Another excellent article by Dennis Yusko. I am always amazed, given how thinly the man is spread, that he is able to thoughtfully cover these issues.
Mayor Responds To Whether Saratoga National Complies With The Special Permit Requirements
I received a response to my inquiry to Mayor Yepsen about the apparent violations of Saratoga National Golf Course’s special permit provisions. The Mayor directed Joe Ogden, her Deputy, to respond.
Letter to John Kaufmann from Deputy Mayor Friday October 9th 
Because the image may be difficult to read I have also provided a PDF version
PDF Version of Letter to John Kaufmann from Deputy Mayor
Mr. Ogden makes the following assertion:
“While we greatly appreciate the concerns you have raised, the idea that ‘a major business in this city has been allowed to violate our land use requirements with impunity’ is simply not accurate.”
Having made that judgment, however, he later states in the same letter that “…. we do not have any data or evidence to say for certain that SNGC has or has not violated the requirements of the special use permit.” Mr. Ogden goes on to state that Kate Maynard will be visiting the hiking trails at SNGC to “evaluate its condition so we can assess whether or not we believe it meets the conditions of the easement.”
One would have expected that, before dismissing the allegations, it would be prudent to actually determine whether data or evidence exonerating SNGC actually exists. On its face it appears to imply a prejudice on the part of Mr. Ogden and the Mayor regarding Saratoga National Golf Course’s culpability in these matters.
The question of what kind of limit exists as regards parking at Saratoga National Golf Course is not a frivolous issue. The purpose of having a conservation district was to establish a rural and low intensity environment around the bustling city core.
When Saratoga National Golf Course originally proposed its plan of operation, they emphasized that their modest project would adhere to the conservation district vision. Consistent with this they reached an agreement with the City that they would only require a parking lot with one-hundred and twenty-five spaces. They also requested that they be allowed to park an additional seventy-three cars somewhere on the property when, occasionally, activities exceeded the regular parking lot capacity.
Here is a picture of the actual parking lot resulting from this agreement:
As part of the negotiations, the City recognized that there might be a few extraordinary times when for “special events” the existing parking lot would be inadequate to accommodate a celebrity golf tournament, for example. Not unreasonably, the City agreed to allow that up to three such events could occur per year without violating its rules for the facility.
A reasonable person would interpret this to mean that only under “special” circumstances would they be using more than the parking lots they agreed to.
The result was that the Special Use Permit for SNGC, as Mr. Ogden noted, reads as follows:
“The facility may have up to three special events/tournaments per year where the visitor’s demand exceeds available designated parking. Each permitted event shall not exceed 3,000 persons.”
Unfortunately, this language was very poorly worded, making it easily subject to different — and conflicting — interpretations. “Say what you mean” is a critical consideration in drafting rules, and to that end, city ordinances and rules imposing codes of conduct should, at a minimum, communicate expectations clearly. Without that, enforcement is vulnerable to charges of arbitrary and capricious administration, and will likely fail if challenged.
One interpretation of this language which seems most intuitive would be the following:
- If the number of visitors to an event find that all the regularly designated parking spaces (as set out in the “Site Plan”) are taken and must avail themselves of parking in non-designated areas, then the event will be considered a “Special Event.” The facility may not host more than three of these events per year.
- Under no circumstance can the number of people attending any event exceed 3000.
Under the interpretation offered above, it is easy to determine when an event is considered “special.” It is: “[w]hen the visitors’ demand exceeds available designated parking” (i.e., the parking lot is full and there is overflow).
The Mayor’s office has chosen to interpret the language governing “special events” quite differently. By their interpretation it is nearly impossible, as they admit, to ever determine if an event’s capacity has run afoul of the rules governing designated parking since, they argue, the overflow may be caused not just by the attendees at a “special event” but by the cumulative burden of cars from those who may be “playing golf, attending the bar/restaurant, attending banquets and other events or are employed by SNGC.” It is possible under this interpretation to have multiple events at the same time where attendees take up more than the designated 125 spaces (or allowing for a generous application of the rule, 198, throwing in the spaces beyond those designated ) and still not meet the criteria for defining an event as “special” under the interpretation offered by the Mayor’s Office. Given its interpretation of the Special Use Permit it is all but impossible to determine if SNGC is ever in compliance.
This interpretation places the Mayor in the awkward position of having no apparent way of enforcing the Special Use Permit. Her solution, according to Mr. Ogden’s letter, is to have the building inspector, Steve Shaw, contact SNGC and ask them “how they comply with these conditions” — in other words, monitoring through self-reporting by the parties subject to monitoring. You can’t make this stuff up.
One would have expected that when Saratoga National Golf Course found that their existing dedicated parking was inadequate that they would have asked to have their special permit revised to address the increased need. In fact, in 2007 when they asked for and received authorization to greatly expand their club house they reaffirmed for the record that they had no need for additional parking. When they can routinely exceed their existing parking lot capacity without penalty, why bother to ask for a change? To ask for such changes would acknowledge that the volume of their activities has radically increased, calling unwanted attention to the increase of their activities in the city’s greenbelt.
This is not the first time nor will it be the last time that lawyers and politicians have used a poorly crafted statute to produce an Alice In Wonderland result meant to benefit some special interest.
Skidmore Survey On Saratoga National Golf Course
This is an interesting little story from Saratoga Today about a survey done by Skidmore students about Saratoga National Golf Course. Not very scientific. They interviewed people attending city council meetings about their views on SNGC
Nature Blog on Saratoga Environs
Jackie Donnelly has a wonderful blog focusing on photographing and commenting about what she finds in the woods and waters around Saratoga and near by. She takes some wonderful pictures and introduces us to the names and information about plants and animals she finds in her wanderings. If you enjoy the outdoors, her site is really worth the visit. Jackie’s Blog
Saratoga National Golf Course Did Not Build A Helipad
During the last several days I attempted to locate the helipad at Saratoga National Golf Course in order to photograph it. It turns out that there may not be an actual helipad. Saratoga National Golf Course had been providing regular rides from its grounds for weddings and other events. I had assumed that in order to land a helicopter they would need a helipad. As it turns out, this is not necessarily the case. It appears that the laws governing where a helicopter can land and take off from may be fairly loose. As far as I can tell, they were using the driving range on the course to operate the helicopter.
I believe that landing a helicopter frequently to provide sightseeing rides in what is supposed to be a rural and bucolic area (the conservation district) is inappropriate and inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. I think that the noise has been a major nuisance to the people in the area.
Nevertheless, I was wrong in posting that it appeared that Saratoga National Golf Course had erected a helipad in violation of the city zoning ordinances. For whatever my differences are with Saratoga National Golf Course, they deserve accuracy in reporting on them as do the readers of this blog. It is not the first time I have had to apologize on this site and it will, unfortunately, not be the last. I apologize to Saratoga National Golf Course. I have taken down the inaccurate posting.
Having said that, the overall issue of the use of the greenbelt to land and launch helicopters remains. It would seem that for safety and noise reasons, there should be guidelines and requirements before someone can regularly land a helicopter on land not designed for that purpose. Unfortunately, there may not be. In fact, the FAA which is increasingly driven by the desires of the flight industry rather than the consumers may have authority over this matter and may have very lax requirements. They may supersede the authority of the local municipalities in the matter. There also may not be any current codes in our own city laws regarding this.
In the next few weeks I will be looking into how the city’s zoning law was amended to permit the building of a helipad in the city’s greenbelt and what sort of regulations exist regarding where non-emergency commercial helicopters can land.
Mayor Yepsen’s Fund Raiser: Oy!
Mayor Yepsen scheduled a fundraiser at Saratoga National Golf Course. In light of the fact that her office is supposed to be investigating allegations from this blog about violations of land-use agreements with the city, one might have expected that she would chose a less charged location for her fundraiser.
The fundraiser, as the flyer below documents, was supposed to be held on Tuesday, October 13. On Friday it was brought to her attention that the date she selected was the same night that the League of Women Voters is hosting a forum for the candidates for Commissioner of Public Safety and Public Works. She has changed it to Thursday, October 15, still at SNGC.
Of PACs, Surveys, And Saratoga National Golf Course
The always interesting Thomas Dimopoulos has a comprehensive article on the Saratoga PAC that you can find on the Hill Country Observer website Article On PAC
There is also an excellent editorial on the same website regarding the Saratoga National Golf Course controversy. Great Editorial
*********************************************************************
Saratoga PAC is having a community reception at the Holiday Inn on Tuesday, October 20th. (This is the same place that the Republicans use for their election eve gatherings). They are apparently going to report on their endorsements and the results of their survey. It will be from 5:00 to 6:30 PM. They are asking for a $25.00 contribution to attend. This is where you can register to attend.
Your Invitation To Saratoga PAC’s Reception
Saratoga PAC claims to have received a thousand responses to their survey. Just to give those of you who missed it a flavor for the survey you are only allowed the following responses:
Respond on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most important.
Level of Importance
- 1 – Not Relevant
- 2 – Somewhat Important
- 3 – Important
- 4 – Very Important
- 5 – Extremely Important–Key Issue
And here is a sample question:
- Approve a zoning change for Saratoga National Golf Club to enable the creation of a 5-Star resort golf destination, helping the region compete more effectively for conference and tourism revenue.
Aside from the assumptions built into the question, what would it mean to answer “Extremely Important?” Could Extremely Important indicate that you think it is an extremely bad idea? Is there any way to indicate that you think it is a bad idea? Is this the way to really find out what people in this city think about these issues?
*********************************************************************
Joseph Levy and I have been working very hard on analyzing the data submitted by city candidates to the Board of Elections regarding their donors. This has turned out to be a very large project for two reasons.
First, my second career was as a computer programmer. I have been hard at work writing a software package that can import the data from the state and put it in a readable format for the readers of this blog with further documentation about who the donors are. Once I have the software written, it will be very easy to regularly report to the followers of this blog about this data. It has, like many projects, turned out to be larger and more time consuming than I had anticipated.
Second, looking up all these people and businesses to identify who they are is quite challenging.
Once we get it all done, we will be publishing it and I think the readers of this blog will find it quite entertaining.
Yepsen To Respond On Saratoga National Golf Course Imminently
I received the following email from Mayor Yepsen:
From: Joanne Yepsen [joanne.yepsen@saratoga-springs.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 5:44 PM
To: John Kaufmann
Cc: christian mathiesen; John Franck; Skip Sciroco; michele madigan; Joseph
Ogden; Vincent DeLeonardis
Subject: Re: Saratoga National Golf Course Violations
John, this has nothing to do with transparency, just time in the day. The staff has done a
thorough job looking back at this over the past week and we will have a report back to you
tomorrow that we are happy to share with more information. Thank you again for bringing this to
our attention.
Joanne
Original Email
From: “John Kaufmann” <john.kaufmann21@gmail.com>
To: “joanne yepsen” <joanne.yepsen@saratoga-springs.org>
Cc: “christian mathiesen” <christian.mathiesen@saratoga-springs.org>, “John Franck”
<johnfranck@your-cpas.com>, “Skip Sciroco” <Skip_scirocco@saratoga-springs.org>,
“michele madigan” <michele.madigan@saratoga-springs.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 9:28:21 PM
Subject: Saratoga National Golf Course Violations
Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, your response referenced important issues but did not
actually address them. I know that you pride yourself on your office’s transparency and its open door
policy. I would like to avail myself of these by meeting with you at your earliest convenience to better
understand what your office has done so far and what it plans to do regarding Saratoga National Golf
Course’s apparent violations. I am intrigued by your reference that “The City may need to tighten up
or update the 1998 language.” It would also be helpful to know you and your staff’s thinking about
how to assess the “Western Trail” compliance and the kind of measures you are considering that
would allow you to determine how many “special events” are held out at Saratoga National Golf
Course.
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 12367 (20151006) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
Confidentiality/Privilege Notice: This e-mail communication and any files transmitted with it
contain privileged and confidential information from the City of Saratoga Springs and are
intended solely for the use of the individual(s) or entity to which it has been addressed. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution,
or taking any other action with respect to the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail.
Thank you for your cooperation.
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 12378
(20151008) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
Mayor Yepsen Responds On Saratoga National Golf Course’s Violations… Sort of
I received the following email from Mayor Yepsen regarding the Saratoga National Golf Course violations:
From: Joanne Yepsen [joanne.yepsen@saratoga-springs.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:13 PM
To: John Kaufmann
Cc: <christian.mathiesen@saratoga-springs.org>; John Franck; Skip Sciroco;
<michele.madigan@saratoga-springs.org>
Subject: Re: Saratoga National Golf Course
John, thanks very much for bringing this to our attention. My staff have been looking into all the
questions and concerns and we will be back in touch soon. The City may need to tighten up or update
the 1998 language and be sure everyone follows the rules. More to come… Thank you.
Joanne
I responded as follows:
From: John Kaufmann [john.kaufmann21@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 9:28 PM
To: joanne.yepsen@saratoga-springs.org
Cc: ‘christian.mathiesen@saratoga-springs.org’; John Franck (johnfranck@your-
cpas.com); ‘Skip Sciroco’; ‘michele.madigan@saratoga-springs.org’
Subject: Saratoga National Golf Course Violations
Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, your response referenced important issues but did not
actually address them. I know that you pride yourself on your office’s transparency and its open door
policy. I would like to avail myself of these by meeting with you at your earliest convenience to better
understand what your office has done so far and what it plans to do regarding Saratoga National Golf
Course’s apparent violations. I am intrigued by your reference that “The City may need to tighten up
or update the 1998 language.” It would also be helpful to know you and your staff’s thinking about
how to assess the “Western Trail” compliance and the kind of measures you are considering that
would allow you to determine how many “special events” are held out at Saratoga National Golf
Course.
Candidate Safford Responds To Questions About Saratoga National Golf Course
[Note: While new posts automatically go out to the “followers” of this blog, comments do not. With that in mind I am posting John Safford’s response to my inquiry to him about Saratoga National Golf Course’s violation of their Special Use Permit]
Hi John,
I do follow your blog and was held in suspense while you and your friend sought out the Western trail at National. I was a little disappointed that you didn’t mention the well done Eastern trail when you talked at the council meeting.
I was not a little concerned to hear that the number of events were limited at National . I have attended many not-for-profit fund raisers there and would not like to see them stopped. However, agreements need to be lived up to or they need to be modified.
As you know my numerous conversations with residents in the area reflect an irritation with the many fireworks displays at National and, even more importantly with the general traffic problems at either end of Gilbert Road. Frankly, almost all of the people I talked with like and use National regularly.
From what I understand (except for the Eastern Trail), National has met or exceeded its promises to bring a hi-end golf course to the Eastern Ridge. As Mayor, I will bring up the agreement and see if there is reason to modify it.
Saratoga Springs Politics 