Water

Resolution for Referendum Passes Unanimously Through Kingston Public Safety Committee.

by

11059681_10204268216927513_9157082644927220106_n

By Rebecca Martin

“We forget that the water cycle and the life cycle are one.” – Jacques Cousteau

Tonight, Kingston’s Public Safety/General Government Committee passed a resolution unanimously for a referendum that would include the Kingston Common Council for any water sales outside of Kingston’s City Limits.

WATCH VIDEO OF LAST NIGHT’S REFERENDUM DISCUSSION

Why is this important?

First,  a referendum would allow the City of Kingston residents to vote on whether or not it should have a voice in water sales outside of our community. Cooper Lake, our reservoir that resides in the Town of Woodstock, is Kingston’s responsibility to manage for its residents and our neighboring communities.

As we learned with the Niagara Bottling proposal, the water department that was organized in 1895 designed to keep politics out of water couldn’t have imagined the politics that would emerge through the interpretation of their original intention. Or climate change. Or water bottling companies. Or fracking. Or any other large extractions of water that would bring great profits to some while potentially decimating the locals ability to grow and to prosper.

Today, we are living in a very different time with the opportunity to reform the way our natural resources are managed. We owe it not only to ourselves, but to municipalities who are also impacted by our decisions and counting on Kingston to be good stewards as we proceed into the future.

Second, throughout the Niagara Bottling proposal, we were told that the City of Kingston hadn’t a seat at the table in the SEQR process because of the Charter. The Town of Ulster, who was hoping to attract Niagara to their community, relied on Kingston’s water in order for them to do so. It took many months of hard work to make the SEQR process a public one and even then, the city of Kingston had no right to be an ‘Involved’ agency.

We will support our Common Council to correct that in November and are pleased to speak more on the subject here all summer long to help the public to make an informed decision.

While we are all at it – the Kingston Water Department needs to do an up-to-date safe yield using climate change modeling.  Simply put, a safe or dependable yield projection is the amount that you can safely remove from a reservoir that can be naturally replenished within a certain amount of time.   6.1 million GPD (gallons per day) was what it was over 50 years ago. We are using close to 4.5 million GPD now.  It’s a ‘come to Jesus’ moment and time to apply modern strategies to our knowing.

A big thanks to Common Council members Bill Carey, Deb Brown, Matt Dunn, Brad Will, Steve Schabot and Brian Seche for three months of discussion. Your support tonight as a result is greatly appreciated.

Thanks, too, the Kingston’s Corporation Council for their support in helping us find a way to move this referendum through to the next step.

What’s next? This evening’s vote will result in a public referendum in November provided that the full Common Council votes in favor of the amendment in June, and the Mayor signs the legislation.

Please stay tuned and involved. There is more work to do.

 

RECOMMENDED READING:

Water Follies by Robert Glennon  (thanks Candace!)

 

Moving Towards a Referendum.

by

Screen Shot 2015-05-22 at 1.05.06 PM

CITIZEN ACTION: Attend the Kingston Public Safety/General Government Committee Meeting TUESDAY, MAY 26th at 6:30pm at Kingston City Hall (Conference Room #1) where a Public Referendum will be discussed on Including the Common Council in Municipal Water Sales Outside of Kingston’s City Limits. VIEW FACEBOOK INVITATION and please share.

By Rebecca Martin

In the news now for a couple of months, it has been reported that members of the Common Council led by the Public Safety/General Government Committee that is chaired by Alderman Bill Carey of Ward 5, wish to explore options to include the Common Council in sales of municipal water outside of Kingston’s boundaries.

In this week’s Kingston Times, our own Mayor is called a ‘formidable opponent’ against the work of creating a referendum.

“…the charter change would need approval from State Lawmakers, since they passed the enabling legislation to create the water department. Such approval is unlikely to be granted.” Said Gallo.

He also shares the concerns of the water department’s founders about political interference with a vital resource. 

“They may be well-intended,” said Gallo. “But it would do nothing but politicize the issue, which is what the state legislature was trying to avoid when the created a separate system.”

Kingston Times READ ARTICLE.

What the Mayor is referring to, is how the Water Department was set up in 1895 to protect the public. 120 years ago – and long before water bottling and other enormous water uses that may or may not benefit the people was in their purview.

We’re not asking that a referendum be placed on the ballot to change the organization of the Water Department/Water Board of Commissioners. We are requesting that a referendum be moved forth that simply includes the Kingston Common Council in sales of the PEOPLE OF KINGSTON’S PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY outside of the City of Kingston.  In essence, to allow the residents of Kingston to have a say in how its municipal water is used outside of the community. Reform that would protect the public, in line with adhering to what those long ago intended.

By implementing better checks and balances in this way, that we have all learned are necessary thanks to the Niagara Bottling proposal (a project that wanted to set up in the Town of Ulster using Kingston’s municipal water source from its reservoir located in the Town of Woodstock to bottle and to sell in the NE), the public would have an important seat at the table.

As to politicizing the issue,  do some of our elected officials not trust the public to choose what is right for their community?  We don’t agree with the Mayor’s take here. His opinion is but one, and although it is important, it should not trump all else. Lets get the language right, and let the people decide. That is democratic.

It is disingenuous for the Mayor to suggest that the process isn’t already political. What about appointees to the Water Board of Commissioners? Did you know that the Mayor has the sole discretion to appoint members without any oversight? Not only could the Mayor’s appointments be considered political, without full fair and open discussions about the appointments with the public, the lack of transparency and direct Democratic accountability could also be viewed as unethical.

Please see the Niagara Bottling TIMELINE for a refresher on exactly how politics in this case were used to work against the public good in our opinion.  Thankfully, we learned our rights and implemented them.   We will do the very same thing in this case.

You can also view a video from early in the Niagara effort where the Town of Ulster Supervisor James Quigley gives an Oscar winning performance.  (No politics at work here)

 VIDEO  / TRANSCRIPT

In ‘Revising City Charters in NYS’ it lays out the requirements for ‘Charter Revision by Initiative and Referendum’.   You can read the document by clicking on this LINK.

On Tuesday, May 26th at 7:00pm (Kingston City Hall, Conference Room #1) the Public Safety/General Government Committee will meet to discuss such a referendum. Members of the council have requested our Corporation Council to be prepared with information on the steps the Council must take.

This is another one of those moments where we are asking the public to attend and witness.  Committee meetings do not have a public comment period like the council meeting does. Your presence next Tuesday will be meaningful in support of our council members as they work to move the referendum out of committee and on to the next step.

 

ADDITIONAL READING FROM KINGSTONCITIZENS.ORG

Powers for Sale of Water Outside of Kingston Put to Referendum? We Say Yes.

Checks and Balances: Amend Charter to Include Kingston Common Council in Certain Water Sales.

 

 

 

Powers for Sale of Water Outside of Kingston Put to Referendum? We Say Yes!

by

d107reflbbyplcrd

During the Niagara Bottling proposal, Kingston citizens and the Kingston Common Council came up close and personal to a glaring problem that it had not ever contemplated.

The Town of Ulster, a neighboring municipality,  wanted to bring a national bottling company to set up shop in Ulster using Start-Up NY tax abatements (and at least one other grant source) to bottle and to sell municipal water that, ironically, was not theirs.

Cooper Lake – the water body in the midst of the debate – is a reservoir owned by the City of Kingston located in the Town of Woodstock. The proposal didn’t just involve the forementioned,  but a hand full of other municipalities due to proposed wastewater discharges from the site into the Esopus Creek.

As for Kingston, outside of the Kingston Water Department (KWD), the residents (whose water and infrastructure it was) were not an ‘Involved’ agency in the SEQR process due to the KWD being independent and the charter being worded as it currently is.  It took months of hard work to simply be included as ‘Interested’ agency which in the end, gave us all little to no say at all (particularly in determining  ‘Lead Agency’ where you must be ‘Involved’ to be included in making that decision). A tremendous effort ensued, and the public prevailed.

Recently, we created a post called CHECKS AND BALANCES: AMEND CHARTER TO INCLUDE KINGSTON COMMON COUNCIL IN CERTAIN WATER SALES.  Since that time, we have learned that an amendment to the charter would require a referendum. If the council and citizens can swing it, by the fall of this year.

In Section C11-5C (Water Supply Outside of City), it says: (C) Such sales or sales must be approved by the New York State Water Power and Control Commission.” (that today is the DEC).  What may be proposed in a referendum are to include four simple words to this section:  “and the common council.”  That right there, would give the public a say as to its water supply outside of Kingston’s city limits.  Additionally, Kingston would be an “Involved” agency in SEQR in the case one were triggered. In the meantime, the public’s water would have a layer of protection that would allow for thoughtful policy to be developed over time for sustainable growth and economic development using this precious public resource.

VIEW our event page to stay informed on the upcoming Water Referendum.

 

Better Late Than Never. Niagara Bottling CFA Application

by
Click on the image to review the Niagara Bottling CFA Application.
Click on the image to review the Niagara Bottling CFA Application.

By Rebecca Martin

On November 26th, 2014, KingstonCitizens.org FOILED the Empire State Development office requesting a copy of Niagara Bottling’s Consolidated Funding Application for review. Month after month, we were contacted and told that the request was being worked on and that we would receive it shortly.

According to NYS Committee on Open Government, it states that “when an agency receives a request, the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) states that it has five business days to grant or deny access in whole or in part, or if more time is needed, to acknowledge the receipt of the request in writing and indicate an approximate date by which the agency will respond to the request, usually not more than 20 additional business days.“

The Empire State Development website however vaguely lists exclusions including grants it appears. Perhaps the language provides a loop hole in this case.

At any rate, we finally received the application on April 2nd, 2015. In their letter, they relayed that “Pursuant to section 87, subsection 2, subdivision (d) of FOIL, we have redacted portions of the Consolidated Funding Application that “are trade secrets or are submitted to an agency by a commercial enterprise and which if disclosed would cause substantial injury to the competitive position of the subject enterprise.”

In other words, all of the potential jobs and their salaries promised to the Town of Ulster site were blackened out. To this day, we still can’t get information on what those positions and salaries were to be as you can see in the application. 

In addition, we requested the minutes of all meetings of the Mid-Hudson Regional Economic Development Council at which the Niagara Bottling proposal was discussed.

They wrote that “pursuant to section 87, subsection2, subdivision (g) FOIL, we are withholding the non-public meeting minutes of the Mid-Hudson Regional Development Counsel that discussed Niagara Bottling’s proposal as they are “inter-agency or intra agency materials which are not (i) statistical or factual tabulations or date; (ii) instructions to staff that affect the public; (iii) final agency policy or determination; (iv) external audits, including but not limited to audits performed by the comptroller of the federal government.”

Nothing.

Perhaps it is truly in their purview not to share the information that we requested. Hard to know. You’d need to a lawyer to confirm that.

It shouldn’t be so difficult to request full transparency when allocating public funding, but apparently it is.  In the end, following the process as we have all along the way, we hope to shed some light and even improve how future funding is allocated.

On Niagara Jobs:

Niagara Bottling Plant a Modern Marvel
“Filling, labeling, capping, packaging and loading are done with minimal human involvement.”

 

 

Checks and Balances: Amend Charter To Include Kingston Common Council in Certain Water Sales.

by

Screen Shot 2015-05-01 at 8.34.50 AM

By Rebecca Martin

In yesterday’s Daily Freeman, there was a report on the desire of Council members to have ‘Authority over City of Kingston’s Water Supply” that could be subject to public vote.

At a recent Public Safety/General Government committee meeting, Ward 5 Alderman and chair of the committee Bill Carey introduced a resolution to amend the City Charter.  But City of Kingston Assistant Corporation Council Dan Gartenstein told the Committee that “they could not make the change through a resolution. He said the state’s Municipal Home Rule Law would require a public referendum be held because the council essentially would be expanding its powers.” Currently, the only public official who has any authority in the matter is the mayor, who sits on the city’s Board of Water Commissioners.

What we have learned over the past decade is that Government is more efficient when proper checks and balances are in place. In Kingston, one of the hardships of the Niagara Bottling project was the council not having a voice in the sale of an enormous amount of the community’s municipal water, leaving many questions in the way of science and modeling, climate change, safe yields, economic development and other critical aspects nearly impossible to challenge.

The Public Safety/General Government Committee was looking to explore an avenue that would include the Common Council in future certain sales of water.  Given the time it would take to update the charter in its entirety (which we would advocate for) a simple amendment as we understand it would give the council – and in turn the citizens – a seat at the table as Involved for any large sales of water outside the City of Kingston.

The Steps

1. All that appears to be required that is most minimal, targeted and yet comprehensive would be to adopt a local law to amend Section C11-5C (Water Supply Outside of City) of the Charter in the following way (and only adding four words that are underlined below):

“C:   Such sale or sales must be approved by the New York State Water Power and Control Commission (today is known as the DEC) and the Common Council.”

2. We found that based on Section 23 of the Municipal Home Rule Law (that list local laws requiring referendum) that it doesn’t appear that a local law passed by the Common Council to amend the Charter to provide for some form of Council approval of certain sales of water would be subject to a mandatory referendum. Section 23 of the Municipal Home Rule Law has the list of local laws requiring referendum, and we didn’t find anything close.

3. If this is correct, the Public Safety/General Government Committee could request that the Council adopt a local law that would amend the section. Once moved out of Committee, the Council would read the amended local law at their next meeting and vote the following month, giving the public 30 days in between for a chance to weigh in.

VIEW: Laws of 1896 and 1895:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kingston Water Board Meeting 4/9/15

by

“Screen Shot 2015-04-09 at 6.35.07 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kingston Water Board Meeting 4/8/15
Agenda

Cooper Lake Damn Project (1:35 – 55:28)
Alternatives to raise the dam.

00:00 – 15:20 Cooper Lake Dam Project
Alternatives to raise the Dam.

16:00 – 30:53
Phase 1B Filter Renovation Project

31:15 – 35:59
SMLP (Storm Mitigation Loan Program)

36:33 -41:43
Alderman Brad Will, Council Liaison

41:53 – 43:46
CSX Main Relining Project

43:51 – 51:05
Purchase of Printer

51:11 – 55:50
Leak Detection

55:46 -1:04 
Alrighty. Correspondance.

“Would the Water Board consider changing the time of the monthly meetings.” – Brad Will

“We’ll think about it.” Water Board Commissioner Chair

“Down in DC, you put together a report. Did you come away with any sense to remove the tax exemption. How likely is it going to happen?” – Brad Will

“I don’t think it’s going to happen…it was interesting experience to see just how dysfunctional that place really is. ” – Judy Hansen

Niagara Bottling Proposal Timeline: 116 Events.

by

As a final follow-up of the work, we are pleased to share a timeline of the recent Niagara Bottling Proposal in our area.  For a good solid month, we have worked to encompass each event of significance to not only document but to also help to further illustrate how incredibly complicated this was.  The people working together with the help of many partners managed to stay on top of every detail and utilize their rights based on policy and the law (there is much room for improvement, too, as we found out in both departments).     VIEW: Timeline

What can we learn here to improve decision making processes in the future? A great deal – and we must never forget it and apply these important lessons to everything from here on out.

If there is an item that has not been recorded that you wish to share, please contact us.

It is our aim to also offer assistance and support to other communities who are in the midst of something similar.  Please be in touch if you’d like by writing Rebecca@KingstonCitizens.org

Special thanks to KingstonCitizens.org’s committee members Debra Bresnan and Rachel Marco-Havens for their assistance. 

###

Here are several key items:

PUBLIC FUNDING

An enormous amount of public funding was lined up to attract the Niagara Bottling project. It is hard to say what the tax abatements through Start-Up NY would have provided along with all the tax breaks that a Manufacturer is given in NYS – but over the course of 10 years it’s probably a fair assumption that it would have been upwards to $20-30 million +. That, plus the $10.8 million they would have received through the Consolidated Funding Application grant through the Mid-Hudson Economic Development Council (MHEDC) to go toward their facility build (an estimate $53 million for a new build, and not to reuse any of the buildings at the Tech City site).

A firm number of jobs and salaries were not ever provided to our group so that a cost analysis could be done to compare their worth vs. the amount of public funding that Niagara was looking to secure.  Very few elected and appointed officials involved knew what they were, but had signed confidentiality agreements and would not release that information to the public.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT (SEQRA): Pos vs. Neg Dec

The public was encouraged to wait for the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process to take place in order to get the basic information that they were requesting. Those who understood what was taking place worked hard to secure a ‘positive declaration’ in SEQRA in order for there to be a public process and thankfully were successful in doing so. It had been reported in the papers that Niagara was hoping to start their build in February of 2015 alluding to the Town of Ulster as Lead Agency probably counting on a ‘negative declaration’ – meaning no public input – sending the project straight to the planning board for a site plan review.

SEQRA, by the way and simply put, examines a project as it is submitted and relies on such submission to be accurate (and not segmented as this proposal clearly was). Determinations are then based on its accuracy for a proper review of the applicable laws. 

PUBLIC FUNDING AND SEQRA

As it turns out and in this case, it is illegal in NYS for public funds to be awarded to a project before SEQRA takes place. Prior to the public’s awareness, the Niagara project had been selected as a priority project for the MHEDC. Whether shining the light on this fact impacted Niagara ultimately not being selected by the State in December is unknown. Though we suspect so.

START UP NY TAX ABATEMENTS 

Start-Up NY is a new program of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo’s that began in January/February of 2014. Corporations who come in from out of state and partner with a SUNY school may qualify for up to 10 years of tax abatements (tax free including employee, business, property, school and others). It is meant for corporations to move on campus to offer onsite internships for students but in SUNY Ulster’s case (located in Stone Ridge, NY), that wasn’t possible due to program allotment of 200,000 square feet to accommodate businesses under consideration. By utilizing their satellite campus’s however, Tech City located in the Town of Ulster where Niagara wished to locate (and for the most part empty since the early 90’s) could qualify.

Niagara Bottling applied and was selected by a very small number of people (four as we understand it) based on these qualifications as we know them:  1) Will the corporation provide jobs? 2) Does the corporation fit within the mission of the program/University? 3) Does the corporation conflict with any other business similar in nature within a certain radius of the potential new location?

…and that’s it.

The SUNY Ulster Board of Trustees (who have a fiduciary responsibility), students and faculty were not included in the decision making process. Furthermore, Niagara would require water from a municipal source (as well as local springs) that could have tremendous negative impacts to the community that the reservoir services (Kingston/Woodstock). The community-at-large were caught off guard, having not been alerted prior to reports in the papers with the process well underway.

LACK OF GOOD SCIENCE

Thanks to several of our partners (and their donors) that include the Woodstock Land Conservancy, Riverkeeper and SaveCooperLake.org, a number of studies were created to show the potential impacts of the water withdrawal, creation of plastic bottles using PET pellets, traffic and waste water disposal in a nearby impaired water-way known as the Esopus Creek.   As you will see by reading through the timeline, there was little to none modeling to gauge future impacts. These studies helped us to show the potential dangers to our communities prior to SEQRA and in turn, helped us to secure a positive declaration in the process.

INTERESTED VS. INVOLVED AGENCY

In the SEQRA process, those who have a “discretionary decision” to  make have a seat at the table and are listed as an ‘Involved Agency’. In Kingston, because the Water Board is independent – they alone would make the decision regarding the sale of the public’s water (and they alone were listed as an Involved Agency). All together, about nine people without any public oversight (unless you include the Mayor as the public, the only elected official who serves on the Water Board and who appoints all of its members, too).

All of the municipalities impacted directly that include Kingston, Woodstock and Saugerties fought another hard battle to be listed as an ‘Involved’ agency prior to not being listed at all. To be ‘Involved’ gives the group the opportunity to voice in on Lead Agency in SEQR. That is a critical moment in the process and much effort, too, was made to request that the DEC become Lead Agency of the project given its regional impacts.

Instead, each were granted only ‘Interested’ agency status, which in essence is not any more authority in the process than the average citizen.

That, right there, is a real glaring problem for our community and we intend to work with our elected officials in the future to help to provide the public with a larger role in decision making for sales such as these.

A LONGER PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING LOCATIONS IN SEQR

Another item that was important to our group given the complexity of the project was to request a longer public comment period than what is allowed in SEQR (which is 30 days once the scoping document is submitted by the client/consultant (Niagara/Chazen Companies)). Because it is not mandatory to allow for more time, the public was beholden to the Lead Agency/Client to allow for it or not.

In addition, given that the impacts of the projects would have included multiple municipalities, we also asked that Lead Agency offer public hearings outside of the Town of Ulster and in those impacted communities so to increase the number of the public and their opportunity to be heard.

ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

We hope that you will visit this page periodically as we continue to fine tune and add any additional information that is helpful to understand better our experience.

To try to keep the timeline tight, we’re including these other entries here to get a little more insight on the City of Kingston’s Water Board and other municipal decisions that have been made over the past 100 + years.

If you have anything that you wish to correct or to add – or you are a community facing a similar situation and would like to speak to us – you can do so by contacting us at Rebecca@kingstoncitizens.org

###

1906:  According to the NYS Archives, “the duties and functions of the Water Supply Commission were assumed by numerous successor agencies, and were ultimately assigned to the Department of Environmental Conservation’s Division of Water in 1970.

1929: NYS DEC Water Power and Control Commission, Water Supply Application No. 493 for the City of Kingston.

1954: NYS DEC Water Power and Commission (today the DEC) application no. 2510 for the City of Kingston.   “Conditions: A) Under this decision and approval the city of Kingston is authorized to furnish a water supply to the new plant of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) in the Town of Ulster. No authority, however, is given herby to the sale of water to any others from the supply main to be installed to such new plant without the further consent and approval of the Commission.”

2007: Ulster County Government demonstrates its commitment to the protection and management of open space and water resources with the adoption of the “Ulster County Open Space Plan,” with the largest section of the plan devoted to water resources.

2009: The City of Kingston demonstrates its commitment to environmental and climate protection by adoption the “Climate Smart and Green Jobs Community Pledge.”

2011:  As a condition of the NYS DEC permit for Woodstock Commons to hook up to the Town of Woodstock (ToW) Water District, the ToW was required to develop and submit emergency back-up water treatment and supply plans to NYS DEC using Cooper Lake main on Tinker Street at site of the Town Hall renovation.

2012: City of Kingston, NY creates “Climate Action Plan” formally adopted on October 2, 2012. In it, the city proposes initiatives that include Water Conservation and Efficiency practices. A prioritized list of projects currently underway by the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC).

 

Become a Water Board Commissioner for Kingston’s Water Department.

by

1794807_371294279719910_8352967726613483063_n

By Rebecca Martin

To be considered as a Commissioner of the Kingston Water Board:

  1. Please submit your resume/CV (Curriculum Vitae) to Carly Williams, City of Kingston Clerk: cwilliams@kingston-ny.gov by April 30th, 2015 (because we were not given a date by the Mayor’s office, this date is arbitrary. However, we presume that it gives the city time to collect interest and make a decision).
  2. The term is five years.
  3. You must be a city resident or business person.
  4. Please let us know that you have applied by contacting KingstonCitizens.org at Rebecca@kingstoncitizens.org

On May 31st 2015, Water Board Commissioner Al Radel’s term will expire. Radel has served as a Commissioner on the Water Board now for 15 years, which is three terms. We appreciate his service.

That means, that a spot is opening up – and we are hoping that citizens who are interested in serving will step up.

The Mayor of Kingston appoints citizens (and business persons) to most Commissions/Boards/Councils in Kingston. Recently, we reached out to the Mayor’s office to find out what the process was. You know how fast we move around here, and after the second request without getting information, we decided to lay out our questions in a PETITION to give the public a chance to weigh in. That petition is live now, so have a look, consider signing it and leave a comment.

The questions were simple.

KingstonCitizens.org requests that Mayor Shayne Gallo require Water Department Superintendent Judith Hansen to:

  1. Make both the description of the Board of Water Commissioner’s role and length of term visible and public on the City of Kingston’s Water Department web page.
  2. Make all of the current members of the Board of Water Commissioners biographies and length of service to date visible and public on the City of Kingston’s Water Department web page.

Furthermore, that:

  1. The City of Kingston’s Mayor, who appoints Board of Water Commissioners, publish a public notice in a timely fashion announcing its search for new candidates for the upcoming term. This announcement should include a description of the Board of Water Commissioner’s expected role; preferred experience / qualifications for candidates; contact info and deadline for submissions; and the term length.

Yesterday, we heard from Water Department Superintendent Judith Hansen who responded:

“The Mayor asked that I contact you to let you know that appointments to the Board of Water Commissioners are made by the Mayor and that if you have anyone that would like to be considered for the position, they should submit their CV to him via the City Clerk’s Office.  Neither the Board nor any employee of the Water Department, including the Superintendent has any role in or input into the selection process.”

Not much in the way of answering our questions. Then later, we heard directly from Mayor Gallo’s office:

“This is in reply to your inquiry about how vacancies and/or appointments are made to the Board of Water Commissioners or any other City board or Commission. Be advised the following process has been used since the City Charter has been adopted: Any interested City resident and/or business person may apply for consideration to any City Board and/or Commission by providing a letter of interest with a resume and background information and/or curriculum vitae of said individual. The interested party should submit the above to the City Clerk’s Office.  Upon receipt, the letter of interest shall will forwarded to my office for review and consideration.   If you know of an interested City resident who would like to be considered for appointment to the Board of Water Commissioners and/or other City boards and commissions, please share the above information with them. Thank you for your interest.”

The points unanswered at least expose something critical.  We have some information on the process, but nothing that we didn’t already know.

So why can’t the City of Kingston provide a description of a Water Board Commissioner? Or nail down their term? Or share their biographies and experience so that we know who is at the helm of our water supply? Or put out a notice in the papers to residents with a deadline for their response?

As we are entering into an election cycle, we will take these things up again at an appropriate time.  We intend to advocate for Kingston to overhaul it’s city charter at a future date.

Until then:

To be considered as a new Commissioner of the Kingston Water Board:

  1. Please submit your resume/CV (Curriculum Vitae) to Carly Williams, City of Kingston Clerk: cwilliams@kingston-ny.gov by April 3oth, 2015 (because we were not given a date by the Mayor’s office, this date is arbitrary. However, we presume that it gives the city time to collect interest and make a decision).
  2. The term is five years.
  3. You must be a city resident or business person.
  4. Please let us know that you have applied by contacting KingstonCitizens.org at Rebecca@kingstoncitizens.org

KingstonCitizens.org sponsors a public educational discussion titled “Water and Waste Water Infrastructure 101” on Tuesday, March 24th

by

 

St-Marys-Water-Recycling-PlantKingstonCitizens.org sponsors a public educational discussion titled “Water and Waste Water Infrastructure 101” on Tuesday, March 24th from 6:00pm – 8:00pm at the Kingston Public Library, 55 Franklin Street in Kingston, NY.  The group’s guest will be Water Resource Specialist Candace Balmer of RCAP Solutions (Resources for Communities and People).

Kingston, NY:   KingstonCitizens.org is pleased to present an educational discussion titled “Water and Waste Water Infrastructure 101” on Tuesday, March 24th, 2015 at the Kingston Public Library, 55 Franklin Street in Kingston, NY. from 6:00pm – 8:00pm.  Moderated by KingstonCitizens.org’s Jennifer Schwartz Berky, the group will have the opportunity to speak with Water Resource Specialist CANDACE BALMER to explore water and wastewater infrastructure,  how it is and can be funded, the importance of regular maintenance and the reality of periodic rate increases to keep this huge investment functioning. A question and answer period will also take place.

This event is free to the public and will be filmed by Kingston News. Sponsored by KingstonCitizens.org with the support of the Woodstock Land Conservancy, Riverkeeper and Catskill Mountainkeeper.

For more information, contact Rebecca Martin at rebecca@kingstoncitizens.org

###

Our Guest:

About Candace Balmer, Water Resource Specialist RCAP 

Ms. Balmer joined RCAP Solutions in March 1997 after previous experience as Associate Director, Pollution Abatement Technology Program at Westchester Community College and as Project Engineer with Environmental Resources Management, Inc. (ERM).  Advisory Boards and Task Forces: NY Onsite Wastewater Training Network (OTN); Lower Esopus Watershed Partnership (LEWP); NYC DEP-coordinated Ashokan Reservoir Working Group (ARWG).  Education: A.A.S. Water Quality Monitoring; B.A. Anthropology; M.S. Environmental Engineering.

RCAP Solutions, Inc. is the Northeast regional partner of the Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP).  RCAP is federally funded to assist small rural communities with water and wastewater projects.

Sponsored by:

About KingstonCitizens.org
KingstonCitizens.org is a community-based organization committed to improving the quality of life of Kingston residents through accountability and transparency between the people and their local government. By providing citizens with current and important information through better communication, our work is meant to nurture citizen participation and empowerment through projects, education and fun.

With Support from:

About Woodstock Land Conservancy
The Woodstock Land Conservancy is a non-profit organization committed to the protection and preservation of the open lands, forests, wetlands, scenic areas and historic sites in Woodstock and the surrounding area.

About Riverkeeper
To protect the environmental, recreational and commercial integrity of the Hudson River and its tributaries, and safeguard the drinking water of nine million New York City and Hudson Valley residents.

About Catskill Mountainkeeper
To be the strongest and most effective possible advocate for the Catskill region; working through a network of concerned citizens we promote sustainable growth and protect the natural resources essential to healthy communities.

TAKE THE SURVEY! KingstonCitizens.org Creates Timeline of the Withdrawn Niagara Bottling Company Proposal.

by

10292554_380019285514076_4427901646239655777_n

TAKE THE SURVEY

KingstonCitizens.org creates timeline of the withdrawn Niagara Bottling Company proposal.  The group has created a survey to capture the impressions of their partners and citizens to make a historical document.

Kingston, NY – KingstonCitizens.org is working on a timeline about the Niagara Bottling Project and wants to hear from the public.

On February 13, 2015, Niagara withdrew its plans to occupy the proposed site in the Town of Ulster. The proposed project would have included the purchase of 1.75 million gallons of water from the Kingston Water Department from our reservoir (Cooper Lake) located in the Town of Woodstock.

The group wishes to document citizens’ impressions of the events that occurred over the past six months. The group is working to create a historical document noting each critical event that can also offer insight, information and inspiration to other communities facing similar concerns that this proposal has brought to light.

TAKE THE SURVEY or visit www.KingstonCitizens.org for more information.  Survey responses are due Monday, March 2, 2015.

For questions or more information, contact Debra Bresnan at debra@kingstoncitizens.org

Niagara Bottling Passes On Town of Ulster Site.

by

 

grow

Over the past five months many groups have worked tirelessly across communities and political boundaries to collect important information regarding the proposed Niagara Bottling project. It has always been our aim to encourage a more open process which is critical when decisions are being made about how our public water resources will be managed, used and potentially sold.

The Niagara Bottling Company chose not to pursue a public scoping process and all that it would entail. We respect their decision.  Any impact that we might have made is a reflection of strong resolve, partnerships, commitment, patience and perseverance by us all. It is a great illustration of Democracy at work in the Hudson Valley.

As we shift gears and look forward to what’s next, we fully expect to continue to use our new capacity to advance the public good. There is a lot to do on the subject of water that has been brought to light by this proposal, and it is our goal to help protect this resource and its infrastructure so that it will remain in the hands of the people forever.

KingstonCitizens.org would personally like to thank our most intimate partners in this work.  Without their time, expertise and courage, the outcome would have certainly been different: The Woodstock Land Conservancy, Riverkeeper and the Esopus Creek Conservancy.

Thank you to Food and Water Watch, SaveCooperLake.org, Catskill Mountainkeeper, NYPIRG, The Wittenberg Center, Mid-Hudson Sierra Club, Red Hook Conservation Advisory Council, Clark Richters and Kingston News, SUNY Ulster Environmental Club, Scenic Hudson, Sustainable Saugerties, Slow Food Hudson Valley, Town of Woodstock, Town of Red Hook, City of Kingston Common Council and Conservation Advisory Council, Kingston Transition, Woodstock NY Transition and all of the local businesses who helped to get the word out and host public educational events.

But most of all – thanks to you. The citizens. It is because of you that the outcry for water protection has resulted in a huge win for our communities, the region and the State of New York and a huge opportunity to plan for wise protection, stewardship and management of our critical watersheds and public water supplies as we face the challenges of climate change.

In solidarity as we proceed.

UP NEXT:  Educational panels regarding Water, Infrastructure, Economic Development and more.

Don’t Drink the Kool-Aid. Three Suggestions That Could Improve Kingston’s Water Infrastructure.

by

16322_372715376244467_7341067584089104996_n

By Rebecca Martin

I received an ARTICLE from a Syracuse paper that’s been forwarded around locally this week where Governor Cuomo was reported to say to Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner that the State has “no plans to send millions of dollars to Syracuse or other upstate cities to fix leaky aging water systems” among other things that were not so pleasant.

Given that one of those responsible for sharing the article was Town of Ulster Supervisor James Quigley – who appears to believe that there isn’t any other possible alternative to our water infrastructure woes other than to privatize them by handing over a portion of the repair work to a company like Niagara Bottling – I had to investigate.

Upon a little research, I have learned that Syracuse Mayor Miner and Governor Cuomo have a longstanding strained relationship. Minor was once appointed to the State’s Democratic Party as a co-chair by Cuomo in May of 2012 only to resign shortly after in April of 2014.   “The relationship between Cuomo and Miner has been strained at times, with the two butting heads on several issues including State aid to cities. Minor also authored an article in the New York Times (on February 13th, 2013) criticizing Cuomo’s proposal to let municipalities borrow money to off-set pension costs.”

Also of note, is that their relationship goes way back as Miner having worked for Cuomo’s father when he was Governor.

Why is this important?

The Daily Freeman did a piece on the article recently.  When asked my reaction to it, my first response was to say that the public should better understand the context in what they were reading.  Cuomo’s reported quotes seemed specific to the Mayor and Syracuse. Was there a conflict between the two elected officials or was this really a statement on policy regarding state funding for water infrastructure in communities like ours?

My initial observation appeared to be correct from what I learned about Governor Cuomo and Mayor Minor. There was more to this then what met the eye.

My choice of action? To place aside what appears to be a bullying attempt by the local proponents of the Niagara Bottling proposal – which is of no use to the public – and instead, continue my efforts to become better educated on the needs and solutions in Kingston and our region.

###

Here are three suggestions worth time and consideration in Kingston.

1. The City of Kingston’s Water Department creates Capitol Improvement Plans (CIP) of only 4-5 years in length.

Those in favor of the Niagara Bottling proposal are hoping that they might be able to save us when Niagara PAYS ONLY SOME of a five year capitol improvement plan that totals an approximate $18 million dollars of Kingston’s water infrastructure costs (a jump of $2 million dollars since September of 2014).

But how about the rest?

Be reminded that the current improvements listed recently include some that are mandated by the DEC.  Niagara’s incremental influx over at least ten years (I am using a 10 year time period based on the number of years they would receive tax abatements if they were to be approved into the StartUp NY program) wouldn’t include improvements to the Cooper Lake Dam which is a part of this figure. A fix that our Water Department has known about since 2009 as I understand it. We are only addressing that now? How come?

What about long term planning? What exactly are we looking at here – and is there a  10, 20, 30 year plan (or whatever is the professional standard to have a long view) that allows us to look at our water infrastructure needs as an entire system?  It seems only logical that we would need a long range plan so that we can not only bite off small pieces along the way, but to also be in line for any future local, state and federal funding that becomes available.

After potentially selling 25% of our water resources to Niagara Bottling, what are we planning to sell to keep water prices low for users yet cover future infrastructure costs?  It appears to me that our elected and appointed officials are placing us in the precarious position to turn to privatization and that’s not acceptable.

2. Conservation pricing. The Kingston Water Department does the opposite and charges users more who use less and less who use more. 

Kingston’s current water rates are organized using an antiquated model by charging those who use the least the most and those who use the most the least. In this day and age, where water is scarce in many parts of the country, we should be applying something called ‘Conservation Pricing’ here at home. Not only are we encouraging users to not conserve today, we are also most probably missing out on large revenues over time that could be used to fix ailing water infrastructure. 

People like throwing around that we are ‘water rich’ in NYS.  But that doesn’t mean that we will always be, or that the 1% of water (which is the percentage that we can actually drink worldwide) will always be clean for us here.

When you have ample amounts of anything, you should not only be saving it but also mindful in setting a good example for our young community leaders who will one day be running our city to be thinking in these terms.

There is so much good reading out there on Conservation Water Pricing and I encourage you to do a little research to read up on it. We can do a longer piece on that at another time, too, if that would be helpful.

READ: EPA Water Sustainable Infrastructure Pricing Structures
READ: Conservation Pricing for Residential Water Supply (Florida)

3. Make the Water Department a part of City Government.

In 1895 when the Kingston Water Department was created it was made independent to keep politics out of water.

When the Kingston Water Board of Commissioners feels as though they have the exclusive right to sell our water and infrastructure to a company like Niagara Bottling – paid for by users and the public for over 100 years – how does that serve the publics interest today or for the future?

Additionally, our Mayor has the sole discretion to appoint members to the Water Board Commission. If the potential for politics doesn’t exist there,  I don’t know what does. Furthermore, our council has the authority to approve any water infrastructure improvements needed. Once more, the potential for politics.

In the Kingston City Charter, Water Commissioner terms are five years in length and it looks to be at a maximum. We haven’t been able to find any information in the Charter or in Water Department By-Laws (which apparently don’t exist) that allow for an extension of that five years and yet, the chair of the Water Board of Commissioners has served since 1981.  Furthermore, there isn’t a Water board Commissioner that has served for less then one term already.

What KingstonCitizens.org is going to explore this spring are steps to create a referendum in November 2015 that would bring an opportunity for the public to vote on whether or not it wants to keep the Water Department independent.  

If we have nothing really to gain for our Water Department to be independent outside of a decision to keep politics out of water from 135 year ago – long before there was bottled water companies and discussions to privatize water infrastructure – then we suggest it’s time for a change.

Insist on better municipal water management and a comprehensive study of Kingston’s water infrastructure needs. Don’t turn over 100 + years of a public investment over to private interests.  We insist on finding creative solutions to solve decades of deferred maintenance.

 

Further Reading:

“Christie Signs Law Greenlighting Fast Track Sale of New Jersey Water Systems”

“Privatization of Public Water, Sewer Systems Could be Fast Tracked Under N.J. Bill“

Now That’s Leadership. Kingston Common Council Passes Resolution for 80 Day Public Comment Period and Local Public Hearing.

by

KingstonCitizens.org would like to express its gratitude to the Kingston Common Council for passing a resolution this evening that will be sent to the Town of Ulster Town Board as Lead Agency in the Niagara Bottling SEQR Process ASAP:

1) For the Town of Ulster Town Board as Lead Agency to provide 80 days from the delivery of the Scoping Document to the Town of Ulster from Niagara Bottling’s consultant the Chazen Companies for public input during the public portion of the Scoping Document.

2) Because the proposed project is complex and multi-faceted in nature and has the potential to impact multiple communities and environmental resources, the City of Kingston as both an Interested and Involved Agency requests that the Town of Ulster Town Board as Lead Agency host a public hearing on the Scoping Document at Kingston City Hall in the City of Kingston in collaboration with Kingston’s Common Council towards the end of Public Scoping.

A motion was made by Ward 5 Alderman Bill Carey. It was seconded by Ward 9 Alderwoman Deb Brown and passed 8 – 1. The decision was made in caucus this evening, where Brian Seche who was the one ‘no’ vote was not in attendance.

Other interested and involved agencies can do the same. Protect the interests of your public and support their request.

###

READ: 3 Kingston lawmakers join effort to block tax breaks for Niagara Bottling; council calls for 80-day comment period

Kingston’s Water Board of Commissioners: A New Appointment Starting June 1st, 2015

by

1794807_371294279719910_8352967726613483063_n

By Rebecca Martin

Recently, we acquired the appointments of the current Water Board of Commissioners and learned that one of their terms expires on May 31st, 2015.

Commissioner Al Radel who has served since 2000. A total of 15 years. We would personally like to thank him for his time on the Water Board.

The Mayor appoints members to the commission, and we recommend that the city do a good search well in advance to find a new professional for the Water Board. Environmentalists, Hydrologists, Engineers, Economics.  New blood.

Any city resident can apply. To learn more, please contact Mayor Shayne Gallo at sgallo@kingston-ny.gov with your request.

INVOLVED & INTERESTED AGENCIES in SEQR: Citizens Request a Longer Public Comment Period.

by

the-seqr-process

By Rebecca Martin

KingstonCitizens.org is expecting Niagara Bottling Company to deliver their Scoping Document (in SEQRA) any day now.

For many months, citizens have petitioned the Town of Ulster as Lead Agency for ac longer public comment period (of at least 60 days) with the opportunity to host a public hearing in each impacted municipality (Kingston/Woodstock/Saugerties).  Hundreds of letters were sent to the Town of Ulster Town Board and Supervisor James Quigley.

Lead Agency does not have to honor this request and so far, they have not.

Today, we are asking that all INVOLVED AND INTERESTED AGENCIES in SEQR to please consider submitting a letter to the Town of Ulster Town Board and Supervisor James Quigley requesting the following:

1. To provide a minimum of 60 days for public input during the public portion of the Scoping Process (some organizations might request longer, given their meeting cycle. See City of Kingston Matt Dunn’s request where they ask for 78 days).

2. Because the proposed project is complex and multi-faceted one that has the potential to impact multiple communities and environmental resources, we ask that the Town of Ulster Town Board as Lead Agency consider more than one public hearing on the Scoping Document to include locations in Kingston, Woodstock and Saugerties. Additional time and hearing locations in communities that will be potentially impacted would allow for greater public participation and input on the proposed environmental review laid out in the applicants Draft Scope.

We wish to thank those who have already done so, including SCENIC HUDSON and Matt Dunn, Ward 1 Alderman of the City of Kingston.

 

INVOLVED AGENCIES

Ulster County Department of Health
Ulster County Department of Public Works Highway & Bridges Division
City of Kingston Water Board
US Army Corps of Engineers
NYS DEC
NYS DEP
NYS Department of Health (Water)
Town of Ulster Sewer Deparment
Town of Ulster Water Department
Town of Ulster Highway Department
NYS DOT
Ulster County Industrial Development Agency

INTERESTED AGENCIES

Town of Ulster Planning Board
Ulster County Planning Board
Ulster County Community College
Town of Woodstock, NY
NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets
City of Kingston, NY
Town of Saugerties, NY
Village of Saugerties, NY
Town of Esopus, NY
Town of Kingston, NY

10436201_371141306401874_406794775755180526_n