A necessary skill in an elected official is the ability to accept the truth of a situation. It is essential for those who work for elected officials to be able to "speak truth to power." Without that ability on the part of staff, and without that skill on the part of elected officials, the public is denied proper, well-informed representation.
At various times in the past, the Mayor and some Village Board members both publicly and privately referred to me and the Heritage Preservation Commission as "obstacles" to proposed development projects, particularly the Seneca Knitting Mill complex. Certainly Mayor Smith and Board members are entitled to an opinion. However, it would have been more credible for them to base their assertions on fact. It would also be incumbent upon them to educate themselves and fully understand the process when dealing with state grants before attaching labels to their own staff, and to members of the public who might ask questions and expect answers about any proposed development.
At various times in the past, the Mayor and some Village Board members both publicly and privately referred to me and the Heritage Preservation Commission as "obstacles" to proposed development projects, particularly the Seneca Knitting Mill complex. Certainly Mayor Smith and Board members are entitled to an opinion. However, it would have been more credible for them to base their assertions on fact. It would also be incumbent upon them to educate themselves and fully understand the process when dealing with state grants before attaching labels to their own staff, and to members of the public who might ask questions and expect answers about any proposed development.
In the case of the Seneca Knitting Mill development, it was my experience that questions were unwelcome, regardless of their relevance to the Village's role in supporting the project; advice regarding the development process as it related to state agencies and grants was also unwelcome.
When an application for demolition of various structures on the site was presented to the Heritage Preservation Commission in November of 2004, the Commission had questions regarding the effect their decision might have on state preservation grants that were under contract to the development corporation. These questions were not meant to throw an obstacle before the project, but to ensure that the Commission's decisions would not in any way negatively effect the project's ability to utilize the state grants. The state had already made a decision about which buildings on the site they would approve for demolition using their grants. But the developer was proposing additional demolitions.
The Commission Chair contacted the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to clarify and ensure that any decision they made regarding demolition of any additional structure on the site would not be contrary to the State's approvals.
Because of this contact, the Commission was publicly chastised at their November 10, 2004 meeting by Senator Michael Nozzolio and Seneca Knit Development Corp. representatives. Not only was the Commission publicly reprimanded for asking a question, I was also later brought into an executive session of the Village Board on December 14, 2004 to explain why I would have allowed the Commission to ask state officials questions about the project. I was told in no uncertain terms that questions about the project and historic preservation issues related to it should have been run through the Senator's office.
It should be noted that while Mayor Smith was a member of Senator Nozzolio's staff she informed Village staff that she had been named the Senator's "point person" for the project. Memos about the project from Mayor Smith were generated from her computer in the Senator's office on Fall Street. It appeared she was expected to ensure smooth approvals for all aspects of the project. Questions by Village staff, officials, or the public seemed to be regarded as attacks on the project.
I was also chastised during the December 2004 executive session as allegedly preventing the Seneca Knit Development Corporation from moving forward with the repair of part of the Mill complex roof. As I explained to Mayor Smith and the Board, the Preservation Commission had in fact approved the proposed roof repairs months before, and that the state had also previously signed off on the repairs that were to be funded under their grant program. Also, SKDC had just received additional approvals from the state on December 10th. Rather than the local Commission or the state, it was the development corporation itself that
had delayed acting on the roof repairs. Here is a copy of the letter the state sent to Seneca Knit Development Corporation after SKDC had proposed more changes to their project (at that time, Bruce Bonafiglia's private development company, Revitacor, was directing the development for SKDC). It appears to me that there was no reason to question me or the Preservation Commission about delays, when it was the developer that had not acted while continuing to alter their plans. Paragraph #5 of the state's letter also makes it clear that the project still required legal and contractual coordination with the state before the work could be started. There is no mention of the need for any further local approvals.Despite having provided the Board with proof otherwise, Third Ward Trustee Tony Petroccia continued to claim I personally had delayed the project. I suggested that the Board contact the developer or the state to determine why they had not yet acted to repair the roof. I never heard again about this issue from Mayor Smith or the Village Board. Now, more than three years after the Village Board accused me and the Preservation Commission of being obstacles to the project, the roof at the Mill site is still not repaired and the Village Board appears to have dropped their interest in pursuing this issue. Sadly for the National Women's Hall of Fame these repairs are now their responsibility, since the property was subsequently transferred to them.
Here you can click on the image of a letter written to me by the former NYS OPRHP Historic Sites Restoration Coordinator, Mr. Richard Lord. He also had an opinion regarding the characterization of myself and the Preservation Commission as "obstacles" to the Mill development.
Occasionally, developers believe that the terms of contracts for state grants don't actually apply to them. Seneca Knit Development Corp. was awarded grants totaling several hundred thousand dollars for repairs and for demolition of specific buildings at the Mill complex. Part of the requirements under state grants is that the recipient must follow proper bidding procedures. At the Mill site approximately $200,000 was spent on demolitions that were approved by the state and local Commission and was paid to the Sessler Wrecking Company. When the SKDC requested reimbursement under the grant for the state's portion of the demolition cost the state denied their request. Why? Because they had not put the demolition contract out to bid as required by their grant contract, but had simply hired Sessler.
That failure to put the demolition out to bid cost SKDC $100,000 that they would have been reimbursed had they followed the required procedures of the grant.
Now, four years later, Mayor Smith says she believes that state grant monies carry "too many strings." Trustees Petroccia and Campese say they agree with her.
These "strings" are actually the terms and conditions of accepting public money for a project. They are built into the contracts of state grants in order to protect the public's money from being spent irresponsibly. These "strings" are provided up front to municipalities and not-for-profit organizations who apply for project assistance. Contracts for state grant funds are not made with a wink and a nod. A signature on a state grant application means that the signer understands and accepts its terms.
Sadly, "telling truth to power" appears to engender scorn from some elected officials who either don't want to hear the truth or perhaps find the truth inconvenient. This behavior isn't exclusive to Seneca Falls. But we should not accept such behavior simply because we expect it and aren't surprised when it manifests itself. When this behavior is tied to the desires of special interests it undermines the ability to act in the best interests of the public.
