Showing posts with label partition street project. Show all posts
Showing posts with label partition street project. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Maurice Hinchey Explains Sewer Improvement Earmark


Congressman Hinchey Touts Saugerties Village Sewer Improvements

June 1, 2010 - Under cloudy skies Saugerties politicians gathered at the Saugerties Village Beach to hold a press conference to herald the $800,000.00 grant which was included in an earmark. Saugerties Village will have improvements to its aging infrastructure , thanks to Congressman Hinchey.

Some of the folks who attended included Saugerties Town Supervisor Greg Helsmoortel, Town Trustee Fred Costello, Mayor Bill Murphy, Alex Wade and both Saugerties Village Water and Sewer Supervisors.

It seems that the Congressman had called together the press to dispel the "Those Lies" he claims were printed that the Daily Freeman that connected the Partition Street Project and the earmark. The Congressman is part owner of the project.

When asked what his position was on the many concerns Villagers had regarding noise, traffic, lighting and safety concerns with the new project, he stated that he was not familiar with the specifics. "I'm not [aware] of the [Partition Street] project details so I can't give you any answers... if citizens have any problems contact me and I'll [try] to address them."

He directed his attention to me [David Radovanovic] and assured me that he would take care of any problems that arise regarding the Partition Street Project.
Posted by Picasa

Congressman Hinchey to Hold Press Conference at Saugerties Village Beach

Congressman Hinchey is having a press conference today (June 1, 2010) at 2:00 PM at the Saugerties Village Beach. He will be speaking on concerns of recent articles in the Daily Freeman about his earmarks to Saugerties Village for sewer improvements. Some have implied that these are self-serving earmarks since the improvements will benefit the new Partition Street Project which Congressman Hinchey is part owner.

Sunday, November 8, 2009

FOIL Appeal Denied - Diamond Mills Paper Company / Dam on Partition Street, Saugerties, New York

FOIL Appeal Determination for 09-08-3A (David Radovanovic, February 13, 2009)

February 13, 2009

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of General Counsel, 14th Floor
625 Broadway, Albany, New York 12233-1500
PHONE: (518) 402-9522 FAX: (518) 402-9018 or (518) 402-9019
Website: http://www.dec.ny.gov/

CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

February 13, 2009

David Radovanovic
100 Dock Street
Saugerties, New York 12477

Re: Freedom of Information Law ("FOIL") Appeal No. 09-08-3A
FOIL Request No. 09-127 / 25-3/09
Partition Street Project / Partition Street, Saugerties, Ulster County (Diamond Mills Paper Company / Dam)

Dear Mr. Radovanovic:

This is in response to your appeal, pursuant to the New York State Freedom of Information Law ("FOIL", codified at §§ 84-90 of the Public Officers Law ["POL"]), from the denial of access to certain records pertaining to the Diamond Mills Paper Company / Dam on Partition Street, Saugerties, New York.

In accordance with the Department's FOIL appeal procedures, I requested copies of the records that were withheld from disclosure by the Department's Region 3 office. On this appeal, I conducted a de novo review of those records.

BACKGROUND
On January 14, 2009 you submitted a letter to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's (hereinafter "DEC" or the "Department") FOIL e-mail address seeking certain records of the Department relating to the Partition Street Project / Partition Street, Village of Saugerties, New York. On January 16, 2009 DEC's Region 3 Records Access office acknowledged receipt of your request and assigned your request FOIL No. 25-3/09. By letter dated January 20, 2009, Region 3 Division of Environmental Permits responded to your request by releasing all responsive records that were in the custody of that division. On January 21, 2009, Region 3 Division of Water responded to your request and released responsive records, however withheld disclosure of six (6) records as they were exempt from disclosure pursuant to POL §87(2)(g), as they contain inter-agency or inter-agency deliberative communications. Finally, on January 27, 2009, Region 3 Division of Law Enforcement responded to your request by stating that after a diligent search, no records could be located that were responsive to your request. On February 5, 2009 you filed this appeal with my office regarding the six (6) records withheld from disclosure by Region 3 Division of Water.

I have received the records withheld by Region 3 Division of Water staff and I have conducted a de novo review. Following is my determination:

RECORDS REVIEWED
On this appeal, I have reviewed six (6) records, consisting of nine (9) pages, that were provided to me by Department staff. The records consist of four (4) e-mails between December 2005 and January 2008 and two (2) internal memoranda from 2008.

RELEVANT STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS
POL §87(2)(g): inter-agency or intra-agency deliberative communications
POL §87(2)(g), authorizes the denial of access to records or portions thereof that are intra-agency or inter-agency materials which are not: (i) statistical or factual tabulations or data; (ii) instructions to staff that affect the public; (iii) final agency policy or determinations; or (iv) external audits, including but not limited to audits performed by the comptroller and the federal government (see POL §87[2][g][i]-[iv]). Intra-agency and inter-agency materials that consist of opinions and recommendations of agency staff are exempted from FOIL "to protect the deliberative process of the government by ensuring that persons in an advisory role would be able to express their opinions freely to agency decision makers (citation omitted)" (Matter of Xerox Corp. v. Town of Webster, 65 N.Y.2d 131, 132 (1985); see also New York Times Co. v. City of New York Fire Department, 4 N.Y.3d 477, 488 (2005) ("The point of the intra-agency exception is to permit people within an agency to exchange opinions, advice and criticism freely and frankly")).

The e-mail before me on this appeal contain opinions, evaluations, requests and perceptions of Department staff. Furthermore, the internal memoranda consist of recommendations regarding a permit and opinions of staff regarding the same. Such internal deliberative communications, exempt from disclosure pursuant to POL §87(2)(g), will not be released through this appeal. Based on the above, your appeal is denied.

This letter is the final determination of the Department of Environmental Conservation with respect to your appeal. You have the right to seek review of this determination pursuant to Article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules, and Public Officers Law §89(4)(b). In any further correspondence relating to this appeal, please refer to FOIL Appeal No. 09-08-3A.

Sincerely yours,

/s/

Dena N. Putnick, Esq.
FOIL Appeals Officer

cc: Robert Freeman, Executive Director
Committee on Open Government
Ruth Earl, Records Access Officer
Michael Knipfing, Region 3 Records Access
Beth Zicca, Region 3 Division of Water
 
For an DEC's online record visit http://www.dec.ny.gov/public/52420.html

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Saugerties Village Ignores New York State Coastal Management Program

Saugerties Village is designated in SASS documents as a Scenic Area of Statewide Significance. Saugerties Village completed its own Local Waterfront Revitalization Program which was approved in1985. The purpose of which was the future protection and restoration of the Village's natural, historic and scenic resources.

The Cantine Dam property (and future home of The Partition Street Project) falls within NYS DOS Division of Coastal Resources' definition of an abandoned site having natural, historic and scenic significance. However, the Partition Street Project developers have not been required to provide for public access to what is undeniably Saugerties Village's most important waterfront resource.

The owners [and developers] of this Village landmark are Tom Struzzieri (HITS), John Mullen and Congressman Maurice Hinchey. You would think, with a US Congressman as an owner, The Partition Street Project would  adhere to the requirements of Saugerties Village's own LWRP (Local Waterfront Revitalization Program).

However, to this point (11/07/09) in the Village Zoning Board approval and SEQRA process, the architects' plans are missing many of the mandated requirements for building along Saugerties' Esopus Creek banks.

In 2004, Ashokan Architects of Kingston New York designed the plans and provided the drawings for a beautiful project which resurfaced four years later (2008) as Tom Struzzieri announced plans (HITS boss plans hotel, catering hall, restaurant in Saugerties) for the catalyst which would be the Village's revitalization. But apparently after receiving $780,000 in EDC grants the original design was abandoned for the latest plans which restricts public access, obscures views of the dam and includes sprawling parking lots which will welcome visitors to the Village's Historic District.

Referring to enforcement of the Villages' Historic Review laws, Mayor Yerick passionately proclaimed [in a 2002 Daily Freeman article] that he would be "... hell-bent ... to get the thing implemented and executed so we can get some people to consider other people, their neighbors..." Apparently the laws he was referring to, only apply to the less favored because this past April (09) Mayor Yerick unilaterally dissolved the entire Historic Review board (Replacement of board draws fire in Saugerties) because the board wrote a letter to the Village Zoning Board stating their concern about the huge parking lots which are included in the newly revised Partition Street Project.

To date, the necessary drawings that would clarify the contour and accurate view of what Villagers could anticipate from the construction of The Partition Street has yet to be made public. The fact remains that this project, whether you support it as is, or with changes, represents a significant change to Saugerties Village's  quality of life.

Please contact the Division of Coastal Resources (Hudson Valley Division)
or Director George Stafford to express your concern about Saugerties Village's refusal to require any meaningful public access and protection of our Esopus Creek waterfront at the proposed Partition Street Project.

###########################################

If you have problems using the above form, please go to http://www.dos.state.ny.us/about/contact.asp and select "Coastal Resources", fill the form with your comments and submit.

###########################################

Albany Office
Division of Coastal Resources
NYS Department of State
99 Washington Avenue, Suite 1010
Albany, NY 12231-0001
Telephone Number: 518-474-6000
Fax Number: 518-473-2464

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

View of Original Partition Street Project - Saugerties



This was the originally proposed Partition Street Project ViewClick link above for more detail

This was the original site drawing (created in 2004) of The Partition Street Project in Saugerties Village before it was abandoned by Leading Edge Developers for a less desirable design.

The attached artwork depicts the preferred design which incorporates many new green and community-centered design aspects which the latest design does not.

Several perspectives of Partition Street Project

Partition St Project Saugerties PerspectivesClick link above for more detail

Partition Street Project (Saugerties, New York) various perspectives which were used to represent the original design prepared for Tom Struzieri of Lead Edge Developers by Ashokan Architects, though Mr. Struzieri later abandoned for a far less preferable design.


Saugerties Partition Street Parking Garage revisited

Partition Street Project GarageClick link above for more detail

The Partition Street Project garage plan proposed for originally proposed design efficiently and effectively uses underground parking, making parking more convenient for customers and invisible to the public.

In Saugerties Village (New York) parking has always been an issue especially since its' history dates back hundreds of years before the automobile. This original design created by Ashokan Architects addresses this dilemma with a sensible solution.



Original Saugerties Partition Street Project

Original Partition Street Project Site Plan
which was initially promoted by Lead Edge Developers , a.k.a Tom Struzieri (Horses in The Sun), Maurice Hinchey (US Congressman) and John Mullen (Mullen Construction. However, the present site plan is much less user-friendly and doesn't seem to take into consideration good design practices.

The original site plan depicts three buildings that total 73,000 s.f., surface parking for 95 behind the street front buildings, and underground parking for 155. The garage is entered from Dock Street and exits onto Partition Street.

Notice the integration of the facility into the waterfront. In the new design any access to the waterfront  is nonexistent.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

IMPORTANT: Public Hearing for Saugerties Partition Street Project

Partition Street Project Public Hearing

Date: Mon, Oct 26, 2009
Contact: Mary Frank
Phone: 845-246-2321 x1
Email: mfrank@villageofsaugerties.org
Description
Time: 7 p.m.

Description:

The Village of Saugerties Planning Board will receive comment on the proposed Partition Street Project, located at the former Cantine Mill premises. The project involves a catering hall, restaurant, hotel, parking, infrastructure, lighting improvements and landscaping.

Senior Citizens Center, Market Street.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Saugerties Partition Street Project is Alive!

Without fan fare or hype, the postponed Partition Street Project seems to be alive and well again. Saugerties Village Planning Board held their Wednesday meeting this evening at 7:00PM with Tom Struzzieri, principal partner of Saugerties Partition Street Project in attendance. The hired architect for the convention center and hotel project presented the Planning Board with a two-dimensional drawing of the buildings' facade. Though little details were discussed [or questions asked], the planning board expressed their approval with favorable comments regarding the color drawing.

Other than Mr. Struzzieri's entourage, the meeting seemed void of many of the concerned citizens that prior meetings attracted. Let's hope that the promised "public meetings" will be announced soon before the project is finished.

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Saugerties Times' Editor "Confuses"

The editorial by Will Dendis on April 9 is very misleading as he tries to guess as to Mayor Yerrick's [equally confusing] dismissal of the Saugerties Village Historic Review Board.

The New York's State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) requires the Village of Saugerties’ Historic Review Board to be a part of the review process for the Partition Street Project. In New York, planning boards, town boards, city councils and other government agencies must comply with strict procedures for the review of environmental impacts of proposed projects that they approve. If the procedures are not adhered to, citizens may challenge the decision in court, generally seeking to annull the decision in question and the environmental review process starts over.

When Will Dendis refers to the current historic Review Board (whom the mayor has tried to remove) as “inserting itself into the process” and that the Historic Review Board has "run amok”, the Saugerties Times editor has totally misrepresented the facts. The current board (Dave Minch, Michael Sullivan Smith and Rosemary Brackett) are required by SEQRA to form an opinion as to the project’s appropriateness. Since they are listed as interested agencies at the beginning of this process, they should remain in place until it’s resolution.

The SEQRA review process involves negotiation between interested parties, developers and the citizens of the Village of Saugerties. The Historic Review Board followed Village law and neither Mayor Yerrick [or Saugerties Village Board] has the authority to usurp the Village's own laws. Will Dendis is entitled to his opinion, but first he should get his facts straight.

Diana Bryan
845-246-3182

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Village Law is Only a Guide - Explains Saugerties Mayor

On April 2 the Village of Saugerties Mayor notified four members (4) of the village's Historic Review Board that all 5 members [staggered 3 year terms] were being replaced and that a "clean sweep" was in order and that the mayor took this action because of [repeated] alleged grievances against the board members.

Three (3) members [David Minch (chair), Rosemarie Brackett and Smith were notified by mail of their dismissal during the week April 6. On Monday April 6, the regular Village Board meeting took place, with the agenda to name the replacements. During the public comment period several citizens, including David Minch spoke about their dismay over the mayor's unilateral and hasty decision. It was brought out that this action was taken immediately after a local developer stated that his project was on hold partly due to the resistance he was experiencing from some citizens.

The mayor was reminded that according to village law, he did not have the right to dismiss the members and that his actions violated the village law. "It's not unprecedented" the mayor contented and that he has replaced boards at least twice of the last 10 years in his "regime". During the April 6th meeting and subsequent meetings, Mayor Yerick defended his action citing his right to replace Historic Review Board members due to the fact that he had up to 20 grievances with the board members, though he refused to reveal the grievances. He explained that his decision culminated with the board's recent recommendation that Tom Struzzieri [local developer] had "stormed" into the mayor's office several times, cursing and complaining of the board's recommendations regarding several of his projects, including The Partition Street Project. The mayor continued to state that"Village Law is only as a guide" and that businesses [like Tom Struzzieri's] sometimes trumped those laws.

Numerous times over the past several weeks, mayor Yerick stated that when a developer who is bringing "many, many million dollars project" into the Village that "common sense" took precedence over laws.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

"Let's just take this one off-line"

Last night Saugerties' Village Mayor Yerrick explained that "It's not unprecedented, I replaced the (entire) membership of committees twice in my regime". The retort came moments after the first of five public speakers inquired about his decision (last week) to replace all of the members of the Historic Review Board. In what the mayor explained was "putting fresh eyes on a committee that extended it's authority too many times over the past several years in my opinion". Penelope Milford, who lives on Valley Street in the south side of the Village asked the mayor, "Please tell us what exactly did the members do that constituted "extending their authority"?" After seemingly struggling with an answer, Yerrick revealed that it was due to a letter that the committee sent to the Village Planning Board which requested "remediation of the parking" situation at the proposed Partition Street Project. The letter explained that since The Partition Street Project was at the entrance of the village's Historic District there should be a reconfiguration of the parking lot/s in order not to present an adverse visual impact. In other words, the committee suggested redesigning the parking lot so as not to look like a Walmart's Super Center.

David Minch (replaced Historic Review Board chair) stood up to take his turn at the imaginary lectern to "share with Village trustees his willingness to step aside and facilitate the transition, though there are legal issues that need to considered". David continued to explain that the Village's own zoning laws dictate that member terms are three years and are staggered in order to provide a smooth and contiguous transition of duties to new members. However, since the mayor replaced all the board members (all at once) there would not be a quorum necessary to conduct business, including voting on the minutes of the last meeting. Mayor Yerrick repeatedly tried to end discussion by suggesting, "David, there are no problems that are insurmountable, let's just take this one (conversation) off-line and we'll come to some solution".

From Partition Street Project

David continued to explain that the board consulted with CLG (Certified Local Government) program which is provided by the New York Department of State regarding the remediation request letter and that it was within their authority as a Historic Review Committee. At one point the Mayor demanded to know, "what attorney gave you that advice? You should have consulted with the Village attorney". Laughs in the audience could be heard as it was explained that the CLG offers legal advice to historic review boards as part of the Village's membership.

Saugerties Village Trustee Suzanne LeBlanc asked the mayor what were the qualification requirements for new Historic Review Committee members. An architect, historian, and real estate professional was the answer. The new replacements that the Mayor appointed were Richard Frisbee (Chair), Don Hackett and Susannah Sattan. Several Village Trustees suggested postponing the vote for new committee members until the next Village Board Meeting, Monday April 20.

Saturday, January 10, 2009

Bait and Switch

Residents question design of Partition Street Project -- by Heather Plonchak

David Radovanovic approached the Saugerties Village Board last Monday, and he was not happy.

Radovanovic, who lives on Dock Street, asserted that significant changes to the proposed 30-unit hotel and 400-seat convention center and restaurant have been made since it was first announced in 2007, noting that they came after the project received a $780,000 grant from the Empire State Development Corporation.

"The original proposal included retail space, a kayak launch, and public access to the creek," said Radovanovic. "It was actually a wonderful design. Then, all of a sudden, at the planning board meeting, there's a new plan, which is completely different. It's really kind of upsetting because the majority of the space is going to be used for parking."

Radovanovic also said that developers made it clear at the December meeting of the Village Planning Board that no public access to the lower Esopus Creek will be available on the site, though it was promised during the conceptual planning stages. He also cited the plan to level Nanny Goat Hill -- the historic and picturesque rocky outcropping on Dock Street opposite the site -- to create an overflow parking lot.

"I wanted this project to happen so that it would benefit the community," said Radovanovic. "I have an investment in this community and I don't want to be run over. It's a shame that folks like myself have to get all up in arms about this but, I'm afraid that there will be very little oversight if we don't look closely at this."

Radovanovic also raised environmental concerns, noting that the area surrounding the former Barclay's Dam falls within a Scenic Area of Statewide Significance, according to a report published by the New York Department of State in 1993. He said the project would violate many points within the waterfront advisory committee's policy book, including scenic quality policies.

Other environmental concerns include fish and wildlife disturbance in a recognized estuary. Reading from a publication by the DEP, Radovanovic said, "The Esopus Creek, entering the Hudson River, is a tributary for spawning habitat for herrings and over wintering areas for black bass species, just to name a few. It is determined that there are six wintering sites that are extremely important or critical to the maintenance of the Hudson River black bass stocks, including Esopus Creek."

He continued, asserting that, "The Partition Street Project will have an adverse affect on this recognized estuary and historically significant resource, if permitted as indicated in the current plans."

Radovanovic is also concerned with the amount of additional wastewater that will be generated from the facility, claiming that the plant is already processing more than it can handle. According to Radovanovic, reports from the DEC show the plant operating in a non-complaint stage during 11 of the 12 quarters in the past three years.

Rosemary Brackett reiterated Radovanovic's concerns over the loss of a scenic location, and stressed her own feelings about the proposed blasting of Nanny Goat Hill.

"Keep in mind that the people of the community do not want Nanny Goat Hill destroyed for the sake of a parking lot," said Brackett. "There is no going back; once it's destroyed, its gone forever."

Mayor Yerick was unavailable for comment, though he has previously stated that questions surrounding the project will be asked and that answers will be required during the public hearing phase. He has said the project may be modified to meet public concerns, although it is important for the local economy that the project comes to fruition. He has also stated that the water treatment plant has enough capacity to accommodate the development.

Sewer separation, wall restoration plans move forward

One plan to alleviate the workload of the wastewater plant may become a reality this spring. According to special assignments officer Alex Wade, the state has approved the anticipated storm water separation project and a call for bids will go out this week Work on this project will be done concurrently with the retaining wall stabilization in order to avoid multiple disruptions to the area of 9W and Valley Street.

Storm water separation involves the rerouting of storm water collection drains, to allow the rainwater to flow directly into the Esopus Creek. Currently, all storm water is transported to the Dock Street wastewater treatment plant, where it is combined and treated with sewer water before being released. This level of treatment isn't necessary, and leads to increased expenses for the plant due to wear and tear on the equipment. Though most of the village storm water system was separated 15 years ago, a portion under Route 9W stretching from just north of the Esopus Creek Bridge to the Dragon Inn has been repeated delayed due to the logistics of coordinating the project with the state DOT and other ongoing projects. (In the old days, when water wasn't treated, everything went down the same pipe and the village relied on heavy rains to clean out the pipes.)

Wade also reported that the village has received a set of semi-final working drawings for the proposed wall stabilization project along Church Street/9W. The DOT is awaiting comments from village officials before finalizing the plans. Anyone interested in viewing the drawings is welcome to contact Wade, who will act as an interpreter to translate the technical language on the drawings into layman's terms.

"The plans are quite complicated and a bit difficult to understand. I will do my best to explain the drawings to any concerned citizens," said Wade.

In other business

After a holiday reprieve from parking fees, the village installed new meters earlier this month. Hourly rates have increased from 10 to 50 cents, with new meters accepting only quarters. Fees for parking violations within the village of Saugerties have also increased, from the current five dollars per ticket to twenty dollars per ticket, and police are expected to step up enforcement policies. Parking meters must be used between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday thru Saturday, with Sundays and evenings remaining free.

The four trustees present at Monday's meeting unanimously voted to extend the contract for grant writer Victor Cornelius of Endeavors, Inc. The village will pay Cornelius a retainer fee of $6,000 and will compensate him at a rate of 3 percent of any grant monies received as a result of his efforts. According to village clerk Mary Frank, this compensation is standard; including in grants as an administrative fee.

Petitions are available for anyone wishing to run in the 2009 village election, to be held on March 18. Village candidates typically run in independent parties, such as the New Vision Party. Candidates wishing to continue this tradition must turn in their petitions to the village clerk no later than February 10. Should a candidate wish to run on a national party line, petitions must be filed by January 29. The difference in dates is attributed to policies governing national parties, which differ from the election guidelines set forth in village law. The position of mayor comes before voters this year, as do the seats currently held by trustees Michael Karashay, Suzanne LeBlanc and William Murphy.

The next meeting of the village board will be held on Monday, January 19 at village hall.

Sunday, January 4, 2009

“It’s Time to End New York State’s Empire Zone Program”

Citizens Budget Commission releases its report entitled “It’s Time to End New York State’s Empire Zone Program”. Saugerties has its share of businesses (Partial List of Companies that Benefit from Empire Zone Program ) which benefit in what amounts to $582 million taxpayers money. The American Candle Factory is just one of several Saugerties businesses that have failed to live up to the program's original intent. At taxpayers expense, businesses have been given tax relief and benefits from a program that most experts have called a "gross failure". Fully 70 percent of the businesses receiving tax breaks in these Zones failed to meet the job creation targets they set when they were certified to join the program. A 2007 assessment of New York State’s economic development apparatus conducted by AT Kearney, the management consulting firm, concluded:
“Of all of the programs examined here New York’s Empire Zones program provides perhaps the best example of good economic development intentions gone wrong. Its original mission has been morphed by political patronage, legislative revision and commercial manipulation, effectively repositioning it from a program primarily helping distressed communities to one routinely offering tax relief for ongoing businesses.”
Let's look at some of the companies that have received Empire Zone Credits in 2006:
  • WalMart Stores $ 2,376,570.00
  • Berkshire Hathaway (Geico) 19,549,900
  • International Business Machines 31,700,000
  • Home Depot 4,128,125
  • Costco Wholesale 31,238
  • Target 4,545,075
  • Walgreen 144,415
  • United Parcel Service 1,896,508
  • Lowe's Home Centers 15,947,647
  • Lockheed Martin 5,662,787
  • PepsiCo 115,500
  • FedEx 542,509
  • Sysco 132,300
  • Hartford Financial Services 875,625
  • Washington Mutual 701,032
  • 3M 400,574
  • CocaCola Enterprises 106,200
  • Staples 1,095,000
  • Nucor Steel 6,130,000
  • Kohl's 1,989,320
  • Bank of New York Mellon Corp. 1,357,005
  • General Mills 629,991
  • Family Dollar Stores 20,175
  • NRG Energy 20,222,810
  • Corning 6,233,259
  • RadioShack 13,125
  • Dick's Sporting Goods 155 34,875
  • American Axle and Manufacturing 72,724
  • Tiffany 496,020
  • Amphenol 605,000
Failing to Meet Economic Development Goals The Empire Zone program is failing to meet economic development goals. Audits by the State Comptroller have shown that job creation fails to meet targets; recent efforts by ESD to improve the administration of the program have revealed high failure rates among firms at meeting investment as well as employment goals.
"".. when legislative leaders attempt to fix the program, their actions succeed only in opening new loopholes as they close the old ones. As AT Kearney reported, “….the program has spawned cottage industry of lawyers and consultants specializing in helping businesses optimize benefits.”Top Ten Credit Per Job Claims by Firm, 2006:
Company Name Credits of Jobs
Location Job
Flat Rock Wind Power LLC $5,582,349 2 Lewis County $2,791,175
NRG Energy Inc. $6,602,043 3 City Of Dunkirk, Towns Of Dunkirk & Sheridan $2,200,681
257 W. Genesee LLC $1,258,995 1 Buffalo $1,258,995
Riverside Enterprises LLC $1,162,193 1 Utica $1,162,193
728 East Realty Corp. $967,211 1 Port Morris, Bronx $967,211
NRG Energy Inc. $7,382,035 9 Oswego $820,226
Greece Town Mall LP $3,184,595 4 Monroe County $796,149
NRG Energy Inc. $6,238,732 8 Town Of Tonawanda $779,842
Manhatten Nursing Home Realty Inc. $692,261 1 East Harlem, New York $692,261
BuffaloMain Street LLC $624,271 1 Onondaga County $624,271
Ulster Business Complex LLC $1,230,711 2 City Of Kingston, Town Of Ulster $615,356

Tuesday, December 16, 2008