Flippin' Amsterdam NY

Maybe it’s because of my dreadful choice for lunch today mixed with the local real estate reports from GCAR that I decided to take my lunch time and pull together some graphs on real estate prices by county. I know what you’re thinking now: “Flippin’ is sooo cool.” Pathetic I know.

If you read my blog you know I focus on local real estate as no one else seems to and also because of my underlying belief that we insanely focus on cutting nickels on taxes while watching shovelfuls of dollars pass idly by as our real estate values remain significantly below the market values of other areas. And  I argue that this need not be so and while this partly stems from external market and economic circumstances, a portion also stems from our own failed policies and actions.

So to that end and to address the fallacy of the notion that we are “looking out for the taxpayer” and like minded supply side economic rubbish rhetoric plaguing the city for decades, I offer the charts below.

I wish martini lunches were still in vogue. Cheers

Capital District Real eState by County

I suggest this article (here) by Curtis Candy for an inside, well-thought and rational assessment of the issues with our infrastructure and public safety. To me this is the salient part of the piece:

That’s the tricky part. City administration is in a tough spot, as they have to deal with a crucial issue with no easy solution. No matter what avenue they take, money will definitely be the most critical ingredient, and taxpayers understandably don’t like to hear that.

We could replace big hunks of the miles of aging water mains that are old and inadequate. The price tag for such a project would be absolutely staggering. I don’t know what kind of assistance our city might be able to obtain from the Feds, but I seriously doubt it would be enough to put a dent in a project of such magnitude and scope.

I think Curtis just poured a cold bucket of financial reality on a heated issue.

One of my favorite Normisms from Cheers:

Bartender: “Hey Norm, how’s the world been treating you?”
Norm: “Like a baby treats a diaper.”

I think this captures the essence of the predominant attitude toward the city’s history, architecture and sense of self. How else do you explain the evolving memes against the Chalmers project, the Walter Elwood Museum and even the viability of the city as a livable community?

Of course, the core arguments against these projects become enwrapped in a Kabuki-esque production featuring brave heroes out to slay the nemesis of taxes with sweeping oratory to the villagers of fiscal responsibility and tough mindedness. And pitchforks in hand the villagers wildly cheer the stalwart heroes saving them from the nemesis of taxes. Meanwhile offstage and unlit reside the true economic villains– low demand for real estate, misguided economic policies and an industrial era mindset– remain undisturbed and unnoticed to wreak havoc on the villagers as they have without bother for decades.

I know my metaphors seem muddied — Cheers, Kabuki and epic heroes– but dealing with the muck and the murk of policy making in this city, it is wholly consistent to use muddy metaphors to deal with muddy policies and even muddier thinking.

I don’t see how my Normism above does not perfectly describe the prevailing attitude toward a significant piece of history and culture in our community in the museum. It’s astonishing to see public policy players actively campaigning against a not-for-profit entity that has been an active part of the community for decades using the most disingenuous of means to do so. Never mind the cognitive dissonance with the school district, now we get the equivalent cognitive dissonance from the council (here):

Fourth Ward Alderman William Wills, who sponsored the resolution during a special meeting Tuesday night, called for the removal of $25,000 in funding based on the “almost-2-to-1 vote taken recently in the school district that basically states people don’t want their tax dollars spent on a not-for-profit organization.”

Besides Wills, Controller Heather Reynicke, and Aldermen Richard Leggiero and Kim Brumley voted to remove the funding.

[snip]

Since at least 1997, the city has contracted on an annual basis for services with the Amsterdam Library, which receives $83,000 a year, and the Inman Center, which gets $2,400 per year. Both of those contracts expire June 30; however no effort was made Tuesday night to end those funding agreements.

It’s nice to see the same cognitive dissonance in talking points from the school district and the Council.

It’s nice to have yet another empty shell in the third ward so it can bookend nicely with the shell of Bacon school. Of course when our elected alderwoman works for the entity responsible for the closures, it’s hardly a surprise but we dare not mention nor address potential conflicts of interest in how you should advocate against your employer when it means protecting the interests of your ward constituents. That would be shrill and irresponsible of me.

But the true plot twist in this Kabuki is how the policy makers lust for the promise and hope of jobs. Yes, we need jobs in the city they say. We want to bring in new jobs; jobs, jobs, jobs! So what about putting the jobs of the museum staff at risk and the grant streams creating secondary jobs for program providers, consultants, caterers, et al? Silence.

I won’t even address the broader issue of arts, history and culture as a vital part of the community. That will push me over the edge today.

The same disdain , nee contempt, applies equally to the notion of Chalmers as a viable redevelopment for a historic building and to the notion of this as a viable, livable community in the broader Capital District.

Our community can never have enough diapers.

The Recorder has two interesting pieces today: the first on the school district budget vote/revote (here) and the second on Chalmers by city historian RH von Hasseln (here).

I find the piece on the school district somewhat vague as to what the op-ed hopes to assert. If districts ’should pay attention to voters’, does that not argue against a revote as the voters voted the first budget down? I also don’t believe that voters did not understand that the budget vote would not effect administrative salaries; and the notion that -voters should think twice about defeating the budget a second time, since it will be students and hourly employees who will suffer- strikes me as acquiescing to a deeply cynical strategy on the part of the board and administration to simultaneously rail against taxes while doing exactly the opposite.

I can say that this budget process confounds me profoundly. I should not be surprised.

The piece on Chalmers challenges many of the memes floating around and I encourage you to read it–twice. Time prevents a more extensive writeup on Chalmers so I’ll try to loop back in a few days.

Great post by Mark Robarge on MOSA (here)

These just seem to go with our idyllic days of late. Cheers

A few years ago I worked with a client who was fond of the term “wrap my head around it” when faced with understanding and solving problems. This phrase became so prevalent in discussions that we would cringe every time we heard it to the point of visible eye rolling toward the end of our assignment.

You see, ‘wrapping my head around it’ didn’t mean solving the core problem; instead it meant dwelling on the periphery of the problem while ignoring a basic understanding of the core problem and the core framework in which to solve the problem. It’s like sticking a band aid on a severed artery; it stops the blood loss briefly but you’re still going to bleed to death. Soon enough my client’s head wrapping led to my inevitable head rapping — metaphorically against a brick wall of the intractability of our client to address the core of the problem.

I only bring up this story as context for my very own struggle today to not rap my head against a physical brick wall after trying to wrap my head around the stories here and here concerning the GASD board decision to put the budget up for a re-vote.

Try to wrap you head around the following:

1)Before the budget will be voted on again, some board members said the public needs to be better informed about the budget, the consequences of their vote and the disadvantages of the budget going to contingency.

Really?! Does this not admit a failure on the part of the board to do so on the first budget?Does this not admit a failure to sell and market the budget?

2)“I thought it was a real tribute to the community that it was that close … it tells me as superintendent that the people who voted yes on the budget want to save jobs,” said Perillo.

And the majority of people who voted ‘no’? Should we not be paying a tribute to the community members who vote against the budget year after year; after all, they are the ones we pander to time and again with the rhetoric of cutting taxes and ‘tough mindedness’ on financials. Now you realize that you are selling the budget to the wrong crowd?

3)Other board members thought that because the vote was so close, taxpayers deserved another chance to go to the polls.

Huh!? Logic escapes me here

4)The re-vote will cost the district $8,000 to $8,500 for the registration, public hearing and voting processes. There is a provision in the current budget to cover the cost of a re-vote, said Business Manager Roger Seward.

F’ing amazing: We have a $55mn budget and $8K should factor into the decision?

Doubly f’ing amazing: The proposition for the museum cost $7K (I think) plus the budget revote of $8K works out to $15K total. To remediate the bats at the museum would have cost less than that. So you see kids, the district likely could have sustained the museum, garnered the good will in doing so and likely picked up the 32 votes to pass the budget for less than what the district is paying out now. Genius.

Think about that for financial cost/benefit. But then, I’m just a lowly, sour graped, word-twisting, foul mouthed  blogger.

5)It could be janitors, it could be hall monitors … it could be modified sports, it could be all activities, it could be a lot of different things,” said Walrath.

Oh please, oh please not sports. Anything but sports; can’t we cut some academic programs instead?

6)There was some discussion about changing the size of the budget, but Board of Education president Gina DeRossi said any marginal cuts would make little difference to property owners’ tax bills.

What more can I possibly say: KoolAid anyone?

7)James Bradt’s voice cracked as he stood before the Amsterdam school district’s Board of Education Wednesday night.

[snip]

It would likely mean his job.

The people who bear the real burden of intractable head wrapping.

Not sure why I bother but if you want to know why our school budgets consistently fail , I offer this from today’s Recorder (here):

“I’m just glad the votes came out and showed they did not like the new tax,” said DeRossi.

Ummm, if you’re going to campaign against taxes then you are advocating voting against any non-contingency budget as a non-contingency budget by definition always has more taxes than the contingency budget. We can parse the semantics of ‘new tax’ but I don’t buy it. And I think the voters listened to the rhetoric of no ‘new taxes’ and voted the budget down. Funny that our budgets do not pass when the very board members who created the budget campaign against it. Whodathunk?!

If anyone has a horse, I’d like to ride it out of here.

I admit to little interest of late in posting– a jambalaya of metaphors involving beating of dead horses, pushing boulders up hills and leading horses to water spring to mind. And I know that these metaphors ring true in some other minds as well.

So please enjoy this clip of a classic Seinfeld episode, The Opposite, where George Costanza reverses his misfortunes by embracing the exact opposite of what his instincts tell him to do. I think there is a lesson here.

If you are into crunching numbers, analysis and research, check out this story on a new search engine called Wolfram Alpha  in the WSJ (here). I tried a few searches/calculations and this has a lot of potential– impressive really.This is an early stage product and technology…