eNEWS
2005
JULY - DECEMBER
THE LATEST BULLETIN WILL ALWAYS APPEAR ON TOP
eNEWS is a news bulletin written specifically for KNGG Members.
The contents of eNEWS are the property of KNGG.
eNEWS may not be copied or reproduced in part or full
without consent of KNGG.

eNEWS is a KNGG Membership Service.

NOVEMBER 12, 2005

The Annexation of Town land into Valatie

ANNEXATION INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS NOW SET:
Nov. 16 - Anthony Buono parcel - Niverville Firehouse 7:00 PM

Nov. 21 – Tim Holk - The Fire House in Niverville - 7:00 PM

KNGG COMMENTS:

RE: Register-Star ANNEXATION Article of October 28, “Buono modifies annexation project request, from 35-acre parcel to only 14.6”

In this article we have learned that what was once a Town of Kinderhook subdivision/housing project application of Anthony & Michael Buono, has evolved into a Village of Valatie annexation project. Two other projects are going the same route.

FOR THE ENTIRE EDITORIAL, SEE OUR NEW CHAPTER "ANNEXATION/SUBDIVISION" Click on "Background"

NOVEMBER 6, 2005

You’ve seen the signs.  VOTE YES ON LIBRARY PROPOSITION.

What do they mean?  

Why does the Kinderhook/Valatie Library need your support for the library ballot referendum?  

For the first time in six years the libraries are seeking an increase. During those six years, prices of everything have soared, - including operating costs, utility bills, the cost of books and materials for the libraries. 

In addition to covering increased costs, the libraries would like to extend library hours and provide additional services to the community.  

Q.  How much additional will my tax bill be?

A.  This translates to a tax bill of  $21.50 a year for a $100,000 assessment.

Library members ask you to support these efforts and Vote YES on Tuesday. 

For additional information: Visit www.kngg.org

Go to CURRENT ISSUES -  Click on URGENT ACTION

POLLS ARE OPEN FROM 6 AM TO 9 PM TUES NOV 8^th

The Independent

 November 4, 2004

Sharp differences mark Kinderhook contest

By: RICHARD ROTH

KINDERHOOK-This fall's race for Town Supervisor is a re-match between former Town Building Inspector Walt Simonsmeier, who has the Republican and Conservative ballot lines, and three-term incumbent Doug McGivney, a Democrat who has also been endorsed by the Independence and Working Families parties.

       Mr. McGivney points out that Kinderhook taxes have remained stable throughout his term in office. At $0.84 per $1,000 of assessed value they are third lowest in the county.

       Mr. Simonsmeier says steps should be taken to ensure that individual assessments are fair and accurate. "You can't sit behind a desk and raise assessments across the board," says Mr. Simonsmeier.

       "Is he running for supervisor or assessor?" says Mr. McGivney. The town assessor does view all properties from the public right-of-way as required by law, he says, and new software will allow the photographs she takes to be included in the Town Hall database.

       Moreover, Mr. McGivney says, the current town building inspector follows up on building permits to make sure the assessor is notified when a certificate of occupancy (C of O) is issued, something he says Mr. Simonsmeier did not always do. "There's no taxing until a C of O is issued," said Mr. McGivney. He said Mr. Simonsmeier had failed to track close to 100 building permits during his time as building inspector.

       Relations between the Town Board and Highway Superintendent Mark Irish have often been strained, and Mr. Simonsmeier says he will be better able to deal with the situation than Mr. McGivney. "The Highway Department situation is political," says Mr. Simonsmeier. "The town attorney has told the board they have no authority over the highway superintendent, and if the voters don't like him they can vote him out."

       Mr. McGivney said he is aware of Mr. Simonsmeier's position highway superintendent's autonomy, but he does not completely agree. "He said at the League of Women Voters forum that he would approve the budget and get out of the way," said Mr. McGivney. "But there are areas where the law specifically puts the burden on the town supervisor."

       For example, said Mr. McGivney, the Town Board would have been held responsible for disturbing the wetlands on Hennett Road, where Mr. Irish was directed to restore an area that had filled in when the road was rebuilt. And the town would have to answer to the state comptroller for purchases made without proper documentation. "It's the duty of the supervisor to see that everybody complies with the law," said Mr. McGivney.

       Mr. Simonsmeier says the town needs to do more for its senior citizens. He would set up a phone line so that they can get help with household tasks such as snow shoveling and leaf raking. And he would see to it that the town builds affordable housing for those above retirement age.

       "The last house of that kind was built 10 years ago in Valatie, and there was a waiting list from day one," says Mr. Simonsmeier.

       Mr. McGivney says the town has done as much as it can given the political situation in Washington. "We have done as much as we can legally do at this point, we have done a density bonus," said Mr. McGivney. "The major current problem is the lack of HUD [federal Department of Housing and Urban Development] funds. Without HUD it's hard to have senior housing. You can do upper-class senior housing, but that's not what we're after."

       Flooding problems in houses at Quail Run subdivision, which was developed by Marcel St. Onge of Advantage Builders, have been blamed on Mr. Simonsmeier, who granted building permits there during his tenure as building inspector. But Mr. Simonsmeier says the Planning Board and the Town Board are at fault for having approved the subdivision and for failing to stop construction of new houses once water problems became apparent.

       Quail Run resident John Zimmerman "started pumping water in December of 2003," said Mr. Simonsmeier. "When they got water, why didn't McGivney and [town engineer Pat] Pendergast put a halt to all buildings at that time? If I was supervisor in December of 2003, I would have halted all construction."

       Mr. McGivney says the problem was that Mr. Simonsmeier allowed Mr. St. Onge to continue building, even after it became apparent that basements in Quail Run were below the water table.

       "The Zimmermans have photos that showed water in the basement, and he allowed them to keep building," said Mr. McGivney. "The state code requires that the footings and basement floor be two feet above the highest water table measurements, and [Mr. Simonsmeier] should have picked that up."

       Mr. Simonsmeier says that he did, in fact, send violation notices to Mr. St. Onge, and that construction on the Zimmerman house was stopped at one point. "[Mr. St. Onge] came back with corrective measures, and raised the house about a foot," said Mr. Simonsmeier. "The engineer and the supervisor saw the report, and I told Marcel to proceed."

       An earlier application by Mr. St. Onge for a subdivision at the Quail Run property had been denied because of the area's high water table, but Mr. St. Onge "misled" the current Planning Board when he re-applied, according to Mr. McGivney.

       "Most Planning Board members were not on the board when the previous application had been made," said Mr. McGivney. "We had a new Planning Board and a new attorney; the only congruity was Marcel [St. Onge], and he came in with different data."

       Just how long the winner of this election will be in office will not be known until after Election Day. A separate ballot provision approved by the Town Board earlier this year allows voters to determine whether the successful candidate serves for two years or four.

       To contact reporter Richard Roth, e-mail rroth@indenews.com.  

VOTE TUESDAY! POLLS ARE OPEN FROM 6 AM TO 9 PM TUES NOV 8^th

November 4, 2005
 
THE ELECTION & KNGG
As usual prior to an election, our membership ask for guidance and wish to know how the candidates stand on issues of interest to KNGG.  The following list hopefully answers this as best as possible.  This is not meant to be an endorsement for any one one candidate.
 
KINDERHOOK CANDIDATES
 
SUPERVISOR – Doug McGivney
On Widewaters, McGivney proclaimed to be pro-development, but anti-roundabout and wanted a smaller project.
 
KNGG proposed the Corridor Study Committee – McGivney supported it.
McGivney supported and was involved in getting land easements in town.
McGivney supported the KNGG proposal for a moratorium on big development
McGivney initiated the zoning change changed to restrict big box development to 40,000 Sq. ft. as opposed to 100,000 Sq. Ft.

With Francis Vecellio and Debby Johnson, he initiated cluster housing into the zoning code.
McGivney came out against LaFarge Cement application to DEC to burn tires as an alternate fuel
 
McGivney voted YES on the moratorium.
McGivney voted YES on the zoning code amendments against big development.
McGivney voted YES on the corridor study committee.
 
SUPERVISOR– Walt Simonsmeier
August 16, 2002 - Code Enforcement Officer, Walt Simonsmeier, wrote a letter to Marco Marzocchi, General Counsel for Widewaters giving a determination on their questions regarding zoning. Simonsmeier was incorrect on the two counts:
1. He advised Marzocchi that Widewaters’ project did not exceed the Density Control Schedule of the Town Zoning Code.
2. He advised that the septic systems for a shopping center could be characterized as an accessory use and be located in that portion of the lot located in the Ag/Residential District where retail uses are prohibited.
 
Simonsmeier did not have jurisdiction. On September 11, 2002, KNGG attorney, Jeff Baker, filed for appeal with Town Zoning Board of Appeals citing CEO Walt Simonsmeier’s determination re: zoning requirements for Widewaters’ Commons.

On November 25, 2002 the ZBA determined that Simonsmeier’s letter was not an official "determination" and thus could not be appealed. Attorney Jeff Baker insisted the ZBA designate that the letter cannot have any legal effect in future. Accordingly, ZBA stated Walt Simonsmeier’s letter could have no legal effect.
 
Simonsmeier has recently tried to take credit for the formation of the Corridor Study Committee when in fact it was first suggested at KNGG meetings by Marilyn Kaplan and Meg Moran and later proposed at a Town Board meeting by KNGG members. Simonsmeier never had anything to do with its formation or adoption.
 
When Simonsmeier was asked how he stood on the LaFarge application to burn tires as an alternate fuel, he wasn't aware of the dispute & healthcare for the town.
 
TOWN COUNCIL: Debbie Johnson.
As an experienced Town Councilwoman, Johnson has planned, supported and promoted the new town park.  She has been instrumental in supporting McGivney and Vecellio on conservation issues including the moratorium, zoning code changes and the Corridor Study Committee.
 
Debbie Johnson voted YES on the moratorium.
Debbie Johnson voted YES on the zoning code amendments against big development.
Debbie Johnson voted YES on the corridor study committee.
 
TOWN COUNCIL: Helen Schneider
Although Helen Schneider spoke up for Widewaters at numerous hearings in the past, she has promised to support the corridor study, the zoning code and the comprehensive plan. “I have concrete plans to improve, preserve and expand our green spaces.   Helen serves on the Village of Valatie ZBA. 
 
TOWN COUNCIL – Mary Kramarchyk
On Dec. 2,  2003, Councilwoman, Mary Kramarchyk sent "Memorandum" to Kinderhook Town Board with Marzocchi’s letter and a copy of the DOT letter Marzocchi sent her. Kramarchyk wrote, "Widewaters has made substantial progress in addressing our concerns until the planning board voted to require a
supplemental EIS." "It would be in the interest of all citizens and the Town of Kinderhook if the planning board would continue to be open-minded and communicate more fully with Widewaters as to their concerns, especially if additional issues should arise."
 
December 12, 2002 – KNGG President Schaefer was quoted in the Register-Star, "It is unethical that a Town Board member (Mary Kramarchyk) is communicating with this developer." Ed Simonsen, Planning Board Chairman, "I find it troubling that an applicant with a proposal in front of the Planning Board, is
communicating with an elected official.” Dec.13, 2003 The Independent: Schaefer stated that Mary Kramarchyk wrote to the Planning Board strongly supporting Widewaters. This letter coming from a Town councilwoman to the Planning Board with her instructions for support of the developer, suggests to KNGG that Widewaters is orchestrating a pressured approval through council member Mary Kramarchyk.. The Town Board needed to remain neutral and not show partiality and should not allow the project to become a political issue as Mary Kramarchyk had tried to do.
 
Kramarchyk voted NO on the moratorium.
Kramarchyk voted NO on the zoning code amendments against big development.
Kramarchyk voted NO on the corridor study committee.
 
TOWN COUNCIL: Jeff Pinkowski – Front page, Register-Star, October 28, 2005:
“Building inspector says Pinkowski violated law for building without a permit.”  The
building is at 73 Chatham Street in Kinderhook Village. Walt Simonsmeier, Building Inspector for the Village of Valatie issued the building permit. Glenn Smith, Village of Kinderhook Building Inspector says the building is in Village of Kinderhook.

Valatie Information Officer Donna Schneider Stated: “There is no assessment information for the (Valatie portion of the) parcel on file in the village office.” She also stated: “There is no taxation/billing documents on file in the village office. We at KNGG know little about Pinkowski except that this is not a good beginning for him or Simonsmeier. 
 
CONCLUSION:   The ELECTION and KNGG
The outcome of Tuesday's election will determine not only how the future Kinderhook will look but how our quality of life will be affected.  This rural town's character versus suburban sprawl and whether or not additional traffic congestion on 9/9H will drastically increase causing air pollution from idling cars and trucks caused by developers of planned subdivisions in the town asking for annexatio in to Valatie.  
Simonsmeier is calling Routes 9/9H Kinderhook's  "BUSINESS" CORRIDOR. That's scary! 

If you believe GOOD GROWTH is important, and I'm sure you do, please get to
the polls this Tuesday, November 8th.
 
KNGG Would like to see responsible officials elected who have the best interests of the town at heart.

KNGG has weighed what the candidates have done and what they tell us. Walt Simonsmeier and Mary Kramarchyk were strongly in favor of the Widewaters project, roundabout and big development no matter what the cost.  They will probably misinterpret the Comprehensive Plan to suit their agenda.  Pinkowski is a developer of subdivisions.  With the annexation vote coming, we consider this a conflict of interest. 
 
Doug McGivney, Debbie Johnson and Helen Schneider support the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code in the way it was intended. 
We believe if there should be any amendments, they would reflect GOOD GROWTH.  Doug McGivney has promoted and been involved in land conservation in Kinderhook and saved much land for farming, open space and the Town Park.
  
It's important for all of us to get out and vote this Tuesday, November 8th. 

Vote for GOOD GROWTH!
 
E X T R A
Pick up Friday's Independent tonight or tomorrow morning.
Front page,
“Sharp differences mark K’hook contest”
Quail Run: flooding of homes discussed
 
You can access past KNGG eNEWS
By visiting www.kngg.org . 
Go to E-NEWS and just click on the year you want.
 
To learn more about the annexation of lands within the Town of Kinderhook into
the Village of Valatie, visit www.kngg.org.  
Go to CURRENT ISSUES, click on “Annexation.”

OCTOBER 6, 2005

NEW KNGG E-MAIL ADDRESS NOW IN EFFECT:
ON UPPER LEFT OF THIS PAGE - CLICK ON - CONTACT US
In order to avoid the high numbers of junk mail we've been receiving, we have followed the advice of "Consumers Report" and changed our address.Please remember to update your e-mail address book.

10/04/2005 From the Independent
Kinderhook corridor study set to expand
By: RICHARD ROTH

KINDERHOOK-Town Supervisor Doug McGivney hopes to see the 9-9H Corridor
Committee broaden its mission to take on a full review of the town's
Comprehensive Plan.

The proposal was listed on the agenda for the regular monthly meeting of the
Town Board last night, Monday, October 3.
"Our problem has been with commercial design standards, which are part of
the Comprehensive Plan," said Mr. McGivney. "And in a sense the corridor study
is so entwined with the Comprehensive Plan. It just had its five-year anniversary,
and it's time for a review." Their experience over the past several months, he said,
makes members of the Corridor Committee "best suited to do that."
There are 13 members on the committee, which is co-chaired by Robert
Cramer and Joanne Gans. Meetings are held at Town Hall at 7 p.m. the second
Wednesday of the month, and they are open to all residents.
The committee intends to look at the entire 9-9H corridor, according to Mr.
Cramer, but he said "the first couple of miles from the train bridge is the first
objective." The loop through the villages of Valatie and Kinderhook is being
focused on, he said.
"We hope to get the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the right people
aware that the mile strip between the villages is the main connector," said Mr.
Cramer. "A piece of sidewalk from Four Brothers [restaurant] to Valatie is also
important. Kids use it a lot and so do workers at Stewart's and McDonald's."
Mr. Cramer said committee members hoped to walk business sections of the
9-9H corridor with representatives from DOT, and that they wanted to discuss a
possible reduction in the speed limit between County Route 28 and the
roundabout at the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H with State Farm Road.
Problems adapting to the recently completed roundabout also need to be
discussed with DOT, he said.
"The Fire Department anticipates problems with the roundabout," said Mr.
Cramer. "It's still up to the driver to stop when they see the red lights on a fire
engine."
The committee has applied for a grant of $52,000 from the State of New York
Quality Communities Program. The money would be used to hire a consultant to
analyze the potential build-out along the corridor.
Meanwhile, a questionnaire is being prepared for all town residents, based
on a poll of community members to determine what they considered the most
important areas of study.
The corridor committee's original mandate, Supervisor McGivney said last
winter, was to speed the review process for potential developers, to clear hurdles
for responsible development, and to improve relationships among town residents,
commercial tenants, and real estate developers.
"We've been making pretty good progress," said Mr. Cramer.
To contact reporter Richard Roth, e-mail rroth@indenews.com.

KNGG Speaks Up 
It is important to have the community involved in the corridor study. But more
importantly, we need professional planners to take a good look and make
suggestions to the committee by submitting various plans incorporating feedback
from the public. Not long ago East Greenbush went through this process.
Unfortunately the EGB Town Board did not have foresight enough to adopt the
final plans made during several meetings of professional planners and the public.
The process beautifully and they came up with some superb plans. We need
those professional planners or we will flounder.
A.S.

OCTOBER 1, 2005

IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR HEALTH, PLEASE E-MAIL THE D.E.C. THIS
WEEK END RE LAFARGE TIRE BURNING. This is not about a shopping center. It's about
the air you breathe and the foods you eat. It's about all our lives!
Issues you may want to discuss may be found on our web site, www.kngg.org &
go to LaFarge Cement Plant. Also much is covered in yesterday's e-NEWS. The
letter need not be complicated. it can be as simple as, "Please do not approve
the LaFarge permit to burn millions of tires yearly in Ravena. I do not believe that
putting tons of toxins in the air yearly can be safe and not have an adverse effect
on my family's health."

Here is a copy of one member's letter:

Dear Mr. Clarke,
I live only a few miles east of the La Farge Cement Plant. As someone who
suffered from severe asthma as a child, I am more concerned about potential
sources of pollution than others might be. And I feel that the DEC granted a
negative declaration to the La Farge proposal to burn tires rather too quickly.
Most of the data that the company presented in the application process was
based on shredded tires which produce far less toxic by products than whole
tires. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how whole tires break down more
slowly and potentially cool the burning chamber before optimal heat is reached
thereby allowing more unburned toxic matter to be released into the atmosphere.
Yet La Farge has made application to be allowed to burn whole tires. They are
not interested in bearing the cost of shredding those tires. And they were not, as
far as I can see, even required to provide an Environmental Impact Statement.
How long must we succumb to the attitude that human health is less important
than corporations making as much money as possible? And in this case, not
even an American owned company?
Robert Baksa
Kinderhook, NY 12106

KINDERHOOK SUPERVISOR DOUG MCGIVNEY WROTE, YOU CAN TOO!

Comments must be received by Monday at 4 PM
Regarding Application ID: 4-0124-00001/00112
FAX OR E-MAIL:

William J. Clarke
fax at: 357-2460
r4dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us
 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2005

TAG SALE BIG SUCCESS!
Your drop offs at the Cash residence and Spivy residence were numerous. The
KNGG Volunteers worked to near midnight Friday 9/23 setting up. And
volunteers started work at 6:30 Saturday morning pricing items, selling until 4:30
PM and cleaning up till 7:00 PM. It was a great day!
 
Our goal was to earn $2000. We earned $3600!
 
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the members and friends who
donated items for the sale.
 
For time donated to the above chores, I thank Ally Anderson Spivy, Abbey and
Larry Cash, Sue Chiafullo, Jack and Carol Corrigan, Dick Morrill, John Pickett,
Phyllis Teal, Jock Spivy and Jayne Zinke. We could not have done it without you.
WOW, WHAT A GREAT TEAM!
 
I thank Abbey and Larry Cash for donating their front yard from Friday night
through Saturday night and for the hospitality of inviting the public to participate.
 
A very special thanks goes to our coordinators, Ally Anderson Spivey and Abbey
Cash. They worked hard planning and making calls and then accepting the
goods. And if that wasn’t enough, they put in many hours from Friday afternoon
through Saturday evening moving tables, sorting, tagging, selling and cleaning up.
Our hats are off to Ally and Abbey! Thank you.
 
From those that donated to those that worked at the site, it could not have
happened without everyone working together toward one goal, a healthy KNGG.
Thank you.
 
Allen Schaefer, president
 
ABOUT THE ROUNDABOUT
Frustrated Motorist
To the Editor:
This afternoon I spent some quality time with my husband trapped in the new
roundabout at the intersection of Route 9/9H and State Farm Road.
I would like five minutes alone with the geniuses who decided this project
would be a good idea.
If their goal was to create confused, frustrated drivers and an extremely
hazardous situation, then they have succeeded admirably.
We will avoid this area in the future at all cost.
Donna Connors
Greenport
-- The Register-Star, Friday September 30, 2005
 
For more information on the roundabout, visit our web site at www.KNGG.org –
move down to ROUNDABOUT and click on your choice.  

TOWN WINS $10,000 IN SIGN CASE
KINDERHOOK – The Town of Kinderhook has collected $10,000 for a violation of
its sign ordinance by the (Cobble Pond Farms) Sunoco filling station on Route 9.
 
“We started an action in Supreme Court to restrain the sign, and at the same time
we started a violation action in Town Justice Court,” said Town Attorney Edward
McConville. “The (town) judge found the corporate defendant guilty and imposed
a $10,000 fine.”
 
The fine was converted to a civil judgment, according to Mr. McConville, which
was then turned over to Columbia County Sheriff. “The sheriff attached a bank
account of the defendant, seized the money, paid it to us,” he said.
 
The outcome of the civil action does not effect a case still before state Supreme
Court that seeks an injunction requiring the owner to remove the sign. “A
judgment in one action does not mean another court is bound by it,” said
McConville.
 
The Town Supervisor Doug McGivney said the currently displayed at the Sunoco
filling station, while smaller than the one that caused the original court action, is
still not in compliance.
 
“It will be on the (Town Board) agenda next month,” said Mr. McGivney. – Richard
Roth, The Independent September 30, 2005. 
For more information on the Route 9 Sunoco violation, on this web site – go to
CURRENT ISSUES and click on Sunoco, Kinderhook.
 

SEPTEMBER 30, 2005

IT'S NOW OR NEVER--
ARE TIRE BURNING EMISSIONS COMING TOYOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?
There isn't much time left. The Lafarge Comment Period ends on Monday,
October 3 at 4 PM. After that it is over. There are no more hearings, nor more
comment periods, no more nothing except possibly a cement plant burning tires
upwind of Columbia County, Rensselaer County and southern Albany County.

The good news- Tuesday I went to the DEC. -the comments against the proposal
were running 4-1 of those in favor. Those in favor were industry associations, tire
suppliers and manufacturers and elected officials in Oklahoma and Pennsylvania
where Lafarge has plants (can you say campaign contributions?)

The bad news-- There were exactly 61 opposing pieces of correspondence.
Some were FoH pre-printed postcards. Add to those the 45 who spoke against
the plant at both public hearings and it comes to a whopping opposition of just
over 100. Not exactly a groundswell.

Here's what we have to do--
After what we have already accomplished Friends of Hudson should be able to
stop this project. This is far less complicated and difficult than SLC was, although
it is a bit more obscure. At the very least we should be able to demand and get
stringent permit conditions that could improve air quality in the region instead of
allowing Lafarge to get a free ride from the DEC. Jeff Baker and CDM are
working hard, at considerable cost, to leave no stone unturned. Lafarge and the
DEC believe that FoH is the 500 pound gorilla. They won't continue to believe that
if our members don't weigh in.

Here are the major issues-
>>> Lafarge wants to burn whole tires when shredded tires would be significantly
better in terms of toxic emissions. They own a subsidiary that sources whole tires
from places like Sears and K-Mart. probably they get a tipping fee for taking them
(don't know that for sure). Then they save at least $1 million a year in the cost of
fuel.

>>> Lafarge's application uses data from shredded tires to project emissions.
Why? Especially since they own 9 whole tire burning plants in North America?
They are using misleading data and DEC is allowing them to get away with it.

>>> Against all logic and reason the DEC issued a Neg Dec on this
proposal--there will be no Issues Conference, no adjudication. They issued a draft
permit on the basis of Lafarge's application. Why?

>>> The draft permit allows Lafarge to increase their carbon monoxide emissions
by 99 tons per year. Other cement plants, burning whole tires at a higher
percentage than Lafarge's proposal have shown no increase in CO emissions.
Why is the DEC allowing this?

>>> Lafarge has consistently exceeded the upper limits of its air permit
conditions. The DEC has not issued any consent orders or enforcement actions,
calling these minor violations. We believe that a pattern of minor violations should
rise to a level of concern. Furthermore we believe that they haven't been so lenient
with other polluting companies in the area. Why?

>>> Northern Columbia and southern Rensselaer counties are directly downwind
of the Lafarge stack. Some are as close as 3 miles away. Yet the DEC has not
held a hearing on this in Columbia County. Yesterday in DEC files I found a letter
from Lafarge to DEC stating that they would not agree to another extension and
hearing in Columbia County.

Sorry to lecture, but:
Where is our outrage? Where is our concern? Where is our activism and our
citizenship? What does it take to send a quick letter or e-mail BEFORE IT'S TOO
LATE?

PLEASE, write, fax or e-mail today. You can refer to any or all the issues outlined
above. You can check our website (friendsofhudson.org) for more information.
You can call me (822-0334).

You don't need to be an expert to say "I am opposed to tire burning. I want an
extension and a hearing in Columbia County so that I and my neighbors can have
our voices heard."

If you haven't already, please sign our petition at
http://www.petitiononline.com/lafarge

Send comments (must be received by Monday at 4 PM) regarding Application ID:
4-0124-00001/00112 to:

William J. Clarke
NYSDEC Region 4 Headquarters
1150 North Westcott Road
Schenectady, NY 12306

or fax at: 357-2460 or e-mail him at : r4dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us

Thank you.
Susan Falzone, FoH

I implore you to join us and write to the above.
Allen Schaefer KNGG

SEPTEMBER 22, 2005
REPORT: on DEC LaFarge Hearing of Sept.. 21st
 
Upon arrival at 7:00 PM, the auditorium of the Ravena High School was about 1/3
full. Four people spoke in favor of approving the LaFarge permit. Three were
consultants hired and paid by LaFarge and one was the president of the union
local representing members employed by LaFarge.
 
Attorney Jeff Baker, who has been retained by Friends of Hudson, Susan Falzon,
Deputy Director of Friends of Hudson and a gentleman representing Scenic
Hudson spoke against the LaFarge permit citing studies and research done by a
consulting firm hired by FoH and other research as well.
 
Members of KNGG, residents of Stuyvesant (including one Town Board member),
Chatham, Schodack Landing and Hudson spoke out against the permit. Only
three people from the west side of the Hudson spoke up against the application.
Supervisor Doug McGivney of Kinderhook was absent but he sent a
representative, Lenny Collins, to read his report to the DEC.  Many speakers from
Columbia County demanded that the DEC hold a hearing in Columbia County.
Why does the DEC think that the only area to be effected by this proposal is
Green County?  Crossing the Hudson to Ravena from various areas of Columbia
County can take from forty minutes to one and one half hours.
 
The most devastating fact that came out was how the DEC gave the LaFarge
application a “negative declaration” meaning that LaFarge will not be required to
file an environmental impact statement (EIS). Judy Grunberg pointed out that she,
owner of a small farm outside Chatham was required to file an EIS to put up a
barn for use as a performance space. Yet the large firm of LaFarge, who has
already been cited for polluting the air and breaking DEC regulations, is allowed
to go forward without filing an EIS. Where is the logic? Where are the safeguards
that are are supposed to protect our health?
 
KNGG Board member Abbey Cash pointed out that the DEC declared a negative
declaration for LaFarge because “it solved the problem of excess used tires in
the state and it gave LaFarge a monetary benefit. This is all being done at the
expense of the health of our local citizens. The DEC should be doing a better job.
You are playing Russian Roulette with our lives.”
 
A gentleman from Chatham accused the DEC of having a conflict of interest in
this situation. He reported that the DEC has been charged with the job of getting
rid of waste tires. Along comes LaFarge who tells the DEC we’ll get rid of these
tires for you by burning them, if allowed to do so.  Is this not a case of the fox
guarding the henhouse?
 
One contributor told of how he asked Mr. Clark, a DEC official, how they
determined this application as a negative declaration. Clark’s answer was that a
“model” was used as a comparison. What model? The full impact of burning tires
has yet to be determined. Scientists have not yet determined the toxicity of many
chemicals that would be released into the air. What model did the DEC use?
 
It was obvious that when the speakers hired by LaFarge spoke, the figures they
quoted were mostly from plants burning shredded tires, not whole tires which is
LaFarge’s proposal. Whole tires release more toxins when burnt. One woman
spoke of having spent extensive time in France where the French had learned to
make safe, noise reduced super highways out of used tires. And one man from
Baltimore brought in a rubber shingle like those he just used to cover his home.
There are many ways other than burning to get rid of used tires.
 
KNGG president Allen Schaefer stated, “One does not have to be rocket scientist
to be aware that the air we breathe is already polluted. Does it make any sense
to add more toxic pollutants to our air?”
 
He continued, “LaFarge is telling us that by burning 5 million tires per year they will
save a million dollars in fuel expense. I ask the DEC, how many millions will we
have to pay out in medical expenses to compensate for this? How many lives are
to be lost to save LaFarge this one million dollars? How can the DEC ask the
citizens of this state to be subject to the many dreaded illnesses caused these
toxic pollutants?
 
LaFarge has hired consultants to prove that burning whole tires in this kiln is safe.
These consultants were hired by LaFarge to do just this. Friends of Hudson hired
consultants also. They did not tell their consultants to prove that LaFarge’s
proposal is not safe. Friends of Hudson asked their consultants to look at every
aspect and report the findings. The findings say that this process is unsafe and
harmful to our health. I am more apt to believe Friends of Hudson’s consultants.
The LaFarge consultants inspire no credibility.
 
Tonight we heard from a Hudson woman who walks down Rossman Ave. every
morning to work. She can see the LaFarge smoke plum from Hudson, 16.5 miles
away across the Hudson. Another lady from Schodack Landing told us she lives
only 3 miles from the plant on the bank on the opposite side of the river and has a
frightfully close view of the plum.
 
The junction of US9 and Albany Ave. in Kinderhook, is only nine miles to Lafarge
and the plum can bee seen from many areas of Kinderhook as well. Columbia
County is very close to this plant and should be more involved in the examination
of the LaFarge application for a permit as should Albany County, Rensselaer
County, the Berkshires and western Connecticut. The members of KNGG
demand that the DEC hold a hearing in Columbia County.
 
Yes, we have concerns about breathing poisoned air. However we are also
concerned about the pollutants that fall in the rivers and lakes. These pollutants
will be found in the fish. People eat fish. Pollutants will fall on local farmland. The
vegetables will absorb the pollutants from the soil. People eat vegetables. Live
stock eats this vegetation as well and people eat beef, lamb, pork and chickens,
etc. We will be hit in many ways from many directions with this LaFarge
generated toxic pollution.
 
KNGG is appalled that a private citizen wanting to build a barn for performing arts
on her farm was forced to file a State Environmental Impact Statement, yet a
polluting giant such as LaFarge is not requited to file an Environmental Impact
Statement. Why and how are they getting away with this? I am told the mission of
the DEC is to protect the public. I certainly do not see this here tonight.
 
In conclusion, KNGG demands that LaFarge be required to file an Environmental
Impact Statement and we expect to see you (the DEC) at a LaFarge hearing in
the near future in Columbia County.
 
KNGG BENEFIT
TAG SALE
THIS SATURDAY 9/24
47 Broad Street, Village of Kinderhook

SEPTEMBER 19,2005
LAFARGE TIRE BURN UPDATE FROM FOH
At last week’s Public Information Meeting on Lafarge’s tire burning proposal the
language used by Lafarge and DEC to answer questions as well as their
comments afterwards made it clear that we are on the right track in our issues.
We heard information about how the DEC handles violations that will allow us to
make a stronger case against the permit and gave us even more basis for a
Clean Air Act citizen lawsuit that we are contemplating.

There were about a dozen and a half people other than DEC and Lafarge
employees at last night’s meeting. That provided us with the opportunity to ask
questions that revealed weaknesses in their arguments.

There were at least as many Lafarge supporters as opponents at this meeting.
That is new- Lafarge is now mobilizing employees and contractors.

We must show strength at the Public Hearing on Wednesday, September 21 and
we must send many more letters of opposition between now and October 3 when
the comment period closes. We don’t appear nearly as strong without a public
display of our strength.

In light of the present and future energy crisis, corporations of all kinds will be
seeking to burn tires (TDF) and other hazardous materials to reduce the cost of
operations and increase profits. We need to be more vigilant than ever. We
cannot allow the draft permit for Lafarge to be issued by the DEC. It presents
several significant problems:

Track Record
Lafarge has a poor track record with frequent Air Permit compliance deviances.
In the first 5 months of 2005 alone our experts have found 20 incidents when
Lafarge exceeded plume opacity limits by a significant percentage for a