Deicing Road Runoff to be Addressed by the County

 


WPCNR COUNTY CLARION-LEDGER. From Westchester County Department of Communications. (EDITED) February 28, 2008: The Northern Westchester Watershed Committee released its Highway Deicing Task Force Report this month. The report documents existing conditions in the Croton Watershed, describes the environmental impacts of road salt and alternatives and provides strategies to decrease the use of road salt without sacrificing safety.


Some communities have already begun installing computerized salt monitors on their deincing equipment to limit the amount of salt and deicing chemicals that can work into the county watershed sources.    



  


“The health of our water bodies is of vital importance to Westchester,” said County Executive Andy Spano.  “This report shows us how to improve record-keeping on alt usage and how to protect our natural resources through best management practices.”


In 2006, Spano, the watershed committee and Alex Matthiessen, president of Riverkeeper, focused attention on the effect road salt can have on water quality. In response, this task force was created to protect natural resources while providing for the safety of the traveling public. The task force concluded that the general public lacks an understanding of the impact salt and other deicing chemicals have on water quality.


The report was distributed to municipalities, and some have already begun to implement recommendations.  For example, the towns of Somers and North Castle will be fitting equipment with computerized salt spreaders to monitor and control  the amount of salt spread on roads.


Funding for further implementation and possible expansion of the report will be discussed at future NWWC meetings.  The report is available online by clicking on the stormwater tab at http://www.westchestergov.com/planning/environmental/.  For more information, contact Christina Anderson, environmental planner, at (914) 995-3782 or [email protected].

Posted in Uncategorized

Comptroller Sounds Warning on Governor’s Budget.

WPCNR ALBANY ROUNDS. From the State Comptroller’s Press Office. February 28, 2008: The proposed Executive Budget closes a $4.4 billion budget gap in fiscal year 2008-09 and adjusts spending in response to growing signs that the economy is in trouble, according to a report issued today by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. DiNapoli praised the Governor for the quick start to the budget process and for increased transparency in the Executive Budget documents. However, DiNapoli said the proposed budget relies too heavily on debt, makes revenue assumptions that may not materialize and could commit the State to future spending that is unsustainable.



The proposed Executive Budget closes a $4.4 billion budget gap in fiscal year 2008-09 and adjusts spending in response to growing signs that the economy is in trouble, according to a report issued today by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. DiNapoli praised the Governor for the quick start to the budget process and for increased transparency in the Executive Budget documents. However, DiNapoli said the proposed budget relies too heavily on debt, makes revenue assumptions that may not materialize and could commit the State to future spending that is unsustainable.

“We’re facing very uncertain economic times,” DiNapoli said. “If things continue to decline in the financial industry, New York will get hit even harder. The Governor made some difficult choices, but there will have to be more. We should only spend within the parameters of what the State can afford. When you spend more than you take in, something has got to give.

“The Executive Budget relies heavily on debt and would increase the state’s debt payments by nearly 50 percent over the next five years. And several of the new revenue streams identified in the proposed budget — including a tax on illegal drugs and conversion of not-for-profit health insurers to for-profit status — may not be realistic. The Governor and the Legislature should make sure this week’s revenue consensus process includes only revenues that are likely to materialize.”

DiNapoli’s report finds:

  • Significant Growth in Debt:  State-funded debt increases 24 percent to $67.3 billion over the next five years in the proposed budget. As a result, total debt service — the amount included annually to pay for the cost of debt — will become the fastest growing component of the budget. It is projected to increase by 48.3 percent from $5 billion to $7.5 billion in five years.
  • Out-Year Spending Increases Significantly Faster than Revenues and Personal Income: On average, General Fund spending is projected to increase 7.4 percent annually between 2008-09 and 2011-12, while revenues are only expected to grow by 4.7 percent annually and personal income by 5 percent.
  • Off-Budget Spending:  The $124.3 billion proposed budget represents an increase of $5.9 billion or 5 percent over 2007-08 on an All Funds basis. This figure does not account for $2.5 billion in off-budget spending by the state’s public authorities, increasing the state’s total spending to $126.8 billion. For instance, $1.1 billion in new statewide economic development initiatives over a five-year period is off-budget and is not counted in the Financial or Capital Plans.
  • Out-Year Deficits Continue:  While the proposed budget reduces out-year gaps, the state will face shortfalls totaling $3.6 billion in 2009-10, $6.1 billion in 2010-11 and $7.2 billion in 2011-12. These gaps remain because the underlying reason for the gaps — spending more than the state is taking in — is not addressed. DiNapoli urged the Executive and Legislature to enact a final budget that does not increase out-year gaps and identifies how these gaps will be addressed.
  • Public Authority Debt:  Debt caps for certain public authorities are increased by $5.6 billion or 19.6 percent. Total sale of new debt by public authorities was $12.2 billion in 2007-08 and is projected to be $15.1 billion in 2008-09 — a 24 percent increase.
  • Capital Projects:  The proposed budget includes approximately $11 billion in new capital spending, including $9.3 billion for SUNY and CUNY projects, $900 million for economic development, $355 million for racing proposals, much of which is financed through debt issued by the state’s public authorities without voter approval. The $11 billion does not include new transportation initiatives from the State Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Transit Authority.
  • Risks:  The proposed budget closes a $4.4 billion deficit and allows for $416 million in new spending by using $1.5 billion in nonrecurring resources, including $200 million from the Environmental Protection Fund, and $1.1 billion in new or increased taxes and fees. However, the report identifies risks of $2.6 billion to the Financial Plan, including $676 million in proposals that have been rejected by the Legislature in previous years and new revenue proposals, such as a new tax on illegal drugs, which may not materialize.
  • Privatization of the Lottery: The proposal is too vague for analysis and further details have not yet been released. When those details are available, DiNapoli’s office will evaluate the potential effect on state finances.
  • Positive Changes in Budget Process: This year’s budget was developed in a much more public way than in previous years. The new process includes consensus discussions on revenues in November, as well as statewide budget hearings. The proposed budget also contains more information in the Financial Plan than in past Executive proposals.  

In January, DiNapoli urged state lawmakers to enact a new debt cap after his office released a debt study, which indicated that State-funded debt grew to nearly $51 billion in the last fiscal year from $39 billion in 2002-03, a 31 percent increase. His proposal would place all new and existing outstanding State-funded debt under a cap, and limit State-funded debt to 5 percent of New York personal income. The cap would be phased in over a nine-year period and prohibit debt for any purpose other than capital projects.

Click here for a copy of the report or visit http://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2008/executivebudget022708.pdf.

An audio feed will be available on the Comptroller’s Web site this afternoon at www.osc.state.ny.us.

Posted in Uncategorized

New York Times Discovers Softball. It’s About Time!

 


WPCNR VIEW FROM THE UPPER DECK By Fastpitch Johnny. February 28, 2008: The New York Times sports section ran a column today – banner head – about softball and baseball being eliminated from the Olympics beginning in 2012. The column detailed the efforts of the USA Softball backed organization, Back Softball to lobby the International Olympic Committee “at the cost of millions of dollars” to lobby reinstate softball and baseball to the quadrennial games.



Connecticut Brakettes in NPF Playoff Action, 2006.


Well, it is about time The Times, which devotes reams of copy to bicycling, golf NASCAR, an amateur basketball team called the Knick-Knacks actually covered softball. Four years or so ago when the National Pro Fastpitch league had a very good professional fastpitch softball team in Montclair, the Juggernaut, The Times never covered their games, never included standings of the NPF in their records section and never listed them as a sporting event. When this reporter called the sports editor of the Times to ask why, I was told it was not a sport anyone was interested in.


 



Well, here’s a bit of news for The Times – if you do not cover it – people do not know about it!


The Times ignores the NPF completely.


Now that the interests and continued “power and influence” of  the USA Softball organization has been threatened by softball being booted out of the Olympics, now the Times and USA Softball is making an effort to enlist Times support.


It is a little late.  But as a father of a softball player and ice-skater, as a fan of the indefatigable pioneers of professional softball, the National Pro Fastpitch league, which has survived for about a decade now, thanks to their commitment, sweat and dedidcation of its athletes, I applaud Mr. Vecsey’s column.


However, he is overlooking the great disgrace of USA Softball – they exist only for themselves and the aggrandizement of their organization which has not pushed or promoted the development of professional softball. Sure, their Olympic stars of their softball team have served as role models, and growth of the sport, but that’s it!


USA Softball exists only to promote one team – Team USA for its promotional tours during the summers – and exerts a selfish and athlete-exploitative influence on softball.  The NCAA by contrast has groomed fastpitch softball, even to the point of getting ESPN to cover its finals.  The NCAA softball stance has made a great deal of difference in the growth of the game.


USA Softball for the last seven years has stood in the way of promoting a career in professional softball for its best players. USA Softball insists on interrupting the National Pro Fast Pitch season for their tryouts for the USA team, and world competitions (for just a handful of players they control). They take away the better stars from the National Pro Fastpitch teams for their exhibition tours of Team USA, and they refuse to “partner” in a growth-friendly way with the National Pro Fastpitch league.


Had USA Softball been really focused “on the kids” (as the old organization line goes), they would have supported NPF financially, become partners and aided the league by giving it USA Softball branding. But they have not done that. Living wage contracts for professional players in fastpitch softball in a league that would sustain itself and grow was not in the mission or interest in USA Softball, which is a disgrace and shows where the minds are on the folks who run USA Softball. It is all about them, and their control of the sport.


How can I make such a charge? USA Softball tried to start a competing tour with the NPF with a series of exhibitions in the last two years, competing with the NPF for players. It did not work out.


Mr. Vecsey’s column today notes how baseball has  developed the World Baseball Classic. Well, this is nice, but baseball is an established sport.


Frankly, considering the doping scandals and the judging scandals, the Olympics has lost a lot of luster and prestige. Who knows that we have even scratched the surface of Olympic competitive corruption?


The USA Softball organization has to get over the Olympics and stop exploiting softball players for their benefit, which is what they do.


USA needs to look for the long term future of softball. The professional league will not grow unless USA Softball supports it and gets over the Olympic fixation. USA needs to partner with the pro league and promote it fully with stars of whatever USA Team is put together being released to the pro league as a step up. Because, frankly any NPF team can beat the USA Team on any given day. The games are close. NPF teams are the best competition the USA Softball team faces.


Spending “millions” to get softball back into the Olympics is not the way to grow softball. Put the millions into the Pro Fast Pitch league, or merger with it and set up your own USA Softball League, incorporating the successful NPF towns: Akron, Chicago, Allentown, Washington, New England, and now Rockford.  


If USA Softball cared about building professional careers playing softball this is what they could do.


Now, to make a living in softball, once they are off the Olympic Team or out of college, great softball players have to play for semi-pro teams like the Stratford Brakettes, coach softball on the college or school levels, work in clinics, or if they are stars on the USA Team, sign endorsement deals and conduct clinics. They do it because that is the only way they continue playing and contributing to the sport they love.


If the Mets and the Yankees had really cared they would have helped the New York Juggernaut when they were playing out of Montclair, New Jersey.


But, no one cares about the girls in USA Softball or their futures or building a professional league – least of all The New York Times.


ESPN for example never even covers softball even when they are televising it! But plenty of coverage is given to poker and NASCAR.


So, can we expect a little more from the Times in covering National Pro Fastpitch teams this year, Mr. Vecsey? The Standings, maybe? A list of results each day? Batting leaders? Schedules?


Today the Times listed the results of the Dubai Tennis results; the Zagreb Indoors Tennis, the player transactions of Major League Soccer, the NBA, the NFL, and the NHL. Does anyone except the superfan read those?


In the new touchy feely era of saving softball, the least the Times can do is give the girls who play fastpitch for pay, and who are really building the sport by signing autographs after every game, making appearances in communities, and holding down full-time jobs in the off-season — some coverage.


You might give the Philadelphia Force a call, who begin play in June in the NPF and have developed a wonderful following out in Allentown, PA.  Contact them at 1-215-875-2800, and they will be overjoyed to give you a story about softball now, the state of pro softball, and how their players are pioneering the sport like the players in the old Negro Leagues did for fifty years.

Posted in Uncategorized

BeeLine Bus Basic Fare Rises to $2 this Weekend

WPCNR COMMUTATION COMMENTATOR. From Westchester County Department of Communication. February 27, 2008: Effective Sunday, March 2, the basic Bee-Line coin fare will rise from $1.75 to $2.  A day earlier — Saturday, March 1 — the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will begin charging new prices for MetroCards which are also accepted on Bee-Line buses. The cost of a single ride MetroCard will remain at $2, however, with the change in the county coin fare from $1.75 to $2, New York City and Westchester bus fares will be identical as of March 2.



          “All transfers between local bus routes will become free under the new fare schedule,” said Spano.  “Coin-fare passengers on the Bee-Line who currently pay an extra 25 cents for a transfer will see that charge disappear.”  Transfer tickets will be good for boarding other Bee-Line local routes and for transfers to New York City local buses.  

         .


         
            The price for a single-ride MetroCard will remain at $2.  However, multiple-ride MetroCards still provide rider discounts.  Pay-Per-Ride MetroCards worth $8 will sell for $7 bringing the effective cost of a bus ride down to $1.75.  MetroCards provide free transfers to local buses and between buses and New York City subways.  Unlimited Ride MetroCards will reduce the single ride cost even more for people who ride frequently. 
            
             “We have been seeing more and more riders using MetroCards as opposed to cash,” said County Transportation Commissioner Lawrence C. Salley.  “With the uniform pricing between cash fares and MetroCard single fares, we anticipate even more MetroCard riders on our buses.” 
           


The increase in the coin fare on Westchester buses is designed to offset fuel and labor costs that have increased significantly in the last year, and to help pay for additional service on routes that have experienced ridership increases.  
           


“The new coin fare is expected to raise about half a million dollars a year,” Salley said. “This will help meet some of the increase in operating costs which has been approximately $5 million annually over the last few years.”


             Qualified seniors and passengers with qualifying disabilities will be able to ride at half-fare on the county’s and the New York City transit system, under both the coin and MetroCard reduced fare systems.  Reduced fare riders will pay $1 in coins and their transfers will also be free.  To transfer to subways, riders will need to use MetroCard.


            MetroCards are sold at many neighborhood stores in Westchester, Metro-North train stations and New York City subway stations.


            To find out more, call the Bee-Line Hotline at (914) 813-7777 or visit www.westchestergov.com/beelinebus.

Posted in Uncategorized