Grains of Salt (v26): Paychex Paychecks

Well, how about that!  It seems Joanie Mahoney, our County Executive, actually does know who her

Grains of Salt

campaign was paying all this time. 

For some time now, going back at least to July, Mahoney has been hiding the identity of the person or people her campaign paid almost $60,000 over the past year, even though Mahoney last ran for office in 2015 and is not up for re-election again until 2019. 

Now, when I say hiding, I mean that on her campaign finance disclosure statements, Paychex is listed as the payee. For those who may not be aware, Paychex handles payroll processing for businesses and, apparently, campaign committees. But in the case of Mahoney's filings, they are not the payee, they are merely the pass-through.

Early on, Mahoney argued that her filings were OK, they were compliant, and of course they were ethical, because it wasn't "government money" being used. The State Board of Elections disagreed, as we were told by John Conklin (on behalf of the Board).

The point is, the thing that needs to be disclosed is who is ultimately receiving the payment, who the payee really is. The payroll processor is not the one who is really the payee. It's the employee who receives the wages, and that should ultimately be disclosed.

Mahoney, a lawyer, would only say the money was for her campaign staff, pointing out that

I have people who continue to do work on behalf of the campaign. I have disclosed everything the way I am required to do.

She further noted

We will discuss with the Board of Elections to ensure our filings continue to be compliant in the future. Our campaign committee has always taken pride in our timely and accurate disclosure filings.

Moving ahead a few days, the Board was advised by Syracuse.com that Mahoney's campaign was not the only one - there were others too, from across the state - who were filing similar disclosure statements. An eye opener, it was for them -- because the people who review filings had never questioned it before. Here's our friend John Conklin again

There was not a consensus that it was a common enough deficiency to spend limited staff time on the issue.

Later in August, the Board ordered Mahoney's campaign, and the others, to amend their filings to accurately reflect who was the actual end recipient of the wages paid by the campaigns.

Finally, we arrived at the outcome that was ordered back in August.  Earlier this month, Mahoney released the name of the person who was being paid almost $60K to work on the campaign: Lesley B. Dublin.  Dublin is the Director of Intergovernmental Affairs for Onondaga County - so while she's not an elected official, she works for county residents. In that capacity, she earns around $79K.

In her spare time - nights and weekends, we're assured - she earns $57K as she

organizes special events and fundraisers for Friends of Joanie Mahoney, and coordinates the campaign's charitable contributions.

Mahoney pats herself on the back for paying one of our employees to be her campaign's employee:

Most elected officials expect their government employees to do campaign work for free and I have never done that. I have always believed that anyone, particularly county employees, who perform campaign responsibilities on their own time should be compensated by the campaign.

I guess we have to give Mahoney credit for her generosity with campaign workers, even if we disapprove of her pretending that it was compliant, or ethical, to hide their names.

Grains of Salt (v19): Waiting for Consensus

I've been neglecting things that are going on around Syracuse and Central New York, what with all of the bluster and noise coming from Washington DC, so I thought it was time to throw around a few Grains of Salt.

You remember the Consensus Commission, right? The group of local businessmen, educators, movers and shakers that were trying t come up with some kind of recommendation for a metropolitan government in this neck of the woods?

I've written about this group a few times in the past, but not lately, as we're still waiting for their final report. The group itself has been quiet, so I guess I can go a little easy on myself.  For example, their official Facebook page hasn't been updated since August of last year, when they posted an article by Tim Knauss of the Post-Standard and syracuse.com stating that their report would be out by "mid-fall" according to Consensus co-chair Neal Murphy. Noting that "no deadline has been set" Knauss reported

Since any public referendum on the initiatives is likely more than a year away, the commission is taking time to deliberate and refine its recommendations...It's more important that we get this right than that we commit to an arbitrary timetable. 

While the commission has been deliberative (the latest was that the report was expected by the end of January, which has come and gone with no update), and while I've been neglectful, I can assure you our Sonofa Gov Andrew Cuomo and our local county executive, OnJoanie Mahoney, have not been sitting idly by, oh no sirree.

Cuomo announced a plan to Empower Voters to Approve Plans to Lower the Cost of Local Government as part of his Rolling State of the State Address, delivered in various cities across the state. This 23rd recommendation from Cuomo requires county execs to come up with consolidation plans, put them in front of their county legislature (not the impacted jurisdiction) by August 1, 2017. If the county's elected officials don't get the plan implemented, it goes to the voters on the ballot in November for approval or, if not approved, the process starts all over again the following year, with similar August and November deadlines.

Sounds like fun, right? Because, after all, according to the Gov,

The property tax is the most burdensome tax to homeowners and business owners in every part of the state, inhibiting their ability to grow and contribute to our economy. By challenging local governments to create a plan to streamline government bureaucracy for voter approval, this innovative and powerful initiative will empower communities and lead to real, recurring property tax savings... this proposal will reduce the burden of the tax and establish New York as a national model for government efficiency.

OnJoanie has said that she thinks people want consolidation, and she'd put a proposal on the table; for example,

We're good at parks, and we can take on the city parks. I would put it on a referendum if I thought the public wanted that, really, regardless of the other political agendas in town. 

We'll see whether Mahoney's judgment on what the people want is on target or not when the final report from Consensus gets here, but if the open comment period last year is any indication, there may bes less support for it than she thinks.

And, of course, we'll have to wait and see if the state legislature, or the three men in a room, even approve the Gov's plan. There's no guarantee the local politicians will set aside their spiteful political agendas and support this, and state senators and representatives are very likely to get an earful.

Consensus, anyone?

Grains of Salt (v18): Audits and Snowballs

Season's Greetings to one and all from Syracuse - the Salt City, the heart of Onondaga County -  where we know how to throw a snowball, a retirement incentive, and a great legislative meeting, I tell ya.

The snowball thing, that's obvious. I mean, we are the usual favorite to win the Golden Snowball trophy.

That retirement incentive, well, that's pretty obvious, too.

It doesn't seem possible it was all the way back in October that we first learned that the Onondaga County Legislature had somehow managed to include elected officials in the retirement incentive program designed to nudge a whole bunch of people into premature retirement to avoid as many as several hundred layoffs.

Our longest-serving county legislator, Kathy Rapp, announced she was retiring, with the incentive, a nice $10,000 of taxpayer money designed to save money, but that will actually cost us money, as we pay her the incentive and also pay her replacement, who will be appointed by OnJoanie Mahoney, our County Executive.

Rapp's last day was yesterday; she had a nice sendoff, got a plaque, and had the opportunity to give us some parting thoughts. She noted that "politics" is driving her out after 18 years. She liked the work, she said, but lamented that "trying to be right instead of doing what's best" seems to take precedence these days -- and the personalities, that too.

I wish her well in retirement, and hope she enjoys her two grandbabies. And I also just wish she hadn't taken the money. Because contrary to popular opinion, a politician is not obligated to take advantage of every opportunity that falls in their lap, any more than they're obligated to say, take LLC money if they think it's wrong that they're able to do so (our Sonofa Gov Andrew Cuomo) or to use campaign funds to buy steaks for people (DA-for-life Bill Fitzpatrick).

But she was right about the personalities, for sure, Which gets us to the throwing a legislative meeting I mentioned at the top of the post.

At a legislative meeting Friday, representatives from a pair of feuding county office showed just how hard it is to be in the same room with one another. What began as a presentation of financial data devolved into a shouting match during the meeting, belying long-simmer tensions between the county executive and the comptroller. 

Yes, the executive, the one who pretty much told us if we didn't like her ramming through her pay raise, we could vote her out.  And the comptroller, who filed a lawsuit over the raise. He won a procedural thing regarding the raise for the legislature, but lost the fight on Mahoney's own raise. It's been all down hill for a while now.

We all know how personally OnJoanie takes everything related to the Lakeview Amp, her pet project. Not a lot of people thought a seasonal concert venue, with several similarly sized competing venues up and down the Thruway, was a good idea for $50M in economic development funds  - but we were promised that it would work out. The first full year only making $150K seems a little low, but if the sales tax revenue and hotel room usage we heard about is true, we might do OK with it.

Is the comptroller wrong to question the finances of the Amp? Nope. Actually, he's right to ask where we might find the money owed to the county by the state for the 2015 Miranda Lambert concert, and where we might find the reports the county was supposed to have filed this year, per the legislature's request, or for a copy of the promoter's concert. Presumably he's asking for these in his official capacity as comptroller and guardian of county taxpayer dollars.

Could he find a better way to go about his mission to get, and audit, Amp financial activities? Sure thing. For one, there's that old adage about catching more flies with honey than with vinegar -- and Antonacci was practically spitting vinegar yesterday.

Maybe instead of doing that, he could challenge Mahoney to a snowball fight.

Grains of Salt (v17): Retirement Planning

Is it really only here, in Onondaga County, that the government could offer an incentive to retire to - wait for it -- elected officials?

I kid you not.

They did make the offer, and as luck would have it,we have a member of the Onondaga County Legislature - Kathy Rapp - who's going to take the $10,000 incentive and run.

I. Kid. You. Not.

Here's how it all played out:

• Back in August, the County came up with the buyout package for certain employees who left by the end of the year. The intent of the package was to save the county oodles of noodles for each of the up to 800 eligibles who took the offer.  They cost the county around $50K,each, so give them $10K to get out, and voila -- we've got a $40K savings per retiree!
• Not surprisingly, looking at the numbers, the Legislature unanimously approved the buyout deal in September- one lawmaker missed the meeting, or it the vote would have likely been 17-0 in favor. The person missing? Kathy Rapp.
• And in October, Rapp advised she's going to retire at the end of the year. 

Cha-ching! There's another $40K for the county coffers, right?  Well, not exactly.

Rapp, who is the county's longest-serving legislator, has a year left to go in her term -- and since it would be unfair to leave her constituents without representation, her position will have to be filled, there go the savings we were supposed to get. And, the way the rules work, her constituents won't actually make the decision on her replacement. That will be left up to the County Executive.

Onondaga County previously offered a buyout, several years back, and that one correctly excluded elected officials. This time around, instead of just using a state law for the retirement incentive proposal, they wrote one of their own, which did not have the exclusion. As long as the person was vested in the pension system, and the they be eligible for retirement benefits.  When Rapp's name, and that of a couple of other elected officials appeared on the list of eligibles, it was an Aha! moment, according to today's article.

Aha, indeed.

How exactly do you un-ring a cha-ching? I don't know that you do -- I think the trick is to not ring it in the first place, if it doesn't ring true.

Rapp can retire, and spend time with her grandchildren. OnJoanie can appoint her replacement. And folks in the county law department, and their outside counsel, can fight over who missed the part about the elected officials.

And Casey Jordan, one of the elected officials who's eligible for but not taking the deal, can have his comment made into a plaque for everyone's office.

We're voting in support of this incentive, and it seems self-serving to be approving it and then taking advantage at the same time.

I kid you not.

The Update Desk: Grains of Salt (v12)

In my post the other day about the Great New York State Fair, I mentioned that our Sonofa Governor had come in to save the day and prevent a doubling of the price at the Rainbow Milk Bar from 25 cents to 50 cents. Fair profits will be used to cover the $90,000 shortfall the price increase would have resolved.

(And yes, I also mentioned that the name was changing to simply the Milk Bar, but old habits die hard - it will always be the Rainbow Milk Bar to me.)

In the same post, I noted the consternation over changes being made by Centro, our regional public transportation company, to the park-and-ride locations. The one for folks on the east side of the county, and beyond, was being eliminated. I ended the column that there might be a chance that the issue could be resolved, just as the price increase for one of the Fair's biggest attractions was resolved.

Initially, I figured it was the Governor, but it seems it was County Executive OnJoanie Mahoney, the go-to gal in our area whenever the Gov has a plan or needs a plan. who was the white knight who made the deal with Centro to have the Shoppingtown park-and-ride restored.

The people who called me, I took their concerns to the State Fair - they said we've kind of hear the same thing - let us talk to Centro and then the three of us came together to make the decision. If you look at a map, the eastern part really had a hole in it. 

Folks who want their Fair stop restored at the Seneca Mall seem to be out of luck.  Centro's statement notes that, while service at Seneca Mall ran every hour, service from the new park-and-ride location will run "about every twelve to fifteen minutes" meaning more people get to the Fair faster, and there's a much shorter wait time if you miss the bus.

The Fair starts a week from today -- got tickets?

Grains of Salt (v8): Fitzing Around

Onondaga County's DA-for-Life, William Fitzpatrick, is investigating Syracuse's City Hall and Stephanie Miner, our term-limited mayor, for allegedly attempting to influence people's opinions against a tax deal for a developer who has been given exclusive rights to make the Syracuse Inner Harbor pretty.

Miner prefers that developer candy baskets include specific hiring requirements for city residents, among other things, and defends (too fiercely, many think) city territory on these deals. The mayor challenged this one because COR Development, the company in question, went straight to  the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency  instead of to the Syracuse Industrial Development Agency, because they anticipated a friendlier reception - and they got one.

Miner sued, saying that COR promised not to seek a PILOT on the Inner Harbor project; the judge didn't buy it, and tossed her lawsuit. Fitzpatrick is investigating to see if there was undue influence by City Hall on legislators or other witnesses, or on public opinion generally. (Note that there was apparently some attempt to influence, as noted by the discovery of a letter to the editor that was 'signed' by five religious leaders, some of whom were surprised to see their names in the paper. Comically, or sadly, all of the local judges recused themselves from the case.)

COR Development once had close ties with Miner, and has a connection with the mayor's husband and his family; the company still has close ties with OnJoanie Mahoney, only the third county executive in Onondaga's history, and perhaps the last, depending on what happens with the Consensus Commission's recommendations to merge government functions between the city and the county.

It was this same developer who was in on the plans to build a half-a-billion-dollar stadium for Syracuse University - in the city - and we know that the plan was not discussed with the mayor in advance of it being announced, and eventually was not given the green light. The property where the stadium was to have been built remains basically undeveloped by COR at this time; all of the grand plans for the Loguen's Crossing development pre-stadium debacle have not yet been realized, nor has any real intent to act on them, as far as anyone knows.

The developer is also huge supporter of our Sonofa Governor Andrew Cuomo, giving a couple hundred thou to his 2014 campaign, and benefiting by having millions of dollars in contracts associated with the Sonofa Guv's gimmicky economic development programs around the state come their way. That includes right here in our own back yard where they have - you guessed it - exclusive rights to develop things like the 'nano-center' where we have a movie production studio generating some jobs, and a new LED lighting manufacturer which will bring in a few hundred more.

Those deals came about through COR's relationship with the Gov, er I mean through their interactions with the SUNY Polytechnic Institute. SUNY Poly is heavily involved in the "Buffalo Billion" project, a shining star in Cuomo's portfolio of economic successes.  Parts of the Buffalo Billion, including SUNY Poly, and people associated with it, including a very close former aide to Cuomo, are currently being looked at as part of the ongoing investigation of US Attorney Preet Bharara into politics and ethics in New York.

Bharara, who has already gotten convictions of both former NY Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos and former State Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver, has made it clear he's not stopping his investigations even if the Governor's ill-fated and "totally independent" Moreland Commission to investigate corruption in NY's government was nipped in the bud when it apparently got too close to Cuomo, his donors, media partners, and so on.

I say 'apparently' that's why it was nipped in the bud, because pretty much everyone thinks that -- reporters, Bharara, and most New Yorkers, except maybe the members of the State Legislature; they're glad the Commission is out of their hair, and I don't think they care why.

One person who doesn't think that, though, is Fitzpatrick, who was one of the three co-chairs of the Commission (OnJoanie was also a member) and who suggested in emails that were uncovered that "the Second Floor" (the Sonofa Guv's home base in Albany) needed to understand what "independent" meant. Many people took that as suggesting at least some level of meddling, but apparently that was not the case.

Because the Commission asserted in court papers that it was fully independent, only a couple of months before it was unceremoniously shut down by the Governor, who pretended that his objectives on ethics reform were met through the budget negotiation process. Bharara noted that the shutdown didn't really pass the smell test. He ordered the Commission to preserve all papers and then, a few months later, let people know he would not take kindly to attempts by the Second Floor to influence any of the now former Commission members into painting a rosy picture of things when that was likely not the case.

And who was one of the Commission members who made glowing statements about the independence of the Commission, noting that no one can push him around and make him drop something he was interested in looking at, oh no siree?  None other than our very own DA,  Bill Fitzpatrick.

Heads spinning as we try and sort out this plate of spaghetti, we're Fitzing around here in Syracuse, fingers pointing, accusations and denials flowing like wine, he saids and she saids and who remembers and who signed and who didn't and who told on who and, frankly, for what?

Absent a smoking gun in Syracuse's City Hall, I would be confused as to how the Mayor's attempts to influence public opinion about a tax deal are really any different than Fitzpatrick's attempt to influence public opinion about an independent ethics commission?

They're both elected officials, speaking to constituents (many of whom don't like them) about things that any number of their constituents don't like or don't believe, and about which many people couldn't care less.

Do we want honest politicians? Of course we do. Do we want to uncover corruption? Sure we do. Would it be better if the person doing the investigating was not someone who has long-standing issues with the folks he's investigating? Of course it would.  Is that likely to happen here?

Nope.

Consensus? We'll Find Out

Consensus Report

With little surprise, a preliminary report was issued today recommending consolidation of governmental services across the city of Syracuse and Onondaga County.

The report, from Consensus, the Committee on Local Government Modernization, was long awaited and frequently hinted at by politicians including our Sonofa Governor, Andrew Cuomo, and his pal, County Executive OnJoanie Mahoney.

Today's releases include the full report  as well as a summary version. I have yet to plow through all of the documents, but wanted to share some of what's in the report, including this from the summary:

Our public servants have an opportunity to lead us in the direction of a bold new vision for the Syracuse-Onondaga community. One that will make our community even better and more reflective of what we desire and deserve. We can do better. The next step in that journey is here. 

Noting that the preliminary recommendations "have not yet been formally accepted by the full commission", they recommend the following in the Governance bucket:

• Establish a process toward creating a new city-county government and service delivery structure that leverages function and scale similarities of the City of Syracuse and Onondaga County.
•  Create a formal mechanism and process whereby towns and villages can join the new city-county framework over time. 
• Vest the new city-county government with responsibility for specific regional matters, including the regional land use plan, overseeing infrastructure planning and economic development using a county-wide model.
• Local government leaders must work together to see local relief from statutes and mandates that drive up cost and limit government efficiency.

Other buckets of recommendations include infrastructure, municipal operations, public safety, and economic development and include cost-saving ideas ranging from combining economic development agencies, parks, courts and more, as well as expanding 'shared services' across the county, modernizing processes and technology, and more. 

Who else has done this successfully, you might ask?  Indianapolis, Nashville and Jacksonville, and the Twin Cities area in Minnesota are referenced in the reports.  

What comes next? Public comment - lots of options, from emails to Facebook to public meetings - heck, you can even host a meeting --are included in the report.  

I encourage those of you in the Syracuse area to read either the summary or the full report, and make your voice heard. You have until mid-March to get your word in edgewise. 

Quick Takes (v2): Implosions

Quick Takes 

Yesterday, the Grandstand at the New York State Fairgrounds here in Syracuse was imploded, to make way for a new RV park, part of our Sonofa Governor Andrew Cuomo's move to revitalize the Central New York economy.

Cuomo's $50M plan to turn the site into a year-round venue and an economic development draw for the area, was of course supplemented by the building of our new seasonal OnPhitheater (formally known as the Lakeview Amphitheater), another $50 million project that, by design, will cause people to either skip the Fair entirely, or leave it for a period of time, to attend Grandstand-level concerts off-campus during the Fair's run in late summer.

And, with the destruction of the Grandstand and the one-mile dirt track, so ends the car and horse racing at the Fair; constituents of those activities are left with only their memories, as are attendees of concerts at the Grandstand. The racing events that used to be held at the Grandstand may both eventually be held at the CNY Raceway Park, a multi-use 'need for speed' venture underway in Hastings, up in Oswego County. (Note: I'm not including any links to the Raceway Park, as more than a few take you to obviously fake sites that immediately ask you to download software of one sort or another; I encourage you to be cautious.)

Here's how the implosion activity was described in a local media report:

The push of a ceremonial plunger ignited 268 explosives at 260 different locations on the Grandstand, sending more than 5 million pounds of steel and concrete crashing to the ground.

The Gov himself was here for the demolition, further cementing his relationship with our County Executive, OnJoanie Mahoney.

Governor Andrew Cuomo and County Executive Joanie Mahoney attended the event and pushed the plunger together, along with a small group of friends. 

Ah, love.

Mayor Stephanie Miner was not in attendance at the implosion; rather, she was holding a press conference with US Representative Paul Tonko (D-Amsterdam), in which renewed calls for federal investment in local infrastructure were made. Some might say she was furthering the implosion of her relationship with both Joanie and Andy. This comes, of course, because of her well-known disagreement with Cuomo on state funding for these projects and her involvement with Building America's Future, a group that lobbies for infrastructure assistance for localities.

To put the Cuomo/Miner rift into simple terms, the Governor believes you can lead a horse to water.

He (and OnJoanie as well) are all about the kind of government assistance that makes people want to participate in something; a nice RV park will draw more visitors to the State Fair, for example, or a makeover will cause users of Penn Station (which he has declared bleak, dark and ugly) to feel better about their experience there, and about New York at the same time.

Miner, clearly, thinks there should be potable water there when the horse arrives.

This could be another long year.

Grains of Salt (v4): Never a Good Time

Our County Executive Joanie Mahoney has apparently been cured of her significant paycheck envy, now that she's getting a 27.3% raise.

Mahoney, in an exclusive interview with CNYCentral's Michael Benny, noted in the nicest possible way her dissatisfaction with the fact that she hadn't had a raise but others had.

Previous to my time in office, when Nick Pirro was the County Executive, there was a raise for the office every single year for the eight years previous to my getting there...

I would just point out to people that none of those raises came along the way so it's not like you're going to go back and make up for all of the years that there was no raise...

The CSEA employees were collecting those raises every year and the County Executive was not.

Every county employee that's full time including every elected official has gotten a raise within the last eight years with the exception of this position. 

Mahoney contends that, while many taxpayers apparently don't recall, this was addressed last December, so it did sort of meet her request that it be taken up before the election. And she basically blames her constituents for their "busy lives" and not remembering that this had been discussed, so there really shouldn't be any complaints now.

When it was raised back then, there was concern about the timing.  Here's what Joanie says:

At that time, some of the criticism was that it shouldn't happen mid-term and that it should be for a new term so they asked to put it off for a year. 

Mahoney also points out, lest we have forgotten, that this was discussed during her campaign last year, and for the legislators last year.

All along the way on the campaign trail, I was asked about raises, county legislators were asked about raises... The fact of the matter is, this was talked about all year long, it did go through the campaign process. You know, I had all of the lumps of a raise on the campaign trail, without having actually gotten the raise.

When questioned about having the County Executive get the raise, while some county employees don't yet have a contract, she noted that

... There's never going to be a good time. There is never a time that you would propose raises for elected officials that everyone would say "that's a great idea" so you have to sort of set that aside.

After pointing out (again) that the union contract included retroactive increases, but that she wasn't getting any retro pay, she noted (again)

...there's never going to be a time that people think it's a good idea.

Actually, Joanie, there IS a good time - if you agree that elected officials should get a raise at all, given that they get pensions (including those who hold part-time positions) and benefits, and given that they know going in what the position pays. In fact, there are a couple of them.

The Legislature actually came close to one of them just last year.

The law that was proposed last December and ultimately dropped earlier this year would have immediately bumped up the salary for the County Executive, County Sheriff, County Comptroller and County Clerk, but would have put off changes for the legislators until the beginning of the new term in 2016. A simple tweak - making all of the changes effective at the beginning of the next term, rather than having some of them be effective upon adoption of the bill, would have been a much more honest way to do this.

Couple the revised proposal with a public hearing or two, at different times when people could actually attend them, and get out some even half-hearted communications, and you could have a clean process, with public input, and it could have been included in the budget process. I'd be willing to bet that CNYCentral would love to have streamed the public hearings on one of their stations.

Another good time, and good way, to do this would be to put it to a referendum. For example, what if the ballot this past November included a question like this:

The Office of the Onondaga County Executive has not had a salary increase in eight years. The current salary for this elected position is $122,413. This position is not term-limited, and includes a pension and benefits. It is proposed that the salary be tied to the CPI-E (Consumer Price Index- Elderly) and changed each year in a percentage consistent with changes in Social Security payments to Onondaga County citizens.

Do you favor or oppose this proposal?

Similar ballot questions could be placed for all of the other elected positions, putting everyone on equal footing with the County Executive in terms of how and when their salaries could change.

I'm sure the wording could be tweaked a little, if needed, although the statement as written is factual. And I'm sure there's probably a way to get the referendum at the top of the front page of the ballot, where people could see it easily.

If the majority of the citizens you and the Legislature represent voted in favor of this proposal, you'd get the same percentage of raise that my elderly mom gets; and sometimes, as she does, you'd get nothing.

Back to Joanie. When pressed by Benny on whether citizens should have some opportunity to chime in, to have a 'community conversation' on this issue, she - like most politicians who are not subject to term limits, and who have the overwhelming benefit of incumbency -- offered one last shot:

Oh absolutely, and that's why voters have the right every two years with the Legislature and every four years with the County Executive to make their voices heard... 

Thanks for the reminder.

The Election Eve Post 2015

It's that time again - the night before the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. That means it's Election Eve, and time for me to do my darnedest to encourage you to vote.

We don't have a Presidential race this year; we know that’s coming next year. As of today, there are three candidates on the Dem side: Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, and Bernie Sanders; there are fourteen wanna-bes on the Rep side, I think: Jeb! Bush, Dr. Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, John Kasich, George Pataki, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum, and Donald Trump. I hope I haven’t left any out (and I sincerely can't wait until there are fewer of them to track).

In my neck of the woods this year, there’s a lot of nonsense happening at the county level, where allegations of threats and infighting have been rampant for months surrounding the County Executive race. Republican Joanie Mahoney is running for her third term; she’s got a huge bankroll, an underfunded opponent, and of course she got the endorsement of our less-than-popular Democratic governor, one of the least surprising announcements of support in recent memory. Mahoney is only the third county exec we’ve had, so if history holds, the job will be hers when well before we go to bed Tuesday night.

Perhaps the most important choice we have to make here in Syracuse is for school board.  The superintendent has had a very rocky tenure; we have 18 schools that are in local receivership at this time; and we've recently learned that the graduation rate may actually creep up to a disappointing 60%. Obviously, there's a lot at stake in the Board of Ed races. We don’t have kids, but we have skin in the game, because this -  Syracuse, Onondaga County, New York - is our home. 

Yes, I’ll be voting.  And I want you to vote, too. Not because I say it's important; you should vote because it IS important. 

As I do every year, I offer the following motivation, in case you need it: 

After some thought, “I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.” (1) Actually “The idea of an election is much more interesting to me than the election itself…the act of voting is in itself the defining moment.” (2) And why is it that “When the political columnists say ‘every thinking man’ they mean themselves, and when candidates appeal to ‘every intelligent voter’ they mean everyone who is going to vote for them”? (3) 

We know it’s true that “Bad officials are elected by good citizens who didn’t vote” (4), and that “A citizen of American will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won’t cross the street to vote in a national election.” (5) Do we still not realize, after all these years, that “lower voter participation is a silent threat to our democracy… it under-represents young people, the poor, the disabled, those with little education, minorities and you and me”? (6) 

After all, “the vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are different from other men” (7) and “to make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not just observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” (8) And complain we do, after every election, when the wrong guy wins. If only people who actually voted complained, it’d likely be a lot less noisy. 

Some folks may not vote because they don’t know how to pick the right person. There are a couple different schools of thought on that. On the one hand, some might think that “politics is the art of the possible” (9) while others may subscribe to the thinking that “politics is not the art of the possible, it consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. And it is true that, the great thing about democracy is that it gives every voter the chance to do something stupid.” (10) 

Said another way, a “Vote (is) the instrument and symbol of a freeman’s power to make a fool of himself and a wreck of his country.” (11) But that’s OK – “personally, I believe that our American system works as long as you participate in it. You must vote and make your voice heard; otherwise you will be left out.” (12) 

It’s generally true that if you “ask a man which way he’s going to vote and he’ll  probably tell you. Ask him, however, why – and vagueness is all.” (13) But voting’s really easy; and “all voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong.” (14) And just about everyone likes to play a game every now and then, right? 

The bottom line is, “voting is simply a way of determining which side is the stronger without putting it to the test of fighting;” (15) “voting is a civic sacrament;” (16) and “the future of this republic is in the hands of the American voter.” (17) If all of that seems like too much pressure, you have an out: “Vote for the man who promises least. He’ll be the least disappointing.” (18) 

Please, vote. It really does matter, this year and every year. If you need information on where to vote, or other assistance, visit Vote411.org or contact your local Board of Elections. 

(Thanks to these folks for their words of wisdom: 1 - Charles DeGaulle; 2 – Jeff Melvoin; 3 – Franklin P Adams; 4 and 13 – Andrew Lack; 5 - Bill Vaughan; 6 - Nancy Neuman; 7 - Lyndon B Johnson; 8 - Louis L’Amour; 9 – Otto Von Bismarck; 10 – Art Spander; 11 – Ambrose Bierce; 12 - Mari-Luci Jaramillo; 14 – Henry David Thoreau; 15 – H.L. Mencken; 16—Theodore Hesburgh; 17 – Dwight D. Eisenhower; 18 – Bernard Baruch)

Grains of Salt: Toby Shelley's Poor Choice of Words

A little bit of this or that, from the Salt City and around Central NY:

Toby Shelley, former candidate for Sheriff, had been chosen to run against Onondaga County Executive Joanie Mahoney on both the Democrat and Conservative lines, with party members from both sides on board to help him obtain the signatures needed to get on the ballot.

In a Syracuse New Times interview, Shelley was asked about the Conservative Party's platform, which the writer noted includes a plank supporting police profiling. Shelley indicated he wasn't aware of that plank, and then clearly noted that that racial profiling was always wrong, but defended police profiling.

In trying to explain the difference, he gave a very poor illustration. He used the example of one of Onondaga County's smaller towns, and said this:

For example, out in Marcellus, a community that is mostly Caucasian, if you see someone who looks different, you might just stop and talk to them, ask how they're doing. 

The answer was inarticulate at best, and politically incorrect, to be sure.  And, not surprisingly, the Dems backed away and are no longer supporting him; the Conservatives are standing behind him. at least for now, and I expect that support from the party leaders will continue.

I'm not sure there is a politically correct way to answer the question, other than to stop, and not pass go, and not collect $200, immediately after saying that racial profiling is wrong. I'm afraid that any attempts to differentiate between pure racial profiling and police profiling would have fallen on deaf ears or would have landed anyone right where Shelley landed: in hot water.

Had it been me, and I was thinking clearly and not doing something else when the interviewer called ("working on my family farm" is what Shelley indicated he was doing), I would hope I could offer something like this:

I admit there can be fine line between racial profiling, which is wrong, and police profiling, which is a critical tool we have to prevent crime from occurring, instead of waiting to respond to a crime that is in progress or, more often, discovered well after the fact.   

For example, say you have a neighborhood of mostly older folks, very well tended neighborhood, nice cars and whatnot, where you patrol regularly. You're on shift in that neighborhood, and you see a couple of poorly maintained pickup trucks pull up, and young men get out of the trucks and start going from house to house, knocking on doors. Sometimes they get let in, sometimes they don't get past the door, sometimes no one's home and they move on to the next house. 

 If the men knocking on some of the doors were white and those knocking on other doors were black, and as a police officer you ignored the white guys but not the black guys, you'd be racially profiling.

If you talked to both groups, who 'looked different' and were 'acting differently' from everyone in the neighborhood (which is very well known to you as you patrol there regularly), even though to your knowledge no crime had been committed, you'd be police profiling. 

And, more importantly, you'd be doing exactly what everyone in that neighborhood wants you to do, what their tax dollars pay for, whether they're Democrats or Republicans or Conservatives or anything else. 

And, I further hope that I'd have the wherewithal to ask the reporter whether, in his heart of hearts, he had ever racially profiled anyone or whether he could provide 100% assurance that he never would. Because I think it happens more often than people (of any political stripe) admit. Here's an example.

Say you're a white person walking alone in downtown Syracuse, in the early evening. No one else on the block, and all of a sudden, a group of  black teenagers is behind you, whispering and laughing, and they begin to follow you. You go into a store, maybe grab a cup of coffee and a lottery ticket, kill some time, and then go back about your business, heading on to your destination. And there the teens are, half a block up, and they fall in behind you again when you walk by.

Across the street, you see a group of white teens, about the same number of kids as the group that's following you. You don't know any of them; they're dressed the same and acting exactly the same as the group behind you. And your destination is on the side of the street you're on now.

If you cross the street to where the white kids are, are you guilty of racially profiling? Of course you are, right? You made a decision and took action using no factors other than race.

And people, even liberal democrats, do this kind of thing all the time. Like when whites sit with the white person on the bus, when there's an equal choice to sit with a person of color, or when they call the police because a 'suspicious' (black) person  is wandering around their (white) neighborhood.

We ask our neighborhood watch groups to do this, to look out for the person who is not part of the neighborhood, or we'll send one of the neighbor men over to 'check things out' if a stranger happens to pass through. The crux of the issue, the determining factor in whether it's racial profiling or something else, depends on what happens next and whether everyone would be treated the same under the same circumstances.

Toby Shelley responded to the New Times article in social media post. In part, he noted:

Let me be clear: I have never racially profiled. I do not advocate racial profiling, nor would I tolerate racial profiling.  Anyone I have encountered over my decades-long career of public service would attest to this fact. If I supported such policies and were a career politician like Ms Mahoney, I could have refused or attempted to dodge (the reporter's) question. Instead I chose to respond from a police perspective. As police officers we are trained to make observations and respond to suspicious behavior, not make make assumptions based on the color of one's skin. 

I met and talked with Toby Shelley when he was running for Sheriff last year. I believe what he said in his post, and have no reason to doubt his sincerity.  I'm afraid, though, that we will not see him on the Dem line on the ballot - we'll see a blank space. Worse, if the Conservative party members (as opposed to the party leadership) respond they way they did in the race for Sheriff, we may not see him on the Conservative Party line either. (In that race, Shelley lost in a primary to a write-in candidate, eventual winner Republican Gene Conway, because he was not Conservative enough).

If that's the case, it would be a shame.

We all benefit when we have a choice between at least two legitimate candidates for a political office. None of us benefit when elected officials, including the County Executive, the District Attorney and others well entrenched at the highest levels of local government, (and not term limited), run unopposed.

And only a handful of people benefit when a good guy get tossed aside simply for a poor choice of words.

Wondering, on Wednesday (v28)

Have you heard the news coming from the New York State Fair?  

We’re learning from officials that somewhere around 20 offers had been put out for Grandstand acts for the 12-day run of the Fair this fall, and only one – country star Eric Church – has been booked. According to the Fair people, there are two reasons we’re having a problem: the short run of the Fair, and the high cost of acts that are on the road. The threat is that there may be only one Grandstand performer this year, which would hurt the fair almost as much as booking acts that only draw a couple thousand people at the 17,000 seat venue.  (Carly Rae Jepson, anyone?) 

I'm wondering, on this Wednesday, how this news impacts plans for the OnPhitheater being built across the street from the Fairgrounds, which has a commitment to hold a concert during the Fair this year, and which will replace the Grandstand going forward. Remember, we were originally told that the OnPhitheater would complement but not replace the Grandstand, and as we all suspected, it is of course going to be the pay-for concert venue for the Fair.

And unless someone's thinking about extending the Fair beyond the traditional 12 days, won’t we have the same problem going forward? And does anyone think prices will be going down anytime soon, particularly when the OnPhitheater will be in competition with other upstate outdoor venues and casinos, making it a musician's market not a venue market? 

Here's one more thing I'm wondering about. Remember the big darn deal that was made when it was announced that Billy Joel would be playing his 400th show at the Carrier Dome? Wasn't it the same promoter who announced at the same time that Buffalo would be getting multiple Garth Brooks shows? And even more Garth shows were added based on ticket sales? Is there something we're missing here? 

Speaking of missing things, I hope you caught the news from the Upstate Freshwater Institute and that we can safely swim at the north end of Onondaga Lake? It's true, they say: the water is clear enough, and the bacteria levels are low enough, for swimming.  We're still not able to eat the fish, but as far as taking a dip, we're good.

And so now County Executive Joanie Mahoney is thinking we could have a study to see about building a beach up at the Liverpool end of the lake. Are you wondering, like I am, how long it will take before we'll have another JoAndrew bus tour, where Mahoney and our Sonofa Governor can get all of the old  Onondaga Lake plans dusted off? Maybe we'll see another pile of taxpayer dollars dropped into the area?

I mean, our Garth-loving friends have the Buffalo Billion, we might as well have OnMillions, right? 

Hell Hath No Fury...(Part 3)

...like an economic development project scorned.

In the first two parts, I discussed the reactions of Onondaga County Executive Joanie Mahoney and former Syracuse City Auditor Minch Lewis to a column by SU professor David Rubin, who had a few words to say about how it appears Syracuse is being treated by our Sonova Governor Andrew Cuomo when it comes to economic development cash.  Compared to Buffalo, and to Albany, it seems we're getting a different kind of attention. Rubin feels we're getting short shrift, and wasn't shy about saying so.

Assemblyman William Magnarelli (who happens to be my guy in Albany) represents Syracuse's Northside, Valley, West Side and Eastwood, as well as the towns of Geddes and VanBuren.  He's been in Albany for over a dozen years; he was also on the Syracuse Common Council.  Basically, he's a hometown guy who's devoted much of his life to public service.

He too took exception to Rubin's column, noting that he

was startled to read the column...which painted a misleading, inaccurate and distorted picture of Syracuse and Central New York's economy.

We have cranes in the sky, Magnarelli noted, and shovels in the ground.  He also specifically called out the CNY Biotech Accelerator at Loguen's Crossing, which opened early last year.  So far, that's the only development that's happened at the Loguen's Crossing site, although, according to Magnarelli

In addition to the accelerator, the Kennedy Square neighborhood now has new life, supported by state funds, as it is to be redeveloped with office buildings, residential and retail space...

Some of that remains to be seen -- we still don't know what COR Development and Upstate have planned for the site; we now know that at least for the near term, there won't be a stadium there.

Magnarelli pointed out that under the Cuomo administration, Central New York has received over $264 million, through the Central New York Regional Economic Development Council (REDC):

• In 2011, our region received $103.7 million, including $3M for the Inner Harbor, $3M for the Syracuse Center of Excellence, $1.95M for the Biotech Center, and smaller amounts for 71 other projects across the region.
• In 2012, we got $93.8 million; big winners were an expansion of the Syracuse Community Health Center ($3.1M), development of the Sibley's building, a key property connecting Armory Square and Salina Street ($2.5M); LeMoyne College medical product development labs ($2M), the Inner Harbor (another $1.5M), and Kennedy Square/Loguen's Crossing (another $1M).
• In 2013, the award was $66.9 million. Among the larger projects are new facilities for Inficon ($3M), renovations of the vacant NYNEX building across from City Hall ($2.5M), the Inner Harbor ($1.3M), an expansion for GA Braun ($1.5M), the Inland Port project ($1M), a warehouse on the Near West Side ($1M), expanded facilities for Hanford Manufacturing ($1M). There were also a number of smaller awards. 

In the overall scheme of things, 264 million bucks is a lot of money to get in a short period of time, and it's a good thing that we're getting it.  Being a top performer two years out of three, some key opportunities for local businesses, and additional funding for some of our better known project like the Inner Harbor and, again, Loguen's Crossing, the proposed home for our no-longer-likely stadium project -- these are all good things. 

But Rubin's point was about the apparent disparity between what we're getting here and what the other areas are getting.  In that regard, here's how Buffalo and Albany did over the past three years:

• In 2011, $100.3M to Buffalo, and $62.7M went to Albany
• In 2012, $52.8M to Buffalo, $50.3M to Albany
• In 2013, $60.8M to Buffalo, $82.8M to Albany

So, $213.9M to Buffalo, and $195.8M to Albany -- looks like were the big winner right?  Well, no.  The REDC money is in addition to to the Buffalo Billion and the Albany nanotech investments which are in the same billion-dollar neighborhood. Doesn't that look like a disparity?

Magnarelli went on to talk about the Lakefront plan, calling it "visionary" when it's really not. It's not completely without benefit -- there's a lot of money for infrastructure to help attract new businesses to the area -- but it does allocate about half of the money on a seasonal concert arena (think OnPAC, like CMAC or SPAC).  That, too was one of Rubin's points. Is a new concert venue (and a fair-weather one at that) going to help drive our economy forward, given the current state of our cultural affairs? It's a valid question.

We are making some progress, to Magnarelli's point - but like Minch Lewis before him, and Joanie Mahoney before him, he faults Rubin for not being a joyous go-along.

There are cranes in the Syracuse skyline, shovels in the ground in the Inner Harbor and a new energy. And for much of this, we can thank the state for its focus on this region. Instead of complaining and distorting the facts, we should be working together to build on the progress and continue to bring vital investments to Syracuse and Central New York. 

It's good to celebrate opportunities that are coming our way, but it's also good to maintain a healthy skepticism when politicians start throwing around tax dollars. It's good to get the dollars, but it's also good to challenge our leaders to make sure we're getting the most bang for those bucks.

The underlying theme that ran through all three parts of this series was the criticism that Rubin took for offering an opposing and, admittedly somewhat sarcastic, view on economic development in our area. He brought no shame or harm to our community by saying what he said, but instead got people talking, the dissenters and champions alike. I'd hazard a guess that more people heard of Loguen's Crossing in the past two months than at any time other than the first couple of days after the project was announced a few years back.

But in the final analysis, doesn't if feel a little like our politicians are afraid that Rubin's column may have had the potential to shut off the tap for Syracuse and Central New York, to damage our chances for future projects funded by Albany's largess?

I hope that's not the case -- because if it is, we are in much worse shape than Rubin ever imagined.

Hell Hath No Fury... (Part 2)

...like an economic development project scorned.

In Part 1, I talked about Joanie Mahoney's response (referred to as "fire-breathing" by the local paper) to SU professor David Rubin's commentary on how economic development dollars are being shared with Buffalo, Albany, and Syracuse. Rubin included a sharp rebuke to our Sonova Governor, Mahoney, and several Syracuse Common Councilors about the wisdom of the stadium project and/or  the Onondaga Lakefront development plans.

The second person to chime in on Rubin's column was Minch Lewis, our former City Auditor, who rose to the defense of Mahoney, the stadium plan, and the difficulty of doing economic development.

First, on Rubin's criticism of the stadium plan:

...Rubin refers to economic development from stadiums as "mindless pieties." He claims that there is evidence that economic benefits do not flow from stadium development. There are several studies related to public funding for sports facilities.They are concerned with financing for professional sports. But they do not apply to Syracuse where the goal is to support a nationally recognized collegiate athletic program. 

Notice anything? While faulting Rubin for using the 'wrong' studies, Lewis presents no 'right' studies supporting public funding for nationally recognized collegiate athletic programs. Absent any facts to the contrary, wouldn't the studies Rubin references be the current data on which our analysis should be based?

Here's the conclusion from one study I found after a quick search; to Lewis's point, it's not specific to college stadiums, but

There is little evidence of large increases in income or employment associated with the introduction of professional sports or the construction of new stadiums.

Rubin further noted that "it won't take long" to assess the value of the stadium project, pointing out that increased ticket prices for the same number of events played by the same two teams that currently play in the Carrier Dome is not really economic development.

Lewis counters with

In actuality, it would take a long time and is beyond Rubin's and my expertise. Such an evaluation would involve many inter-related economic factors. Simplifying it to "25 events" and an "increased in ticket and concession prices" is a disservice to the community dialogue. 

Again, are we to ignore what's happened on the North Side since the stadium was built?  The Regional Market is booming but NOT during ballgame hours, and NOT because of the stadium. The mall is doing well, but NOT because of the stadium. The community was promised use of the stadium for a number of days a year, for instance for concerts -- and THAT hasn't happened either. No hotels, no restaurants, no cool housing or funky retail, all the promised development and growth from that project? THAT hasn't happened either.

Maybe being downtown would make a difference and give us the opportunity to benefit from all of the spin-off development. That's what everyone thought all those years ago when the Chiefs stadium was discussed and the decision not to build downtown was made.

Maybe COR Development, who is already supposed to be turning the Kennedy Square area in to a mixed-use development in cooperation with SUNY Upstate, really would have built the other stuff that was to go along with the new project. There certainly hasn't been much of anything going on in that area since the announcement of the partnership with Upstate in December 2011.

Upstate and COR do not have specific plans for the site yet, nor a firm estimate of what it will cost to redevelop it...an office building will probably the first project built within the next two years. That would allow Upstate to reduce the amount of office space it leases.  (Dr. David) Smith said he expects the redevelopment to be paid for almost entirely with private funding.  The project will pay property taxes.

Ah - there's the rub.  Private funding and property taxes -- two things that are anathema to developers. Maybe COR will come forward and ask for public money and actually get something moving on that site now?

The second report I found on stadium development offers up a very nice summary of what the pro-funding and anti-funding sides claim about this type of project, and concludes with these cautions:

In negotiating whether or not to subsidize construction of a new stadium, it is important to consider whether or not the proposed stadium is sited and designed in a fashion that integrates the interest of the team, the neighbors, and the city at large. It is also important to ask whether or not this facility might be able to share in some of the infrastructure costs that the city might be ready to spend on projects, and how expenditures on stadium subsidies might integrate with other public interests. With these issues properly addressed, one will be better equipped at deciding whether or not subsidizing sports stadium construction in your locale fits within the greater interests of the constituents at play. 

I get the sense from everything I've read on the proposed deal that the conversations that did occur did not seem to include all of the "constituents at play." Certainly, not bringing in Mayor Stephanie Miner until the conversations were at least fairly well along seems ill-advised from a consensus-building perspective, if not politically incorrect. As I noted previously, I wonder how Joanie Mahoney would have felt had her neighbors all gotten together with a plan to re-landscape her backyard, without engaging her in the discussion.

 If you read this column by Sean Kirst from last June (perhaps he knew more than he let on at the time), you'll see he recommends bringing all of the constituents together, by way of a civic arena panel, to start a long-term discussion on how to more forward. Rubin pointed out that this didn't happen, and he was right.

Lewis went on to blast Rubin for exposing our region's truth: we have infrastructure issues, we have a struggling arts community, we have a number of facilities in need of repair already in our inventory.

Here's Lewis:

Further, statements about the deficiencies of our community's facilities are not smart marketing if we are trying to compete for more external business. The venues that Rubin refers to were state-of-the-art in their design. Along with Symphoria and all our cultural programs, they need additional resources. And state funding should be pursued. But the funds that would support the stadium or concern pavilion would come from a different source . Both should be pursued, not one at the expense of the other. (emphasis added)

Three comments on this:

1. When did it become wrong for citizens to speak openly about our issues? Is that something that only politicians, former politicians or reporters can do?  Are we taxpayers not allowed to comment on the good, the bad and the ugly?
2. Is 'smart marketing' pretending that the customers we're talking to are not paying attention? That they can't read? There's nothing that Rubin put forward that hasn't been said already, many times, by many people, including our own elected officials. 
3. All government funding comes from the same source - taxpayer dollars. You can call them fees, or taxes, or surcharges, or tolls, or special assessments - but they're dollars that people and businesses pay. What bucket they come out of once they get to Albany or Washington doesn't really matter - the 'source' is still us. And we need elected officials, at every level, to be reasonable when spending them. Sometimes that means investing in old things instead of new; sometimes it'll go the other way.

Minch Lewis is a strong supporter of our region - that's clear based on his many contributions to the dialogue  over time. But he's also pointed out Syracuse's economic woes  and those of our regional economy in print.  Is David Rubin not allowed the same privilege?

Here are the final thoughts from our former City Auditor:

In conclusion, there are two lessons in this exercise. The first is that economic development is an extremely difficult task...many economic development projects have been funded in our area. But we still need more... In pursuing those resources our community's dedicated economic development specialists are facing the competitive challenges from other regions that have the same needs we do. Their efforts should be celebrated. Secondly, the community dialogue should be solidly rooted in analysis that is balanced and accurate. Then decisions that determine our future can be made through our official procedures and elected representatives. 

He's right. Economic development is hard, and we are all competing against each other, and we have gotten some projects, and we need to pursue more of them that will promote increased tax revenue (property tax or sales tax), encourage people to live and raise families here, and truly generate or enable additional economic development.

While it certainly bears noting that Mahoney and her team bounced back with the plans for opening up development on the west side of Onondaga Lake, now it will be up to a different set of elected officials - the ones in Albany, not the ones sitting in downtown Syracuse -- to put the proposal through our official procedures and reach a decision on  whether the funding will be approved.

One can only hope that their analysis will be balanced and accurate, and that they at least support those parts of the Onondaga Lake plan that offer the best opportunity for our future:  the $20 million for infrastructure improvements, $2 million for demolishing blighted properties, $1.8 million for road improvements, and the money for waste water treatment. Those are things that will make that part of the county ripe for development in ways that a seasonal amphitheater and water taxis can't.

Hell Hath No Fury... (Part 1)

...like an economic development project scorned.

There's been a flurry of public hand-slapping in response to the opinion expressed by SU professor David Rubin that Syracuse is getting the short end of the stick when it comes to Governor Cuomo's economic development handouts.  County Executive Joanie Mahoney (in part 1), former City Auditor Minch Lewis (in part 2), and State Assemblyman William Magnarelli (in part 3) have all chimed in.

Now I'm going to.

Rubin noted in his column, A Tale of Three Cities, that there seems to be quite a difference in what's happening in Buffalo and Albany compared to what's going on here in Syracuse and Onondaga County. Personally I didn't think the column was negative (although it did have a bit of sting). I agree with Rubin, looking at the Buffalo Billion particularly, that it seems we're not being offered (or else we're not taking advantage of) similar opportunities.

Rubin chastised Mahoney and Cuomo, as well as some members of the Common Council, for the stadium plan, and supported Mayor Stephanie Miner in her decision to say no. He also had some thoughts about the 'replacement plans' for the development along the west side of Onondaga Lake, with the amphitheater being the centerpiece of the project.

All of Rubin's attempted wit or sarcasm aside, even if  Mahoney disagrees with him, which she does, strongly, is this really the reaction you'd expect from someone in her position?

Public service is not easy...I think I speak for many when I say the abuse we take when we put ourselves out there to help our communities is annoying. The negativity is loud and you are just one of the many naysayers who stand back and throw stones from afar. Instead, why don't you pitch in to help? If you think you have ideas worth considering, why don't you throw your hat in the ring and get involved? Your column has caused real harm, not only to Syracuse University but to our entire community. I think you owe an apology to the members of the City council you insulted, to the Governor, to your employer and our entire region for your irresponsible words...

Those comments came at the end of her scathing reply to Rubin; here's the end of his response to Mahoney:

I am a columnist. Columnists and journalists "get involved" by asking questions, stimulating debate, and adding to the marketplace of ideas.  That is our role in a democracy. I would of course serve Onondaga County and the City of Syracuse in other ways if asked. I have never been asked (and I guess that option is now pretty much dead)...

I'm hoping that she at least cracked a smile at that last part. At the same time, I wonder what wrath might rain down upon my head for being a citizen with an opinion?

How exactly did Rubin's column cause real harm?  His words did not bring about the end of the stadium deal; nor did they cause any businesses to pack up and leave, nor did they likely scare any businesses away from coming here. In his commentary,I don't think he exposed a single fact or opinion that can't be found in a casual review of comments in any local media outlet's discussion forums. Truth be told, he was much kinder and gentler than many of those who comment anonymously.

His words will not have any impact on the proposed project for development on the west side of Onondaga Lake.  Those plans, considered visionary by some, are actually reflective of all of the ideas that have been tossed around since the 1920s. I'd suggest that the inability of government, businesses, and civic leaders to get a plan implemented over the past eight or nine decades, as well as changing winds of fortune, the global economy, free trade, climate change, rock and roll, and Miley Cyrus have done far more real harm here and elsewhere than Rubin's words earlier this month.

And those words certainly haven't damaged SU's reputation in any way. As the home of the Newhouse School,  SU should support not only Rubin's right to express his opinion, but also understand that not all of their 1,100 or so full- and part-time faculty would agree with the plan to move out of the Carrier Dome and into a challenged area of the city. I suspect many of the 21,000+ students and thousands of alumni - or current ticket holders for that matter - also weren't consulted and might also express disapproval, if given the forum Rubin has.

We can't all be politicians, but we are all entitled to our opinions. And in my opinion, throwing stones at someone for throwing stones is, well, kind of silly. I'm glad Rubin didn't apologize; had he, I wouldn't have accepted it.

I wish that Joanie Mahoney - someone I've supported in every election where I've had the opportunity - might consider apologizing to him and the rest of the people in this community who, like Joanie, have staked a claim here and who, like Joanie, want to make this a better place to live.

Consensus Commission Gets a Pass

There's a whole lot of government going on, going on -- if not a whole lot of governing -- in New York State, that's for sure.  At last count, there were around 10,500 separate jurisdictions, according to Governor Cuomo in his State of the State address. That includes counties, cities, towns, villages, fire districts, water districts, sewer districts, district districts...

Onondaga County Executive Joanie Mahoney mentioned consolidation in a live chat on Syracuse.com last week. Here's what she said.

Consolidation is a hot topic and we are talking on many fronts. Parks is part of that discussion. County parks are one of the things we do best in county government and if we can help the city or towns and villages, we want to. The discussion has been about an inter-municipal agreement and we are in the early stages. Ryan McMahon and Bob Dougherty are the two leads at this point.  Food for thought: We have (State Senator) John DeFrancisco, (Assemblyman) Bill Magnarelli, Ryan McMahon, Stephanie Miner and myself as former city councilors. It seems like as good a time as any to talk about how to do this in a way that protects everyone.

A state senator, a state assemblyman, the mayor, the county executive, the leaders of the county legislature - seems like they could figure something out, doesn't it? So then, why do we need the Consensus CNY group, which I learned about reading an editorial in The Post-Standard?

Here's what caught my eye:

The commissioners visited with the Editorial Board last week. We intend to hold them to their promises of real results. We urge them to be bold. Listen to the naysayers, but ignore the ones who put their self-interests above the community's. We urge them to include new voices in the discussion, not just the same old arguments from the usual suspects. 

Consensus commission? Are you wondering what the heck that is? Here's the explanation in a recent article.

So local government officials are teaming up with leaders from business, labor, schools, and neighborhood groups to figure out how to shrink the layers of public bureaucracy in Onondaga County. The group, called Consensus, plans to use the bulk of the money to hire a consultant. They plan to meet once a month and report their findings within the next 12 to 18 months.

The group, which was announced towards the end of January, already has a slick website, which identifies  the members (many of the names are familiar ones) and also the partner organizations, including Syracuse 20/20, CenterStateCEO, Focus Greater Syracuse, the local chapter of the League of Women Voters,  the Onondaga Citizens League, and the Homebuilders and Remodelers Association of CNY.

Right off the bat, I'm confused. Why on earth would these high-powered civic leaders, wise businessmen and women, all these community organizations need to spend 'the bulk of" the $250,000 state grant that Senator DeFrancisco helped get, on a consultant to try and figure out what to do?  Isn't 'figuring out what to do' pretty much the mission of these organizations, some of which have been around since the 1990s, or even earlier?

And CenterStateCEO?  Heck, this organization itself was born from a consolidation: the merger of the Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce and the Metropolitan Development Association. When I see that they're part of a group that is going to spend a quarter-million dollars on a consultant, I'm left scratching my head, because I think they already know where to get the analysis done. Check out this snippet from the Message from the President on their website.

In a knowledge economy, smart regions prosper. CenterState New York is rich in intellectual resources, with the third highest concentration of colleges and universities in the nation.  In this region, there are 35 campuses educating more than 138,000 college students and conducting more than $2 billion in research and development annually.  

Uh, how about we tap into those colleges and universities, where we have people with no particular skin in the game, and send their best and brightest out across the county to come up with ways to solve our problems, as part of their course work?  Maxwell School anyone?

You don't have to go too far to find examples of where what we have today doesn't work well. For example, to the west, we find one fire department that has filed suit against, well, pretty much everyone: the town, the town board, the village where the fire department is located, the village trustees, the neighboring village, those village trustees, their volunteer fire department, their village fire department, another neighboring fire district, that board of fire commissioners, and their fire company, the second village's ambulance company, and Onondaga County. Had there been any reasonable consolidation in this neck of the woods, there likely would not even be a lawsuit.

And to the east, we have another village that, in the face of an almost 22% tax hike, is again trying to garner enough support to abolish the village police department and sign on with the town police. This was defeated a couple of years back, but that was before the tax hike. In the same village, on the other hand, the fire department is hoping to split off from the village, and - wait for it -- form their own district, which is the exact opposite of what's needed.  But imagine how this could look, if village residents were willing to consolidate or share police services with the town,and be better positioned to make a decision on their fire department.

Something's got to give, somewhere, somehow. Because, as the editorial noted, Onondaga County has 15 villages, 19 towns, 16 police departments and 55 fire departments. We have more heavy rescue trucks (40) than New York City (5), when we have 7.5 million fewer residents. This is no way to run a rodeo.

Frankly, I think the editorial board went easy on the Consensus commission; I'm surprised they're satisfied with it taking another 18 months or so to come up with a plan - and that's just the first step. Instead, I would have loved to see some encouragement to get this figured out faster, using readily available resources from within our knowledge community, and make something happen quickly.  Because either we figure out a way to consolidate and share services, or some of our Rubik's cube of jurisdictions may have to stop offering services all together.

When it gets to that point, will people look back and say, boy, I wish we had worked slower on this, and hired more consultants?