If you can control information, you can control people. Tom Clancy
What I am about to report is not the work of a great fiction writer, but the reality at Warren County. The men who run Warren County understand the power of controlling information:
• The mindset at the county is once a vote takes place it is done and the decision has been made. At the recent state of the county Chairman Geraghty asked supervisors be respectful of the process and move on after the issue has been debated and subject to a vote.
o That would be fine IF supervisors, the public and the media were notified in advance, and provided all of the facts and information. However, what if new information and facts come to light after a decision/vote is made? Should a supervisor just ignore this?
• Agendas for county meetings are not sent in advance so most supervisors, the public and the media do not know what is going to be covered in the meeting until they arrive.
o Meeting notices go out according to the Open Meeting laws, but not agendas. For three years I’ve been asking for detailed agendas to be sent in advance. One committee is now doing it.
o As Chairman of Social Services in 2014, I worked with the department on a new policy for 2015 to release detailed agendas and information a week before the Social Services committee meeting so people have the chance to review information and come prepared.
Notes:
– Last week, I was notified by email of my removal as Social Services Chairman and taken off the committee with no explanation.
– I was replaced by a first term supervisor who has been on the board for 1 year.
– After notifying Maureen Schmidt, Social Services Commissioner, she responded:
I appreciate and respect all you did for me and the Department.
We will miss you as our Chairman. Thank you for all the time you spent working with the Department.
• Asking tough questions, challenging decisions, researching on your own is derided and even punished at the county if it goes against what has already been voted and decided on.
o This attitude is unfortunate. If an organization is not willing to take a hard look at a decision, especially a decision that can still be stopped or altered, based on new facts and information, then it is destined to repeat the mistakes of the past, e.g. Burn Plant lost tens of millions of dollars. Cogeneration plant lost millions of dollars. Jail is too big, expensive and did not bring in the promised revenues.
• Presentations, contracts, analysis of complicated subjects and other pertinent information are not sent in advance of meetings (or withheld) so most supervisors, the public and the media are not prepared on the day of the vote.
o Below are three examples where the county voted, made a decision, but new facts and information came to light after the vote.
o In each of these three cases the county chose to ignore the new facts and information, and proceed with a bad decision because of the simple fact … the decision had been made.
Example 1: The Westmount Nursing Home Sale – April 15, 2014 Health Services Meeting (Notes-http://www.warrencountyny.gov/gov/comm/health_services/04-15-14.pdf)
o At the April 15, 2014 Health Services Committee to discuss the sale of the Westmount Nursing Home, I asked why Fort Hudson Healthcare was out. The answer – “Fort Hudson had wanted to apply for tax exempt status” and “Fort Hudson would not consider an increase in the amount of their proposal.” I specifically asked if there were any other reasons and the answer was no.
o On August 17, The Post Star reported “When Warren County made it a term of sale that the buyer agree to keep the cogen facility and make payments but Fort Hudson wanted to reconnect to the electrical grid, the company’s bid was rejected.” Source: http://poststar.com/news/local/cogen-plant-affected-nursing-home-bidding/article_c94a7336-c673-11e3-a48a-001a4bcf887a.html
Notes:
– I verified in writing with Fort Hudson the veracity of The Post Star report.
– The cogen was a major factor why Fort Hudson’s bid was rejected by the county negotiating team, but this information was not shared when asked – see the April 15, 2014 Health Services Committee meeting notes – http://www.warrencountyny.gov/gov/comm/health_services/04-15-14.pdf
– It was only after this information was released in the press and after Fort Hudson was already out did most supervisors find out about it.
– It is important to note Fort Hudson was not rejected by the board … the board never had the chance to determine if Fort Hudson’s bid was acceptable or not.
– The decision to proceed without Fort Hudson had already been made internally at the county by a small team (the negotiating team – a subset of the Health Services Committee).
– What a shame. The original Request for Proposal (RFP) for the nursing home sale included a vision to build out a “health care campus.” We will now never know the potential that existed with Fort Hudson whose vision included a health care campus.
Example 2: The Cogeneration Performance Assurance Reports – 2006 through 2014
o For seven years (June 2005 – May 2012) the Warren County Board of Supervisors unwittingly approved the Cogeneration plant annual “Performance Assurance Reports” from Siemens (except for Supervisor Peter McDevitt who consistently voted no). These reports supposedly provided the “documentation” of the energy savings from the cogen.
o For seven years local unpaid engineers complained about the factual reliability of these reports. It is important to note these were highly credible engineers including the late Linc Cauthers, Doug Auer, Dave Klein, Travis Whitehead and Gif Harvey.
o Former County Treasurer Frank O’Keefe who saw the actual bills come in questioned how he could be paying so much when there were all these reported savings? When I asked Mr. O’Keefe about it, he said “It stinks to high heavens.”
Notes:
– Finally in 2013 the county hired an engineering firm EnerNoc to audit the annual Siemens energy reports. The EnerNoc report verified what the local engineers and Mr. O’Keefe had been saying all along. There are no savings from the cogen. In fact it lost a lot of money.
– EnerNoc in the December 2013 report page 2 titled “Scenario back to Grid” estimates Net Loss for Electricity and Gas over first 8 years (2006-2013) was a loss of $147,487 versus if the county had stayed on the Grid. Plus there were $3.4 million of payments on top of this.
– The EnerNoc report was withheld from the public and supervisors alike for many months. After being denied under FOIL, one taxpayer even filed an Article 78 to obtain its release. Eventually it was released.
– Since the EnerNoc report the county has held the last two Siemens Performance Assurance Reports from coming to a vote. This is mistake because supervisors now know the truth and should be given an opportunity to vote against the reports.
– This is not merely symbolic, but would serve as a claim towards the savings that were guaranteed to Warren County by Siemens, but never materialized. Further the county continues to make payments to Siemens – more than $400,000 annually.
Example 3: The Airport FBO vote – June 26, 2013 Warren County Board of Supervisor Meeting (Notes – http://www.warrencountyny.gov/gov/min/2013/docs/min2013-06-21.pdf)
o Warren County approved a multi-million dollar five year contract extension with Rich Air the airport FBO (Fixed Based Operator) responsible for many of the functions at the airport without properly vetting it, without following the usual committee process and without even a passive review of what the other options might be.
o This is not a complaint against Rich Air, but a questioning of how the county handled it. If there was an opportunity for the County to negotiate a better deal with Rich Air the County missed it. This could have included a more favorable revenue sharing agreement and/or requiring the FBO to pick up more responsibilities and cost at the airport.
Notes:
– Rich Air took over the airport in 2008 and invested over $1 million in hangars, facility improvements and equipment, we are grateful for the improvements Rich Air made.
– Payments from the FBO to the County under Rich Air have almost doubled compared with those made by the prior FBO, but revenues the county receives from the airport are significantly lower than county expense.
– For example, Rich Air charges $5.65 – $6.50 for aviation fuel. The county share is only 7.5 cents per gallon.
– Since Warren County’s annual airport operating expense is approximately $850,000 per year would it not have been prudent to see if there was a way to increase county revenues and/or decrease expense by renegotiating with Rich Air? We never had the chance.
• Supervisors have had to FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) information in order to obtain information that is being reluctantly released. This was the case when the county would not release initial drafts of the environmental assessment for the runway expansion.
o There is no reason for information to be withheld from supervisors. If information is being withheld due to confidentiality reasons this should be clearly stated and documented by law. In some cases, I have offered to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to review information, but still have been denied.
• Notices for public meetings are released with the minimum time and effort required by law. It is the opposite of the way it should be. The county should do everything possible to allow the public the opportunity to attend and participate especially on the most controversial issues. Further the county holds its meeting during the day when most people work.
o Last week there was a request for the public hearing on the Westmount nursing home sale to be held at night. It was supported by only 4 supervisors. The hearing will take place during the day. You will now have to take time off from work if you would like to comment on this important matter.
o After more than a year of requesting a night meeting in July 2013 to discuss the airport, including a petition with 1,100 signatures asking for it, the county agreed. 200 people attended. Attendees were clearly against the expansion. Meeting notes: http://www.warrencountyny.gov/gov/comm/county_facilities/07-08-13.pdf; And the Adirondack Journal: http://www.adirondackjournal.com/news/2013/jul/09/controversy-erupts-county-airport-meeting/
Closing Comments
This is why I started writing these emails; and why I founded the Upstate New York Taxpayer Advocates (www.unyta.org). In 2014, I wrote 26 emails on a variety of subjects (77 emails since January 2012).
With the help of UNYTA members, people like Freda Solomon, Bill Osborn and Shay Mason, we have researched and published a number of papers, presentations and analysis not provided by the county.
Mark
Westcott