Hayseeds No. 55

Monday, March 8, 2004

This Sunday the Times Union decided to have a front-page center series of article on the hilltowns, and their rather unique culture of sorts.

Let me quote the byline: The western half of Albany County remains a place unto itself, and residents hope to maintain that uniqueness even as the economy and times change..

My statistics show that only about 3.6% of people in the county live in the hilltowns (Berne-Knox-Westerlo)—whose population of 10,874 is roughly equivalent to the population of New Scotland.

Of course some claim it's hard to live out here, in the words of Kevin Crosier, Town Supervisor of Berne—and I'm all for that claim, although I sometimes doubt the truth—is it not hard to live in cities and comply with all the silly regulations?

Guess what—it's pretty unanamous that local residents don't want strip malls, gas stations, and Burger Kings lining four lane roads"—and Mike Hammond says "We want an orderly growth, that's what the popiulation has said many times over". And luckly, slow-growth proponents have a friend in the area's karst geology. Bedded on limestone and underground caverns, the Hilltowns are not conducive to water or swer systems.

And that says nothing about the large-lot zoning around here—requiring 3 acres for all new buildings (which is unfortunate in the hamlets—but in other areas makes a lot of sense). 3 acres gives lots of breating room.

But Kevin Crosier notes that we're going to have some growth. But we need to do smart growth. If we follow our (existing) zoning, we're going to look like Colonie. Which is pretty smart thinking, if you ask me—I'm glad we have people like him in power.

Only 252 homes were built in the hilltowns from '95-'00, and when you consider replacement, it's probably less. Guilderland saw 1,043 houses build in the same period—in a much smaller area.

Growth also causes 'flatlanders' who invade the area to get pretty upset with the usual rural style of life—the farm noises, smells, loose livestock—all problem's I've enjoyed in the past.

At least Richard Rapp had to note the absurdity of increasing sprawl in the area—I don't think you're going to have to worry about (sprawl) for awhile, [as] a lot of people don't like the winters we have. Hey, I like the winters—they are good for snowmobiling and the alike.

Real seasons are great to have, although I wish we had more nice spring and fall weather around here—it comes and goes too fast—although this year has been very muddy.

At any rate, many solutions might be neccessary—the article mentions the possibility of local-market agriculture helping the existance of local farms, along with using large plots of land to generate renewable energy. Still, one can hope that we can keep this area as nice as it currently is.

See the front page article on the Hilltowns...

P'Link

Another article details poverty in hilltowns , with 19% of hilltowners being poor or working poor—a side not always seen—Kay Quinto of Berne headstart says: You drive out to this beautiful countryside, you think, 'Oh, everything's great. You've got these beautiful old farmhouses'... Well some of these old farm houses might have six apartments with families in them.

My family is now above the level low-income family, although not much above it (although more this year then previously as I'm working and my parents have gotten small raises). Through most of the early 1990s though, I think my family was only slightly above the poverty line (only my dad worked, and not through steady jobs—remember the upstate NY economy was terrible during this period).

I know I was eligable for reduced lunch all throughout high school—it was kind of neat only being able to spend 25¢ a day for a lunch, when some others paid a $1.25.

The article mentions 14 year old Sean Peck (and his dad Ron), who I can only assume is Shannon's younger brother, and their rather tough way of life. While the article didn't mention the hard knocks of his brother (I remember as he would tease me jelously in High School), who killed a girl going too fast around a curve with his pickup truck. Sean has the responsiblity of feeding their many animals from cows to pigs (well, I had the responsiblity of feeding the chickens and the rabit when I was in high school—my parents had gotten rid of the goats by then), then going to school, then helping his dad do auto work after school (hell—his house on Lobel Mill Road is essentially a junkyard).

I'm glad my life is so much easier then that—his dad only holds a marginal job stocking at Best Buy at Crossgates to support his rather largish family, and I don't think Shannon ever made it into anything particularly great.

Fortunately, this area's saving grace for the poor, is it's pretty close to the city for commuting to work—all of the hilltowns are within that critical 45 minute limit of commute time (people will generally NOT commute for more then 45 minutes to any location). But it still leaves those without cars very isolated (it was difficult before I drove), and makes it difficult for those with cars to get social services (from the Albany County Office building, where parking is impossible).

And rural poverty is not nearly the same as urban poverty. There isn't the drugs, crime, pollution, and other urban malices—and the educational system is generally better—after all, I am a product of Greenville High School.

In many cases, the rural poor are not asset lacking, being land rich (many farmers and others own multi-million dollar plots of lands), but are cash/liquid asset strapped. My family has a substanal asset in my house, and my dad's car, and some pretty good pieces of money in the bank, but their jobs (and mine) pay pretty little.

This article is not avalible online, but it was found in Section A5—try Lexis-Nexis for details...

P'Link

Some other stories sort of related to this all would be the lack of success of farmers getting out of the agriculture business to sell their properties—some of it quite expensive, as previously mentioned.

How many people are going to put up well over a million dollars to be a working farm, and then continue it as a working farm, making maybe a $50k-$100k a year—and that's before paying anybody.

This is the problem certainly mentioned in the previous articles on the hilltowns, and it's all over New York—and it's seemingly following my concept of the deinstrumentalization of agriculture—where farms seem to exist more for secondary purposes then their orginal food producing purposes.

I think the deinstrumentalization of the farm isn't neccessarly a bad thing, but the cost of farmland without using it for a strong profit, means only the rich will be able to own farms. Or more likely it means more subdivisions. Farming primarly for hunting, and 4-wheeling isn't exactly going to be sustainable for most of us—and it some how forever changes the insitution, when the seemingly useless barns collapse into weeds.

See the story from the Business Section....

P'Link

I see that in the Catskill Daily News that burrying people out in the back 40 might be illegal in the Town of Catskill—it's obvious that they prefer the old landfilling ('regulated' cemetary) and incinerating (cremation) of bodies—we want people's bodies to last for ever, in toxins in our air or forever protected in the backyard.

I know, rotting bodies create a greater water hazard risk then rotting cows—and the alike. Of course, proper placement seems to mediate the water containmentation problem (duh!).

Of course, the same article also mentions potential new ordiences relating to keeping junk—it would seem as though Catskill is going towards fascism.

P'Link

At the anti-mecury ralley at SUNYA this weekend, Jason Babbie of who else but NYPIRG has to say "mercury makes you dumb. It seems Bush and his whole administration have had too much mercury. We all know where the EPA can stick their proposal."

Beautiful—I'm all for getting rid of more of that mecury floating in the air—and it's simple—just regulate power plants more. It's going to cost more, but at least it will mean better fishing.

See today's article in the TU.

P'Link

Today's Getting There column explains how to properly get on and off of a cloverleaf (like that one on Route 5) and how to properly use a left-hand turn land—there isn't detailed legal explanations on the law, because it tends to be vauge, besides telling drivers to be courteous and safe.

P'Link

Republicans say it's time to keep those people off Medicaid who don't really belong on it in first place—especially seniors who pass off their money to other family members, in an effort to escape those painfully expensive medicaid bills.

Coming from a rather poor family, I know how that goes—and the money from my Grandparents is probably making ends meet. But, still a bunch of my Grandfather's money went to his two week death-bed stay at the nursing home. So him getting Medicaid would be essentially the only way we could keep him alive and at the same time keep our family together.

But at the same time, we have to contrast that with my parent's struggle to pay the property tax bills, to say nothing of the farmers who have many, many, times that to pay. It's tough—but I'm siding with the Republicans on this one, as Medicaid property taxes make us suffer now, not later in our lives—but it's a difficult choice to make, and I'm not totally sure myself.

P'Link

There is some pretty remarkable news about how much electronic stability control can help you avoid an accident.

Drivers lost control just 3.4 percent of the time when the "electronic stability control" system was on, compared with 27.9 percent when it wasn't, according to the study being released today at the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress in Detroit.

The study is pretty remarkable—see the front page of the TU for details...

It's just too bad that such systems exist on only 10% of new American cars, and 1/3 of all new European cars. P'Link

Wednesday, March 10, 2004

I haven't really seen much in the papers to write about the last couple of days.

Let's see, I did Statewatch yesterday, and I went to Cole Hill today for a little of skiing (and mostly to get out for a couple of hours).

Also, I've made some code improvements, and added more stuff to the free speech page.

What else? I really don't know—shurg.

P'Link

Friday, March 12, 2004

Pataki and Schumer are lobbying the Federal EPA, again for getting rid of ethanol from our gas.

The fear is the same, as the one for Jan 1 of this year—that gas prices will go up big time, when refiners have to switch over to summer production, which requires more ethanol.

The solution, supported by some, is using a petroleum-based oxygent, currently not allowed by the EPA—namely acholites, and other ultra-refinded petrochemicals from crude.

So will we see higher summer gas prices, over $2.00?

Maybe—but it's not the end of the world, as gas prices are still pretty low nowdays. Remember, gas in the late 1970s and early 1980s sold for more then $3.00 a gallon, inflation added.

Yet, high gas prices effect us all, even us Sundance drivers, or those who purchase stuff.

P'Link

There have been several stories in the paper as of recent about the latest push for the burn barrel bill.

Well kids, the end of the session is rapidly approaching, which means that the burn barrel bill will be up in smoke, if it doesn't get off the Assembly floor again, and back in the Senate.

For the 6th year this bill has been up (I previously thought it was more like 10 years now)—and this year it will not be much different—at least I hope.

Since when should be regulating what people do in there backyards? I know environmentalists certainly think different—but they always do.

David Carpenter of the Health and Environmental insitute of UAlbany says you can't drink a glass of milk without getting some dioxin—and I say, so?

Dioxin (in case you never read this site) is pretty fearful cholorine based compound, in which all of 2,5,7 electrons are filled (whatever that means), created by incomplete combustion—you know, when you see black smoke pouring out of a tail pipe or after burning some plastic, you probably got it. It's so bad for you, because it bioacculates in your fat (in other words takes a while to break down), and disrupts certain hormones, possibly causing cancer, or at least decreasing your manliness (it diminishes testostrone).

Of course, we don't really know how much dioxin is bad for you, and we don't really understand it's effect on you, so all we are left with is fear.

But when [Barbara Hawn's] neighbors burn garbage in their backyards, and home's ventilation system draws in the fumes, the West Sand Lake resident has no options.

"There's nowhere for me to go" said Hawn. "It gives me a sore throad, and makes me feel likel my throat is closing in."

That really isn't surpising, as what your breathing in from the burning garbage is not dioxin, but is another rather nasty chemical, called Benzene. It's found in almost anything (including wood), but als gasoline, and as a stablizer in plastics. I theorized that exposure to that chemical was the main reason why people got so sick initially from the WTC disaster.

Benzene basically makes your hairs in your lungs stick back, stopping the crap out of your lungs—pretty nasty stuff, this is probably what allows so much of that stuff to get in the lungs of smokers (cigerattes also have his chemical in them).

But that's beyond the point—if you don't like your neighboor burning trash while your around, then ask them to stop. If they won't, then go to your local government, and ask them to pass an ordinence against it.

Do we need a cookie-cutter approach, statewide to ban burn barrels? I don't think so, our local government is far more respresentative.

At any rate, the burn barrel bill is now on the floor of the Assembly, and it will pass again this year, but I'm laying money on the fact that it will die again in the Senate—and our rights to burn trash will be protected.

P'Link

Saturday, March 13, 2004

Happy Saturday— I'm off to work in a few minutes.

Only one real story of interest in the news today, namely on the Bethlehem moratorium.

It's clear out, but fairly cold.

P'Link

The FP of the TU takes a look at Booming Bethlehem and it's attempt to limit sprawl.

The moratium on new buildings, in a town that has over 100 homes a year built every year, certainly is unpopular with builders, but residents like it—the building ban is needed to keep runaway residential growth from straining town services and pushing taxes too high, especially as the school district struggles to keep up with booming enrollment.

It looks like this proposal is supported by the Bethelhem Democratic majority headed by Egan (yes, that's werid to say), and also by the Republican minority respresented George Lendhardt—although with some reservations. I think the Bethelhem dems will need at least some Republican support for this measure, as their ranks aren't that strong.

Realators are thrilled with proposal, as it will likely drive property prices up for them (they'll make more money—on an already overpriced houses that go for an average of $239,000 a piece).

The business community as such is mixed—as Marty DeLany of the Bethlehem Chamber says—you are never going to a consensus from our business community on whether this is a good thing or not and I haven't heard anyone who is strongly against it or anyone who has aid they are totally for it..

The farming community in Bethlehem (another anti-thesis of sorts) seems happy with mortorium, if farmer John Geurtze of Route 9W is representative of them.

P'Link

Sunday, March 14, 2004

Today in the paper Paul Bray lements the lack of connections between SUNYA and the city of Albany.

Yet, it's not surpising, as SUNYA is suppost to be fairly seperate from the city itself, with it's uptown campus essentially being in suburban Guilderland. The Rockefeller college is much more in the city (being downtown), although it still is pretty starved compared to uptown.

It was a conscious design decision of the 1960s—but at least the uptown campus made parking easy, and the same thing can be said about access to the school.

P'Link

Fred LeBrun notes that State Conservation Council , the lobbying group for rod and gun clubs, sportmans clubs, and the alike now has some competition.

The new group, the Conservation Alliance, claims it is not competing with the Conservation Council, but seeks to advance it's own similiar adgenda, pushing forward goals that are not be currently being advanced with the current leadership of the Conservation Council.

"There are many of us who feel sportsmen and women are simply not being equately represented by the council and this leadership", says co-creater Dave Miller.

It's going to be headed by some biggies in the lobbying world—Trapper Dave Miller of Steuben County, Russ Williams, the recently retired head of the state Senate's intern program, and Tom King, president of the State Rifle and Pistol Association.

Fred gives a nice summary...

The purpose of the new group is to represent not only clubs and federations and the establishment, but also to reach out to the state's 1.5 million individual sportsmen and womeny who are unaffiliated, as well as to hiking, camping, bird-watching and other outdoors groups.

The magnificent idea here is to create a coalition of recreationists who may not agree with each other, all of the time, but who recongize the advantage of mutual protection and represenation, and a louder voice through bigger numbers.

This something to watch, for sure—and maybe it will move our adgenda ahead farther in the state legislature.

P'Link