Behind the Adirondack Park’s battles, a nuanced conversation
Over the last week, I’ve had emails from mainstream pro-development groups claiming that environmentalists are trying to “demonize” them and derail economic progress in the Adirondack Park.
I’ve also received press releases from some of the region’s biggest green groups, claiming that they’ve been “harassed” and “bullied” by pro-development groups.
After years of relatively healthy detente, and even a certain amount of collegiality between the various interests shaping the Park’s future, the gloves appear to be coming off.
There are a couple of big reasons why this is so. Foremost is the fact that the stakes are higher than ever.
Environmentalists want to close the deal on the Finch and Follensby conservation projects, expanding the forest preserve by more than 70,000 acres.
There are strong indications that they want much of that acreage protected under “wilderness” status, the most restrictive classification.
On the other side of the fence, economic development interests are pushing hard for the Adirondack Park Agency to approve the Big Tupper resort, the largest single development of its kind ever proposed inside the blue line.
Backers of the project see it as an economic engine for an increasingly depressed corner of the North Country. They also see this as a test of the APA, with the outcome indicating whether or not the Park is open for business.
All of this is set against a backdrop of declining small towns and double-digit unemployment, factors which inevitably raise the blood pressure level of everyone concerned.
Exacerbating the new tension is the fact that Albany is providing fewer and fewer dollars for the Park, which means that everyone feels more vulnerable.
But even as partisans on both sides hurl barbs back and forth, it’s important to nod once at the fact that much of the conversation inside the Blue Line remains neighborly, nuanced and civil.
Yes, many local government officials want more development, but they are also far greener and far more sensitive to the unique dynamics of the Park than when I first arrived here thirteen years ago.
Yes, a lot of environmentalists hate the Adirondack Club and Resort project, but there is also a growing effort in many groups to participate in economic and community development efforts.
A decade ago when I asked many greenies about the dangers of closing grocery stores and shuttered schools, I got blank stares. But now community sustainability is a major topic for environmental groups.
Behind the scenes, there are new levels of cooperation between snowmobile clubs and environmental leaders.
One of the biggest logging operations in the Park is happening on land owned by the Adirondack Nature Conservancy.
And a growing number of local government leaders and pro-business groups are open in their acceptance of the APA as a legitimate referee when it comes to granting permits for controversial projects.
Meanwhile, all sides are participating in pushing key demands in Albany, including adequate funding for stewardship and recreation projects, and continued payment of property taxes on forest preserve lands.
That’s a lot of cooperation for a Park that usually gets attention for its internal battles.
The truth, of course, is that some activists on both sides don’t like this kind of moderation. They view developers as scoundrels. They see environmentalists as green whackos. They think APA officials are thugs.
And yes, there is a danger that increasing polarization could disrupt important, ongoing partnerships. That question will be tested over the next year, as we get some answers on Big Tupper and the Finch deal.
But when you push past the headlines and the hot-blooded press releases, I think we’ll find that a lot of these ties and relationships are tougher, more enduring, and more productive than people realize.
Tags: adirondacks, environment
As far as the Tupper Lake thing is concerned, I only have one question.
If this project is approved and starts, is it bonded so that if the old man Foxman dies it will go forward without the Tupper Lake residents being stuck with the cost of money invested in a dead White Elephant?
As to the larger issues mentioned by Brian M., the problem here in the Adirondacks is too many old people (mostly men) on both sides of the debate.
In fact, the number one problem faced by the USA is too many old men in power. One foot in the grave and just like Gaddafi, they fight to hold on to power.
Pete,
Foxman is pursuing the permit because it has great value. It is widely suspected (and not denied by him) that he intends to sell the property as soon as the permitting process is approved.
Erb and Pete- you need to expand your news reading beyond NCPR. The ACR project is designed NOT to be a white elephant for either the town or village and there are more investors and developers beyond Mr Foxman- who continues to prove his support of Tupper Lake.
I agree with Pete — too many old men and women are making all the calls. How many will be around in 10 years?
Mark, And who are these investors and developers beyond Mr Foxman? Like Mr Lawson who can’t seem to pay his utility bills and taxes? And how is Foxman continuing to prove his support of Tupper Lake? Like not paying his property and school taxes for over 3 yrs until he was forced to?
If this project gets approved who is going to run the ski slope? I guarantee it won’t be Foxman and company.
It’s no secret that if and when this is approved Foxman will sell the great camp lands and exit town with his proceeds. Lawson will be left holding the bag for a development he admits he would not have invested in if he had know more about it at the time.
On the division of opinions – just look at the proponents for the project and you will see that they are 100% made up of skiers or local business owners who think (wrongly) that they will have a windfall from this project. Won’t they be surprised when the trucks come rolling into town with materials and workers from far far away.
Mark,
I’ve been following Foxman’s utterances pretty closely and as far as I know he has never committed to being in it for the long run. If you can find a source where he puts to rest the rumors that he will sell after permitting, I’d be interested to see it.
@Pete, don’t be ignorant. your questions have been answered time and time again, perhaps if you showed up and participated and asked questions during the countless public forums that have been held in TL over the past 7 years you would know this answer. You have the gall to compare him to Gaddafi?? wow, just wow!
@rockydog- it is widely known and admitted that foxman will not run the ski slope and instead will look to experienced ski resort managers to handle day to day operations.
@Jim-Don’t be holier then thou. have you ever missed a payment? does it look bad? yeah i’ll give you that, but has it been seized for taxes, no. Grow up, and stop grasping at straws
erb is correct, no one expects foxman to stick around forever, but Lawson seems to be in it for the haul and i know they would not have taken it this far without making sure investors were ready to step in once permits are issued, that’s just common business sense.
It is really pathetic that some of you keep asking the same questions over and over again when they have been answered repeatedly. just because you don’t like the answer doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Does it really make any difference whether Foxman is the ultimate developer or he sells to another developer? Too much chatter about irrelevant details. The key is that “someone”, anyone, is willing and motivated to invest in stimulating the Tupper Lake economy. To the person who asked if the project would include a performance bond; if the APA and local government are doing their jobs, they will require a performance bond from any developer of a project of the scale of the ACR. Failing to do so would be negligent. The bigger question that should be asked is why the greenies believe that there isn’t enough forest preserve land in which they can play. Sure protected habitats, endangered species, fresh waters all need protection. Otherwise, private property is still private property in the ADKs. One should be able to use their land as they see fit with respect for the environment.
Mark,
It seems curious that someone who has the best interests of Tupper Lake at heart has no intention of staying with the project. I mean, if it’s so attractive, why sell it?
Mark,(7:53) You are wrong about the APA and local governments. the APA has no authority to require the developer to secure a performance bond. As far as local government, they will do whatever this developer asks of them and you can be sure he won’t be asking if he needs a performance bond. And I,m sure with his financial background he couldn’t get one anyway.
Brian Mann writes: “All of this is set against a backdrop of declining small towns and double-digit unemployment, factors which inevitably raise the blood pressure level of everyone concerned.”
The median income for a household in the village of Tupper Lake is $31,654. The median income for a household in Ogdensburg is $27,954. Need I add that Ogdensburg is outside the Blue Line.
We need to recognize that the existence of the Park and the amount of state land in it is not the whole story behind why it’s small towns are declining– that is happening in rural areas throughout the country, and has been for decades. Everybody wants to find a villain to blame their problems on, but just because the APA and the “greenies” are made to order for that role, don’t make it so.
Walker – It’s only fair to point out though that the salary difference you point to is caused entirely by the presence of government-sector jobs, not a robust private sector.
–Brian, NCPR
Brian M,
Let’s be fair and point out the Bronx has a higher unemployment rate than up here.
Let’s all whine together about how everyone is rich in NYC and we are so poor up here.
Brian Mann, Ogdensburg also has a State prison located there which is a major souce of government jobs. So that shouldn’t be a big factor in the salary difference.
Brian, the point is that if the only factor killing the private sector in Tupper Lake was the APA and the high proportion of state land in the region, then you’d expect Ogdensburg to be booming relative to Tupper. Why isn’t it?
Or let’s take the state out of it: the median income for a household in Indian Lake is $32,328; for Moira, it’s $26,393.
Most reasonable people seem to understand that tourism is the key to this areas economic future, it’s “economic engine” as some say. It is all ready. Environmental groups seem to understand this. At least they use it as one of the reasons they support adding additional public land to the Forest Preserve. The only problem with the argument is that development is key to getting and keeping the “engine” running. Projects like ACR or others on the adjacent private land are the only way to turn the Forest Preserve into a money making asset. Look at the shore of Lake Placid you can make it work. The only problem I can see with ACR is the same problem we see with the Whiteface Lodge project, not enough waterfront development as part of the project. People don’t want to be stuck in the woods.
To dontdefundnpr: If all the questions have been answered already why is the APA preparing for their largest Adjudicatory hearing in their history? (Largest by far in fact) Secondly, equating missing a payment to Foxman and Lawsons record is way off. When F-man is out in the public claiming everyones taxes will go down when the ACR is built and at the same time not paying his own taxes on those very same ACR properties people should be suspicious. Especially when the amount was over $150,000. ?See the article in the Plattsburgh Press Republican from July 2009. Or go to the Franklin county dot org website and see how much Lawson is behind in his taxes, somewhere north of $35000. at last count. Or ask the Village of Tupper Lake Elec Dept why they had to remove the electric meter from his house for non payment of his Electric bill in April 2010. I know all the supporters of ACR will trivialize these issues but I think they are a major cause for concern. Remember Foxmans Sunrise Savings and Loan failure in Florida in the 80’s. He cost the US taxpayers over 680 MILLION DOLLARS, see St Petersburg Times article August 10, 1988.
Walker,
Because NY is an overregulated and overtaxed state.
“Look at the shore of Lake Placid you can make it work.”
I am not sure many would agree that Lake Placid (the actual Lake) is the example we should be using for Adirondack development. You can count in feet the area of that lake where you are not assaulted by large development projects. Very few of which seem to have given any thought to their surroundings.
“The only problem with the argument is that development is key to getting and keeping the “engine” running. ”
The issue is the type of development needed. Large resorts are not the only way to capitalize on a natural resource.
The entity issuing the site plan permit or subdivision permit with conditions has the authority to require a performance bond to ensure completion of those conditions.
Scratchy, that explains what? How?
“Large resorts are not the only way to capitalize on a natural resource.”
Dave I agree. Lake Placid was developed piecemeal without this controversy. Lake George is another good example.
I agree that Lake Placid is not the perfect model but it is an example of an area that is capitalizing on the tourist economy.
Give us your ideas on how to capitalize on the natural resource in away that will create income for Adirondack residents?
walker,
High taxes and burdensome regulations hurt the north country economy.
So scratchy, how does that explain why Indian Lake is doing better than Moira?
The APA is not preparing for an adjudicatory hearing.
Actually, property taxes tend to be lower in the Adirondacks than other parts of the state. Also there tends to be fewer regulations in the Adirondacks.
Want regulations? Move to NYC. At least we can still smoke outside in the Adirondacks.
I don’t think I’ve ever been to Moira, so I don’t know. Indian Lake really doesn’t seem all that prosperous, though I admit I don’t go there very often. I’ld say Lake Placid, Saranac Lake, Old Forge, Lake George, and Tupper Lake are the areas in the Park where you’ve seen some economic activity in recent years.
Pete, maybe. I own land in the several places in the Adirondacks and both of them have higher tax rates than the land I own outside the park. Not much higher, but higher still.
I doubt that you would have a hearing like the have with ACR and the environmental groups outside the blue line?
Sure there are questions but nothing like this?
Brian M.: “The truth, of course, is that some activists on both sides don’t like this kind of moderation. They view developers as scoundrels. They see environmentalists as green whackos. They think APA officials are thugs.”
I don’t belive this is true. I know people on boards of environmental groups who work with developers to buld their own camps and I know pretty extreme property rights types who will readily admit that the APA does some good.
As to the Tupper Lake development, I hope the residents of Tupper have a back-up plan. People need to have a very clear-eyed view of this type of thing. Big Tupper just isn’t a big enough mountain, doesn’t have appropraite terrain, and isn’t close enough to population centers to be viable as a huge draw for winter sports. It might do fine as a mom&pop resort and that would certainly help the economy of TL. And the initial investment in construction would help the community briefly, b ut it isn’t a long-term solution to the economic problems of the area.
People need to stop looking for white-knights from outside to come and save them and learn to do something well and sell that product or service. Then there can be less emotional and more well-reasoned debates about projects like Big Tupper.
Paul,
If property taxes are so high here, then why do people move here to retire?
Pete, I was just saying what the comparative rates were. I assume that retirees don’t care that the that the taxes are high. I own land in the Adirondacks despite the rates. If I lived there I probably could not afford the same land. I have to live where I can make a living. I wish that it was different.
Property taxes are high because there is a lack of business to help out.
Here is a little information you might find interesting.
At last week’s meeting of the Local Government Review Board, there was some discussion on working forests and its future in the Adirondacks.
How does the Adirondacks compare to Maine when it comes to taxing working forests?
The 480 and 480a were mentioned at the Review Board meeting but it was felt the Maine model offers a better deal to reduce land taxes.
What is Maine is doing? In a word, it is confusing. Maine doesn’t assess working forest land. It assess the growth rate, county by county, of pine, hardwood and mixed pine and hardwood. This can range from a low of $105 per acre for hardwood to a high of $428 per acre for pine.
The link is http://www.maine.gov/revenue/rules/pdf/rule%20202_finalamend_Feb11.pdf
Even more interesting is how Maine permits any landowner to reduce their open space property taxes.
OPEN SPACE
No minimum acreage requirement with this program! Any property owner may apply for tax reduction. However, minimum areas and setbacks must be excluded from classification.
The tract must be preserved or restricted in use to provide a public benefit. Benefits recognized include public recreation, scenic resources, game management or wildlife habitat.
The municipal assessor is responsible for determining the valuation placed on Open Space land. In the determination of the value of open space land, the assessor must consider the sale price that a particular open space parcel would command in the open market if it were to remain in the particular category or categories of open space land for which it qualifies.
If an assessor is unable to determine the valuation of a parcel of open space land based on the valuation method above, the assessor may use the Alternate Valuation Method. Using this method, the assessor reduces the fair market value of an open space land parcel by the cumulative percentage reduction for which the land is eligible according to certain categories. Those categories are as follows: Ordinary Open Space – 20% reduction; Permanently Protected – 30% reduction; Forever Wild – 20% reduction; Public Access – 25% reduction.
In other words, if the property met all of the above requirements, the owner would see a cumulative reduction of up to 95% on the classified land!
If the property no longer qualifies as Open Space, then a penalty would be assessed using the same methodology as is used for removal from Tree Growth classification.