For the past three years we at Niagara County Community College have witnessed an insidiously enervating assault on collegiality and educational progress. The Klyzek administration, backed by a myopic Board of Trustees, has conspired to take control of “education” at the college. Their strategy is to destroy the faculty union and probably return the college to the obsolete vision of community college as job training facility for local business and industry. Should they be successful they will not only ruin a college but pound the last nail in the coffin of a citizenry crying out for an institution in which the kind of general education can be obtained that frees and prepares its students for life in the citizenry, autonomously, responsibly and democratically.
Apparently out of touch with the most obvious of trends in community college education for the sake of saving a few budget dollars, the administration and Board of Trustees are foolishly at the brink of dismantling what has taken 40 years to build in Niagara County. While at last survey 52% of college students enjoy their first two years of a liberal arts education at a community college, the trend does not seem to be declining. They receive a background of general education that helps them decide upon their future direction in life while experiencing a range of courses that serve as indispensable building blocks for personal development and growth as citizens. They receive the benefits of reduced tuition and the availability of faculty for one on one counseling, tutoring and academic inspiration through close contact in and out of the class room. This advantage is now being threatened BY the technocratic managerial ideology of the Klyzek administration.
Community colleges themselves have grown from technical schools of training to preparatory liberal arts institutions rivaling the first two years of college at any local and some of the best 4 year colleges in the nation. As an example of this I will speak of my own experience. After completing my Ph.D. at UB in Philosophy with a specializiation in the work of the German philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer as applied to problems in learning and teaching, I was hired at NCCC as the replacement philosophy instructor. I had had several years of part time teaching at ECC, North and South, Medaille and UB. I had also completed master’s level work in psychology before completing my work at the doctoral level in philosophy. Now, after having completed my 20th year at N-trip, and having doubled the size of philosophy offerings at the college, not to mention years of continued study, writing and teaching, I am often compared to what a student would receive in philosophy education at UB. I would more often than not be seen as coming up short in this comparison. Even though, more often than not, a first year philosophy student at UB would be taught by a graduate student without a Ph.D., with little or no teaching experience and with much less life experience, education with me at NCCC would be considered less valuable, not as good, in short, inferior. In fact, the truth is, they are getting quite a deal. As compared to most of the educators at UB undergraduate level the education at N-trip is superior.
Moreover, I am a full-time, tenured faculty member. It takes a faculty of full-time professors to create the robust and productive educational institution we now have. But the present administration and undoubtedly a clueless Board of Trustees would eviscerate this faculty and replace it with part-timers most without Ph.D.s. This pennywise pound-foolish strategy is the step-child of managerialism in business. Kept on a shoe-string budget year to year by the county and state, the administration follows an obsessively penurious budgetary monitoring practice that keeps the college in a state of Orwellian oversight if not warfare over funding. The typical Academic Dean is kept running about shuffling papers, troubleshooting and defending the President’s latest money-saving maneuvers to the detriment of his supposed task, improving the quality of education at the college. In light of the mangerialism, every Academic Dean is inevitably turned into an assistant money manager incapable of seeing the educational forest for the budgetary trees.
Because administrative vision at the college has been painfully myopic in my experience since my hiring in 1989, they make mistakes that could have been avoided if they did not, in technocratic arrogance, refuse to listen to faculty. Again I will use my own case as an example. For approximately 15 years I have argued that simply hiring one more full time philosophy professor would give me the time and support to increase philosophy offerings and students that would not simply grow the department of philosophy but also bring in more students. It would in the long run mean more income for the college. Even as it is with only myself as the entire philosophy department, since I have been at the college, the size of philosophy has doubled. With one part timer and myself we offer approximately 10 philosophy sections per semester which includes 4-5 different courses, namely Introduction to Philosophy, Philosophy of Art, Philosophy of Religion, Aesthetics and Political Philosophy. This includes offerings taught online in Introduction to Philosophy, Religion and Politics. If one more full timer in philosophy were hired to work with me we could not only agian nearly double the size of offerings but surely also double the size of the number of students becoming interested in philosophical studies. As it is I am overextended in what I do with no time for program development and improvement. Because philosophy is not seen as producing jobs, they don’t see the value in developing the program. Again they are surely painfully penny wise and pound foolish. The irony is that philosophy done my way would not only improve general education in enhancing our ability to deliver regarding teaching critical thinking but also bring in more students than some of their precious job training problems many of which simply fail.
If the Administration and hapless Board of Trustees, who do not really understand the implications of this needless assault on the faculty, have their way, they will eviscerate the quality of education at the college, permanently destroy any spirit of cooperation and collegiality and demoralize a fine group of educators all in the name of a managerialist ideology that does not believe nor trust that a well-rounded general education guided by an autonomous and responsible faculty is control and guidance enough for the institution to grow qualitatively and otherwise prosper.
The administration wants control of virtually every aspect of education at N-trip. They refuse to see that education is not a business any more than government is a business. Yet they persist for the sake of saving negligible amounts of money in reducing collegiality at N-trip to a situation of academic apartheid. In short all control and decision making, if the Klyzek administration has its way, would reside with a business inspired model of control disenfranchising faculty and placing them at the hands of an autocratic vision of educational leadership.
The recent vote of no confidence in President Klyzek was not a knee-jerk response nor loosely, thoughtlessly used rebuke because we can’t get what we want. It is a red flag that the leadership at the college is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Board of Trustees needs to wake up and smell what roses are left. New dorms and a Culinary Institute do not a college make.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Goldman Sachs or Government Sachs?
[THE FOLLOWING IS COURTESY OF ALTERNET VIA I CITE BLOG:
Why Goldman Sachs Is the Greediest and Most Dastardly of the Wall Street Pigs
(or reason 2, 998 why what the Obama administration is doing is not evidence of socialism but rather evidence of desperate measures to save a dying, greedy capitalism)
......
We could call it late finance capitalism, financial monopoly capitalism, debt capitalism, or, something with a history: Mafioso Capitalism. It's what we called the Russian form that emerged in the shock treatment of privatization as everything public was expropriated. Our version is of course much more extreme and advanced--makes you almost proud to be an American--because it's rooted in expropriating not just current public funds, but private savings (the exsanguination of all savings funds, funds themselves that were part of the buy off of the middle class). So, it's not the return of Mafioso Capitalism, but it's public face--they don't even have to hide it anymore.)
So, while these golden ones are loudly repudiating the $10 billion public subsidy they took from us, they are coyly retaining at least 40 billion of our dollars to stay afloat -- a tidy sum that does not include any restrictions on pay levels. Coincidentally, Goldman has since announced that it is setting aside nearly $5 billion to be distributed at the end of the year as compensation for its executives, including payments for outlandish bonuses for those at the top.
Saying that such-and-such is the greediest bunch of bankers on Wall Street is like someone claiming to have the biggest hairdo in Dallas -- the competition is fierce. But that's quite a head of hair atop Goldman Sachs. Well, sniff the executives, we merely play the game according to the rules we're given.
Sure, and the Mafia plays its game strictly according to Hoyle. The difference is that the Mafia must actually break the rules, while Wall Street simply hires lobbyists and politicians to write the rules.
Indeed, Goldman Sachs has been nicknamed "Government Sachs" by its rivals, for it always seems to have at least one of its top officials strategically placed inside government to bend federal financial rules to its benefit. In the 1990s, for example, two Goldman foxes -- Robert Rubin and Larry Summers -- were inside the Clinton administration henhouse, where they helped craft the deregulation scams that enriched their former banks, before the scams caused the crash of our economy.
Why Goldman Sachs Is the Greediest and Most Dastardly of the Wall Street Pigs
(or reason 2, 998 why what the Obama administration is doing is not evidence of socialism but rather evidence of desperate measures to save a dying, greedy capitalism)
......
We could call it late finance capitalism, financial monopoly capitalism, debt capitalism, or, something with a history: Mafioso Capitalism. It's what we called the Russian form that emerged in the shock treatment of privatization as everything public was expropriated. Our version is of course much more extreme and advanced--makes you almost proud to be an American--because it's rooted in expropriating not just current public funds, but private savings (the exsanguination of all savings funds, funds themselves that were part of the buy off of the middle class). So, it's not the return of Mafioso Capitalism, but it's public face--they don't even have to hide it anymore.)
So, while these golden ones are loudly repudiating the $10 billion public subsidy they took from us, they are coyly retaining at least 40 billion of our dollars to stay afloat -- a tidy sum that does not include any restrictions on pay levels. Coincidentally, Goldman has since announced that it is setting aside nearly $5 billion to be distributed at the end of the year as compensation for its executives, including payments for outlandish bonuses for those at the top.
Saying that such-and-such is the greediest bunch of bankers on Wall Street is like someone claiming to have the biggest hairdo in Dallas -- the competition is fierce. But that's quite a head of hair atop Goldman Sachs. Well, sniff the executives, we merely play the game according to the rules we're given.
Sure, and the Mafia plays its game strictly according to Hoyle. The difference is that the Mafia must actually break the rules, while Wall Street simply hires lobbyists and politicians to write the rules.
Indeed, Goldman Sachs has been nicknamed "Government Sachs" by its rivals, for it always seems to have at least one of its top officials strategically placed inside government to bend federal financial rules to its benefit. In the 1990s, for example, two Goldman foxes -- Robert Rubin and Larry Summers -- were inside the Clinton administration henhouse, where they helped craft the deregulation scams that enriched their former banks, before the scams caused the crash of our economy.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Lewiston Provincialism Obstructs Niagara Regional Progress
Niagara Heritage Partnership has fought for over 12 years to restore the Niagara River gorge to its pristine state in the interest of creating a world class eco-tourist attraction. Local business interests in Lewiston have systematically and probably illegally obstructed progress toward the restoration of the gorge without any real concern for the greater good of the region and Niagara County. The following is an update by advocates for gorge restoration and the necessary removal of the Robert Moses Parkway of the obstacles thrown in their way by the myopic provincialism of the Lewiston business crowd:
ACCORDING TO PARKWAY REMOVAL ADVOCATE Michelle Vanstrom, a Niagara Falls businesswoman from Youngstown and member of the NF Tourism Advisory Board:
"I continue to find it interesting and appalling that decisions by elected and appointed leaders regarding the Robert Moses gorge parkway are continually made without EVER asking the removal advocates to make a presentation.
Why is that? I am perplexed, bemused.
How can anyone, especially when seated in a leadership/advisory position, expect to make an intelligent, well-thought out, informed decision without exerting any effort or desire to review or listen to all sides of an issue? To me, that's an imperative and crucial leadership role.
My statements made to the professor[Mr. Angus] and Mr. Ceretto were facts, not accusations. I don't recall seeing many of you at either Lewiston trolley meeting. Perhaps if had you attended, it might have become clear to you, also, that the trolley was all about Lewiston and only Lewiston and running it on the parkway. You would have heard this stated clearly by the owner of the Barton Hotel. Her statements (and my questions to Mr. Sloma and Mr. Ceretto) are documented, filmed by the local cable channel.
To date, Mr. Angus and Mr. Ceretto still refuse to provide a copy of so-called trolley "study" to the public.
This is an opinion I have as a parent who paid for several college educations: Since this was a graded project for the NU students, Mr. Angus, as a college professor, had an opportunity and a professional obligation to insist on accepted academic form. He did not encourage the NU students to conduct an genuine academic argument, a presentation of all sides. In the eyes of Mayor Soluri, at the second Lewiston trolley forum, that is an "unbiased" approach. Again, a statement on film.
Regarding the "spirited meeting":
Mr. Gromosiak's justified anger came from two situations. One he mentioned several times as he spoke, the on-going, snide remarks Mr. Nicols made in undertones not caught on camera to a woman seated next to him. Two, the disparaging remarks made by the Niagara University professor about Niagara Falls and Main Street, the roads in particular.
From what I witnessed, Mr. Gromosiak as he spoke to the EMC clearly stated he felt threatened and harassed by Mr. Nicols. As a follow up to the remarks made about the City, Mr. Gromosiak subsequently contacted the individual NF City Council members. No one from NU met or contacted the City Council about the trolley.
Why? Mr. Sloma and Mr. Ceretto mentioned regionalism multiple times during the first trolley meeting.
As a County advisory council, you might find this interesting: as we left, several people listening from outside the library meeting room, opened a closed door, and made a point to stop us and thank us for speaking up.
For your perusal, I'm enclosing a benefits to removal summary of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway. It's a copy of an email sent to about 30 key leaders at local, regional, and state levels. It might have crossed your desk already.
I've also attached a copy of the resolution(s) signed by objective people who took the time to not only envision the concept of total gorge parkway removal, but took the time to become well-informed. I think you'll see the very clear reasons why they signed it. Perhaps, that's what terrifies the parkway preservationists.
Please read the attached resolution. We will provide and/or present the supplemental information to anyone who would like to hear the rest of the story, the counter response to those who say it (the removal of the Robert Moses GORGE Parkway) can't or shouldn't be done.
One of the reasons we advocate so hard for total gorge Robert Moses Parkway removal is to reclaim and protect our viewsheds (a key Smart Growth initiative), the old growth at DeVeaux and in the gorge walls, and to stimulate the economy in every Niagara Falls business district as well as the entire region (a key Economic/Business Survival initiative).
We have provided all the supporting documentation-- studies on road removal from unbiased, unsolicited experts proving the NHP proposal is not only the right thing to do, it's astounding--economically viable and feasible. The NHP report includes employment numbers (hundreds to thousands) and economic and quality of life benefits and tourism dollars (in the billions) all provided by the very successful, dozens of cities around the world that implemented the exact type of project NHP has advocated for over the last 12 years. We have an informal marketing study (www.niagaraheritage.org) where locals and potential tourists (millions) tell us clearly what they want to experience when they come to Niagara Falls.
The NHP proposal is visionary. It promotes Deep Change rather than incremental change which inevitably leads to decay. (Author, Robert E. Quinn, a Leadership Buffalo suggested reading book.) To quote Mayor Dyster, "We could have been pioneers. Instead, we follow."
Somebody benefits if the city of Niagara falls. The question, posed to the Buffalo Niagara Partnership, is who and why?
Please read the attached resolution. This was signed by the Main Street Business and Professional Association, Niagara Falls City Council, the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board.
We have personally handed the complete Niagara Heritage Partnership proposal and report to:
the Buffalo News,
the Niagara Gazette,
NYS Parks Commissioner Carol Ash,
Governor Patterson,
Mayor Paul Dyster,
Senator Antoine Thompson,
the Niagara Falls City Council,
the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board,
to the entire Niagara Co. Legislature - which includes representation from the Niagara County IDA,
the Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper,
the Buffalo Niagara Partnership,
and to anyone else we could think of that is in a position to and might actually help, presenting and providing them with the complete NHP package.
Senator Gillibrand (D) was also personally handed the NHP proposal with all its supporting documentation when she was in town attending a luncheon hosted by the County Democratic Committee. (This was after the convention center meeting with local governments, including Mayor Soluri (R). Senator Gillibrand stated she'd contact me by phone the next day. She didn't.
Now what's sad: everyone, especially after reading the NHP documents and seeing the proposal presented in actual economic dollars and numbers, knows the NHP proposal is the right thing to do for the greater good, for the most people, with minimum impact on neighborhoods. It shows everybody profits.
Here's the wrinkle:
What's being proposed by Niagara Falls master plan, removal of RMP up to Findlay Dr., is to, yes, remove the RMP, BUT join it to Whirlpool Street AT Findlay Dr. In other words, remove one road and replace it with another. This does absolutely nothing to support the city business districts, yet it's in the city's current, proposed comprehensive plan, as yet not passed. In picturing that scenario, it appears that another slice of DeVeaux Woods will be sacrificed.
The NH proposal for RMP gorge removal would REJOIN the DeVeaux Old Growth with the Old Growth remaining at Whirlpool State Parks. (Standing in parking lot, facing Whirlpool and the gorge - see the few remaining trees on your right.)
NHP, and supporters of their proposal, advocate total RMP removal to the north city line. That's a compromise, something Lewiston et all claim the NHP doesn't or won't do.
Well, as stated to Mr. Cerreto and the Niagara Co. EMC. NHP and advocates did compromise. We want the RMP gorge section totally removed to Lewiston and replaced with a natural landscape for ecotourism, but have, in the interest of compromise, backed up to the North City Line.
Now, we want Mr.Ceretto and the northtowns to compromise and send the proposed trolley down Main St, into Niagara Falls, via Hyde Park Blvd and Highland Ave to North St. to Main Street. This route, if coming from Lewiston, starts at the intersection light by Niagara University. It bypasses the entire DeVeaux residential neighborhood. This alternate route was presented to the DOT two years ago. It's also pothole free.
In case you're wondering why this isn't being considered? Well, drive it. Come to your own conclusions.
This is why NREC was asked to stop Lewiston's incomplete proposal presented to the Niagara River Greenway. It's another attempt to circumvent the removal of the RMP.
We have provided this information to county Legislator John Ceretto, and to the Niagara University students who are attempting to undermine all efforts for RMP removal by promoting the trolley on the gorge parkway, which is illegal. (According to DOT laws, the only traffic allowed on the RMP are cars. No school or tour buses, no trucks, no bikes, no horses, no commercial traffic. Why aren't the state, and local police issuing tickets? I saw a semi on it the other day and tour and school buses.)
NU professor Angus has refused to share the trolley study with the public, despite the fact they presented it in two public forums. I asked for a copy, even offered to pay for copying it. He refused, claiming it belonged to the County. I had a county legislator make the request and was refused. I asked again, at the NCEMC meeting, and was told it belonged to the County as "they" hired him. I stated the county was in attendance (Mr. Ceretto and Mr. Jason Murgia.) Would he please give it to Mr. Murgia?
So, we now know: it belongs to Mr. Ceretto. NU still refuses to provide the public forum information, and Professor Angus and Mr. Ceretto refused to say they wouldn't send the trolley down the parkway. [Note in 5/14/09 Gazette, the NFTA omitted sending the FREE-but-supported-by-NF-bed-tax trolley down Main Street, Niagara Falls.]
We want to make it clear that NHP and their advocates support the trolley. We do not support the proposed Robert Moses Gorge Parkway route. The trolley could be and should be beneficial for the entire region,e very business district. We are on record, in both public forums, in newsprint, and television media as stating this. I attended both trolley presentations. NHP was presented in the NU power point as an obstruction to the trolley. A blatant fabrication and lie.
I also attended a meeting - Re-imagining Youngstown - and listened to key tourism people state that "Youngstown needs traffic on Main St." The NU students suggested the closing of the RMP and redirecting traffic down Youngstown's Main St. Ironic, no? Same meeting: How key people intend to support regionalism: "they were going to go to Niagara Falls and just take the tourists." and at a different meeting, last Saturday, I heard another, different key leader state: "Niagara Falls is no longer. It's gone." A recent letter writer to the Gazette, yet another leader, stated removing the RMP is "repugnant."
Webster defines "repugnant" as inconsistent, incompatible, and contradictory. Key people have made major decisions and statements about removing the RMP without ever looking at or considering the NHP proposal and their subsequent report. Please read the attached resolution. Some one, please, explain how the NHP proposal is "repugnant."
In light of these facts, whose guidance would you suggest?
In summary.
We, NHP and the NHP advocates, have systematically researched every opposition argument and successfully documented that four-lane removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway from Niagara Falls to Lewiston,NY and the subsequent reclamation and restoration of natural landscapes not only includes the tri-nation area, (Seneca Nation, US, Canada) it embraces cultural celebrations (Underground Railroad and the Native Americans), it has value, a net worth in hundreds of thousands of jobs, and it can and will stimulate our economies, generating profit margins in the billions for Niagara Falls, for the county, for the western NY region.
We did our homework. We met with people and organizations. We listened and responded. We provided a well researched, articulate, economic and factual report.
Now, in the interest of fairness and for the regional greater good, the State needs to do the same and they need to include all the Stakeholders.
We ask for and trust we will receive the same complete, thoughtful and objective response backed with facts irrefutable figures."
.............
THE FOLLOWING IS THE ADVISORY BOARD'S RESOLUTION FOR PARKWAY REMOVAL:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS: The lower Niagara River and the Niagara gorge is a natural wonder of international botanical, cultural, ecological, geological, and historical significance and remains a unique corridor of wilderness within our urban region; and
WHEREAS: The Robert Moses Gorge Parkway bypasses the entire Main Street Business District, Pine Avenue Business District, Niagara Street Business District, Third Street Business District, the Niagara Falls Downtown Business District, and the City’s core; and
WHEREAS: The Niagara Falls’ City Master Plan calls for miles of parkway removal and the Niagara Falls’ December, 2008 “A View of the Falls Final Report,” (page 51), USA Niagara has proposed the 6.5 mile section of the Robert Moses Parkway along the lower river gorge from Niagara Falls to Lewiston be removed with traffic channeled through the city’s center; and
WHEREAS: Eco-tourism is one of the fastest growing major trends in the U.S. and over 55 million U.S. travelers can be classified as eco-tourists who can be drawn to the area to create new economic opportunities; and
WHEREAS: Green Infrastructure Planning College Curriculum (page 10) notes there are economic reasons to protect “viewsheds” since they are important to attracting what are known as Heritage Tourists who come to see historic or culturally important sites spending, on average, two-and-a half times as much money than do other tourists; and
WHEREAS: The 32 member, Smart Growth Network’s (page 43-44) economic analysis concluded owners of small companies ranked recreation, parks, and open space as the highest priorities in choosing new locations for their businesses; and
WHEREAS: Niagara Falls and the Niagara River Region has been designated a National Heritage Area and removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway is consistent with its goals; and
WHEREAS: Removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway is consistent with the Niagara River Greenway Plan for the Region and New York State; and
WHEREAS: the New York Natural Heritage Program concludes the Niagara Gorge calcareous cliff community harboring some of the oldest trees (500-1,000 years old) in the state are threatened by adjacent upslope development (e.g. residential, agricultural, utility right-of-ways and roads) and its associated runoff and other habitat alteration (NYNHP Conservation Guide – Calcareous Cliff Community -page 2); and
WHEREAS: When land adjacent to a historic site is developed, it can mar or even destroy the integrity of the historic site and when these scenic vistas are lost, visitors may stop coming and residents will lose aspects of the landscape that they most value; and
WHEREAS: The people of our region as well as the people around the world should have an opportunity to experience this wonder in its natural and restored state, unmarked by destructive and unsightly development; and
WHEREAS: The Niagara Heritage Partnership’s online petition (www.niagaraheritage.org) and list of supporting organizations represents an informal marketing study of over 1 million people who support total gorge parkway removal; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board strongly endorses the Main Street Business and Professional Association resolution for four lane removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway from Niagara Falls, north, to the city line and the subsequent restoration of this land as a heritage natural area, as described herein with the supporting documents attached; and therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board strongly endorses demapping the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway, remapping it as parkland, as the road is neither environmentally sound nor economically feasible, and notes that such closure is financially sound, more cost effective, a more sensible tourism strategy, and a timely economic stimulus for city tourism.
Representing: The Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board
745 Main Street, PO Box 69
Niagara Falls, NY 14302
716-286-4303
ACCORDING TO PARKWAY REMOVAL ADVOCATE Michelle Vanstrom, a Niagara Falls businesswoman from Youngstown and member of the NF Tourism Advisory Board:
"I continue to find it interesting and appalling that decisions by elected and appointed leaders regarding the Robert Moses gorge parkway are continually made without EVER asking the removal advocates to make a presentation.
Why is that? I am perplexed, bemused.
How can anyone, especially when seated in a leadership/advisory position, expect to make an intelligent, well-thought out, informed decision without exerting any effort or desire to review or listen to all sides of an issue? To me, that's an imperative and crucial leadership role.
My statements made to the professor[Mr. Angus] and Mr. Ceretto were facts, not accusations. I don't recall seeing many of you at either Lewiston trolley meeting. Perhaps if had you attended, it might have become clear to you, also, that the trolley was all about Lewiston and only Lewiston and running it on the parkway. You would have heard this stated clearly by the owner of the Barton Hotel. Her statements (and my questions to Mr. Sloma and Mr. Ceretto) are documented, filmed by the local cable channel.
To date, Mr. Angus and Mr. Ceretto still refuse to provide a copy of so-called trolley "study" to the public.
This is an opinion I have as a parent who paid for several college educations: Since this was a graded project for the NU students, Mr. Angus, as a college professor, had an opportunity and a professional obligation to insist on accepted academic form. He did not encourage the NU students to conduct an genuine academic argument, a presentation of all sides. In the eyes of Mayor Soluri, at the second Lewiston trolley forum, that is an "unbiased" approach. Again, a statement on film.
Regarding the "spirited meeting":
Mr. Gromosiak's justified anger came from two situations. One he mentioned several times as he spoke, the on-going, snide remarks Mr. Nicols made in undertones not caught on camera to a woman seated next to him. Two, the disparaging remarks made by the Niagara University professor about Niagara Falls and Main Street, the roads in particular.
From what I witnessed, Mr. Gromosiak as he spoke to the EMC clearly stated he felt threatened and harassed by Mr. Nicols. As a follow up to the remarks made about the City, Mr. Gromosiak subsequently contacted the individual NF City Council members. No one from NU met or contacted the City Council about the trolley.
Why? Mr. Sloma and Mr. Ceretto mentioned regionalism multiple times during the first trolley meeting.
As a County advisory council, you might find this interesting: as we left, several people listening from outside the library meeting room, opened a closed door, and made a point to stop us and thank us for speaking up.
For your perusal, I'm enclosing a benefits to removal summary of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway. It's a copy of an email sent to about 30 key leaders at local, regional, and state levels. It might have crossed your desk already.
I've also attached a copy of the resolution(s) signed by objective people who took the time to not only envision the concept of total gorge parkway removal, but took the time to become well-informed. I think you'll see the very clear reasons why they signed it. Perhaps, that's what terrifies the parkway preservationists.
Please read the attached resolution. We will provide and/or present the supplemental information to anyone who would like to hear the rest of the story, the counter response to those who say it (the removal of the Robert Moses GORGE Parkway) can't or shouldn't be done.
One of the reasons we advocate so hard for total gorge Robert Moses Parkway removal is to reclaim and protect our viewsheds (a key Smart Growth initiative), the old growth at DeVeaux and in the gorge walls, and to stimulate the economy in every Niagara Falls business district as well as the entire region (a key Economic/Business Survival initiative).
We have provided all the supporting documentation-- studies on road removal from unbiased, unsolicited experts proving the NHP proposal is not only the right thing to do, it's astounding--economically viable and feasible. The NHP report includes employment numbers (hundreds to thousands) and economic and quality of life benefits and tourism dollars (in the billions) all provided by the very successful, dozens of cities around the world that implemented the exact type of project NHP has advocated for over the last 12 years. We have an informal marketing study (www.niagaraheritage.org) where locals and potential tourists (millions) tell us clearly what they want to experience when they come to Niagara Falls.
The NHP proposal is visionary. It promotes Deep Change rather than incremental change which inevitably leads to decay. (Author, Robert E. Quinn, a Leadership Buffalo suggested reading book.) To quote Mayor Dyster, "We could have been pioneers. Instead, we follow."
Somebody benefits if the city of Niagara falls. The question, posed to the Buffalo Niagara Partnership, is who and why?
Please read the attached resolution. This was signed by the Main Street Business and Professional Association, Niagara Falls City Council, the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board.
We have personally handed the complete Niagara Heritage Partnership proposal and report to:
the Buffalo News,
the Niagara Gazette,
NYS Parks Commissioner Carol Ash,
Governor Patterson,
Mayor Paul Dyster,
Senator Antoine Thompson,
the Niagara Falls City Council,
the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board,
to the entire Niagara Co. Legislature - which includes representation from the Niagara County IDA,
the Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper,
the Buffalo Niagara Partnership,
and to anyone else we could think of that is in a position to and might actually help, presenting and providing them with the complete NHP package.
Senator Gillibrand (D) was also personally handed the NHP proposal with all its supporting documentation when she was in town attending a luncheon hosted by the County Democratic Committee. (This was after the convention center meeting with local governments, including Mayor Soluri (R). Senator Gillibrand stated she'd contact me by phone the next day. She didn't.
Now what's sad: everyone, especially after reading the NHP documents and seeing the proposal presented in actual economic dollars and numbers, knows the NHP proposal is the right thing to do for the greater good, for the most people, with minimum impact on neighborhoods. It shows everybody profits.
Here's the wrinkle:
What's being proposed by Niagara Falls master plan, removal of RMP up to Findlay Dr., is to, yes, remove the RMP, BUT join it to Whirlpool Street AT Findlay Dr. In other words, remove one road and replace it with another. This does absolutely nothing to support the city business districts, yet it's in the city's current, proposed comprehensive plan, as yet not passed. In picturing that scenario, it appears that another slice of DeVeaux Woods will be sacrificed.
The NH proposal for RMP gorge removal would REJOIN the DeVeaux Old Growth with the Old Growth remaining at Whirlpool State Parks. (Standing in parking lot, facing Whirlpool and the gorge - see the few remaining trees on your right.)
NHP, and supporters of their proposal, advocate total RMP removal to the north city line. That's a compromise, something Lewiston et all claim the NHP doesn't or won't do.
Well, as stated to Mr. Cerreto and the Niagara Co. EMC. NHP and advocates did compromise. We want the RMP gorge section totally removed to Lewiston and replaced with a natural landscape for ecotourism, but have, in the interest of compromise, backed up to the North City Line.
Now, we want Mr.Ceretto and the northtowns to compromise and send the proposed trolley down Main St, into Niagara Falls, via Hyde Park Blvd and Highland Ave to North St. to Main Street. This route, if coming from Lewiston, starts at the intersection light by Niagara University. It bypasses the entire DeVeaux residential neighborhood. This alternate route was presented to the DOT two years ago. It's also pothole free.
In case you're wondering why this isn't being considered? Well, drive it. Come to your own conclusions.
This is why NREC was asked to stop Lewiston's incomplete proposal presented to the Niagara River Greenway. It's another attempt to circumvent the removal of the RMP.
We have provided this information to county Legislator John Ceretto, and to the Niagara University students who are attempting to undermine all efforts for RMP removal by promoting the trolley on the gorge parkway, which is illegal. (According to DOT laws, the only traffic allowed on the RMP are cars. No school or tour buses, no trucks, no bikes, no horses, no commercial traffic. Why aren't the state, and local police issuing tickets? I saw a semi on it the other day and tour and school buses.)
NU professor Angus has refused to share the trolley study with the public, despite the fact they presented it in two public forums. I asked for a copy, even offered to pay for copying it. He refused, claiming it belonged to the County. I had a county legislator make the request and was refused. I asked again, at the NCEMC meeting, and was told it belonged to the County as "they" hired him. I stated the county was in attendance (Mr. Ceretto and Mr. Jason Murgia.) Would he please give it to Mr. Murgia?
So, we now know: it belongs to Mr. Ceretto. NU still refuses to provide the public forum information, and Professor Angus and Mr. Ceretto refused to say they wouldn't send the trolley down the parkway. [Note in 5/14/09 Gazette, the NFTA omitted sending the FREE-but-supported-by-NF-bed-tax trolley down Main Street, Niagara Falls.]
We want to make it clear that NHP and their advocates support the trolley. We do not support the proposed Robert Moses Gorge Parkway route. The trolley could be and should be beneficial for the entire region,e very business district. We are on record, in both public forums, in newsprint, and television media as stating this. I attended both trolley presentations. NHP was presented in the NU power point as an obstruction to the trolley. A blatant fabrication and lie.
I also attended a meeting - Re-imagining Youngstown - and listened to key tourism people state that "Youngstown needs traffic on Main St." The NU students suggested the closing of the RMP and redirecting traffic down Youngstown's Main St. Ironic, no? Same meeting: How key people intend to support regionalism: "they were going to go to Niagara Falls and just take the tourists." and at a different meeting, last Saturday, I heard another, different key leader state: "Niagara Falls is no longer. It's gone." A recent letter writer to the Gazette, yet another leader, stated removing the RMP is "repugnant."
Webster defines "repugnant" as inconsistent, incompatible, and contradictory. Key people have made major decisions and statements about removing the RMP without ever looking at or considering the NHP proposal and their subsequent report. Please read the attached resolution. Some one, please, explain how the NHP proposal is "repugnant."
In light of these facts, whose guidance would you suggest?
In summary.
We, NHP and the NHP advocates, have systematically researched every opposition argument and successfully documented that four-lane removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway from Niagara Falls to Lewiston,NY and the subsequent reclamation and restoration of natural landscapes not only includes the tri-nation area, (Seneca Nation, US, Canada) it embraces cultural celebrations (Underground Railroad and the Native Americans), it has value, a net worth in hundreds of thousands of jobs, and it can and will stimulate our economies, generating profit margins in the billions for Niagara Falls, for the county, for the western NY region.
We did our homework. We met with people and organizations. We listened and responded. We provided a well researched, articulate, economic and factual report.
Now, in the interest of fairness and for the regional greater good, the State needs to do the same and they need to include all the Stakeholders.
We ask for and trust we will receive the same complete, thoughtful and objective response backed with facts irrefutable figures."
.............
THE FOLLOWING IS THE ADVISORY BOARD'S RESOLUTION FOR PARKWAY REMOVAL:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS: The lower Niagara River and the Niagara gorge is a natural wonder of international botanical, cultural, ecological, geological, and historical significance and remains a unique corridor of wilderness within our urban region; and
WHEREAS: The Robert Moses Gorge Parkway bypasses the entire Main Street Business District, Pine Avenue Business District, Niagara Street Business District, Third Street Business District, the Niagara Falls Downtown Business District, and the City’s core; and
WHEREAS: The Niagara Falls’ City Master Plan calls for miles of parkway removal and the Niagara Falls’ December, 2008 “A View of the Falls Final Report,” (page 51), USA Niagara has proposed the 6.5 mile section of the Robert Moses Parkway along the lower river gorge from Niagara Falls to Lewiston be removed with traffic channeled through the city’s center; and
WHEREAS: Eco-tourism is one of the fastest growing major trends in the U.S. and over 55 million U.S. travelers can be classified as eco-tourists who can be drawn to the area to create new economic opportunities; and
WHEREAS: Green Infrastructure Planning College Curriculum (page 10) notes there are economic reasons to protect “viewsheds” since they are important to attracting what are known as Heritage Tourists who come to see historic or culturally important sites spending, on average, two-and-a half times as much money than do other tourists; and
WHEREAS: The 32 member, Smart Growth Network’s (page 43-44) economic analysis concluded owners of small companies ranked recreation, parks, and open space as the highest priorities in choosing new locations for their businesses; and
WHEREAS: Niagara Falls and the Niagara River Region has been designated a National Heritage Area and removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway is consistent with its goals; and
WHEREAS: Removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway is consistent with the Niagara River Greenway Plan for the Region and New York State; and
WHEREAS: the New York Natural Heritage Program concludes the Niagara Gorge calcareous cliff community harboring some of the oldest trees (500-1,000 years old) in the state are threatened by adjacent upslope development (e.g. residential, agricultural, utility right-of-ways and roads) and its associated runoff and other habitat alteration (NYNHP Conservation Guide – Calcareous Cliff Community -page 2); and
WHEREAS: When land adjacent to a historic site is developed, it can mar or even destroy the integrity of the historic site and when these scenic vistas are lost, visitors may stop coming and residents will lose aspects of the landscape that they most value; and
WHEREAS: The people of our region as well as the people around the world should have an opportunity to experience this wonder in its natural and restored state, unmarked by destructive and unsightly development; and
WHEREAS: The Niagara Heritage Partnership’s online petition (www.niagaraheritage.org) and list of supporting organizations represents an informal marketing study of over 1 million people who support total gorge parkway removal; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board strongly endorses the Main Street Business and Professional Association resolution for four lane removal of the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway from Niagara Falls, north, to the city line and the subsequent restoration of this land as a heritage natural area, as described herein with the supporting documents attached; and therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board strongly endorses demapping the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway, remapping it as parkland, as the road is neither environmentally sound nor economically feasible, and notes that such closure is financially sound, more cost effective, a more sensible tourism strategy, and a timely economic stimulus for city tourism.
Representing: The Niagara Falls Tourism Advisory Board
745 Main Street, PO Box 69
Niagara Falls, NY 14302
716-286-4303
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)