Engage Mid-Hudson: Bad for You, Bad for Me

 I sent this email to David Church, Orange County (New York) commissioner of planning, and Thomas Madden, planner for the Town of Greenburgh.  Church and Madden led an Agenda-21-inspired regional planning charade called "Engage Mid-Hudson." The plan is packed with lies and superstition.  Church and Madden are front men for Andrew Cuomo and Barack Obama, who are pushing for regional plans that aim to destroy Americans' living standards through ill-considered environmental regulation.  Cutting carbon emissions by some predetermined amount is based on ignorant, junk science advocated in places like The New York Times by badly educated "environmental scientists" who are ill equipped to evaluate the limits of their own training.  Ms. Muller is the public relations officer for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which funded 10 regional organizations with $10 million each to draft half-baked regional environmental plans. The Engage Mid-Hudson plan is here.

Dear Messrs. Church and Madden and Ms. Muller:

I am writing an article for The Lincoln Eagle, an 18,000-circulation monthly paper in Kingston, NY, concerning Engage Mid-Hudson’s regional green plan (executive summary attached) that was released in May.  I have a few questions for you.  Please address these concerns either in writing or by telephone:

(1)    “(The plan) was developed through a consensus-building process. “  At the initial meeting there were a number of protestors who voiced concerns about the plan. The plan does not address their concerns. At one point in the initial meeting you threatened to evict those who were disagreeing, although you rescinded that threat.  You did not appoint any who disagreed to officer positions, reserving your organization’s formal appointments  for connected retired IBM employees like Herb Oringel and other corporate-and-government insiders.  Although you ultimately were cordial in the initial meeting, the plan is misleading because it does not mention the sharp disagreement that was made evident to you and that you have failed to address.  This is also evident on your group’s website, which asks for reactions to the plan but does not permit a negative reaction. 

There is no consensus, and your plan’s claim that there is is a falsehood.  In particular Lynn Teger’s group Citizens for the Protection of Property Rights in the Mid Hudson Region was excluded from the process. If you wish to contact Ms. Teger, she can be reached at teger.lynn@gmail.com . If you do not wish to contact her for her group’s input, I would appreciate an explanation as to your selective choices as to who got to be invited to your charade.  IBMers, yes. Property rights activists, no.  There is no consensus because major opponents of your “non-binding”  plan were excluded.

(2)    You claim that carbon emissions cause global warming.  Yet, here is a graph of 5 million years of climate change, and current temperatures are well below those of five million years ago, when there were no human carbon emissions.  How is it possible that the climate is now cooler than it was before humans existed if climate warming  is anthropogenic?  If you do not know the answer, please explain why you claim to know the sources of climate change in your report, but really you, your consulting firm, Francis Murray, Andrew Cuomo,  climate scientists, and the environmental movement are ignorant about it.

(3)    You make the claim that you aim to “reduce the region’s overall contribution to climate change.” Please produce empirical evidence of any kind that specifically shows that the Catskills and Hudson Valley region make any significant contribution to climate change.  On what factual evidence other than hearsay from your consulting firm and the ignorant parties previously noted do you base this claim?

(4)    How much did you pay Ecology and Environment, Inc. to frame this plan?  The plan is a knock-off of other ICLEI-and-Agenda 21-based plans; a monkey could have copied it off other plans for free.  Please explain why 300 people who supposedly participated in this planning process came up with a model that already exists in hundreds of plans around the world.
 

(5)    In the 1930s, there were the dust bowl storms, which were worse than any storms occurring now.  Please provide me with evidence of this claim: “Critically, climate change can impact the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. The Mid-Hudson Region is already challenged by extreme weather events, particularly flooding, as evidenced in the recent hurricanes Irene and Sandy. “  Was Sandy the first hurricane or storm to affect the region? I think not.  In 1821 a hurricane made landfall in New York, flooding Manhattan to Canal Street. 

(6)    Your report lacks evidence of an understanding of cost-benefit tradeoffs.  Even if windstorms increase by 50%, is that a rationale to curtail living standards by 50%? Please clarify how you calculated the tradeoffs in the report’s many far-fetched, extreme claims, such as that there is a need to reduce automobile use or to force people in rural settings to move to urban ones.

(7)    You write that the region needs to “become radically less energy and fossil fuel intensive while strengthening the regional economy.” Please provide data or empirical evidence that the region needs to become less energy and fuel intensive.   There is no evidence that the regional economy can become stronger without fossil fuels. You implicitly make the claim that it is possible, but there is no empirical evidence that it is.  Please provide some.  You wild, unverified claims amount to superstition, not intelligent policy making.

(8)    The reduction in available farmland was caused by a massive building binge that was funded through sub-prime mortgage lending.  Earlier, the Federal Reserve Bank expanded the money supply over a century, in part to fund energy-intensive centralized agriculture, suburban development, and the automobile industry.  Could you please mention that Andrew Cuomo in 1993 had proposed expansion of home building to include sub-prime borrowers, which led to increased use of farmland for home building and ultimately harmed the financial industry? First, Cuomo advocated massive expansion of private home ownership.  Now he is attacking private home ownership.  Can you please reconcile these wild vacillations in the direction of Mr. Cuomo’s maelstrom?

(9)     You write that you aim to “foster economic development” and “make all growth smart growth.”  The term “smart growth" is vacuous and nonsensical.  Historically, economic growth occurs in the absence of government regulation.  I do not believe that you or your crew of IBM bureaucrats have the slightest idea as to how to foster economic growth.

The best way for New York to grow is to abolish Engage Mid-Hudson and fire three quarters of New York’s vampire government.  Would you please explain your track record in fostering economic development in a state that has lagged the national economic performance for decades? To be precise: What do you know about economic development?  Is Orange County successful in developing economically compared to North Dakota or other carbon energy-developing states?

(10) You make the claim that tourism can strengthen the area’s economy. Do you have any evidence that you know how to develop tourism?  You remind me of the film Roger and Me in which Flint, Michigan attempts to turn itself into a tourist mecca. They succeeded in further damaging their blighted economy--which was not as blighted as New York’s.

(11) Engage Mid-Hudson has no authority to pass legislation or regulation, yet you write in terms of targets. How can you implement targets if you have no authority?

US ParksService's Alma Ripps on Maurice Hinchey's Hudson Valley Federal Park Proposal

Alma Ripps of the US Parks Service has responded to my inquiry concerning the implications of Congressman Maurice Hinchey's HR 4003, which would begin a process of federalizing the Hudson Valley, as follows:

Mr. Langbert,

Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding legislation introduced by Representative Maurice Hinchey, H.R. 4003, which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of resources in the Hudson River Valley in the State of New York. I apologize for the tardiness in responding to your inquiry. As you can imagine, it is sometimes difficult to reach people during the holiday season to provide information.

The bill does not propose to establish a park in the Hudson River Valley, rather, it would (if enacted) initiate a study to determine whether any resources in the region meet the criteria for potential congressional designation. Such studies determine whether resources are nationally significant, suitable for inclusion into the National Park System, feasible to administer, and require management by the National Park Service versus being able to be managed by others. At the conclusion of a study (which normally takes two or more years), if resources in the region are found to meet these criteria, separate legislation would need to be enacted by Congress to establish a unit of the National Park System.

The Department of the Interior does not take an official position on pending legislation until a hearing by a congressional committee is conducted. To date, no hearing has been scheduled on this bill.

Since a study of the Hudson River Valley has not even been authorized, much less concluded, it would be premature to offer any conjecture on what the implications of establishing a unit of the National Park System in the region might entail. The first question, of course, is whether one or more resources would meet the criteria indicated above. Even when a study does determine that resources qualify for congressional consideration for establishment of a unit (although most do not), alternatives to National Park Service management must be explored and detailed in the study report.

Today, there are various models of units of the National Park System ranging from the traditional model where the National Park Service owns and manages a resource to those where we have limited or no ownership interest and work with partners for the continued protection of natural or cultural resources and to promote public understanding of their importance to the nation through education and interpretation. An example of the latter model is the Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area where we partner with state and nonprofit organizations and provide financial, technical and interpretive assistance. We also have affiliated areas of the National Park System which we do not manage, but provide financial and technical
assistance to those organizations that protect the resource. A study permits us to tailor the appropriate model to the resource(s), assuming that the criteria for potential designation have first been met.

Should a study of the Hudson River Valley be authorized by Congress, an extensive public involvement process would accompany the study since public support for any potential designation is a key aspect of the feasibility analysis. A study must also provide an analysis of environmental, cultural and socio-economic impacts of a unit of the National Park System should one be determined eligible for establishment.

Since you mentioned the Catskills and the Adirondacks, we assume you understand that the regulatory policies affecting those two regions were enacted by the New York State Legislature and are administered by agencies of the State, not the federal government. Currently, we have a cooperative relationship with the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area which was established by Congress in 1996. No unique federal regulations apply to this area because of that designation, although the National Park Service provides financial and technical assistance to the heritage area.

We hope the above information has been helpful and that you will understand that we are not in a position to provide detailed answers to your questions since we have not commenced a study of the region to determine if a unit of the National Park System could be established in the Hudson River Valley.

Thank you for your interest in the National Park Service. Please contact me if you have further questions.

Alma

Will Cap and Trade Abolish Your Home Equity Value?

Jim Crum had sent me a copy of the Cap and Trade bill. Notice section 202, which creates a federal regulatory authority over home energy standards. The authority could not be controlled by state or local government. What would stop the regulator from establishing insulation standards that are so expensive that your home equity is reduced or eliminated? What would stop them from establishing regulations that force homeowners in rural areas to move to cities, creating large, empty parks regions? Might Congressman Hinchey's recent proposal to turn the Hudson Valley into a federal park dovetail with section 202 of the Cap and Trade proposal?

US Park Service: Legal Ramifications of Hudson Valley Park Unknowable

In response to the November 3rd Kingston Freeman article stating that Maurice Hinchey has proposed a bill to turn the Hudson Valley into a federal park, I have (a) contacted Congressman Hinchey's office for a copy of the bill and (b) inquired with the National Parks Service as to the legal implications of designating the Hudson Valley a national park.

In the Adirondack Park, a state park, construction of new septic tanks has been largely stopped and much residential construction is limited or illegal. New jobs rarely enter the Adirondack Park. If a citizen of Long Lake, Blue Mountain Lake or Speculator wants to start a business of any stature, they will have to move elsewhere. In the Town of Olive, New York City and State own about 70 percent of the land, so development is largely impossible. The city reservoir is located in Olive.

In the future, stricter regulations concerning wood burning, hunting and home sales are likely to ensue from various federal laws, specifically including the "cap and trade" proposal currently before Congress. Thus, law directly governing many ordinary citizens, specifically including those adhering to "alternative" lifestyles, farming, communal living and the like can easily become directly affected.

The following is an exchange I had with a representative of the US Park Service who says it is unknowable how much flexibility the Park Service will have in implementing regulation--or how responsive they will have to be to various external pressure groups. For example, Congressman Hinchey is a direct recipient of campaign contributions from numerous political action committees (PACs) in the agribusiness field. Might there be a tie-in between Hinchey's agribusiness interests and his focus on instituting park regulations?

Langbert: I live in the Catskills about 25 miles from Kingston, NY. In the November 3 issue of the Kingston Freeman, a local newspaper, there was an article that stated that Congressman Maurice Hinchey has proposed a bill to turn the Hudson Valley into a national park. I have a number of questions for you as the article was not descriptive the effects of this policy.

a. What regulations normally accompany the establishment of a federal park in a developed region? Here in New York we have the Catskill Park, in which I happen to live, and the Adirondack Park. There are regulations that apply in the Catskill and Adirondack Parks that do not apply elsewhere.

b. Do you have a model or a developed set of regulations for another park region that would be similar to the regulations that would be put into effect should the Hinchey bill pass?

c. What would be the effect of establishing a park on economic freedom in the following areas:

--building houses
--building septic tanks
--sale of real estate
--liens on property not deemed environmentally acceptable?

d. Would there be an effect on construction such as limitations on the amount of real estate development, and/or restrictions on how sewage systems are designed, and/or limits on size, drainage and other environmental effects of real estate construction?

e. Would there be effects on hunting, the introduction of wildlife, the use of firearms and/or on fishing.

Park Service: DEAR MR. LANGBERT: Thank you for your thoughtful inquiry regarding the proposed study of the suitability and feasibility of creating some form of national park system unit in the Hudson River Valley. I note that Congressman Hinchey's bill would require the NPS to examine approaches that would (1) encompass large areas of non-Federal lands within their designated boundaries, (2) foster public and private collaborative arrangements for achieving National Park Service objectives, and (3) protect and respect the rights of private land owners. I have referred your inquiry to others who have been working more closely on this particular issue, and they will respond as soon as possible to your specific questions.


Langbert: Are parks normally governed through regulation rather than law? In other words, what would you say is the ratio of regulation to law? I used to work with pension plans and the regulation/law ratio might have been 40-60 or something like that. What would you say it is in parks governance? Thanks, Mitchell.

Park Service: MR. LANGBERT: As of right now, there are 392 units in the National Park System. They range in size from less than an acre to several millions of acres. Each one has its own mission or purpose for existing, usually as defined by Congress. The parks are governed by a combination of laws, regulations, and policies that work in tandem, and I do not generally think
of them as applying in any particular ratio. The laws, regulations, and policies that would apply to a particular park will also vary, depending on the resources and values that characterize the park, and depending on any particular instructions that the law that established a park has imparted to us. I would invite you to visit the Office of Policy website at www.nps.gov/policy and browse through the wide range of laws, regulations, and policies that come into play. In particular, you might want to look at the Introduction and chapter 1 of NPS Management Policies 2006 (http://www.nps.gov/policy/mp/policies.html), which provide a pretty good context for understanding how we manage the National Park System

Langbert: Thank you very much for the information. I really appreciate it. If you hear anything else from your contacts please let me know. Thanks again.

Hinchey Aims to Bureaucratize Hudson River

Glenda McGee just sent me this article about Congressman Maurice Hinchey's plan to turn the Hudson Valley into a national park. I can imagine that the right to re-hab your house, put in a new bathroom, or sneeze without permission from the goose steppers in Washington will be eliminated.

Adam Bosch of the Times Herald Record writes:

"KINGSTON — Congressman Maurice Hinchey wants the federal government to adopt the Hudson River Valley as a unit of the National Park Service.

"The designation would make the valley eligible for more federal grants to boost conservation, historic preservation and tourism."

Catalano Re-Elected Ulster County Republican Chair

Mario Catalano, a dentist, has been re-elected chair of the Ulster County Republican Committee. I am a member and was privileged to vote for Catalano at last Thursday evening's meeting. Also, the Committee approved a new version of its by-laws.

Mr. Catalano noted that the speaker at the Committee's fundraiser dinner in October will be Rudy Giuliani, whom I hope runs for governor. Tickets are selling fast, and I hope I can get one.

There was a minor conflict between supporters of the prior chair, Pete Savago, and Catalano. However, in the vote on the by-laws and the re-election of the committee officers, only three members opposed and the rest of the more than 85 members in attendance supported Catalano's positions. Debate and disagreement are healthy.

Mr. Catalano is charming, affable, brilliant and articulate. He is also very handsome and reminds me of Burt Lancaster. I was impressed not only with his presentation and expert conduct of the meeting, but also with the entire committee. Many of the county's best and brightest were in attendance and the evening afforded me an excellent opportunity to meet capable and intelligent people. James Quigley, III, a CPA, treasurer of the Committee and the member who made the motion for Catalano's re-nomination, bought everyone an open bar. The meeting was held at the Hillside Manor in Kingston, NY. Their website features a rendition of "Ashokan Farewell".

Declining Integrity Hurts Small Business

Alexandra, my wife's friend from Woodstock, just mentioned that many of the small businesses in the Hudson Valley/Catskills region are dishonest. In fact, it took me ten years to rehab my house in West Shokan in the Town of Olive, and almost as long to find honest craftsmen--an honest, competent plumber who knows how to design a heating system; a responsible electrician; a sober landscaper who does the work efficiently and intelligently; a mason who shows up and does a competent job quickly; a carpenter who finishes the job; a roofer who does not allow tar to spill over the side of the roof and knows that the problems are in the corners and details; and a snow plow guy who shows up punctually when it snows. Along the way I met a builder who took almost two years to re-work my bathroom (including an extension) and disappeared when I objected to the cost's becoming four times his original estimate; a landscaper who went way over budget and called me dishonest for objecting; another landscaper who left a new septic tank sitting on my front yard for almost a year; and a mason who never finished the job.

Without going into details excessively, I learned that requesting references chases away the worst perpetrators (several of them simply disappeared when I requested references) and to get all estimates in writing.

Although construction may be the worst venue, dishonesty seems to be common now. I have seen this in northern New York (Potsdam) as well, and I do not believe it to be a regional pattern. Rather, I suspect that ethics are on the decline.

That is unfortunate. Small business can offer a lot that big business cannot: good relationships, superior service, and understanding local needs. But the lure of the quick buck blinds too many of us from the traditional path of building a reputation through fair dealing. Unfortunately, big business has contributed to this moral climate. I do not believe that a business can become big by being dishonest. But once big, businesses too often utilize their market power in questionable ways. This should open up competitive avenues for small business. But instead of seeing the opportunity in quality, too many entrepreneurs see the opportunity in emulating corporate managers in seeking the quick buck.

The Catskills never seems to develop (which incidentally is fine with me now that my house is built and I have a good list of contractors). I think one reason is the failed moral attitude whereby money and short term gain are put before integrity. Show me an honest culture and I will show you a successful one.

Hudson Valley Republican Liberty Caucus to Meet on 11-18

I just received this from Carl Svensson:

I've updated this Meetup. For more details, see the full listing:

http://rlc.meetup.com/120/calendar/9103419/

When: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:00 PM

Where: College Diner
500 Main St
New Paltz, NY 12561
845-255-5040

If the changes affect your plans to attend, please take a moment to update your RSVP. (You can RSVP "No" or "Maybe" as well as "Yes".)

You can always get in touch with me through the "Contact Organizer" link on Meetup: http://rlc.meetup.com/120/suggestion/