The Bethesda Episcopal Church and Skidmore College are hosting a series of events celebrating the 150^th anniversary of the birth of Harry T. Burleigh, one of America’s most important composers, mentor to and friend of Marian Anderson and Paul Robeson, and a specialist in African-American spirituals. 

Mr. Burleigh worked for a period in Saratoga Springs where he got his musical start.

Stephen Salters, a leading interpreter of Burleigh’s music, will be performing both at Skidmore and Bethesda.

Here is a link to an excellent interview with Gordon Boyd about the celebration.  Mr. Boyd, himself an accomplished singer and a member of the Episcopal Church, gives a fascinating history of Mr. Burleigh.

http://www.looktvonline.com/harry-burleigh-anniversary-interview/ 

                The Burleigh observance schedule is as follows: 

•             Friday Dec. 2, 12:15 p.m. A talk by Myra Young Armstead (Bard College), “Blacks in Saratoga Springs: Then and Now.” 

•             Friday Dec. 2, 7:00 p.m. Pre-concert talk by historian Jean Snyder, author of  “Harry T. Burleigh: from the Spiritual to the Harlem      Renaissance” (2015), Ladd Concert Hall, Zankel Music Center.

•             Friday Dec. 2, 8:00 p.m. Concert by Salters, Ladd Concert Hall.

•             Saturday Dec. 3, 3 p.m., Service of Advent Lessons and Carols.  Bethesda Church, 26 Washington Street, featuring Salters, the Bethesda choir and several works by Burleigh. 

 

 

A friend sent me a link to an interview that David Lombardo did with Robert Freeman, executive director of the New York State Committee on Open Government.

David Lombardo is the son of Barbara Lombardo who recently retired as editor of the Saratogian.  Mr. Lombardo  worked for the Daily Gazette newspaper some years ago and part of his beat was Saratoga Springs.  He was an excellent reporter.

Robert “Bob” Feeman is my hero.  He has worked in his current job for over forty years.  I believe he retired briefly but returned to the job.  Consistent with the mission of his office he is extraordinarily accessible.  On a number of occasions he answered the phone himself when I called his agency.  He was like having your own lawyer.  On occasion, when I asked about the accessibility of a document under the Freedom Of Information Law he would offer advice as to how to make the request so that it fit within the law.  In an age in which government institutions have become increasingly hostile to requests for information, it is quite amazing that Mr. Freeman has survived.  I expect it is because, aside from being a person committed to the mission of his organization, he is a very good lawyer.

Link To Interview

 

John Baker purchased Gaffney’s Restaurant on Caroline Street back in 1982.  It was reported in the Albany Business Review that he has sold the restaurant to Ryan Venezia and his partner Gary Elfont for $3.4 million.  Venezia is a real estate investor from Westchester.  He already owns Mrs. London’s Bakery, Max London’s, and the Stadium Café.

---

I received these renderings from Sonny Bonacio of the proposed condominiums for the Moore Hall site.

Saratoga Springs is the best small city to live in New York, according to a study from financial advice site WalletHub.

The study, which examined cities with populations between 25,000 to 100,000, ranked Saratoga No. 11 out of 1,268 cities nationally. The ranking was calculated by looking at the affordability, economic health, education and health, safety and quality of life in each city.

 

Since its inception, Mark Baker has been the President and CEO of the Saratoga Springs City Center.  After thirty-three years he has announced that he will be retiring at the end of December.  He will be staying on in his current position until the Center hires his replacement.  He will also continue in some capacity to assist in the building of the proposed parking facility.

This city has been tremendously fortunate to have had Mark’s services.  It has been my pleasure to know Mark.  He is a quiet spoken and thoughtful man.  During the recent controversy over the parking project I have spoken and corresponded with him on many occasions.   His grasp of the smallest detail of the project is consistent with the excellent management of the Center.  My interactions with the staff simply reaffirm the positive atmosphere that his leadership has brought.

 I know I speak for many when I wish Mark the best for his retirement.

 

The popular analysis by the usual suspects is to blame the triumph of Donald Trump on anti-immigrant feelings, racism, authoritarianism, provincialism, misogyny, et al.  There is also the more strategic approach which involves blaming wikileaks and/or FBI Director Comey for the eleventh hour reintroduction of Hillary Clinton’s email server.

I studied to be an historian and these kinds of critiques ignore the underlying issues.  It is the usual ahistorical moralism that provides easy answers.   While the above may have been contributing factors to Clinton’s defeat they do not fully explain how this country that elected Barack Obama  twice now has Donald Trump as its President-elect  albeit it seems by way of the electoral college. Indeed it does not provide any insight into why, for instance two counties in Ohio that Obama had carried twice went for Trump on Tuesday.

I would argue that the anger, maybe rage would be a better term, has been building for the last decade.  We, in Saratoga Springs, are fortunate to live in something of a bubble.  One does not have to drive far, though,  to pass through the small towns that are decaying shells.  The inflation adjusted wages of most Americans have been declining for decades.  The once thriving industries that provided people willing to work hard with good wages have been vanishing.  The epidemic of opiod addiction and rural meth labs are an expression of the despair that is eroding this country.  Good, well paying jobs that provide futures for those currently employed and their children are vanishing at an alarming rate.

In the meantime,  people have not only had to endure the 2008 crash in terms of their loss of jobs and homes, they have had to suffer through the knowledge that the bankers who brought this all on and were bailed out by these same struggling people’s tax dollars are enjoying huge bonuses and golden parachutes.

They also must suffer through a culture that touts “smart” people who are making out handsomely as deserving of their great success while ordinary people working two and three jobs worry about their own future and that of their families.  The “smart people” are the winners in the globalization game.  You see them on TV in shows about lawyers and doctors, and young professionals.  

In spite of all the retraining programs, without good paying jobs for modestly skilled and educated people, the vast majority of people must suffer the sense of being losers and the even deeper indignity that no one really cares.

The reality is that in Washington, with a few exceptions, no one really does care.  The Republicans promise that with tax cuts for corporations and the shredding of regulations (the basic agenda of all the lobbyists who shower money on them) the jobs will flourish.  The Democrats claim that with education and retraining programs along with more tax incentives for the same corporations, the jobs will come.  Well, for the people living in Gloversvile, Malone, and Amsterdam, nothing has changed.  There is, in fact, no significant sign of even a government presence  doing anything in places like these across the country.

It does not take a degree in political science for many of the trapped Americans to see that the road they have been traveling is one that involves diminishing resources and hopelessness. 

I do not share the same demonization of Hillary Clinton that many of my conservative friends do.  I do see her as someone who had and probably still has, no real sense of just how bad things are in America.  Donald Trump’s zinger asking her what she has been doing for the last thirty years has been dismissed by my friends who strongly supported her candidacy from the beginning.  The fact is that the needs of all of these Americans have been very low on the priority list.  Every four years the “promise machine” goes into high gear and some vapid slogan with the word “change” in it is trotted out for the campaigns.

Hillary Clinton would have lost even if there had never been an issue with her server.  It was seized on as a symbol to be exploited.  The real issue was that she was the poster child for “more of the same.” 

I kind of enjoy using this metaphor.  In 1968 people marveled that black Americans, burned down their own neighborhoods when Martin Luther King was assassinated.  People wondered as to how they could do something that was so self destructive.  On Tuesday, angry Americans burned down their country when they elected a narcissistic conman because in their rage they wanted to send a message to Washington.

This brings me finally to a local issue which is what my blog is really about.  The Democratic Party in this city is cut from the same cloth as the leadership of the National Democratic Party.  They see their responsibility as electing  Democrats period, rather than as speaking as a party to some of the major issues facing this city.   The threat to the greenbelt posed by Saratoga National Golf Course’s plan to build a huge resort?  The Democratic Party has no position.  The threat to the neighborhoods posed by our hospital’s expansion?  The Democratic Party has no position.  The threat to neighborhoods from the Witt Project “Downton Walk?”  The Democratic Committee has no position.  The pathetic ethics code of this city and the Ethics Board’s violation of open meetings law?  The Democratic Party has no position.  The attempt by Sonny Bonacio to convert Moore Hall into micro apartments with all the issues of parking and the exorbitant rents he wanted?  The Democratic Committee had no position.  The on going abuse of the Zoning Board of Appeals decisions to grant variances?   The Democratic Committee has no postion.

Is it any wonder how angry people are at the traditional political parties?  Is it any wonder that this country could elect Donald Trump?  The answer is no and no.

---

After writing this I came on Glenn Greenwald’s piece on the Intercept web site.  Readers will note many of the same points but I am no Glenn Greenwald.  I highly recommend his piece.

Link To His Piece

 

Commissioner Chris Mathiesen has sent a draft of proposed changes to the city’s ethics code to the Ethics Board seeking their comments.  Much of our current code is more an honor system than a serious standard that properly protects our city.  Here are two simple examples.  As a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, if your immediate boss were to come before you there is nothing in the code that would require you to recues yourself.  Similarly, if your next door neighbor came before you seeking a variance to build a garage on your property line, you would not be required to recues yourself.

Geoff Bornemann, Jerry Luhn, and I worked with the Commissioner on the document.

Below is the text of the document.

PROPOSED ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND USE BOARD MEMBERS

with foreword

The standards proposed in this draft are somewhat more exacting than the present  guidelines and rules applicable to Ethics Board functions.  Notably, they would prompt more recusals by sitting members than current practices anticipate.  One of the realities animating this change is the fact that the City has grown, and continues to do so: we are not the insular,  small town of just twenty years ago.  Growth and prosperity bring with them a number of challenges to governing, even while foundational concerns, such as integrity and accountability, remain constant.

In this vein, recusals as appropriate — an admittedly  indefinite concept influenced by individual judgments — are a valuable tool, a complement if you will, to governing the City in ways that inspire confidence and trust.  That said, it is necessary to plan for recusals to avert undue burdens and delays in the functions of land use boards so as not to jeopardize their critical and timely functions, such as having quorums allowing them to proceed with their mandated tasks.

_____________

The current standards set out in the City Code (Chapter 13, Code of Ethics) do not assure the strong and consistent ethical expectations that govern the conduct of various City land use board members.  In particular,  for example, standards which guide the Ethics Board’s actions should be grounded in common experience, explicit and easily understood by its members as well as by the public.  They should, at a minimum, aim to reduce ambiguities and thus the opportunities for inconsistency in the Board’s issuance of opinions intended for guidance of public officials in matters affecting land use in the City of Saratoga Springs.

Upon the assumption that the Ethics Board has inherent authority to recommend standards stronger than those presented in the existing City Code, it is proposed that the Board adopt and propose to the City Council standards that reflect the following principles.

REQUIRED RECUSAL

The board member of a City land use agency or board must publicly disclose and recuse him/herself from acting in a particular matter if:

1.  During any time (a) in the twenty-four (24) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the member has been employed by the applicant or property owner having an application before the relevant board, or (b) In the preceding six (6) months has supplied goods or services to the member including, but not limited to, professional services having an aggregate value greater than one thousand ($1,000) dollars.

2.   (a) At any time in the twelve (12) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the board member has received a personal gift, consisting of goods, services or favors having an aggregate monetary value of seventy-five ($75) dollars from the applicant or property owner; or (b) at any time following submission of an application by the applicant or the property owner to the member’s board, the member has accepted a gift of any kind from that applicant or property owner.

NOTE:  Personal gifts of any kind are likely to raise questions and suspicions among the public, other officials, competing applicants, etc.  Worst of all, gift-giving risks establishing a de facto pay-to-play threshold, however unintended.  By way of comparison, the NYS JCOPE rules allow for some token gifts in limited circumstances, but the City’s Ethics Board may advance stronger expectations, by enactment of codes of conduct.  If we know that arsenic is not good for our health, why allow even a drop to be added to the pitcher we intend to drink from?

During anytime in the past twenty-four (24) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the board member has been employed directly or indirectly (as by subcontract, for example) by any firm, architect, engineer,  surveyor, landscape architect or attorney who represents the applicantor property owner with business before the member’s board.

4.   During any time in the twenty-four (24) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the board member has employed or paid, in cash or in kind, a sum or thing of value greater than one thousand ($1,000) dollars for the services of the applicant or the property owner.

5.   During any time in the twenty-four (24) months preceding the filing of an application before that member’s board, the board member has made a financial investment of any kind having, in the aggregate, a value greater than one thousand ($1,000) dollars with the applicant or the property owner.

6.   The board member has any financial investment of any kind in the project pending before the relevant board.

7.    The board member has any ownership of property that lies within one hundred (100) feet of the property that is subject of the application.

8.    Any member of the board member’s family (e.g., spouse, domestic partner, sibling, parent, children, including children of spouse or domestic partner, grandchildren and the spouses of any of them, and any member of the individual’s household) is currently employed by the applicant with pending business before the member’s board, or any of the professionals representing the said applicant.

NOTE: This proposal is admittedly challenging. The courts in New York have wrestled with small-town/small community relationships and interpersonal familiarities where, in a manner of speaking, or literally in some cases, everybody knows everybody and one can’t hope to categorically avoid some intersections between civic business and broader social exchanges. The focus of this standard may have to be inherently flexible, erring on the side of no-reasonable-suspicions or the like. The courts tend to support each other up on the “know it when I see it” judgment calls but they too err on the side of standards that pass the straight-face test where latent conflict issues present themselves.

9. The board member is an officer or member of a financial institution that is, or is actively considering financing a project that is the subject of the application before the member’s board.

REQUIRED DISCLOSURES

The board member must publicly disclose, for the public record, at the most proximate board meeting:

1. Any ex parte communication or conversation with anyone about a pending application and reveal the date, name and substance of the information received or given.

2.   Whether the board member has any ownership of property that lies within five hundred (500) feet of the property that is subject of the application pending before the member’s board.

3.   The board member is an officer or a board member of a non-profit organization that intends to or has submitted comment on an application before the member’s board.

4. The board member is a personal friend of the applicant or any of the professionals representing the applicant having business before the board.

RECOMMENDED BEHAVIOR STANDARDS

The board member should scrupulously avoid the following kinds of actions:

1. Outside of a board meeting, land use board members should have no discussion about an application pending before their relevant board with the applicant, a person standing as his or her agent, or any of the professionals representing the applicant.

2.    Outside of a land use board meeting, the board members should have no discussion among themselves or with any individual that could lead a person of ordinary sensibilities to suspect undue influence, subterfuge, or doubt the integrity of the board members concerned about an application that is pending before that Board.

3.      Individual board members should refrain from making any public statement or publicly talk about an application that is pending before their land use board.

4.    A former land use board member may not be employed by any applicant, or by a professional representing an applicant whose application for action appears before the board, within twelve (12) months of the member’s departure from board service.

NOTE:  Even while enforcement of this is likely to pose challenges in select instances, it may serve as a vehicle for communicating the City’s expectation of openness and integrity in all realms of board functions.  Waivers may be sought through an established procedure that preseves the integrity of exceptions drawn in compelling cases.

5. Any action that would risk creating the public appearance of a lack of fairness or  impartiality regarding an application before the relevant land use board.

 

Commissioner Michele Madigan should not expect an apology from the Times Union in spite of the 5-0 vote last night to accept her proposed budget.

An earlier post  on this blog published the Times Union  Sunday editorial taking Commissioner of Finance Madigan to task for not including money for the Greenbelt Trail in the city’s capital budget. Commissioner Madigan had proposed postponing this funding until the city secures grant money for the project. The TU editors rejected this reasoning out of hand and instead accused Commissioner Madigan of postponing this funding because of animus towards the Mayor for whom this was  a priority.   This was, they claimed, “petty politics at their worst” and they accused Madigan of having “an ax to grind.”  The  editorial announced that the Mayor was suggesting  a separate vote on the capital budget something they endorsed so the Council could “tell Ms. Madigan to get her priorities straight.”

Well, at the City Council meeting last night the Mayor did not suggest a separate vote on the capital budget. Instead the Mayor joined in the enthusiastic love fest of  praise for Commissioner Madigan’s budget which passed unanimously. All this can be seen on the city’s website.

One has to wonder again where the TU is getting its disinformation on Saratoga politics.

 

 

The Times Union’s apparent obsession with Michele Madigan has reached a new level of craziness. 

Commissioner Madigan has put off appropriating money in the capital budget for the greenbelt trail until the grants that the city has applied for are awarded.  Ms. Madigan has made it clear that she is in support of the project but as the chief financial officer of the city she believes that the city should not commit its own funds until there is a viable fiscal basis for going forward.  Given the costs and scope of this important project, Ms. Madigan’s deferral seems wholly reasonable.  I expect that she will be supported in her budgeting at Tuesday night’s meeting by a majority of the Council.  The Mayor has indicated that in spite of the fact that the grants remain an unknown she wants the city to move forward anyway.   

There is little question that the relations between Commissioner Madigan and Mayor Yepsen are not cordial.  It seems to me utterly unreasonable for the Times Union to cast this disagreement, though,  as driven only by petty conflict and to characterize Commissioner Madigan as the villain whose policies are put forward because she has (in the words of the Times Union) an axe to grind.

I have to wonder,  where is the Times Union getting their analysis from?

What follows is the Times Union’s editorial and Commissioner Madigan’s rebuttal.

The Spa City’s priorities

By TU Editorial Boardon October 27, 2016 at 2:37 AM

As the Saratoga Springs City Council prepares to vote next week on a budget that includes – and excludes – some noteworthy projects, council members might consider how this might read in, say, a promotional brochure for the city.

As things are looking, it will read like this:

“Saratoga Springs is investing in its historic City Hall, with almost $750,000 in renovations to the finance commissioner’s office that include a new private bathroom and break room for the staff and some ceiling work.”

With some tweaks to the budget, on the other hand, it could read like this:

“Saratoga Springs is investing more than $830,000 in its citizens and its future, starting work in 2017 on a Greenbelt Trail that will eventually create a 24-mile walking and biking trail. The first phase of this more than $16 million plan will be a downtown connector linking parts of the trail in the heart of the city. The local commitment will leverage millions more in state, federal, and private investment.”

We’re all for preservation of historic buildings like City Hall, but clearly, the Greenbelt Trail would be a boon for the city and its residents, and yet another attraction for the many tourists who visit in the summer. A feasibility study of the trail estimated that it would mean several million dollars a year in health and environmental benefits.

A committee comprising the mayor and representatives of the four departments, in fact, ranked the connector project seventh on a list of 22 capital projects; the work in the finance commissioner’s office ranked ninth. There’s nothing to say both can’t be done.

But Finance Commissioner Michele Madigan, whose job it is to merge the recommended capital budget with the proposed operating budget and present the council with a comprehensive budget proposal, has her own priorities – and they don’t include the Greenbelt Trail.

Her stated reason is that she can’t justify borrowing $833,000 unless the city knows if outside grants will come through. The city doesn’t expect an answer from the state until December, nor from the federal Department of Transportation until early next year.

We’re not buying it. It’s no secret that Ms. Madigan is at odds with Mayor Joanne Yepsen, for whom the Greenbelt Trail is a priority. This smacks of petty politics at their worst – a worthy community project that would benefit the entire city financially and in terms of quality of life sidelined by a single public official with an ax to grind.

Because of the quirks in Saratoga Springs’ system commissioner form of government, the budget is normally presented in its entirety for an up-or-down vote. Mayor Yepsen suggests that rather than force the council into an all-or-nothing decision, the operating and capital budgets be voted on separately. It’s a fair approach – one that would allow the council to tell Ms. Madigan to get her priorities straight.

---

Commissioner Madigan Responds

A recent Times Union Editorial took me to task over two of the 30 plus projects that currently sit in our Capital Budget (Finance Department Renovations at an estimated cost of $750K) and Capital Program (Greenbelt Trail Connector at an estimated cost of $2.3M, of which $833K would come from the taxpayers).  The Editorial reduced my entire proposed budget down to these two projects and pitted them against one another as if there is some kind of rift between departments, and giving the impression that the City Council must choose between these two projects.

The budget I proposed for the taxpayers and residents of Saratoga Springs consists of a $45M Operating Budget, an $8.4M Capital Budget, a Debt Service Budget, and the Water and Sewer Budgets.  I presented this “comprehensive budget” with no increase in property tax rates for the taxpayers of our city.   The various budgets include funds for many high priority projects, funds for essential city services, wages and benefits, infrastructure and safety needs. It is important to remember that adoption of the city’s budget will  require a majority vote of the Council.

I immediately responded to the Times Union’s first inaccurate article about the City Hall Finance Department renovations, which falsely claimed that I was getting my own private bathroom and kitchenette (for my exclusive use) with the following letter http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Letter-Maintaining-City-Hall-essential-9240182.php.  It seems I need to respond yet again.  I’ve been offering weekly public tours of the Finance Department since the publication of the first inaccurate article; many have participated in these tours and all have concluded that this space – which occupies approximately 1/3 of the first floor of City Hall – is “desperate” for renovations.

The $2.3M Greenbelt Trail Connector, which began under Mayor Scott Johnson in 2013 (and for which I’ve publicly stated my support, repeatedly, on the record), has always been presented to the City Council as a project that would be primarily funded by grants and that the City would not be expected to commit any of its own funds until this grant funding had been secured.  As a procedural matter during Council discussions of grant applications, I always ask for the record “is the City expected to provide any matching funds? If so how much, under what form, and does this obligate the City financially if we are successful at receiving the grant?” This is my duty and obligation as a Finance Commissioner exercising her fiduciary responsibilities to the City and its taxpayers.  Since its inception the plan has always been that we would not move forward on the Greenbelt Trail Connector project until the applied for grant funding had been secured – which is expected in 2017.  Therefore, this project is still in our 6 year Capital Program, which means we still plan to move forward with it, but is not included in the proposed 2017 Capital Budget.  It would be irresponsible for me to propose that we borrow funds in 2017  – and ask our taxpayers to make principal and interest payments on those borrowed funds during the year – for a project that may not even move forward until 2018 or thereafter.  I have stated, for the record, my support for amending the Capital Budget in 2017 if our grant applications are successful, as has Mayor Yepsen and at least two other Commissioners.  I do not anticipate that getting the required votes to make this change in 2017 if the sought after funds are secured will be a problem, but I do not speak for the entire City Council.

Furthermore, I have been discussing all of this with members of the Greenbelt Trail Committee and Sustainable Saratoga.  They understand what we are doing here and that this is not intended to jeopardize or delay progress on the Trail Connector.

This is merely an issue of timing. I say we shouldn’t borrow the funds until we actually know we need them. The “fiscally conservative” Times Union urges me to go ahead and borrow them now, and bake the repayment of them into the 2017 property tax rate, even if we don’t yet know we need them.  I say lets wait a few months and borrow the money when we know we need it – and know how much we’ll need – there is no guarantee we will receive the full grant amount. The TU says this means my priorities are skewed and that I am engaging in petty politics.  I say that this shows the TU editorial was written without a full understanding of the issues.

Another issue that needs to be considered is that the $2.3M cost estimate for the trail is just for one of eight phases of the proposed trail. The total cost is still not known, and has not been discussed with the City Council, but latest estimates are between $16.5M and $20M.  For a full overview of the proposed Greenbelt Trail and it’s cost please visit https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxfrGj3VKIbcMVJIa09pZjROOFU/edit

 

Our very own Joseph Levy is running for the New York State Senate on the Green Party Line.

Here is a link to the WAMC story in which he debates Republican Kathy Marchione (whose odious campaign against previous incumbent Roy McDonald was based on opposing his vote in support of gay marriage) and the Democratic candidate Shaun Francis. The story includes audio excerpts.

http://wamc.org/post/candidates-debate-43rd-senate-district