or 10 feet deep, and not target entire properties. Most of the parcels subject to this action include structures set far enough back from the road as to be be unaffected. The net change has more to do with relocating landscaping features, such as the scrubs and fencing, than relocating or displacing families.

Mr. Pompay lives at 111 Geyser Road and, as you can see from photos excerpted from Google Earth, the right-of-way would necessitate removing or moving the mature shrubbery that borders his front yard. As a point of fact, Mr. Pompay would stand to loose 0.09 acres of a parcel that totals 7.83 acres. That’s less than 1/10th of an acre.

The other private property owners are Munter Land Holdings LLC (they would loose 0.04 acres out of 45.83 acres of vacant land), Van Hall Holdings LLC (0.07 acres out of 3.58 acres of vacant land), and the Saratoga Springwater Co. (0.6 acres out of 46.6 acres).  Thomas Harrington, Jr, who owns 159 Geyser Road, had concerns about how much of his property, if any, would be taken, but he was not on the list presented by Mr. Faith. Neither was the property at 119 Geyser Road, right next to Mr. Pompay’s, though it would seem that strips of both parcels would be necessary to complete the trail.

In 2005, the principle of property owner’s absolute right to their land was struck down by the US Supreme Court in a Connecticut case known as Kelo v. City of New London. Like it or not, a claim of eminent domain in the furtherance of development is perfectly legal. Despite this, Amanda Jackson, an attorney with the law firm of Harris Beach announced that she was representing both Mr. Pompay and the Saratoga Springwater Co. and would oppose any attempt to claim eminent domain over their respective properties in court.

Dave Morris, a commentator well known to readers of this blog, also came forward to denounce the process and served notice that two Geyser Road property owners, whom he did not name, also planned to sue the city over eminent domain. He took a very aggressive stance and claimed that two of the city council members, also unnamed, had privately admitted to him that they thought the Red Trail had safety concerns due to its proximity to the very busy thoroughfare, an argument used by everyone who spoke against it. Although he did not mention his exact residence before addressing the council, there is a David Morris who lives on Tamarack Trail in the Geyser Crest development, off the south side of Geyser Road. His property would be unaffected.

The figures, noted above, show that the actual amount of eminent domain-related  property under discussion is fairly minuscule, so what’s the big brew-ha-ha all about? What’s missing from the public view? To find out, a mutual friend put me in touch with someone who has closely followed this project from the beginning and who is familiar with many of the principals. This individual, who preferred to remain anonymous (let’s call him Deep Woods) mentioned a number of points, to which I will add a couple based on my own observations:

1. The appraiser, who was hired to evaluate the proposed parcel buy-outs, apparently lacked certain diplomatic skills and offended land owners with both his manners and his math. To illustrate this point, Mayor Romano mentioned that Ballston Spa was offered a mere $1,800 for about 1/4 of an acre of prime road frontage. This, after being threatened with an eminent domain action before there was even an opportunity to negotiate, among other insults.

2. We know from his posts elsewhere on this blog that Dave Morris despises Mayor Yepsen, who backs the trail, as proposed, along Geyser Road.

3. Deep Woods alleged that Adam Madkour, the CEO of the Saratoga Springwater Co., is an extreme conservative who also despises Mayor Yepsen and is also thought to be the financial backer of the proposed lawsuits against the city’s eminent domain actions, including one by Mr. Pompay (Ms. Jackson pretty much confirmed this).

4. Saratoga Springs Republican supervisor candidate John Safford spoke up, as well, and urged the city to delay action until it had more thoroughly considered the proposal by Saratoga Eagle and Slack Chemical. He was defeated for mayor by Yepsen in 2015 and was also the recipient of campaign donations from Jeff Vukelic, the president of Saratoga Eagle.

Frankly, it looks like the principal objections are coming from individuals who are out to embarrass the mayor over a project that she’s promoted and worked to advance for the past several years. But what’s the point? She’s not running for re-election, the Geyser Road Trail was initiated by her predecessor and will be certainly by inaugurated by her successor, so why gang up on her now? I’m not a big believer in conspiracies, but there seems to be some sort of political mischief at work here, if only by coincidence.

If I may further editorialize, the safety objections are superfluous. Mayor Romano suggested that increased foot traffic would lead kids to stray from the path, go into the woods and then into the reservoir, where they might drown. Of course, they could do that now and what would stop them? The whole point of the path is to increase safety for bikers and hikers, as attested to by many of the speakers. If there is a genuine need for additional safety measures, then put a low fence or bollards between the path and the road. Should conditions call for it, this can always be done retroactively.

Rather than waste money on a legal dispute that it’s likely to win, anyway, the city should negotiate a reasonable price with Ballston Spa, put a fence around the reservoir to limit their liability (why isn’t it there now?), and apologize for the appraiser’s ill-mannered treatment of the mayor. It should take the same action with the property owners. Offer them a generous settlement, relocate their fences and shrubs, and agree to a year’s worth of maintenance in order to guarantee restoration of the landscaping to its original appearance.

The next hearing will be this Tuesday, August 15, and the public is invited to submit additional comments, after which the comment period will end. If you’re really passionate about this, don’t just comment here — tell it to the City Council where the vote to proceed, modify, or delay will take place.

For additional insight, a LookTV video of the August 1st City Council meeting can be viewed on YouTube http://www.looktvonline.com/saratoga-council-meeting-8-1-17/. This particular discussion begins at marker 8:08:00. If you’re curious to see and hear Dave Morris in action, he comes in at marker 1:27:25.