SamPratt.com: Counties

139 entries categorized "Counties | Columbia"

October 24, 2011

Comparative Burgerology

Does healthy, organic food cost more than “regular” food? And what’s a hamburger supposed to cost around here, anyway?

Ever since Grazin’ revitalized a formerly-empty restaurant space on Warren Street, one has heard more than a few hyperbolic discussions about prices, with little actual relationship to the reality of the 21st Century cost of delivering a decent meal.

The chart below collects some representative menu prices for burgers in the region. For the purposes of a fair comparison, the price of a side of fries was included if those don’t come automatically with the burger:

As the hard numbers above show, the price of a burger in these parts can range from a low of $5.50 to a high of $13. The average burger price of the 15 establishments list above is $9.98—precisely 3 cents higher than than that of the Grazin’ all-organic, Animal Welfare Certifed burger.

In short, getting a healthy, organic, responsibly-created, locally-sourced, farm-to-table burger is no more expensive than eating at most any other non-fastfood restaurant in the area... which just points up the irrationality of some of the anti-organic voices in our midst. Those who denounce $9-$10 for a burger as outrageous clearly haven’t been getting out much lately.

Now some Rush Limbaugh listeners may cry foul, noting that they could get a slider and fries at McDonald’s or Burger King for even less than any of the prices above. Yes, you could... except those aren’t hamburgers. Those are reprocessed sewage patties masquerading as food. If you eat them regularly, you will almost certainly die early. And the price of that to your family and society far exceeds anything that buying organic ever could.

September 24, 2011

402 years ago today

Entry in the September 24th, 1609 journal of sailor Robert Juet, who was aboard the Half Moon as it encountered the flats of the “middle ground” between what is now Hudson and Athens:

The foure and twentieth was faire weather: the winde at the North-west, wee weighed, and went downe the River seven or eight leagues; and at halfe ebbe wee came on ground on a banke of Oze in the middle of the river, and sate there till the floud. Then wee went on Land, and gathered good store of Chest-nuts. At ten of the clocke we came off into deepe water, and anchored.

The five and twentieth was faire weather, and the wind at South a stiff gale. We rode still, and went on Land to walke on the West side of the River, and found good ground for Corne and other Garden herbes, with great store of goodly Oakes, and Wal-nut trees, and Chest-nut trees, Ewe trees, and trees of sweet wood in great abundance, and great store of Slate for houses, and other good stones.

The sixe and twentieth was faire weather, and the wind at South a stiffe gale, wee rode still. In the morning our Carpenter went on Land, with our Masters Mate, and foure more of our companie, to cut wood. This morning, two Canoes came up the River from the place where we first found loving people, and in one of them was the old man that had lyen aboord of us at the other place. He brought another old man with him, which brought more stropes of Beades, and gave them to our Master, and shewed him all the Countrey there about, as though it were at his command. So he made the two old men dine with him, and the old mans wife: for they brought two old women, and two young maidens of the age of sixteene or seventeene yeeres with them, who behaved themselves very modestly. Our Master gave one of the old men a Knife, and they gave him and us Tabbaco. And at one of the clocke they departed downe the River, making signes that we should come down to them; for wee were within two leagues of the place where they dwelt.

The seven and twentieth, in the morning was faire weather, but much wind at the north, we weighed and set our fore top-sayle, and our ship would not flat, but ran on the Ozie banke at halfe ebbe. Wee layed out anchor to heave her off, but could not. So wee sate from halfe ebbe to halfe floud: then wee set our fore-sayle and mayne top-sayl, and got downe sixe leagues. The old man came aboord, and would have lad us anchor, and goe on Land, to eate with him: but the wind being faire, we would not yeeld to his request; so hee left us, being very sorrowfull for our departure.

At five of the clocke in the after-noone, the wind came to the South South-west. So wee made a boord or two, and anchored in fourteene fathomes water. Then our Boat went on shoare to fish right against the ship. Our Masters Mate and Boat-swaine, and three more of the companie went on land to fish, but could not finde a good place. They tooke foure or five and twentie Mullets, Breames, Bases, and Barbils; and returned in an houre. We rode still all night.

[ h/t Ian Nitschke ]

September 5, 2011

Missing Ink: Part III

How our docile local press
undermines democracy

by Sam Pratt

The following article appears in the current issue of Our Town: The Columbia County Quarterly, and will appear here in four installments over the next two weeks. Links to the previous two installments: Part I | Part II

“We Jewed them down.”

At a public meeting on February 15, 2011, Taghkanic Assessor Art Griffith uttered these words in response to questions about a contract with an outside firm.

Griffith shrugged off criticism of his anti-Semitic slur. He refused to apologize, calling it “a common phrase used all the time.” Its currency may depend on one’s social circle, but the incident prompted angry letters to the editor, articles in the New York Daily News and the Albany Times-Union, blog posts, discussions on WAMC, and a stiff letter of condemnation from the Anti-Defamation League of New York.

But nothing appeared in print locally for twelve days, even though the remark had caused an immediate uproar in the presence of reporters from two local newspapers.

The Columbia Paper finally broke the story on February 27.

Their article was prompted by community e-mail discussions, as witnesses questioned why nothing about the slur had appeared in a previous issue.

Now realizing his paper had a big story on its hands, editor Parry Teasdale wrote an editorial rebuking Griffith, as much for his unapologetic attitude, as for his choice of words. The Register-Star waited still longer, until March 8, to report what its own reporter had witnessed firsthand, three weeks earlier.

The incident reveals a lot about the importance, as well as the failings of local media: its value in spreading the news, and its readiness to soft pedal the news when those in positions of power screw up.

“Chamber of Commerce Journalism” is a term often used to describe much of what appears in print. The Texas Monthly defined it benignly as “covering events and announcements intended to boost civic pride.” It typically implies a Panglossian tendency to make things sound better than they really are, exacerbated by a willingness to avert the eyes when something uncomfortable occurs.

Such boosterism inspires a barely-hidden distaste for independent voices who question the status quo. A textbook example of that dynamic—sympathy for those in power, disdain for those who challenge it—was illustrated by the Times-Union’s early coverage of the controversy over St. Lawrence Cement’s proposal to build a massive, coal-burning plant in Columbia County.

In 2001, the T-U declined to cover a major breaking development in that six-year battle: the decision by the doctors of Columbia Memorial Hospital to oppose the project. Bucking overly-cautious administrators, CMH’s medical staff conducted an independent analysis, concluding that the proposed plant would increase asthma in children, heart attacks in the elderly, and cancer in all residents.

That blow to St. Lawrence Cement became a turning point in the battle. But it was not deemed newsworthy by the editors of the region’s largest and most influential paper—at the time a regular beneficiary of SLC ads. So what was newsworthy? Soon afterwards, the Albany paper ran a feature on the office décor of SLC Vice-President Dennis Skidmore, including sentimental descriptions of cement industry memorabilia on Skidmore’s wall, and portraits of his kids on his desk. Subtext: We won’t let readers know about a credible, independent health study by caretakers in the community, whose research contradicts a big advertiser’s claims. But we will go out of our way to humanize a corporate executive who’s behind those claims. Two years later, after opponents kept up their drumbeat of well-researched concerns, the T-U came around—publishing a comprehensive special report on the project, largely unfavorable to SLC.

Such misjudgments are driven by a baseline assumption that news from a government or business source is presumptively true until proven otherwise. Area papers are filled with barely-altered press releases from “legit” sources. The burden lies with others, not the press, to prove them wrong. Those who dare try are viewed with suspicion by the media. Entrenched interests trump the credibility of private citizens, activists, or advocacy organizations.

Even progressive voices in the media tend to write off anyone on the outside looking in. At a meeting of journalists on radio station WGXC, in August 2009, the Columbia Paper’s Teasdale—considered more enlightened than most area editors—unabashedly characterized citizens who speak up at local meetings as people “no one will listen to at home.” This dismissive attitude is dismayingly common among media mavens, who spend their days in front of computers. But people who attempt to participate in community affairs tend to be better informed, less compromised, and have better social skills than the officials and reporters in the room. (One recalls, for example, former Independent reporter Chris Simonds berating Hudson resident Allon Schoener, as he attempted to speak at a 1999 public hearing at the St. Charles Hotel.) Many local towns are fortunate to have at least one citizen who attends meetings far more regularly than the press, types up reports far more detailed than anything in print, and circulates the news widely via e-mail or the Web.

In August 2006, on a local e-mail listserv, I noted an article about a proposed Claverack housing development, by Kate Mostaccio in the Register. The article seemed to me highly slanted in favor of the developer, and against the citizens who voiced concerns. The first paragraphs lovingly detailed the developer’s claims. Finally getting around to the public’s point of view in paragraph 14, Mostaccio acknowledged that most were against the proposal, but called them the “vocal opposition”— then immediately returned to chronicling the developer’s smooth assurances.

I wrote to Mostaccio, noting that the press often uses labels to belittle citizens who speak out. Words like “vocal” and “strident” are typically used to imply that citizen concern is somehow irrational.

Reporters now use them routinely when there is public comment, no matter what the actual tenor of the remarks. This is just one small aspect of the persistent and sometimes unconscious bias against citizens who try to influence local government. Officials and developers are afforded neutral coverage and most of the space. Citizen com- ments are summarized, rather than conveyed in depth, or relegated to ‘below the fold’ or after the jump to a new page. (The lower down a quotation appears, the fewer people see it.) Mostaccio refused to accept the criticism until I submitted our exchange to prominent media critic and NYU professor Todd Gitlin, author of The Whole World is Watching, a trenchant memoir of Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s. The book chronicles SDS’s fight against the routine sliming by the media of students organizing for peace and justice.

“There’s no question, ‘vocal’ modifying ‘opponents’ is at best redundant. Are there quiet opponents?” asked Gitlin. “Vocal would most likely be interpreted as a mark of Cain, equivalent to ‘strident,’ ‘irrational,’ ‘unruly,’ etc.” Mostaccio finally conceded the point, but the Register hasn’t changed its ways.

While presuming to render judgment of others, members of the media are themselves notoriously thin-skinned. Quick to anger when challenged, they’re not above taking revenge for criticism, by minimizing their critics’ point of view—or erasing it entirely. Even as they bat away criticisms as spurious, members of the established press are equally quick to pat themselves on the back for their professed objectivity.

A self-serving media defense, heard at times from the Times-Union’s Rex Smith on WAMC’s Media Project: If both sides are unhappy about our coverage, we must be doing something right. (Note: In the survey cited above, WAMC was rated by far the most popular and credible news source in this region.) This pat excuse neatly deflects criticism, releasing the press from any obligation to search their souls or notebooks for where they might have gone astray. They might consider another possibility: Both sides are unhappy because we got both sides of the story wrong.

Next Up: In the conclusion of this series, Part IV of Missing Ink looks at the future of local media, in particular in relation to the rise of blogs and social media.

in Counties | Columbia, Media & Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

August 31, 2011

Local case blows lid off CIA torture flights

A major story about a Columbia County court case has yet to hit the local press,* even though articles have already appeared in Time Magazine, USA Today, The Atlantic, The Associated Press, UPI, The Guardian, numerous blogs, and more than 250 other national and international publications.

Here’s a summary of the case from The Washington Post, whose reporting indicates that County Judge Paul Czajka presided over at least part if not all of the trial(s):

[D]etails of shadowy CIA flights that have emerged in a small Upstate New York courthouse in a billing dispute between contractors. The court documents offer a rare glimpse of the costs and operations of the controversial rendition program.

For all the secrecy that once surrounded the CIA’s program, a significant part of its operation was entrusted to very small aviation companies whose previous experience involved flying sports teams across the country.

The August 2003 flights—and dozens of others to locations such as Bucharest, Romania; Baku, Azerbaijan; Cairo; Djibouti; Islamabad, Pakistan; and Tripoli, Libya—were organized by Sportsflight, a one-man aircraft brokerage business on Long Island. It secured a plane from Richmor Aviation, based near the Columbia County Airport in Hudson, N.Y.** Richmor eventually sued Sportsflight for breach of contract. In the process, the costs and itineraries of numerous CIA flights became part of the court record.

In other cases, the government has invoked the “state secrets” privilege to shut down litigation over the CIA program, but the case in Columbia County proceeded uninterrupted in an almost empty courtroom. There were only two witnesses at the bench trial: Richmor President Mahlon Richards and the owner of Sportsflight, Donald Moss.

According to several of the articles cited above, Richmor was due some $6 million from the flights, but sued Sportsflight for $1.6 million in unpaid bills. But Richmor’s president seems to have felt that the government’s use of the planes had harmed the company, its employees and its clients:

Richmor changed the tail number of the Gulfstream and complained in a letter to Sportsflight that it became the subject of “negative publicity, hate mail and the loss of a management customer as a consequence of the association of the N85VM with rendition flights.” The letter also stated that Richmor crews were not comfortable leaving the country and that the jets’ owners “are afraid to fly in their own aircraft.”

The U.K.-based Guardian adds:

[I]n May 2002, contractors hired by the US government sought the use of a private Gulfstream jet for government missions. Richmor Aviation offered the N85VM, on the understanding that it should be in the air at any time given 12 hours' notice.

Over the next three years, this plane flew at least 55 missions for the US government, often to Guantánamo Bay, as well as to numerous destinations worldwide.

These destinations include places that have now been associated with the CIA’s secret prison programme: Kabul, where the CIA ran the notorious "Salt Pit" prison; Bangkok, where Abu Zubaydah was first taken and used as a guinea pig for "enhanced interrogation techniques"; Rabat, where prisoners were kept incommunicado and tortured by Moroccan agents who passed information to the US and Britain; and Bucharest, one of the European secret jail sites.

The testimony taken right here in Hudson included details which many legal analysts and human rights groups have been trying to find out, but which until now were typically suppressed by U.S. government invocations of “State secrets.” Again from the Post:

The more than 1,500 pages from the trial and appeals court files appear to include some sensitive material, such as logs of air-to-ground phone calls made from the plane. These logs show multiple calls to CIA headquarters; to the cell and home phones of a senior CIA official involved in the rendition program; and to a government contractor, Falls Church-based DynCorp, that worked for the CIA.

The AP article and others note that the flights were provided with special State Department letters which allowed them to deviate from flight plans, and apparently aided in the flights’ purposes avoiding detection. Prisoners were cynically referred to as “invitees” of the United States.

USA Today’s piece reminds readers of some of the history behind the euphemistic term, “rendition”:

President George W. Bush acknowledged the existence of the prison network in 2006, and the CIA director in 2009, Leon Panetta, said that the prisons were no longer in use. Detainees have claimed in legal actions that they were flown, often hooded and shackled, to the prisons, where some were exposed to simulated drowning known as waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques.

A commenter on the Post’s website cites the following from U.S. and military law sources, pertaining to renditions, particularly the Convention Against Torture (CAT) signed by Reagan in 1988:

Article 3 provides that no State Party 'shall expel, return (‘refouler’) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.' The U.S. ratification of CAT was contingent on its understanding that this requirement refers to situations where it would be 'more likely than not' that a person would be tortured if removed to a particular country, a standard commonly used by U.S. courts when determining whether to withhold an alien’s removal for fear of persecution.

Also:

The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 implemented U.S. obligations under CAT Article 3.31 Section 2242 of the act announced U.S. policy 'not to expel, extradite, or otherwise effect the involuntary return of any person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture, regardless of whether the person is physically present in the United States.' The act further required all relevant federal agencies to adopt appropriate regulations to implement this policy.

Attorneys involved with the case expressed surprise in the published reports that no government official weighed in to keep the evidence secret.

* The Register-Star, whose offices are located just one block from the courthouse where this international story took place, has now hurriedly added the AP wire story to their website. It does not appear in its Thursday print edition. The story was dug up by a little-known British torture watchdog group, which obtained the court records and forwarded them to national publications.

** Published reports place Richmor Aviation in Hudson, but that is just its mailing address. The company is actually based in Ghent, operating out of the Columbia County airport off Route 9H.

August 29, 2011

Eyes of the Storm

Everyone likes to scoff at “social media,” even those who use it most... as if its use consists of nothing but narcissists tweeting about their toddlers, or posting pics of their pedicures.

Which, usually, it does.

But during disasters, social media proves its worth. As Hurricane Irene progressed up the Hudson Valley, Facebook, Twitter, and the liveblogs which build upon them filled up with on-the-scene reports and pictures which, in a least a few cases, may have actually saved lives. The traditional media did its part, but mostly couldn’t keep up with the hoi polloi.

Above, you'll find links to a sampler just a small portion of the countless Irene photos posted online over the past 24 hours in the Hudson Valley. Wherever possible, the photographer has been credited, though a few were hard to pin down. (If for any reason you want your photo removed, just ask.)

August 28, 2011

Catskills bearing Irene’s brunt

At (p.m.) last night in Hudson, a patron at the bar was predicting authoritatively that today's storm would hit the Catskills much harder than Columbia County, due to the mountains’ elevation and terrain.

Seems he was right... While Hurricane Irene mostly has not lived up to its advance billing on the eastern side of the Hudson River, the same cannot be said for the western side. Facebook and Twitter are replete with pictures of semi-submerged cars, homes and businesses in places such as Arkville, Catskill, Cornwall, Tannersville and Windham.

Notably, flooding—not wind—is the problem. From the looks of things, many creeks in Greene, Ulster and Delaware counties have risen to, or above, the tops of their banks.

A liveblog over at the indispensable Watershed Post is filling up with alarming reports of roof rescues and (disputed) tales of dam ruptures, and is well worth a check-in: click here.

August 5, 2011

New (old) media

Over at his Seeing Greene blog, Dick May has leaked the widely-rumored news about three new (and alliteratively-named) newspapers coming this Fall to Columbia and Greene counties and also the Catkskills:

Veteran journalist Paul Smart has announced plans to launch a trio of “independent community” newspapers. [...] In times past Mr Smart edited The Mountain Eagle and The Phoenicia Times, as well as operating The Olive Press [...] He envisions a September 8 launch for three bi-weeklies that are stuffed with local news: The Catskill Current, The Hudson Harpoon and The Mountaintop Meteor.

Appearing (per above) every two weeks, word is that ad revenues are already flowing in nicely.

July 16, 2011

New site preview: Clovr.net

For several months, I’ve been building another site—one which would help me look over all the local headlines, blog posts, and event listings that I check regularly, at one central location ... Realizing that this service would probably also be useful to others, I’m previewing this work in progress, called Clovr.net.

There are currently three sections: Blogs, News and Events. The headlines are pulled automatically, so that if anyone adds something to their site, it shows up pretty much immediately. Each headline is linked to the source, so you can then read the full stories which interest you. I’m also updating the site manually with some commentary and/or highlights for each section.

More sections and counties may be added later, if this catches on. Give it a whirl and send along some feedback. (Note: If you use Internet Explorer, it’s not going to look good on your monitor at this point. Please, just stop using Internet Explorer. It stinks. There are links to download other browsers on the front page of the beta site.)

in Blogs, Counties | Columbia, Media & Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

May 7, 2011

Divide and conquer

The Gossips of Rivertown and others have taken note of an Albany Times-Union article entitled “Nobody home, for now,” about demographic shifts in Columbia County—with a focus on Hudson.

The piece is anecdotal and shallow at best, misleading and inflammatory at worst.

For example, the reporter quotes a random pedestrian who implies that Warren Street went straight from Mom & Pop stores to antique stores (a/k/a Pop & Pop stores). Other comments in the article deepen this false impression, one with little relation to reality on the ground.

But few journalists making a whirlwind tour of a place can resist an easy us vs. them narrative; it makes writing the story so much quicker and easier. And so the paper, abetted by several of those quoted, would seem to have us ignore the following:

• Nevermind that the downfall of downtown markets and shoe stores and the like was caused primarily by the growth of Fairview Avenue in Greenport—long before antiques or art or restaurants came into play. Shoppers across the country killed their own beloved main street businesses to save a few pennies at big box stores, and Hudson was no exception.

• Nevermind that there was a long gap of 15-20 years between the collapse of the “old” Warren Street and the slow but steady arrival of new businesses. During that interim period, much of downtown was given up for dead. Yet the “new” entrepreneurs (most of them middle-class or below) who saw Hudson’s promise and opportunities, rather than looking at it as a ghost town. And they keep getting scapegoated for having taken a chance on Hudson when it had hit rock-bottom, then succeeding with their small businesses against long odds.

• Nevermind that virtually every store in town is locally-owned by a Hudson or County resident. Or again, that these folks have turned a once-forsaken street full of empty storefronts, derelict buildings and street-level apartments back into a vibrant commercial district (propping up sales and property taxes in the process).

• And nevermind that there are many other types of businesses thriving in Hudson today besides antiques, from Vasilow’s to Steiner’s to coffee roasters and hair salons and more. Or that larger-scale businesses, from online marketer Etsy in Hudson to goat cheese manufacturer/distributer Coutourier in Livingston are moving jobs into the area, bucking expectations and trends. Why? Because this rural-but-sophisticated area is attractive to certain types of businesses. That they don’t have belching smokestacks or workers who routinely get injured doesn’t mean they don’t count as economic development.

Bottom line: Can anyone say with a straight face that the Columbia County or Hudson economy between 1975 and 1995 was thriving, healthy, or in any other way enviable? Those who resent the positive changes that have taken hold in the past 15 or so years should at least stop making false connections between the collapse of previous models from 1-3 generations ago, and the positive attempts more recently to get the area back on its feet.

Meanwhile, we get Matthew Fredericks opining that “deindustrialization” will cause people to pack up and leave. For where, one wonders? Is there some fairy-tale part of the United States where the 1950s never ended, everyone carries a lunchbucket to work, and every child is apple-cheeked? And how, precisely, will those who find themselves destitute in our new economy (which is by no means perfect) find the means to move? Moving is always expensive, in both obvious and non-obvious ways.

Moreover, 90% of the loss of industry in this area happened already, much of it a generation or more ago. So by Fredericks’ theory, those folks who depended upon it should already be gone. The County’s stagnant-but-stable population figures don’t support that idea.

Next we hear from an armchair pundit that “they’ve jacked up rents.” (It’s always a nebulous They.) Where, precisely, can one find lower rents than in this region? If the rents are actually lower there, the likelihood is they have even fewer traditional job opportunities, or other major problems. How, one wonders, is that magic place managing to outmaneuver the same national social and economic trends which affect every American community? And if this Land of Eldorado, with its low rents and plentiful jobs, really exists, how long can their cost-of-living stay at that level?

The article (and its haphazard sources) of course never mentions that Hudson provides far more subsidized rental units per capita than virtually any other municipality in the region. Hundreds pay only that rent which their income allows them to afford in the Terrace Apartments and elsewhere; there is tons of Section 8 and senior housing in town. If anything, the quality and numbers of these units has improved over the past decade, with some exceptions.

Those who launch facile attacks on the economic changes in Columbia County rarely recognize that the move from a heavy manufacturing to a service-based economy has been a tectonic international shift, occurring for 40 years or more. U.S. consumer demand for ever-cheaper merchandise, coupled with vastly lower labor costs overseas, has steadily stripped manufacturing from the landscape pretty much everywhere. The vast majority of traditional manufacturing was out Columbia County’s door already when I was a kid, when second-home owners were few and far between.

(Not to mention: Where is the support for greener, more sustainable, compatible industry from official quarters? When a traditional boat builder wanted to buy a piece of land owned by the City on the south end of the Hudson Waterfront in the early ’90s and create jobs, he was spurned, and took his business to Ulster County instead. The City sold the land to St. Lawrence Cement, now Holcim, and it’s remained unused and blighted ever since.)

If every County second home owner left their house and went away, and every Hudson antiques store and gallery closed, would heavy manufacturing suddenly roar back to life here? Would Warren Street suddenly fill up with dress stores and supermarkets? Please. What we’d have left is abandoned homes, empty main streets, still very little manufacturing—and everyone putting their meagre paychecks into the hands of the Walton family at Widewaters Plaza, exporting our local capital off to Arkansas.

We also get from the T-U article the same old simplistic analysis of population and the schools: “The population is stagnant, but there are more second home owners, so our schools will suffer!”

Well, sorry, but all I can say here is... duh. If you have more properties but the same number of residents, with the same or fewer number of kids in the schools, the results should logically be:

(1) A lower tax burden on each property owner, since the costs of running the schools can now be distributed across more properties; and/or

(2) The ability to spend more per child without raising individual tax payments, since once again you have more properties to tax but the same or fewer number of students.

Here’s the real tax problem at the moment: With the State essentially bankrupt and cutting back aid, but with many School districts unwilling to be disciplined and transparent about spending, the opposite is happening... higher taxes but declining education. Ditto local municipalities: In the face of Federal and State cutbacks, towns and small cities are in many cases simply passing on those costs to homeowners (new and old) rather than seriously looking at where their budgets could be trimmed.

That has everything to do with a failure of leadership, not with the demographic bogeymen painted in the minds of T-U readers by such articles. But rather than take a hard look at the leaders responsible for such mismanagement, it’s a lot easier to point the finger at “those people” who arrived here in the past 30 years.

It makes one wonder whether the folks advancing these canards (“Warren Street was killed by antiques! The newcomers are destroying our schools! They’re driving us out!”) paid any attention in civics and math class when they were in 7th Grade. Whether these wolf cries originate in ignorance or malice, such misleading exercises serve only one real purpose: to sow more division and resentment, allowing those in entrenched positions of power to keep propping up their status quo.

And why does the American celebration of entrepreneurship and small business not extend to our area’s independent, doing-it-yourselfers? Does a business have to be poisoning its neighbor’s air and water, or demanding a handout in the form of a PILOT plan, in order to be deemed legit?

Is our local economy perfect? Obviously not. (Whose is?) Are there people suffering, who our society has left behind, both economically and educationally? Clearly yes. (And we should pay them more heed.) Does spreading bad information through superficial reporting and opinions help anyone who’s feeling left behind? Not in the least. Will scapegoating those who have tried to improve their homes and create small businesses help anyone at all? Yes: Politicos, slumlords and other predators (who benefit from the promotion of social resentment and profiting from boom-bust cycles).

in Counties | Columbia, Economic Development, Media & Publishing, Planning & Land Use | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

April 25, 2011

MH Cable: Not tapping that grant after all

It’s hard to imagine any company turning up its nose at nearly $3,500,000 in free money... especially in this economy, and if that money would both expand the company’s customer base and also perform a vital community service.

But apparently, Mid-Hudson Cablevision is one such company.

As a result, potential rural customers in hard-to-reach “last mile” locations—including Yours Truly—are being told they’ll have to pony up thousands of dollars each just to get connected. Customers in densely-settled cities like Hudson or within 200 feet of existing lines typically pay no such fee.

During last year’s hotly-contested Congressional race between Scott Murphy and Chris Gibson, Murphy announced the award of a $3.5 million “rural broadband” grant to MH Cable. According to the then-U.S. rep’s August 2010 press release, the funds would come from the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utility Services programs.

Now, this funding was not forced upon Mid-Hudson. The company applied for, was awarded, and at the time celebrated the grant. MHC President James (Jim) Reynolds crowed last year that

We are very pleased to receive the news that we are being awarded this grant. These tax payer dollars will help us to continue the work we have been engaged in for 30 plus years. This government support will help make it possible to extend service to rural marketplaces that would otherwise be very difficult reach. We will be moving as quickly as possible to move forward with the outlined in our proposal and certainly appreciate all of the support and assistance that we received from Congressman Scott Murphy.

Murphy in turn gushed that the towns of Ashland, Cairo, Catskill, Coxsackie, Jewett, Lexington, New Baltimore and Windham in Greene County, plus Austerlitz, Copake, Claverack, Ghent, Chatham, Hillsdale and Taghkanic in Columbia County would benefit from this Federal program, stating that

Expanding rural broadband in our Upstate communities is key to building businesses and creating jobs. This is one of the most critical issues for our rural communities. This project will benefit everyone from farmers and small businesses looking to sell their products online, to volunteer firefighters needing high-speed Internet to keep the public safe. Broadband investments like this are a critical component of my Renew Upstate New York plan, and will help ensure the 20th District becomes a leader in the 21st century economy.

Yet according to Mid-Hudson engineer David Fingar, the company has since decided not to tap into these funds—at least for the moment.

Asked why (during a cordial visit to my property recently, after I'd placed multiple calls over the past three months to MHC about availability in my area), Fingar stated that there were “too many conditions attached” to the funding, but did not rule out accessing the funds later.

Until then, potential customers are being asked to come up with rather large lump sums—in my case $1,870 plus tax—for the privilege of then giving Mid-Hudson about $1,000-$2,000 each year in subscription fees, depending on what services one orders. (Fingar—a member of the local insurance clan, which includes County Republican chair Greg Fingar—did offer that if I ordered a significant enough package, they might be able to work out an installment plan on the hookup.) Others in my neighborhood have been quoted figures ranging from $2,000 to $2,600 for getting hooked up. Meanwhile, with an estimated 20,000 subscribers, MHC’s annual revenues are variously reported as between $20 and $50 million.

At the time that the Town of Taghkanic negotiated its franchise agreement with the company in 2007, MHC provided service to only 5.5 of Taghkanic’s approximately 49 miles of roads. Though most residents can opt for Dish network TV service, internet access is glaringly lacking, as many homes are eligible for neither cable modems nor DSL. Making do with either wifi hotspots, satellite internet from the likes of Hughes or Wild Blue, or even 1990s-grade dialup from AOL, many of the innovations of today’s dynamic, video-driven web are not feasible. Streaming movies from Netflix? Forget about it.

But this past fall and winter, Taghkanic residents’ anticipation mounted as MHC trucks were seen stringing heavy black wires in various parts of the Town. Here on County Route 27, activity was spotted to the immediate east and west of my property. But due to a fluke in how telephone poles are sited, a roughly quarter-mile chunk of 27 has no poles on the road, with phone and electricity lines routed through woods. This places homes in “line extension areas,” some of them a good deal more than the typical maximum of 200 feet from existing wires, and thus in the position of having to pay a large “contribution in aid of construction” (or CAC) to get hooked up. These are precisely the type of conditions meant to be addresses by Federal programs like the one to which MHC applied for funding it now has spurned.

The problem is compounded by many rural governments being woefully uninformed about their ability to negotiate better agreements from cable companies, in effect turning over rights worth hundreds of thousands or even millions without negotiating for more community services (such as public access channels, production facilities) or coverage. According to Metroland,

State law requires cable service providers to set aside public-access channels for home-grown programming [and] also give municipalities the opportunity to enter into contracts known as franchise agreements with these companies, whereby the cable-service providers must give up to 5 percent of their revenues to local governments.

The Town of Taghkanic demanded neither a franchise fee from MHC in 2007, nor secured any free goodies—besides one standard installation each for the town's handful of public buildings. The City of Hudson similarly made few if any requests from Mid-Hudson when they last came before the Council for renewal, despite getting expert advice from Troy media advocate Steve Pierce. In much the same way that insurance policies only get cursory review, many small towns and cities fail to realize how much more they are entitled to, deferring instead to highly-profitable cable enterprises as if they were doing the municipality a giant favor just by showing up. The Town of Ashland, by contrast, would appear to have taken a somewhat more responsible approach, asking Reynolds to answer a host of common-sense questions prior to approving a franchise renewal.

Still the larger questions remains: Since nearly $3.5 million was sought, received and touted by MHC less than a year ago, why not use it to overcome the obstacles to (in Reynolds’ own words) “extend[ing] service to rural marketplaces that would otherwise be very difficult reach”?

What about the stated reason—an excess of onerous grant “conditions”? Recipients do have to fulfill normal, routine responsibilities like keeping payroll documentation and other records; but typically grants cover the costs of such administration. A longer list of conditions can be found here.

One theory is that the decision is somehow ideological—that Mid-Hudson’s generally conservative and politically-connected leadership didn’t want to appear, in the age of Tea Party fanaticism, to be suckling at a government teat... But if that were the case, why did they apply in the first place—and why did they accept and use a $5.3 million loan (arranged with help from Murphy’s predecessor, John Sweeney) for expanding rural broadband access in much the same way? Back in 2009—while acknowledging the lesser-known costs of maintaining rural broadband networks—Reynolds predicted that his company would indeed seek more Federal funding opportunities in the future:

Based on [the Sweeney-backed loan] success, Reynolds said Mid-Hudson is likely to apply for stimulus funding ... While the earlier buildout was to areas with 20 to 25 homes per mile, the remaining unserved areas in his footprint are in locales with 10 to 15 homes per mile, butting up against the threshold for making the endeavor cost-effective.

Indeed, MHC cites this past Federal partnership in most of its applications to area towns and the State's Public Service Commission. Some thus speculate that the reversal may be in some way entangled with the Murphy-Gibson rivalry, i.e. that maybe a grant or loan from the new Republican Congressman would be treated differently.

Another theory—and the one I find more plausible—is that Mid-Hudson is simply testing the waters to see how many people they can get to shell out cash up front before dipping into the Federal pool to cover the rest. Once they've maxed out the folks who are willing to foot the bill themselves, they can in theory then start using the grant funds to hook up the rest, and thus get the most new customers possible at the lowest possible risk to the company. When I asked Fingar—who was quite amiable and forthcoming during our visit—whether those who agreed to pay now would get a refund if they used the grants later, he appeared bemused by the question.

According to a telecom legal expert I spoke with, they can probably get away with such temporizing, as the USDA rarely “claws back” such funding even when it doesn't get used as intended. The Federal government oversees about $5 billion in similar programs, and evidently making sure they get spent wisely is low on the list of priorities... Meanwhile, at least one publication, CC Scoop, has expressed skepticism about the grant programs, and The Columbia Paper is expected to publish an article on the topic as well shortly.

So for now, I've reluctantly extended my satellite internet deal, paying for commercial-grade (but still pokey) service at a steep cost. I’d vastly prefer to do business with a locally-owned company, and to not have to deal with the bandwidth limitations and service headaches common to satellite. But at about two grand to get started, it’s hard to justify at this point. If Mid-Hudson Cablevision waits too long, though, to access those funds and provide this community service, they may get left behind by the ever-increasing capabilities of cellular and other over-the-air networks.

NOTE: Calls to the USDA RUS department which handles the Mid-Hudson grant were not returned in time for publication.

April 18, 2011

Food notes from all over

More culinary reports from around the region, following on the news of the Hudson diner's purchase:

• The Vanderbilt Inn in Philmont reopens tonight, Monday, with a serious chef and a farm-to-table ethos;

• Chopsticks in Catskill, located near the relatively new Beer World, offers Chinese, Japanese, and most of all Thai food — each of them simple but solid. (It remains a mystery why Columbia County has no Thai restaurant, while Greene has two...)

• Wunderbar in Hudson has changed hands, though Imre is still around for a few weeks for the transition;

• Also in Hudson, the former Hudson House gallery building (which briefly housed an outpost of Hammertown Barn) reportedly has been purchased by a Brooklyn bistro owner, but won't open for one or two years by various accounts;

• MOD's new Hudson digs got their beer and wine license.

• The Ramp Festival launches next weekend (April 30th) at the Basilica in Hudson on Saturday;

* Agriturismo in Pine Plains reopens on the 22nd.

April 16, 2011

NYMag again

WikiCoCoNews points out that New York Magazine has published (yet again) a guide to visiting Columbia County... Previous iterations are reviewed here and here, one by yours truly. Shout-outs include the Union Street Guest House and Vico in Hudson, Bish Bash Falls straddling the state line, the new Banjo Mountain Café in Harlemville, Valatie’s Harvest Spirits, the Main Street Public House in Philmont, and the HADA website.