Flippin' Amsterdam NY

Interesting Analysis of state budget picture nationally; no time for analysis or comment but interesting for our own local analysis and impact.

From The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities , State Budget Troubles Worsen

I’m curious as to how this will turn out (from Recorder story Planning board to revisit site plan for proposed eatery):

The planning board asked BBL Hospitality to come up with some ideas to make the restaurant fit into the historic district it will lie in. The restaurant will be across from the Sanford Stud Farm, and ideas to make it fit into the area included period style lighting fixtures and an equestrian theme on the outside.

As there are no plans to see or renderings, I’ll reserve judgment but I think it’s safe to say that “equestrian themes” do not necessarily translate into “architectural fit”. I find the characterization a bit odd so we’ll see once the plans come out.

Update: As I drove by Walgreens this morning, I admired the ‘big ugly retail box’ themed exterior that really fits the history of the surrounding farm: the architectural detail plus the sweeping expanse of asphalt were just spectacular displays of historic and architectural fit!

Too tired and distracted for the golf course analysis in any detail but I did manage to stumble upon a troublesome statistic: the business plan mentions the word ‘marketing’ 23 times!

We’d have gotten away with our meme of ‘nothing to market in Amsterdam’ if it weren’t for those meddling kids.

I’m getting a bit tweaked over the citing of the 1st Amendment and freedom speech when it comes to blogs or the medium. Here is the 1st amendment:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I am not Congress and my blog is not part of the Constitution — I don’t even need to research that– so please stop citing your rights to freedom of speech or how I limit or seek to limit those rights as some inherent Constitutional right as a poster on this blog. Or how my blog even advocates for suppression of freedom speech rights ala my FCC posts. It’s nonsensical and needs to stop.

And I’ll have every right to delete such nonsense from the blog so maybe the 1st Amendment gets understood.

Just another telling example of how the national debate on important issues get so blithely shaped and discussed and its impacts on political discourse.

Sunday AM and highly agitated…

The Recorder editors support terminating the Chalmers deal (here). I’m not surprised given their longstanding position on Chalmers.

A surprising take on what I can only characterize as an acid and peyote fueled trip through Amsterdam here.

Oy, the letter from the State Comptroller on the city budget not liking the projections on the budget or the budget process. And the Recorder paints a less than flattering picture of the budget process (here).

Let me point to a statement that should give pause when we think about how unsustainable an economic strategy built exclusively upon the hope of retail development (from the Comptroller report):

Considering the current economic conditions, specific steps should be taken to “hedge” against potential shortfalls of certain revenues included in the 2009-10 budget. For example, although the City may not realize the full $3.5 million in sales tax revenue it had expected to receive from Montgomery County for the current year because of the economic downturn, the City has estimated sales tax distributions for 2009-10 at $3.9 million, which represents about 29 percent of anticipated general fund expenditures. This estimate may be too high.
[snip]

However, according to information provided by Montgomery County during our review, sales tax revenues during the County’s first quarter ending March 31, 2009, were down approximately 6 percent from the same time period last year. The County Treasurer estimates that sales tax revenues for the second quarter ending June 30, 2009 will also be down about 6 percent from the same quarter in 2008.

This report coupled with the Golf Course financials signal to me that we have some structural finance issues in the next few years based upon what is happening in the broader economy and based upon past and current governance. And just to pile on, we know that sales tax will impact county budgets and we also know that the school budget for next year will pile on even more due to the anticipated decline in state funding and an even more pronounced shifting of the tax burden to property owners.

I’m afraid that we are going to personally experience the financial consequences of our longstanding no-growth and negative-growth strategy in the years ahead.

I’m not sure that we can address this locally as the budget cuts required may be draconian assuming numbers such as above or another double digit tax increase on the school level.

I’d advise a concerted lobbying effort start now on multiple fronts as the projections look scary. And to the extent that school budget reform vis-a-vis property tax based can gain traction I think now is the time. Unfortunately our state legislators mockery of a legislative process and legislative body continues unabated so getting traction on meaningful reform looks impossible. Still we should be lobbying especially by the school board.

PS I’m not delivering on my promise to look at the Golf course figures due to many demands on my time.  I hope to get back to it next week along with some open items from some exchanges on economic growth and AIDA. I have non-public financials to worry about too.

I encourage comments and criticism on this blog and of 550+ comments, I have deleted only one comment for inappropriate content. I think that’s pretty good and it supports my view that opposing viewpoints to mine should not be silenced.

That said, I’m not pleased with the tone of some of the recent comments as they don’t contribute to the debate in a meaningful way. Now you may ask  “What does that mean?”. I’m not sure exactly as I feel very much on a slippery slope to define a standard for comments. I can only ask that we all raise our game for a higher standard of dialog on the substance of the issues.

I want to keep the deletions as a rarity than a matter of course. Let’s all raise our game.

Thanks

Check out  Mohawk Valley Guide if you are looking for things to do this summer in the area. It has a listing of all the fireworks in the area for the 4th.

Summer is much too fleeting to not kick back sometimes.

Cheers

Actually not: a pitch perfect, no holds-barred editorial on the GASD decision to terminate modified sports: GASD board’s disregard for public deplorable

Awesome

Here is the Recorder story on the termination of the Chalmers agreement via a resolution to be introduced and likely passed next week (here). Through some well placed contacts, I was able to acquire the resolution itself.  Here it is:

Let it be resolved on this day of Tuesday June 30th by the Amsterdam Council on the matter of the Chalmers building the following:
1) whereas developers see opportunity for residential development and adaptive reuse of historic, architecturally significant buildings within the city, we proclaim such development to be unwanted and undesirable.
2) whereas we decry the ever growing local tax burden on property owners coupled with an underperforming housing market, we reject any and all development which may reverse this decades old trend. We embrace this trend.
3) whereas developers envision projects to attract a younger demographic, we see no need for retention of nor attraction of youth  to our local community and in fact, see growth through a continuing attrition of a younger demographic.
4) whereas legal agreements rely on a level of good faith effort by both parties and in cases where legal agreements may be less than clear, we will interpret that as strictly bad faith on the other party notwithstanding our less than good faith efforts
5) whereas the public may hold us accountable for the consequences of this action, we claim no basis for such accountability
6) whereas successful and viable communities foster positive relationships with private developers and industry, we see no such need.
7) whereas other developers and investors will interpret our actions against Mr Kaufmann as a community hostile to development by radically raising the financial risks of development, we do not consider financial risks as relevant to policy making.
8 ) whereas Murray Gould expressed an interest in Esquire and whereas he sees our actions against Mr Kaufmann as risky and whereas we may lose another adaptive reuse project, we reject any possibility of negative consequences of our actions.
9) whereas the site was known prior to demolition as the Chalmers building and whereas the site will be demolished, we will erect a lifesize monument of the sponsors of this resolution. Such monument will be engraved with the following: “In recognition of the Leggiero-Wills-Isabel-Roth Resolution passed on June 30, 2009. Architects of a bleaker tomorrow than today”.

Let it be so resolved.