Fresh air is hard to find even in Saugerties. Take a look for yourself:
Showing posts with label saugerties. Show all posts
Showing posts with label saugerties. Show all posts
Monday, November 7, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Saugerties - Hudson Valley Water Industrial Discharge Permit Gets Renewed after being expred for 9 years.
| Hudson Valley Water Companies, Inc. Jeffrey Fuller, Owner |
83 Eagle Chase Woodbury, NY 11797 |
516-802-7103 |
Ulster County
Applicant:
Hudson Valley Water Co83 Eagle Chase Rd
Woodbury, NY 11797
Facility:
Hudson Valley Water Co Plant #1Park Circle
Mt Marion, NY 12456
Application ID:
3-5148-00079/00003Permit(s) Applied for:
Article 17 Titles 7 & 8 Industrial SPDES - Groundwater DischargeProject is Located:
Saugerties, Ulster CountyProject Description:
The Department has determined to renew existing SPDES permit NY 007 6376, which expired in 2002, as a Uniform Procedures Act Major groundwater discharge of industrial waste for a term of 10 years. Discharge consists of backwash from a water treatment plant in the amount of 3,000 gallons per day. The permit requires monitoring and submission of an annual report to the regional water engineer.Availability of Application Documents:
Filed application documents, and Department draft permits where applicable, are available for inspection during normal business hours at the address of the contact person. To ensure timely service at the time of inspection, it is recommended that an appointment be made with the contact person.State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
Project is not subject to SEQR because it is a Type II action.SEQR Lead Agency: None Designated
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
The proposed activity is not subject to review in accordance with SHPA. The permit type is exempt or the activity is being reviewed in accordance with federal historic preservation regulations.Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Sep 02, 2011.Contact:
Andrea SheeranNYSDEC Headquarters
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233
(518)402-9167
depprmt@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Vertis Inc applies for change in Air State Facility Permit
Applicant:
Vertis Inc250 West Pratt St 18th Fl
Baltimore, MD 21201
Facility:
Vertis Inc1 Tomsons Rd
Saugerties, NY 12477
Application ID:
3-5148-00070/00013Permit(s) Applied for:
Article 19 Air State FacilityProject is Located:
Saugerties, Ulster CountyProject Description:
The New York Division of Vertis Inc. produces advertising inserts and other printed materials for commercial use. The facility operates five heatset and two coldest web offset lithographic printing presses. Supporting operations include pre-press, a scrap paper recovery and baling system, a labeling operation, and a bindery.VOC (volatile organic compound) emissions from the heatset presses are controlled by natural gas fired catalytic oxidizers. Particulate emissions from the scrap paper recovery system are controlled by two cyclones and a bag filter unit.
Presently, the facility is designated as a major source of air pollution. The Air State Facility Permit will limit VOC emissions from the facility to 40.89 tons per year, in order to stay below the major source threshold of 50 tons per year. Thus, the facility will no longer be subject to the requirements of Title V of the Federal Clean Air Act. The facility will track usage of VOC containing materials to demonstrate compliance with the VOC limit.
Persons wishing to inspect the subject files, including the application with all relevant supporting materials, the Draft Permit, and all other materials available to the DEC (the "permitting authority") that are relevant to this permitting decision should contact the DEC representative listed below. The Draft Permit and Permit Review Report may be viewed and printed from the Department web site at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/32249.html.
DEC will evaluate the application and comments received on it to determine whether to hold a public hearing. Comments and requests for a legislative public hearing should be in writing and addressed to the Department representative listed below. A copy of the Department's permit hearing procedures is available upon request or on the Department web site at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/6234.html.
Availability of Application Documents:
Filed application documents, and Department draft permits where applicable, are available for inspection during normal business hours at the address of the contact person. To ensure timely service at the time of inspection, it is recommended that an appointment be made with the contact person.State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
Project is an Unlisted Action and will not have a significant impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration is on file. A coordinated review was not performed.SEQR Lead Agency: None Designated
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
The proposed activity is not subject to review in accordance with SHPA. The permit type is exempt or the activity is being reviewed in accordance with federal historic preservation regulations.Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Jun 17, 2011.Contact:
Kenneth R GrzybNYSDEC Region 3 Headquarters
21 South Putt Corners Rd
New Paltz, NY 12561
(845)256-3054
r3dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Spring Elections are the Cure for Cabin Fever
With a smile across his face, my son says "Look Dad, look", as he's pointing out the kitchen window. I stare in disbelief as yet another snow storm begins to fall. It means another school "Snow Day" for him, though for me it's the sixth morning this season shoveling out of the driveway. The entirety of the scene is a bit daunting. Gazing beyond the snowy flakes I see huge icicles hanging from my neighbors house, they look like stalactites. Several of them well over six foot long, grow closer to the ground with every evening freeze. We're not even half way through winter's coldest part and the storm sequels repeat endlessly. When you live in upstate New York, clips of Jack Nicholson in The Shining come to mind about the same time every mid-February. As to say, "I'm back" old man winter sets his sight on my little Village of Saugerties. Cabin fever has taken hold. The only way I'll survive till warmer weather is with vivid recollections of my spring garden, and anticipation of the Village election in March.
Old Farmers' Almanac explains that the particularly rough winter we've been experiencing is due to "two huge weather patterns tag-teaming us - the La Nina and the Artic Oscillation (AO)". Since 1792, the Almanac has predicted the weather to an 80% accuracy. It's the oldest continuously published periodical in North America. By the way, it's predicting that a warm spring will follow this year's frigidity. I'm really longing for a warm March. When crocus break the ground is around the same time that Village elections take place across the state of New York. Both signify hope that "winter's cold spring erases". Typical turnout is low. Some years as little as 50 votes are counted in a community of 2500 registered voters. Not surprising, years that my name appears on the ballot, election inspectors are busy with upwards of 50% casting their vote. Last year was the best thus far, including a referendum to abolish the Village Police Department. Seeing new faces standing in long lines through the doors of Village Hall to the polls is always a very good sign.
Being covered in snow four months of the year can make you introspective. Any hint of sunny weather in February teases of spring. I imagine all of us "upstaters" look at sunlight breaking through winter clouds as an epiphany of sorts. It reminds us that we need to rise from our warm comfort zone and take on a new challenge. After my first year of living through a Saugerties' winter I had my own revelation. Looking around my community, I knew I wanted to change the status quo. This is my community and wanted to have a say in how my taxes are being spent. Forcing the courage to stand up at board meetings and community groups, I made my voice heard. Though politics in a small Village can be tightly knit.
In the Village of Saugerties alliances have existed for centuries. Alliances that may be based on ancestry, membership to an organization, church fellowship or businesses interests. American Legion, Knights of Columbus, Kiwanis and Lions Club are a few of the many community groups that have an influence on local elections. Patronage is also a serious consideration and is the essential glue that holds all of it together. Loyalty is sometimes earned through favors, special treatment and job security. Those in charge of hiring can wield their power at the ballot box and can be the most difficult obstacle to breach.
Peculiar as it may seem, New York state villages typically hold their local elections on the third Tuesday of every March. In order to have your name on the ballot you must collect enough signatures on a Designating Petition for nomination and submit them to the Village clerk for approval. Rules are detailed and vary based on whether you're running as an Independent or a recognized Political Party. My first two attempts for Village trustee was as an Independent and last year I ran as a Democrat. In the latter case, the required procedure was to form a Village Democratic Party (http://bit.ly/saugerdems) which had not existed, and then hold a caucus in order to be nominated. New York State Village election law is unique and has its own rules which are specified in The Election Law, Article 15. When YOU choose to run [as I know you will] for office, you'll need to carry a copy of Election Law with you at all times. Don't take for granted that the Village clerk, or for that matter, the Board of Elections will know every legal detail. The reality is that you need to be familiar with New York election law and be willing to persist, be tenacious and sometimes forceful when you feel that you are not being listened to. Remember that government officials have at their disposal attorneys and usually a well-rehearsed repertoire that may be used to dissuade you from challenging the incumbency. This is not to say all election officials are the same nor do they have ill-intentions. It's just natural order and we're all just human.
You are like a hibernating bear, for the past several months you've been sheltered from the cold. Even though your reserves may be near exhausted, you have undoubtedly built up a lot of nervous energy. Get online and remind your friends that Village elections are on Tuesday, March 15. Attend local Village Board meetings and stand-up, introduce yourself to all your neighbors. Let them know the importance of voting in the upcoming election. There may not even be any challengers this year. However, the incumbents need to know that you are watching them closely. This is no time for complacency, especially with a struggling economy. Remind them that you will hold them accountable. And, then hold your head high and tell them in a matter of fact way, that you've been considering running in next year's primary.
David Radovanovic
Creative Director
www.whatsthebigidea.com
Being covered in snow four months of the year can make you introspective. Any hint of sunny weather in February teases of spring. I imagine all of us "upstaters" look at sunlight breaking through winter clouds as an epiphany of sorts. It reminds us that we need to rise from our warm comfort zone and take on a new challenge. After my first year of living through a Saugerties' winter I had my own revelation. Looking around my community, I knew I wanted to change the status quo. This is my community and wanted to have a say in how my taxes are being spent. Forcing the courage to stand up at board meetings and community groups, I made my voice heard. Though politics in a small Village can be tightly knit.
In the Village of Saugerties alliances have existed for centuries. Alliances that may be based on ancestry, membership to an organization, church fellowship or businesses interests. American Legion, Knights of Columbus, Kiwanis and Lions Club are a few of the many community groups that have an influence on local elections. Patronage is also a serious consideration and is the essential glue that holds all of it together. Loyalty is sometimes earned through favors, special treatment and job security. Those in charge of hiring can wield their power at the ballot box and can be the most difficult obstacle to breach.
 |
| 2002 campaign photo with my running mate. |
You are like a hibernating bear, for the past several months you've been sheltered from the cold. Even though your reserves may be near exhausted, you have undoubtedly built up a lot of nervous energy. Get online and remind your friends that Village elections are on Tuesday, March 15. Attend local Village Board meetings and stand-up, introduce yourself to all your neighbors. Let them know the importance of voting in the upcoming election. There may not even be any challengers this year. However, the incumbents need to know that you are watching them closely. This is no time for complacency, especially with a struggling economy. Remind them that you will hold them accountable. And, then hold your head high and tell them in a matter of fact way, that you've been considering running in next year's primary.
David Radovanovic
Creative Director
www.whatsthebigidea.com
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Saugerties Residents: IMPORTANT MEETING regarding water supply
Important meeting:
Tomorrow evening Monday December 6, 2010 - 6:45 PM at Saugerties Village
Hall, 43 Partiion Street Village of Saugerties 845-246-2321
Agenda: Engineer Dennis Larios will read letter signed by Saugerties'
Water Supervisor Joesph Bisagnano addressing claims made by Hydrologist
Paul Rubin of HydroQuest concerning Blue Mountain Reservoir [and lack] of
scientific measurements.
Conclusion of HyrdoQuest: all future development should be halted.
Public questions will be answered by Denis Larios.
Please attend.
HydroQuest presentation documents available here for download:
http://www.scribd.com/document_collections/2750174
Tomorrow evening Monday December 6, 2010 - 6:45 PM at Saugerties Village
Hall, 43 Partiion Street Village of Saugerties 845-246-2321
Agenda: Engineer Dennis Larios will read letter signed by Saugerties'
Water Supervisor Joesph Bisagnano addressing claims made by Hydrologist
Paul Rubin of HydroQuest concerning Blue Mountain Reservoir [and lack] of
scientific measurements.
Conclusion of HyrdoQuest: all future development should be halted.
Public questions will be answered by Denis Larios.
Please attend.
HydroQuest presentation documents available here for download:
http://www.scribd.com/document_collections/2750174
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Saugerties: Water Supply May Be Inadequate for Additional Development
Presentation by hydrologist shows an inadequate water supply for Saugerties development. Comparing similar area watersheds that have empirical data reveals 1.8 million gallons per day figure used by Saugerties officials to be flawed. If Kings Highway water district opens as planned there will be water shortages.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Data reports inaccurate monitoring of Saugerties' water supply.
Saugerties' Blue Mountain Reservoir "cannot supply adequate water for additional development".
The information presented at last night's public meeting was non-biased and thorough. The conclusion of the report performed by Paul Rubin, president of HydroQuest:
The 1.8 million gallons of water per day that has been used to support expansion is based on a water value metering, NOT on empirical data. In other words, the 1.8 figure is baseless and inaccurate.
There has NEVER been a study performed based on historical data. Therefore when severe times of drought [eventuality] occur, there will be NO water for those businesses.
A more accurate [though optimistic] figure is 1.2 million gallons per day which would suggest that another source for water is needed if Kings Highway and other development is to have adequate water volume.
Not acting upon this new data would lead to law suits and severe consequences for those of us who receive our water from the Blue Mountain Reservoir.
The information presented at last night's public meeting was non-biased and thorough. The conclusion of the report performed by Paul Rubin, president of HydroQuest:
The 1.8 million gallons of water per day that has been used to support expansion is based on a water value metering, NOT on empirical data. In other words, the 1.8 figure is baseless and inaccurate.
There has NEVER been a study performed based on historical data. Therefore when severe times of drought [eventuality] occur, there will be NO water for those businesses.
A more accurate [though optimistic] figure is 1.2 million gallons per day which would suggest that another source for water is needed if Kings Highway and other development is to have adequate water volume.
Not acting upon this new data would lead to law suits and severe consequences for those of us who receive our water from the Blue Mountain Reservoir.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Northeast Solite of Saugerties Requests Title V Facility Permit from DEC
Applicant:
Northeast Solite CorpPO Box 437
Mount Marion, NY 12456 -0437
Facility:
Northeast Solite Corporation962 Old Kings Hwy
Mt Marion, NY 12456
Application ID:
3-5148-00084/00025Permit(s) Applied for:
Article 19 Air Title V FacilityProject is Located:
Saugerties, Ulster CountyProject Description:
The Department has prepared a Draft Permit pursuant to Article 19 (Air Pollution Control) of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and Title V of the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments and made a tentative determination to issue a renewal for the Title V Air Facility Permit for the operation of Northeast Solite Corporation located in Mt. Marion, Ulster County. Northeast Solite Corporation is a lightweight aggregate manufacturing facility. Raw material (shale) is quarried and processed on site. The shale is heated and expanded in any of three kilns to form the lightweight aggregate. The three kilns can burn coal or no. 2 oil. Recycled aggregate from off site can also be used in the manufacturing process. For purposes of the Title V permit, the facility is divided up into five air emission units. These units include a raw material processing area, the three kilns and associated equipment, a coal processing area, a lime handling system, and a finished material processing area. The raw and finished material processing areas consist of crushers, screeners, and conveyors. Five new conveyors will be added to the finished material processing area. The following regulations are applicable to the facility: 6NYCRR Parts 200, 201, 202, 211, 212, and 225. The new conveyors will be subject to 40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO. By acceptance of this permit, the permittee agrees that the permit is contingent upon strict compliance with the ECL, all applicable regulations, the General Conditions specified and any Special Conditions included as part of this permit.In accordance with 6NYCRR Parts 621.7(b)(9) and 201-6.4(c), the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has the authority to bar issuance of any Title V Facility Permit if it is determined not to be in compliance with applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act or 6NYCRR Part 201.
###################################
Persons wishing to inspect the subject Title V files, including the application with all relevant supporting materials, the draft permit, and all other materials available to the DEC (the "permitting authority") that are relevant to this permitting decision should contact the DEC representative listed below. The Draft Permit and Permit Review Report may be viewed and printed from the Department web site at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/32249.html.
DEC will evaluate the application and the comments received on it to determine whether to hold a public hearing. Comments and requests for a legislative public hearing should be in writing and addressed to the Department representative listed below. A copy of the Department's permit hearing procedures is available upon request or on the Department web site at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/6234.html.
################################
Availability of Application Documents:
Filed application documents, and Department draft permits where applicable, are available for inspection during normal business hours at the address of the contact person. To ensure timely service at the time of inspection, it is recommended that an appointment be made with the contact person.State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
Project is not subject to SEQR because it is a Type II action.SEQR Lead Agency: None Designated
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
The proposed activity is not subject to review in accordance with SHPA. The permit type is exempt or the activity is being reviewed in accordance with federal historic preservation regulations.Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Sep 17, 2010.Contact:
Kenneth R GrzybNYSDEC Region 3 Headquarters
21 South Putt Corners Rd
New Paltz, NY 12561
(845)256-3054
r3dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Monday, August 16, 2010
Ah... 4th of July in Saugerties calls for special outfits for doggies too!
 |
| Saugerties Village 4th of July Parade spectator |
Even doggies need special outfits for Saugerties Independence Day parade. It looks like the fella on the left has his pussy cat on a leash! Or is it a rabbit? Check out the rest of the photos at 2010 4th Of July Parade in Saugerties for more views of true Americana via Hudson Valley, New York.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Auto Shows and Man's Best Friend: What's More American?
 |
| Stevie is a good girl... I promise. |
I approached Bob Siracusano of Sawyer Motors (the show's organizer) and he stated that it was the police that made the restriction.
One thing lead to another and after engaging Saugerties Village Luetenant Tom Rea, he demanded, "did your dog crap on the sidewalk?" Well the rest of the conversation went down hill and after shouting at each other, he told me to "stay right there" (pointing to the corner Exchange Hotel) while he found out more. He returned and said that "dogs were allowed".
Firstly: the car show's organizers need to realize that they are occupying a state highway, which runs through a public Village that allows them to hold their function. If it were held in a private setting, then they could choose to make such restrictions.
Secondly, Police officers need to start ticketing dog owners who don't clean up after their critters. You can't place blanket restrictions on folks based on the stupid behavior of a few. With that logic, then all the belligerent drunks at these festivities need to be ticketed.
Thirdly, thanks to Lieutenant Rea for being a reasonable police officer.
Saugerties needs to be more friendly especially to its residents (with dogs).
Enjoy the car show!
Monday, June 28, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Last minute lies before Tuesday's Village Elections
It's late Sunday morning. As my neighbors' families leave Sunday Mass, there is a small cadre of silver-haired Saugerties Village Police loyalists spreading last minute lies to undermine Tuesday's Elections.
Who would ever dream that two nice old ladies would be out spreading anonymous leaflets making false statements about fellow Villagers? The leaflet they are distributing proclaims "Top 10 Reasons to Keep Your Police Department" listing an unbelievable conspiratorial agenda as if to come right from the mouth of Glenn Beck. The allegations includes diversion of NYS grant monies to build a Taj Mahal for Town Supervisor Helsmoortel and accusations of "Power Hungry" conspirators whose plan is to subvert the will of Saugerties Villagers and take over our local government.
The real "reality check" isn't as exciting as this anonymous leaflet. Of all the "behind-closed-doors" accusations that have ever been flung at Saugerties' legislators, the two and a half year process to merge Village and Town Police Departments has been the most transparent I've ever witnessed. The real FACTS are all contained in a detailed $30,000.00 tax-payer funded study performed by Fairweather Consultants on New Paltz, New York. The numbers don't lie and it reads like a huge tax savings for Village property owners.
If only all legislative acts of Saugerties Village government were as open to the public as this one was! The lesson that one should take away from this lame attempt to persuade Villagers, is to VOTE "YES" to Prop. 1 at March 16, 2010 Saugerties Village Elections.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Saugerties Village Democratic Party Caucus
Democratic Caucus
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
that a Democratic Caucus will be held in and for the Village of Saugerties, NY
7:00 PM Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at Frank D. Greco Senior Center, Market Street for the purpose of nominating Democratic Candidates for Saugerties Village Trustee to be voted for at the March 16, 2010 General Election
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
George Heidcamp joins Teachers' Unions to sue Gov.Patterson
More on the education funding lawsuit
An excerpt continues:
The lawsuit seeks to stop the governor from usurping the constitutional policy-making authority of the Legislature, and asks the court to order the governor to release the appropriated funds immediately. The suit notes that, if the court does not stop the governor’s actions, “He will only be emboldened to take other … unilateral action, further unbalancing the three coordinate branches of government (and) silencing the voice of the people.”
“The governor is well-aware that his actions violate the Constitution but he seems intent on carrying through with them regardless of his constitutional obligations,” the suit states.
Among the suit’s plaintiffs are NYSUT through its President Iannuzzi; NYSSBA through its President Wayne Schlifke; NYSCOSS through its President Robinson; and SAANYS through its President Peter Kruszynski. CFE, NYSASBO and the state PTA are strongly backing the groups’ lawsuit.
Other individual plaintiffs include Doug Becker, a math teacher in Churchville-Chili; Brian Boyd, a fourth-grade teacher from Yonkers; George Heidcamp, president of the board of education in Saugerties; Paul Hetland, a social studies teacher from Rochester; Florence D. Johnson, a member of the board of education in Buffalo and president-elect of NYSSBA; Kimberly Petramale, a math teacher in Saugerties; and Harry B. Reeder, a member of the board of education in Herkimer.
In addition to Paterson, the suit names as defendants the state Division of Budget and Budget Director Robert L. Megna, as well as state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.
An excerpt continues:
The lawsuit seeks to stop the governor from usurping the constitutional policy-making authority of the Legislature, and asks the court to order the governor to release the appropriated funds immediately. The suit notes that, if the court does not stop the governor’s actions, “He will only be emboldened to take other … unilateral action, further unbalancing the three coordinate branches of government (and) silencing the voice of the people.”
“The governor is well-aware that his actions violate the Constitution but he seems intent on carrying through with them regardless of his constitutional obligations,” the suit states.
Among the suit’s plaintiffs are NYSUT through its President Iannuzzi; NYSSBA through its President Wayne Schlifke; NYSCOSS through its President Robinson; and SAANYS through its President Peter Kruszynski. CFE, NYSASBO and the state PTA are strongly backing the groups’ lawsuit.
Other individual plaintiffs include Doug Becker, a math teacher in Churchville-Chili; Brian Boyd, a fourth-grade teacher from Yonkers; George Heidcamp, president of the board of education in Saugerties; Paul Hetland, a social studies teacher from Rochester; Florence D. Johnson, a member of the board of education in Buffalo and president-elect of NYSSBA; Kimberly Petramale, a math teacher in Saugerties; and Harry B. Reeder, a member of the board of education in Herkimer.
In addition to Paterson, the suit names as defendants the state Division of Budget and Budget Director Robert L. Megna, as well as state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Saugerties Village held hostage by incompetent government
Except for Mayoral musings of random "dog poop" bag police checks, "executions" and "rapes", last night's (11/16/09) Saugerties Village Board meeting was boilerplate. Oh wait, I forgot the bit about PBA demanding a SEQR.
The pledge of allegiance was followed with the standard mix of self-congratulations, quips and odd explanations of why the Village is in such financial straits. Analogies were abundant, with the mayor grasping for the right picture to illustrate his fiscal position. Like the one about "falling dominoes", which excused repeated bank loans (to make payroll) and the Village's burgeoning $6,000,000.00 debt. According to Mayor Yerick, it was all the Federal government's fault. He ended with, "We (the Village) don't have many products to sell" as the apparent reason why his government has had trouble (for the past several years) paying its workers.
Though all hope was not lost when trustee LeBlanc and Murphy announced that the board was going to vote "tonight" on the board's intention to seek Lead agency status for a SEQR (The New York State Environmental Quality Review Act) which the PBA is requesting. You may be asking yourself, what is "SEQR" and when did the Police Benevolent Association become environmentalists?. Well, the supposed answer to this perplexing question lies deep within the creative mind of the PBA's legal counsel. After the Saugerties Police Consolidation study was presented in August, the Saugerties Village PBA threatened to sue if the Village proceeded with a public referendum. Now it appears that Village attorney Alex Betke agrees that [giving us a chance to vote] on a Town and Village police merger can not proceed without a NYDEC environmental impact assessment review.
But all was put into proper perspective, when the mayor explained that "we've been working on consolidation for the past fourteen (14) years". I couldn't help but think to myself how comically sad the Village's state of affairs has become and that we [tax payers] are forever being held hostage by a self-perpetuating local government machine. 14 years after the first attempt to consolidate and after a $35,000.00 study, Saugerties Village [New Vision Party] trustees still can't get the will to implement the only reasonable solution to our deepening debt; consolidation of services!
The pledge of allegiance was followed with the standard mix of self-congratulations, quips and odd explanations of why the Village is in such financial straits. Analogies were abundant, with the mayor grasping for the right picture to illustrate his fiscal position. Like the one about "falling dominoes", which excused repeated bank loans (to make payroll) and the Village's burgeoning $6,000,000.00 debt. According to Mayor Yerick, it was all the Federal government's fault. He ended with, "We (the Village) don't have many products to sell" as the apparent reason why his government has had trouble (for the past several years) paying its workers.
Though all hope was not lost when trustee LeBlanc and Murphy announced that the board was going to vote "tonight" on the board's intention to seek Lead agency status for a SEQR (The New York State Environmental Quality Review Act) which the PBA is requesting. You may be asking yourself, what is "SEQR" and when did the Police Benevolent Association become environmentalists?. Well, the supposed answer to this perplexing question lies deep within the creative mind of the PBA's legal counsel. After the Saugerties Police Consolidation study was presented in August, the Saugerties Village PBA threatened to sue if the Village proceeded with a public referendum. Now it appears that Village attorney Alex Betke agrees that [giving us a chance to vote] on a Town and Village police merger can not proceed without a NYDEC environmental impact assessment review.
But all was put into proper perspective, when the mayor explained that "we've been working on consolidation for the past fourteen (14) years". I couldn't help but think to myself how comically sad the Village's state of affairs has become and that we [tax payers] are forever being held hostage by a self-perpetuating local government machine. 14 years after the first attempt to consolidate and after a $35,000.00 study, Saugerties Village [New Vision Party] trustees still can't get the will to implement the only reasonable solution to our deepening debt; consolidation of services!
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)