SamPratt.com

Election Roundup for 2021

2021-11-03T15:36:18-04:00

Local Turnout Plummets

In the 2020 Presidential election, a whopping 35,000 people came out to vote in Columbia County, with Biden winning handily. Data circulated this evening by the Board of Elections indicates that only about 20,000 voted this time around—meaning that 43% of those 2020 voters didn’t show up this time.

Voting is generally lower in local cycles compared with Presidential contests, but the precipitous drop suggests that there are many voters who only care about national politics. That’s something for both parties to work on, since in many ways local races affect our day-to-day lives far more substantially.

The full 2021 Columbia County unofficial results spreadsheet can be found here. These await the counting of absentee ballots, followed by official certification, and thus will change somewhat over time.

No Headway for Dems on Board of Supervisors

Despite a lot of big talk in the past month of a sweep which would take over the Board of Supervisors from Republicans, the Columbia Dems failed to make any progress toward that longterm, elusive goal. Dems lost key races for Super in four large towns (Claverack, Germantown, Ghent and Kinderhook).

In Taghkanic, two Democratic candidates for Town Board both won by a very large margin over the lone Republican opponent, 56% vs. 44%. Yet the Taghkanic Democrats, who enjoy a 4-1 majority there, allowed incumbent Republican Supervisor Ryan Skoda to run unopposed. So that Taghkanic seat would appear to be quite winnable by the Dems; but Town Board member Joyce Thompson has been instrumental in convincing them to leave the Republican Supervisor unchallenged.

In Stuyvesant, Democratic Committee officer Lee Jamison may have set some sort of record by losing yet again, having run repeatedly there over the past 20 decades. Other Supervisor races were uncontested, leaving the balance of power on the Board still firmly in the Republicans’ hands.

Meanwhile, the apparent winner of the Ghent Supervisor position, Craig Simmons, recently appeared in a social media video of a Chatham School Board meeting stating that he does not support vaccine mandates, much as he also “fought against helmet and seatbelt laws here in New York.” Simmons was formerly Chatham’s School Board President, but his nomination to be reappointed apparently received no second from any of his colleagues earlier this year. His term on the School Board expires in 2022, so presumably he will relinquish that position once his Ghent victory is certified.

A Taste of Tammany Hall in Ghent

Also in Ghent... The County Board of Elections decided to add a polling place due to shifts in the population, and chose the Ghent VFW as its extra venue. This raised some eyebrows among Ghent Dems, since the Post is traditionally used by the Republicans as their clubhouse, and also a site for GOP fundraisers.

It seemed an even odder choice given that another polling place, the Town Hall, is just a stone’s throw away, meaning it did not help many voters get closer to the polls. Other rejected suggestions had included a site closer to Hawthorne Valley, or another of the Town’s firehouses not already used for voting.

Of particular concern was the fact that the VFW Post has an active bar downstairs from the main space where the election was being conducted, including both an interior staircase from that room and an exterior entrance as well. This raised the specter of old-school Tammany-style politicking, which in the 19th Century often involved promising voters drinks as an inducement for voting.

That has not been alleged so far, let alone proven. But one Democratic poll watcher noted that the bar’s parking lot was very full in the afternoon and early evening of Election Day, and complained that a Republican inspector was telling some voters they could go downstairs for a beer after they finished.

(Note: This author also served as a poll watcher at the VFW in the early morning hours of Election Day... Much too early for a Budweiser.)

Krapf Holds his Own Party

According to Democratic committee sources, after beating incumbent David Bartlett, the party’s nominee for Sheriff decided to hold his own victory party, separate from the party’s event.

After besting Bartlett, Don Krapf reportedly held his own private (less “transparent”?) event in Hudson at the Power Boat Association, after briefly stopping by the Dems’ event in Chatham.

Krapf is a former Republican, who according to multiple sources voted twice for Trump and said voting for Hillary Clinton would be like voting for “the devil.” Sources have further indicated that his commitment to the platform advanced for him by the Dems is tepid at best.

Dem Committee members may consider this a win, but now seem stuck with a Sheriff with deep conservative roots. The party tends to be reluctant to abandon its own nominees, even if they prove problematic in office. Barring some major scandal, Krapf will now be likely to serve until retirement, unless eventually there were a Democratic primary—which could be bruising and vicious. This site will have some thoughts on the futures of both major parties in a future post.

Statewide Setbacks for Dems

One local Dem Committee member described last night’s results as “a bloodbath across the whole state, really” for the Democrats. Particularly disappointing was New York’s failure to approve ballot access referenda backed by the Dems. These would have loosened requirements absentee voters, as well as allowing same-day registration of new voters.

In better news, a referendum supporting stronger protections for clean air and water in the State did pass. But overall, results across New York suggested that Republican voters still fuming over the 2020 Presidential election were in a mood to strike back. There are national concerns that this foreshadows more trouble in the 2022 mid-terms, which are typically challenging for the party controlling the White House.

Hudson Results are Too Berserk to Parse

Meanwhile in Hudson, where Democrats have had a virtual lock on most offices going back 16 years to the hotly-contested Grandinetti-Tracy mayoral race, the results are so hard to comprehend as to defy analysis by an outside observer—even one with a lot of experience in Hudson politics.

Hudson has a remarkable number of positions: Three citywide offices (Mayor, Council President and Treasurer); 10 Common Council members, a/k/a Aldermen; and five County Supervisors. Sometimes, there are also primaries for Republican and Democratic Committee seats. In the above-mentioned 2005 contest, there were something approaching 50 candidates for various positions.

This time around, some key offices were uncontested, but the subject of (mostly) futile write-in campaigns. Other races involved candidates who had asked too late to be removed from the ballot, at least one of whom appears to have won. For more close-to-the-ground details, try reading coverage at Carole Osterink’s The Gossips of Rivertown.

Hudson seems to be becoming a textbook example of the perils of one-party rule—resulting either in a herd mentality among members of the same team, or else vicious infighting among elected officials and Committee members of the same party.

Multiple factions now exist among the Dems, each jealously defending its piece of the party pie. Despite sharing a party affiliation, there seems to be less not more cohesion and cooperation over time. It almost makes one nostalgic for a time when there were a few moderate Hudson Republican aldermen like Ed Thompson and Kathy Harter, with whom one could have open and reasonable discussions.

Testy and close, Ghent vote count finally kicks off

2019-11-22T09:17:52-05:00

UPDATE #1: The review has finally begun a little before 10 am, though it is unlikely anyone’s ballot will get counted for many hours.

UPDATE #2: GOP attorney Ciampoli has already had his first ugly outburst, lecturing a Democratic attorney that “I am going to shove your argument down your throat!”

UPDATE #3: Ciampoli is objecting to numerous absentee ballots on vague, unspecified grounds about the voters’ “qualifications,” or else referencing “the Constitution”—and getting authoritative pushback from the Dem attorneys. Nevertheless, GOP Commissioner Nastke is upholding most of his objections, even while stating that he disagrees with some of them.

UPDATE #4: According to one observer, Nastke independently decided—without Ciampoli lodging a complaint—to question the ballot from a 90-year-old woman, indicating that he intended to call her and question her.

UPDATE #5: More than 40 ballots have been set aside as of about 1:30 pm, almost entirely from spurious challenges from Ciampoli. The Democrats have gained ground, with Matheney virtually certain to win, and Nelson almost certain to lose; the remaining contest between Zan and Simmons remains very close.

: : : : : : :

In one of the last local races yet to be decided in Columbia County, lawyers for Town Board candidates in Ghent have been scheduled to descend on 401 State Street at 9 am Friday to wrangle over the remaining absentee and affidavit ballots.

Going into the day the two Democratic candidates, Koethi Zan and Patti Matheney, were trailing their Republican opponents, Pete Nelson and Craig Simmons by margins smaller than the number of ballots left to count—or not count.

According to the Ghent candidates, the unofficial numbers from the machines and the hand counts are Simmons 950, Matheney 947, Nelson 926, and Zan 923.

There are reportedly some 121 potential votes yet to count, broken down as follows by party: Republicans 33, Democrats 71, Indpendence Party members 3, Working Families voters 1, Conservatives 1, and 12 voters unafiliated with any party (“NOPs”).

Matheney & Zan

Both the Dems and Republicans are bringing in the heavy artillery, seasoned election lawyers expert in scrutinizing absentee ballot applications, postmarks, signatures, registrations, and other technical hurdles voters must surmount before their mailing envelopes can be opened.

Once the envelopes are open and combined into an anonymized , the wrangling will likely continue, as each ballot is scrutinized for stray marks, overvotes and other potential disqualifying flaws.

As of 9:10 am, the Board of Elections staff, inspectors charged with counting, and both Democratic candidates and their attorneys, were present. But the Republican candidates and their lawyers were nowhere to be seen.

The GOP is employing infamously-abrasive attorney John Ciampoli, the former Nassau county attorney who was dismissed by Nassau’s county executive in 2013. The Dems have hired attorneys Josh Oppenheimer and Bob Harding.

While it is possible that both sides could agree to open everything, and let the chips fall where they may, it is likely that they will grapple over every single ballot.

The first stage, if the parties are in a combative mood, is for either side to try to knock out some of the ballots before their enclosing envelope are opened, based on residency challenges, signature challenges, or other flaws in the application for or deliver of the ballot.

In some past counts, the Republicans have indiscriminately challenged almost every ballot envelope mailed by registered Democrats, not providing specific reasons or evidence to support the challenge.

Attorney John Ciampoli (Source: Newsday)

For a ballot to be set aside, both Election Commissioners must agree with the challenge. Typically, Republican Commissioner Jason Nastke votes with the Republicans to exclude it, and Democratic Commissioner Virginia Martin votes with the Dems to uphold the person’s right to vote.

Democratic candidates have occasionally mounted challenges if they find specific and plausible reasons to object, such as evidence that the person has moved, or voted in the wrong place. But these have tended to be substantially fewer.

Wholesale challenges of Democratic ballots has, in the past, resulted in huge piles of ballots getting set aside. For the challenges to be upheld, the responsible party hasto go to court to determine which get opened. If they don’t they get opened by default after a short waiting period.

In 95% of cases, these either don’t get formally challenged, or judges order all but the very most fishy and fatally flawed ballot submissions to be opened.

Once opened, another round of blood sport begins—as the parties scrutinize the ballots themselves for mistakes or invalidating marks, then issue more challenges. And the same process begins all over again with Commissioners’ rulings, and potential court challenges.

Bottom line: Unless the parties and their attorneys are in a particularly good mood this morning, the likelihood is that Ghent residents will not know who is representing them for another two weeks or so.

Premature construction causes Ginsberg’s to torch its own $500K grant

2016-01-12T16:36:58-05:00

David and Nancy Ginsberg, in a photo posted at the company’s website

Agency denies release of funds due to failure to follow grant requirements

A $516,000 Federal grant for the expansion of Ginsberg’s Foods in Ghent has been rescinded by the State, due to the company and Columbia County’s failure to follow strict procedures set forth in the grant requirements.

According to a news release from the community group GhentCAN, which obtained a letter documenting the State’s decision, the final approval of funding was denied on January 11th. The main reason given was a regulation which prevents grantees from beginning construction prior to final approval and release of the funds.

The letter from the Vice President of New York State Homes and Community Renewal, which can be downloaded as a PDF via this link, states firmly that “the Request for Release of Funds cannot be approved [due to] the transfer of the property to the business and construction starting at the site… The consequence of [these actions] is that the Federal HUD funding cannot be used for the ‘project.’”

Furthermore, the transfer of land from the County to Ginsberg’s was also apparently performed prematurely—both action leaving the State no choice but to cancel the grant under its rules.

The findings by the State indciate that evidence of premature construction was found on the website of the Columbia Economic Development Corporation, or CEDC, which was involved with obtaining the grant funding and approved transfer of 33 acres to Ginsberg’s for just $1. (The value of the land has been estimated at roughly $275,000.) The State letter indicates it also performed site visits and obtained information from local residents.

The relevant State regulations are apparently both clear and strict, leaving the State no choice but to cancel the grant.

Numerous residents driving past the expansion site off Route 66 had noticed in November and December that work was underway at the site, without realizing that it was in violation of the grant regulations. According to GhentCAN, residents noted excavation activity, including the “removal of dirt and gravel from the site”; the creation of “an access road”; and the presence of “various construction companies and personnel.”

Trucks belonging to the Colarusso company were noted by some passersby, which was of note as the company’s president has been a longtime CEDC member who voted in favor of benefits for the project. Colarusso’s name no longer appears on the CEDC board roster as of its December minutes.

GhenCAN also noted that Columbia County appeared to be well aware of these rules, having signed an October 20, 2015 certification agreeing that “no physical alteration to individual sites can occur nor can funds for those activities be committed or expended until receipt of an environmental clearance letter.”

With Nastke’s help, GOP lawyers make a mockery of election process

2015-11-19T14:15:43-05:00

On Thursday, local Republicans sought once again to disenfranchise absentee voters—this time in Ghent. In doing so, the GOP not only tried to revive failed legal arguments of the past, they also raised doubts about their basic sense of decorum.

The days events make you wonder: Do County Republicans need a few cases of gingko biloba to help with their memory problem? And: Does Republican Election Commissioner Jason Nastke need a refresher course in the basic obligations of public servants?

To review:

GOP Election Commissioner Jason Nastke, hamming it up for a magazine profile in younger days

Back in 2010, the Columbia County Republicans were embarrassed in both the court of public opinion and in actual court. Their judicial smackdown came in Taghkanic, when County GOP chair Greg Fingar rehashed a long-settled legal question: Namely, whether people with more than one residence have the right to choose Columbia County as the one place they vote. (Answer: They do.) Well before 2010, courts had repeatedly said everyone can choose where they vote, as long as they have a dwelling there.

The 2010 attempt to re-litigate the matter did not go well for Fingar et al. And the GOP’s loss was doubly embarrassing, considering that the legal rebuke came from a Republican judge, Jonathan Nichols—complete with critical commentaries during the hearings about their attorney, James Walsh.

At that time, as reported by this site, Walsh was “admonished” for “misleadingly reading only a portion of an Election Law statute.” Nichols “twice stated that the Republican position was ‘completely unconvincing.’” And “Nichols expressed frustration that his repeated orders for the Republicans to produce specific objections to voters were repeatedly ignored... In many court observers’ view, the GOP operatives are fortunate not to have been found in contempt.”

Moreover, the hypocrisy of Fingar’s personal role in the failed 2010 disenfranchisment effort became an issue, as it was discovered that his family insurance company overtly solicits the home insurance accounts of second-home owners... The very people Fingar was trying to disenfranchise. In the wake of the election, some longtime Fingar policy-holders moved their accounts elsewhere.

Now, according to observers of today’s absentee vote count for two open Town Board seats in Ghent, the GOP is at it again—using the same lawyer, Mr. Walsh. Going into the count, Republican Pete Nelson and Democratic challenger Patti Matheney have leads over Republican Mark Huston and Democrat Koethi Zan, Matheney’s running mate. With well over 150 ballots to count, primarily from Democrats, there appeared a strong chance both Matheney and Zan could prevail—giving the Dems a majority on the five-member Ghent board, along with Mallory Mort.

Within minutes of the count beginning, the GOP’s strategy became clear, according to observers. The Republicans began challenging all ballots originating in New York City, claiming they were “not entitled to vote by absentee.” Citing no specific evidence, the attorneys nevertheless challenged the “qualifications of the voter” and the “veracity” of both the absentee application and the enclosing envelope. By 11 am, 15 such ballots had been set aside pending resolution of the challenges—more than enough to change the outcome of the election. By early afternoon, that number had climbed to nearly 30.

Adding to the absurdity of the proceedings was some stunningly unprofessional behavior from the GOP attorneys. An observer reported that they were “screaming” at one point; and when Dow was speaking about his understanding of election law as a former Commissioner, one of Walsh’s team actually started singing to attempt to drown out a Democratic lawyer.

GOP commissioner Jason Nastke—who reportedly was getting up constantly from the table to speak on the phone to an unknown party—did nothing to restrain this childish behavior. And Nastke dutifully upheld the GOP lawyers’ objections to these voters, even though no specifics were provided.

The Republican challengers failed to make any concrete allegations as to why each was not entitled to vote at their local residence, why they were unqualified, what was untruthful about the envelopes or ballots, etc., using the same boilerplate objections each time. Yet Nastke sustained their challenges anyway, without explaining his reasoning.

The one-sided nature of Nastke’s rulings was thrown into relief as the Republican appointee (and former Valatie mayor) unexpectedly reversed course on a single ballot, not sustaining the out-of-town lawyers challenge to a lone New York City Democrat’s vote. Why the different treatment, attendees wondered? Nastke did not provide any reason for changing course. But the application for that ballot stated that it was “carried” (delivered) to the voter by a member of the Colarusso clan—influential in GOP circles.

In other words: If it’s likely a vote for a Republican, it’s OK to vote absentee at your second home. But not if you’re likely voting Democratic.

Former Columbia County Democratic Election Commissioner and State Legislature attorney Ken Dow was representing Matheney and Zan, made clear his astonishment at the brazenness of the Republican disenfranchisement effort. Dow suggested that Nastke’s failure to rule in favor of the GOP without facts could be an abuse of his power as an Election Commissioner, to the extent that he was making decisions to disenfranchise voters without being presented with a shred of evidence.

The Republican effort is not entirely surprising when one considers that Huston posted highly divisive messages on Facebook, attempting to pit “local” vs. “new” residents—echoing a somewhat subtler GOP-funded mailing campaign.

In the end, it appears the whole fracas raised by the Republicans will be moot. The GOP team got up and left abruptly once it appeared the machine vote ballots will stand, regardless of the absentees they had challenged, with one Republican (Nelson) and one Democrat (Matheney) joining the Ghent Town Board.

The gang of attorneys—who appear to have modeled their behavior after boorish GOP election lawyer John Ciampoli, Walsh’s mentor—left without saying a word about the 29 votes they had challenged—which will in all likelihood be opened after sitting in limbo for three days, since the Republicans will not bother going to court as it would not change the outcome. Once the absentees are eventually opened, Zan will likely fall 7-8 votes short of displacing Nelson.

Supers meeting on Wednesday may be best show in town

2015-06-09T14:12:00-04:00

BOS Chairman Pat Grattan (image adapted from: GrandOldPress.com)

The public may want to bring some extra bags of popcorn to the County Board of Supervisors’ regular meeting on Wednesday at 7:30—where the ethics, transparency and other management issues dogging the Columbia Economic Development Corporation (CEDC) are likely to come up.

Last month, the County’s separate economic development committee voted 5-0 to forward a resolution proposed by Hillsdale Supervisor Art Baer to the full Board, calling for an independent investigation into possible conflicts of interest during CEDC’s past five years of loans and grantmaking.

Prompted by a State report on conflicts of interest related to the Ginsberg’s Food proposal, as well as violations of open government laws, the investigation (if approved) would focus on only grants of $25,000 or more.

GhentCANN petition gathers steam

2015-06-03T05:38:35-04:00

In five days, over 270 signatures have been gathered on an online petition calling for the Ghent planning board to appeal a judge’s ruling, which forces the Town’s Planning Board to issue permit to Ginsberg’s Foods.

The petition, which also calls for reforms of the County’s economic development agencies, can be read (and if so moved, signed) at this link.

The Board is slated to meet and discuss its options tonight at 7 pm at Ghent Town Hall.

UPDATE: Attorney Louise Roback has obtained and scanned the four decisions by Judge Koweek, which can be downloaded at the following links: ONE | TWO | THREE | FOUR

Online petition calls for Town appeal of Koweek ruling on Ginsberg’s

2015-05-29T09:40:25-04:00

A new online petition posted by GhentCann calls upon the Town’s planners to appeal this week’s ruling by Judge Richard Koweek, forcing the Planning Commission to reverse its denial of a permit to Ginsberg’s Foods.

The petition, which can be found here, can be signed by residents of both Ghent and the County, says GhentCANN’s Patti Matheney, to support “sound planning decisions in our County.” The 300,000 square-foot project also received large tax breaks from the Columbia County Industrial Development Agency.

Denial of Ginsberg’s permit overturned by Judge Koweek

2015-05-26T16:42:42-04:00

According to an attorney who has seen the decisions, Columbia County Judge Richard Koweek “ruled in favor of Ginsberg’s on all four lawsuits” and has ordered the Ghent Planning Board to grant the company a special use permit.

As a rule, it is very rare in New York State for judges to overrule decisions by local agencies such as planning and zoning boards.

The decision is ironic in at least one respect: The State Authorities Budget Office decided not to delve deeper into the conflict of interest issues related to Ginsberg’s and the Columbia Economic Development Corporation, due to the denial by the Ghent Planning Board. The ABO said that the denial rendered such conflict questions moot:

No harm has yet arisen [emphasis added] from the board’s failure to follow its own policies since the Ginsberg Foods expansion project was not approved by the Ghent Planning Board. This may not always be the case with future projects.

Today’s news begs the question: What harm may have arisen now?

Greenport on Ginsberg’s radar?

2014-12-12T18:56:56-05:00

More than one confidential source is whispering that having been denied necessary permits by the Ghent Planning Board, Ginsberg’s Foods is searching for a new location in Columbia County—and has been focusing on the Town of Greenport.

The company still might go through the motions of a court challenge to the recent Ghent Planning Board denial on the off-chance they still can’t find another location in another 12-18 months.

That’s the likely timeframe for obtaining a judicical ruling. But such a process is lengthly, costly, and by no means guaranteed to provide the company’s preferred outcome. Courts tend to give deference to agency rulings, and at best a judge might send the matter back for further review at the Town level... Meaning another 6-8 months after that, before having a marginal chance of maybe getting a more favorable decision. Even so, such a “victory” would likely result in a much different facility by the time more mitigations and changes were made.

Given that uncertainty, such sources indicate that Ginsberg’s has shown interest in another Columbia County town with much less zoning: The Town of Greenport, which requires minimal site plan approvals, but notoriously has no actual zoning code.

The location reportedly being scoped by Ginsberg’s is somewhere in the Route 9 corridor between Flanders and Buckley’s Corners, just southeast of Hudson. This stretch includes the former Holcim/St. Lawrence Cement headquarters, currently home to the company’s toadies at the Columbia Economic Development Corporation; the former Local Ocean facility, which seems to have been acquired by a waste management/scrap recycling firm with no obvious connection to growing fish in vats; and several very large agricultural parcels which have been on the market for nearly a decade.

This is strictly at the rumor phase at the moment, but the reports come from well-placed by disparate sources.

Another Ghent mess

2014-10-31T16:02:24-04:00

Multiple news outlets are reporting that a 7,000-gallon oil spill occurred early Friday morning at First Fuel & Propane, located on Route 9H in the Town of Ghent.

Local lawyer tells a whopper

2014-10-30T21:21:06-04:00

It’s cute when a young child fibs. Most kids are very bad fibbers, so there is little risk of them fooling anyone. Plus their motives are usually harmless, and their alibis often hilarious. (“Did you eat all the cookies, Billy?” —No, the goldfish did.)

Attorney Andrew Howard’s picture from his website

The same can’t be said of grown men, especially grown men being paid upwards of $150/hour out of public funds... So what’s the excuse of Andy Howard, the former County Attorney turned lawyer for the Columbia Economic Development Corporation (CEDC)?

At this week’s CEDC meeting, Howard told an obvious whopper. During Tuesday’s meeting, the topic came up once again of Hillsdale Supervisor Art Baer’s request for legal confirmation that CEDC’s $1 land deal with Ginsberg’s food was aboveboard—free of any conflict of interest.

Previously, CEDC (via Howard) had declined to issue the certification Baer requested, vaguely claiming that the request was too vague.

But this time, Howard took things a step further, grossly embellishing the nature of Baer’s written inquiry. This misleading colloquy sounds a lot like an attempt to gin up fake outrage among the CEDC’s elite membership, who in the past have expressed reluctance to comply with ethics disclosure, training and oversight.

CEDC Board member Scott Wood raised the matter of the “letter from Supervisor Baer asking us to review the legality of certain issues we had done. And we had discussed it on here with our counsel, and we believed that everything we had done was legal and in conformity.”

But though Wood felt CEDC had fully responded—an opinion shared by few outside observers— he expressed surprise that another Supervisor found the response “evasive,” and wondered what they could do to clear up the matter.

That’s when Wood turned things over to Howard, who says:

You received a general request for a legal opinion that everything this Board has done has been legal and ethical standards. Not specifically with Ginsberg’s, not specifically with anything… It seemed very ambiguous and vague.

In fact, Baer’s request was hardly general, and was not aimed at “everything” CEDC had ever done. Rather, it specifically and narrowly dealt just with the Ginsberg’s land transaction.

The subject line of Baer’s August email inquiry was:

Ginsberg Land Sale

The body of the message featured a formal request for “a legal opinion from CEDC counsel and/or the County Attorney that all ethic and legal guidelines have been followed in this proposed transaction” [emphasis added].

The purpose of the request was clear to CEDC executive director Ken Flood, who spelled it out just as explicitly in an early September memo to Howard (attached here). Flood noted that CEDC “has received a formal request for a legal opinion that all ethic [sic] and legal guidelines have been followed in the proposed land transaction between CEDC and Ginsberg’s” and sought Howard’s response.

And indeed, at that time it seemed Howard understood the narrowness of the request. Two days after Flood’s memo was sent, Howard himself referenced Baer’s specific request about “the proposed land transaction between CEDC and Ginsberg’s.” While refusing to provide the assurance sought by Baer, Howard then proceeds to discuss details of that deal—and no other CEDC business.

But during the unrestrained CEDC session this week—which was recorded in full by Arthur Cusano of The Register-Star—Howard saw fit to blow up Baer’s request into something far broader. He continued:

Does that mean I start and look at each and every one of your appointments, to see if you were legally appointed? Does that mean I go to Lisa and look at every one of the legal notices, since I was appointed?

“We should be done with this!” Bartolotta is heard to exclaim on Cusano’s recording, followed by a loud sigh. (Earlier, Bartolotta said of the County’s request for reimbursement of $109,950 paid for the land that “it just makes me crazy... It’s just ridiculous!”

Wood suggests that CEDC “should take the offensive… Maybe that is a strong word… Take the initiative… Relying on counsel’s affirmation that we have been doing things correctly.”

A voice which sounds like CEDC Board member Mike Vertetis derisively says that responding further won’t “quiet the chance to run off at the lip a bit in front of the paper.”

CEDC Board member Greg Fingar chimes in that Baer and [Ancram Supervisor Art] Bassin are “both retired,” so they should be able to attend meetings. Bartolotta demands to know whether the two are up for re-election next year, echoing an insinuation from a previous meeting by CEDC President David Crawford—and Ginsberg’s project engineer—that “this is all political.”

Perhaps more illuminating than Howard’s whopper is that the rest of the CEDC Board did not utter a word of correction, though Baer’s specific request has been widely reported and commented upon in the past few months.

Bassin: Crawford should resign from CEDC

2014-10-19T18:23:49-04:00

In an email circulated to his Board colleagues last week, Ancram Supervisor Art Bassin called for the resignation of David Crawford, President of the Columbia Economic Development Corporation (CEDC).

Crawford’s engineering and planning firm, Crawford & Associates, is handling permitting and engineering work for Ginsberg’s Foods’ proposal for a 300,000-square-foot facility in Ghent and Claverack, which has received substantial financial and marketing support from CEDC.

David Crawford

David Ginsberg preceded Crawford as President of CEDC, remaining on its Board (according to its minutes) until October 2013, well after the agency had decided to apply for $1.5 million in funding for the Ginsberg project. Ginsberg’s Food also has had a $400,000, 1%-interest loan from CEDC; the loans term overlapped the tenures of both Ginsberg and Crawford. Finally, CEDC has come under fire for voting to give 33 acres of land to Ginsberg’s for just $1.

Bassin’s email calling for Crawford’s resignation treats the controversy about the Ginsberg’s project as mostly a perception problem needing a cosmetic fix, writing that

The negative reactions to the Ginsberg project seem to be related to the apparent conflicts of interest associated with Mr. Ginsberg’s past role on the CEDC board, and Mr. Crawford's current role as both chair of the CEDC Board and president of the engineering firm advising Mr. Ginsberg on the project.

In this context, the proposal from CEDC to sell the 33 acres for $1 and the 1% $400,000 loan made years ago to Ginsberg's has triggered ethics and legal concerns, and has exposed the project to additional scrutiny.

Chairman Grattan’s letter suggesting CEDC repay the County for the $114,000 County cost of the 33 acres, and his decision to chair a special committee to review the relationship between the County and CEDC, are steps in the right direction, but do not go far enough to clear the air surrounding this project.

While CEDC Executive Director Ken Flood has claimed that Crawford stayed out of all votes and discussions about the Ginsberg’s project, the agency’s minutes suggest otherwise. Meanwhile, CEDC has rebuffed a written request from Hilldale Supervisor Art Baer that CEDC provide a legal opinion verifying that the $1 transaction meets ethical muster.

In addition to having Crawford resign, Bassin proposes two additional steps:

CEDC responds to Supervisor Bear’s [sic—Baer] request for an opinion letter stating the proposed sale of the 33 acres for $1 is consistent with NYS legal and ethical standards, and the ethical standards of the CEDC.
CEDC requests Mr. Ginsberg to pay the full fair market value of the 33 acres.

Opposition to the land deal and concern about an additional $660,000 property tax break pending before the County Industrial Development Agency has spread from neighbors, taxpayers, citizens organizations and independent news sites to the editorial boards of both of the County’s print newspapers, The Register-Star and Columbia Paper.

Opposition has also come from two neighboring farms, whose owners have apparently filed an Article 78 against the Ghent and Claverack Planning Boards.

As the issue has heated up, BOS chair Pat Grattan has called for the company to reimburse the County for its land purchase at the 1997 price of $109,950 (plus related costs), which would amount to only 40% of the land’s current appraised and assessed values. Another recent applicant to CEDC, a local farm, was required to borrow $50,000 for a piece of land nearly six times smaller than the Ginsberg’s plot, and pay 10% interest on the loan.

Members of the Ginsberg clan have told this site and other sources that they do not intend to pay for the land, harrumphing that opposition to the project will not diminish even if they do.

The Columbia County Board of Supervisors does not directly control CEDC. But several Supervisors serve as trustees, and the bulk of its funding comes from the County.