"Curfew" not really a curfew, But It's Still A Good Idea

Just about anyone who lived in Geneva in the1950s or 1960s remembers some kid getting into trouble and being brought home to their parents by the cops. Capraro, who lived on Cortland Street back then, recalls police were a regular presence at the old school playground. Those days are long gone-- the stuff of nostalgia-- but holding families more accountable for the actions of their children is still a good idea. We need to provide our police with resources for dealing with juvenile violations without requiring them to ‘babysit’ kids. After listening to what Charlie Davis, head of the Dorchester Ave Neighborhood Watch, had to say about his group’s proposal for a “curfew,” it makes sense to us. Only we wouldn’t call it a curfew.

We did some research on “juvenile curfew laws.” [Click here for a report from the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice] Technically, a curfew is setting a specific time that people have to be off the streets, or in their homes. Oftentimes, the curfew is enforced through general sweeps of neighborhoods, bringing any curfew violators to a central ‘holding center’ for processing before release. [See more details here] So, our initial reaction to a curfew is that it overburdens our police and the taxpayers by requiring labor-intensive enforcement and construction or renovation of some space to serve as the detention center.

But that’s not what Charlie Davis’ proposal calls for. According to Davis, children under the age of 18 would still be allowed out at night. It’s when they misbehave that things would change. For certain classes of violations, the police would be empowered to bring children home to their parents, instead of down to the station for elaborate processing. Their parents would have to take responsibility for their children, receive an appearance ticket and have to pay a fine, similar to the way parking tickets are handled. This seems reasonable and we think it would be effective.

As we see it, the proposal accomplishes three important objectives:

1. It empowers the police to re-connect children with their families almost immediately, without requiring them to get into the “family counseling” business. Therefore, they’d be doing less social service work, and would be back on their beats.
2. It provides for simplified follow up for certain kinds of violations. Serious crimes would, of course, not be handled in that manner.
   
3. Its primary goal is to involve families in crime prevention. It’s pulling families into a Neighborhood Watch of their own children.

A real curfew (like those in large cities such as Rochester, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, etc.) is aimed at reducing violent crime—crime committed by youth and crime where youth are the victims. These curfews are major operations, with entire police units dedicated to enforcement. However, there is no conclusive evidence that the curfews work. Rochester’s curfew did not show major results in its trial period, and Monroe County Supreme Court Justice VanStrydonck cited a 2003 study of municipal curfews when stating that the promises of curfews, “embraced by legislators of various municipalities - both large and small is often in conflict with the reality of the effectiveness of these ordinances. Curfew laws are said to provide legislators with the ability to project an image of being for law and order and of being tough on crime. However, a growing body of evidence gained from the study of the effectiveness of these laws 'fails to support the argument that curfews reduce crime and criminal victimization' committed by and upon youthful citizens.” In other words, an actual curfew, which the Davis proposal is not, would not likely work.

What does work in reducing crime is prevention, and the Davis proposal is essentially a prevention program involving families and communities.

We think the next step here in Geneva is for Council to see the Neighborhood Watch’s fully developed proposal and solicit input from the police officers, perhaps through a briefing from Chief Pane. We can then ask City Attorney, Clark Cannon, for a legal opinion both on issues of legality and enforcement. In our view, it shouldn’t take more than a few weeks to have a proposal ready for a public hearing. In the meantime, we encourage interested residents of all ages, to get involved in the community effort that Davis is leading to move this proposal forward.
The next meeting will be Wednesday, May 30th at 6:30pm at the Geneva Public Library.

Correcting Council’s “Revisionist History” with Real Facts

As described in our post about the last City Council meeting (Hindsight is 20/20) a number of claims were made under the guise of “New Business” that we didn’t get a chance to respond to. There had been a public hearing about the Kirkwood property that night, but no discussion of it was had until after members of the congregation and their attorney had left. If we had known that the end of the meeting would turn into a public hearing on us and our blog, we would have been prepared to respond in the following way:

First, we were criticized for posting images of the Kirkwood property and church membership. Those photographs were offered to inform the public what and whom was being discussed. The church is at the end of a dead end street and the site for sale can only be accessed from their private property. The argument for not selling the land to the church was based on the land’s potential for ‘a larger economic development use.’ Councilor Greco says that the pictures were offensive and embarrassing to the church and its neighbors. How so? The permission to access the site and to take the pictures was given by the church and there aren’t any pictures of the neighbors, so where’s the problem?

Next, Councilor Greco invoked an urban legend regarding the 9/11 memorial that is now located in Canandaigua. He claims it didn’t get placed in Geneva because Council objected to the image of prayer on it. In reality, the monument was proposed to be located in the former park on the corner of Lake and Exchange Street. Why do we refer to it as the “former park?” Because the Hampton Inn now sits where the park used to be. When the Fratto family approached the city about the monument, we were already in the midst of discussions about the Hampton Inn (in the back room). But we were told that those discussions were “confidential” and couldn’t be shared with the public. If we had accepted the monument, it would have been dug up and moved somewhere six months later, which seemed inappropriate treatment for a monument. But we couldn’t share that reasoning with the public, so other people filled in the blanks (including the Finger Lakes Times) and started a rumor that it was denied because it depicted prayer. Council declined the monument (as a majority), for reasons having nothing to do with prayer. It would be nice if Councilor Greco would deal in facts rather than rumors.

Then Councilors Greco and D’Amico attempt to discredit us with their assertion that we, Augustine and Capraro, somehow refused to participate in the neighborhood meeting between the church and its neighbors. Here's what council was told in a memo from the City Manager:

“Clr. Greco, in conjunction with Mark Venuti and the Kirkwood Ave residents, has organized a meeting on Tuesday (6pm) with the owners of the Church. It will be held in the Church.”

The City Manager in no way indicated that this meeting was a public meeting that other councilors could attend. In fact, if we had attended, there would have been a quorum present, meaning that the meeting would have been in violation of the Open Meetings Law and everyone would have had to go home because there was no public notice of the meeting provided. Even the Times' city reporter, Craig Fox, wasn’t told about the meeting, which really communicated to us that this was a closed-door session. Funny that other councilors seemed to have received a special invitation to attend.

In his typed out speech, Councilor Schroeder attacked Augustine by accusing her of opposing various projects because she “smelled a rat.” Let’s check the City Council record. The first was the Lyons National Bank project. Multiple councilors (Augustine included) expressed concerns about the speed with which Council was being asked to approve the project, and with the apparent lack of concern being shown to local businesses being affected by the project. Augustine was especially angered to hear that the project had been in the works for almost a year before Council was informed. A year certainly would have been plenty of time to bring the business owners along and prepare them for the changes. At no time did Augustine claim to “smell a rat.” After the project was approved, several residents and business owners came forward with concerns that management staff at the new bank had been employed by the City during the time the bank project was being considered. This information came as news to many on council, Augustine included. It never factored into the public discussion of the project, but perhaps it should have.

Schroeder went on to criticize Augustine for joining Councilor Nyrop in opposing tax breaks for the Lyceum Street Housing project. The reason for the opposition was clearly explained: Geneva cannot afford to give tax breaks to profit-making entities. The proposed housing was not low-income by local standards, it was in direct competition with private rental opportunities. Again, concerned citizens raised the issue that the City Manager was a board member of the very entity requesting the Payment in Lieu of Tax (PILOT) agreement. But this was not the reason Nyrop and Augustine voted ‘no;’ perhaps it should have been? Schroeder also mentioned the debate about the Main St. gas station, which has already been discussed here and the former firehouse behind city hall which is the subject of an upcoming post. Augustine didn’t vote against projects because she “smelled a rat” or suspected a “conspiracy.” She voted against projects that were done in haste or without the best interests of the community at heart.

It’s clear that some Councilors are using the same old tactics of personal politics to draw attention away from the facts; but we can’t figure out what purpose that serves.

Hindsight is 20/20: ReRuns of Meeting Show "New Business" is the Same Old Business

The agenda of our last council meeting (Wednesday, May 2nd) looked pretty harmless, on paper. Unfortunately, the real agenda that was played out before the people was anything but. In drafting this post, we reviewed the video footage of that meeting and have included links to clips of it. Just when we thought Mayor Cass was getting it about the need for our meetings to be well organized with a proper agenda, he found a loophole, and used it—once again—to take us by surprise. Concealed under “New Business” was a pre-orchestrated attack on us and our blog, reminiscent of what usually stays hidden in the backroom. [See it here.]

Led by Councilors Greco, Schroeder, and Cosentino, with the Mayor passively looking on, the chaotic assault served no purpose except for them to vent their anger. OK, so the blog makes them uncomfortable. We knew that. But if they truly wanted a serious discussion about the blog, wouldn’t they have included it as an agenda item? But the Mayor said Council didn’t need a “topic” to have a discussion, even if it goes on for almost an hour. In other words, anything goes.

We did our best to respond civilly to each attack that came our way, but, we have to admit they were difficult to deal with: complaints that were hard to follow, prepared statements that were nothing but catch-alls of for past grievances, coordinated messages boiling down to one thing: they don’t like the blog. How is that “New Business” for Council?

Councilor Greco led things off with a report that he had received complaints from Kirkwood Avenue residents about the slide show of the Geneva Hispanic Church property. He made a reference to its being “offensive” because it includes an image of prayer [See GenevaCCM3 here.]

Then there was Councilor Cosentino’s claim that our blog is “anonymous” because we don’t sign our postings. Please see the Augustine/Capraro signature at the bottom of this and every post. [See his comments here.] Even Councilor D’Amico got into the action to point out that we did not attend the meeting at which Councilor Schroeder said the decision to ambush us was made.

Schroeder read from a prepared speech. [SeeGenevaCCM8.] Still under New Business, he covered the Lyons Bank project, the Lyceum Heights housing development, and the City Hall/Firehouse improvement plan.

Had we known that the council meeting was going to be a Public Hearing on us, we might have been prepared to offer facts to counter their opinions. You can find those facts here, in our latest post “Correcting Council’s ‘Revisionist History’ with Real Facts.”

All in all, the New Business on Mayor Cass’s agenda was the Same Old Business. Why can’t we have well organized, properly run, professional Geneva City Council meetings?

A Celebration of our 1001st Visitor!

On May 17th the 1,001st new visitor logged on to our blog. That means 1,001 unique computers have checked out our site at least once (creating what is now close to 4000 hits!). Overall, visitor activity is trending toward approximately 900 regular visitors to the site. Thank you all for logging on!

Because readership seems to increase on the day of (or day after) a big Finger Lakes Times story about city government, it appears that people are using our site as a resource for in depth analysis and follow up on public policy issues. That was exactly our intent and we are thankful that you are finding value in it!

The interest in our blog seems to be an important statement about Geneva’s evolving political life and the need to supplement what local media is able to provide its readers and listeners. In Geneva, the Finger Lakes Times plays a vital role. Most of what most people know about City government comes from “the paper.” But the Times’ readership covers a large area. Stories must be relevant not only to people in Geneva or Ontario County, but also Yates, Seneca, and Wayne counties as well. Those limitations on space and interest often prevent the Times from giving full, or even extended, coverage of what’s going on in the City, and what to think about it.

The Finger Lakes Times, in our opinion, often relies on the ‘official word’ of the City, rather than independent, investigative journalism and editorials that analyze the facts directly. We provide information here that can be of use to journalists covering the story, if they choose to include it. For instance, the Times wrote a story about the Attorney General’s findings involving a deal between a former Councilor and the IDA, and mentioned that there was a letter from the AG’s office detailing these findings. The story focused on reactions to the letter (those of the City Attorney, the Mayor, and Councilor Augustine) but we bet readers would have liked to hear more about what the letter said directly. Recognizing that the Times can’t print the letter in its entirety, we posted it here. And many of you accessed it to judge for yourself.

More recently, the Finger Lakes Times reported on the inquiries into the Ontario County Revolving Loan Fund, with reference made to documents that we posted here. All three stories gave the impression that there is tension between the Geneva IDA and the County Economic Development Department and/or tension between the City and the County IDA. But that is not the case, and not the source of the problems being addressed. As documents (publicly available and posted here) reveal, the real problem lies in the very close connections between the City IDA, the County Economic Development Department, the County IDA, and the City of Geneva. And what some might call a “high degree of cooperation”, others call “too close for [the taxpayer’s] comfort.” That’s why the County Board of Supervisors had to step in to fix the situation.

The Geneva IDA Executive Director (who is also the City’s Director of Planning and Economic Development) shared our concern over Finger Lakes Times coverage. Valerie Bassett submitted a letter to the editor to say that her views were misrepresented. (Click here to read her letter.) A subsequent correction to the letter of correction makes the situation all the more confusing.

We hope that our blog, providing direct access to the documents being discussed, can help to cut through the haze. The issues that the Times covers, are often complex and in need of more intense and thorough coverage. We’ll continue to try and provide that, and we hope you’ll continue to follow it!

Time to Can "The Can?"

Thursday night (May 10), the Ontario County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the package of reforms related to the County’s Revolving Loan Fund. As you review those documents, particularly the spreadsheet of uncollected loans, you will see a series of loans to the Geneva Industrial Development Agency (GIDA) earmarked for the Geneva Enterprise Development Center (GEDC). The GEDC is more commonly referred to as “The Can”, a reference to the building’s original owner, the American Can Company (you can view pictures of the building here). The building is supposed to be a business start-up incubator, hatching new businesses and creating new jobs. Unfortunately, there are precious few eggs in this incubator, and very few baby chicks ever emerge from it.

We obtained a copy of the County’s “Loan Review Project” document (click here to view it). It says the County approved loans to the Geneva IDA for The Can, for up to $60,000 per year, for a maximum of up to five years, or $300,000. The approved use of the loans was “deficit financing for the GEDC until grant moneys received or building becomes self supporting through lease income.” These, then, were “bridge loans,” meant to cover operating expenses until grants or lease revenues kicked in. Problem is, as the City’s Economic Development Director, Valerie Bassett told the Finger Lakes Times there were never enough grants or lease revenues to sustain the GEDC.

The Loan Review goes on to report several “departures from approved terms/protocol” of the loans, including the fact that the Geneva IDA did not submit an application for the loan until nearly three years after it started receiving loan money. Also, the report notes, there have been no County audits of any financial statements submitted by the Geneva IDA; in fact no financial statements pertaining to the loan are listed as received since April 2004.

To date, $269,751 of the $300,000 in loans remains unpaid by the Geneva IDA. And there is little evidence of jobs creation for the investment. According to the Loan Review, “no jobs report” even exists.

The Can became the “Enterprise Development Center” in 1993, when the City of Geneva teamed up with Ontario County to purchase it from the CCN furniture company to keep them out of bankruptcy. The Finger Lakes Times reported (May 11, 2007) that Ontario County Economic Director Mike Manikowski and CCN president Dick Conoyer defend the government purchase of The Can. CCN was able to relocate to Lehigh St., and, until now, no one was really paying any attention to the drain on revolving loan funds to keep the building open.

The Can’s current tenants are not exactly start-up businesses: the City of Geneva occupies a large portion of the building, Zotos another big chunk of space, a few small companies. There are only 17 jobs there at the moment. The Geneva IDA has hired Mancuso Business Development Group to operate the facility and find new tenants.

The whole thing reminds us of Rochester’s Fast Ferry fiasco, where good money was thrown after bad in a futile attempt to save a lost cause, and with tax payers footing the bill. We applaud Rochester’s Mayor Duffy for his leadership. He did his homework, saw the Ferry was never going to work, and pulled out of the project.

The information we are providing here is all publicly accessible through the Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”). These are not secret documents and only a little bit of questioning led us in the right direction. You, too, can become more informed about government business by “FOIL-ing” public records. Click here to learn how. According to the FOIL-able minutes of the April 17, 2007 Geneva IDA meeting, a board member asked “if there was any action on the status of the grant funding at the GEDC and what would happen if the building were sold." City Manager Rich Rising said he will “look into this.” Maybe the Geneva IDA should follow Duffy’s example and can "The Can?"

Blog Gets More Hits Than DiMaggio, Mantle, Ruth, or Williams

As good as they were, Joe Dimaggio, Mickey Mantle, Babe Ruth, or Ted Williams never achieved 3,000 career major league hits. We got them beat. On May 9, 2007, No Strings Attached had its 3,000^th hit.

We’d like to thank our readers for their sustained interest in our fact-based point-of-view on local government. Back on April 17, just three weeks after launch, we had our 1000^th visit. Two weeks after that, our 2000^th. And a week later, our 3000th.

With a steady rate of 70% returning visitors and 30% new visitors, our readership is constantly increasing and remaining loyal. It appears we have over 700 people checking out our site on a regular basis.

County Supervisors Take Charge of Wayward Loan Program

At our monthly meetings, Council receives updates on Ontario County business from our County Supervisors. This month, Supervisor Charles Evangelista reported that a recent audit of the county’s Revolving Loan Fund raised questions about the administration of the program and the lack of jobs created by some firms receiving loans. The purpose of the program is to loan money to companies interested in locating in the county, or expanding their existing operations, all with an eye toward the creation of new jobs.

We obtained a copy of the Summary Sheet for the County’s loan program (click here to view it). It lists all loan recipients and the history of their loans. In critiquing the program, the Canandaigua Messenger reports, “of the 39 current loans, 36 are listed as having ‘problems.’”

In addition to issues of repayment, there is the question of job creation. Companies receiving funds are required to report progress on their employment goals. The Messenger continued, “Only 31 companies out of the 39 reported job-creation statistics, and many of them only after prompting by the OED. Of those that created jobs, only four met their job-creation target; six are not on track to meet their target; and five did not meet their target. Sixteen other businesses reported job loss.”

Responding to the crisis, the County’s Planning and Research Committee, chaired by Geneva Supervisor Rocky LaRocca, brought forward a series of resolutions designed to correct perceived problems. The reforms are intended “to provide greater accountability and transparency” by giving the Board of Supervisors more information about and control over the loans.

They have created a Loan Review Committee which will “make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding the granting of loans, including the terms and conditions of such loans.” (View the bylaws of the County Revolving Loan Review Committee here.) Committee meetings will be open to the general public under provisions of New York State’s open meetings law. The bylaws also include a “Conflicts of Interest and Ethics Policies” section, covering such areas as “pecuniary interest, gifts, and confidential information.”

In legislation covering “Amendment to Loan Authorizations,” the Board gave itself direct oversight of changes in the terms and conditions of any loan after the original loan agreement was in place. (Click here to view the resolution.) Apparently, it was common practice for county loan administrators to decrease interest rates, extend the term of the loan, or otherwise offer concessions to firms. It appears some loans were never repaid.
New procedures for loan application processing and monitoring were also put into effect. These reforms seem sensible to get the wayward loan program back on track.

The audit findings and recommendations are reminiscent of last year’s inquiries into IDA’s in communities across New York State, including the Ontario County IDA (OCIDA). In April, 2006, Ontario County Economic Director Michael Manikowski and OCIDA Chair Christopher Iversen responded to an unflattering state audit. (Their response can be accessed here, or visit the State Comptroller's site to see the complete set of responses). OCIDA has claimed that increased reporting and independent monitoring is not a good idea because “it would not bode well for the county's economic landscape to take such a hard line with risk-liable companies”.

But we think that the reforms make sense. The intention is not to discourage business investment, but instead to provide accountability to taxpayers for the use of their funds to subsidize the start-up or expansion costs of private industry. We applaud the efforts of our elected County representatives to keep a check on their administrative colleagues.

The Local Impact of Federal Programs: Arcuri's Message About Fire Grants

Our new Congressman, Michael Arcuri, recently sent a mailer indicating his current legislative priorities. High on his list was full funding for grants to local fire departments.

We called Arcuri’s office to get more details. According to Peter Scalise, on staff in Arcuri’s Utica office, President Bush’s 2008 budget calls for only $300 million for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Programs (Fire Grants) and ZERO funding for Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Firefighters (SAFER) grants. According to Arcuri, for the 2007 year, Congress appropriated $547 million for Fire Grants, and $115 million for SAFER. Funding had been as high as a total of $750 million in fiscal years 2003 and 2004, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

The “primary goal” of the Fire Grants program is “to meet the firefighting and emergency response needs of fire departments and nonaffiliated emergency medical services organizations.” (For more about that program, click here.)

City of Geneva firefighters have received Fire Grants funding four of the past five years, including: in 2004, the amount of $96,840, for equipment, including personal protection equipment; in 2005, the amount of $111, 032, for a similar purpose. This is a case of taxpayer money put to good use! Of all the government spending programs, we cannot understand why this one would be in the crosshairs.

Arcuri sent a letter to the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee requesting an increase in federal funding to support our community firefighters. In that letter, he said, “We ask far too many of our firefighters to risk their lives in our defense every day…and we have an obligation to provide them the necessary resources to perform their jobs as safely and effectively as possible.” (For full text of their letter, click here.)

In Geneva, we certainly count on our fire department to be there in an emergency. The coordination of the paid professional members and the three volunteer companies yields a dedicated, well-trained, and fast response system. The federal and state governments create these grant programs with the understanding that public safety is a primary concern. They should continue to fund them.

To send a letter of support to restore funding for Fire Grants and SAFER, visit Congressman Arcuri’s website and send an e-mail.

Property Sale Compromise in The Works: Photo Essay Highlights Church and Land

It appears that a compromise will be reached between the Geneva Hispanic Church of God and a neighbor over the sale of City land, and the City is ready to go along with it. The compromise may be a good idea under the circumstances, but if the City had done the right thing the first time around, the sale of all the land to the Church should have been approved last fall, and an arrangement to accomodate the adjoining neighbor's interests, if necessary, worked out without all this intrigue. Since June of 2006, the Church had approached City officials about the land. The City turned the Church down, but later flip flopped on policy and was ready to sell the same land to one of the Church’s neighbors. There is a public hearing on the land sale, Wednesday, May 2, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., prior to the start of the regular City Council meeting. We encourage the public to attend the meeting and voice their views on the issue.

In the course of our work on the Geneva Hispanic Church of God’s attempt to purchase the land we learned that many people following the issue wanted to know more about the Church and the property in question. Local photographer Jan Regan (Jan Regan Photography) went on location and produced some story-telling images of the site, and last Sunday’s services at the Church.

Regan’s photography nicely documents the land and people. The Church congregation consists of about 25 multi-generational families, mostly Puerto Rican American in background. The church itself is a refurbished, white washed garage. The city owned land in question is a small, wooded lot directly behind the Church. The congregation would like to clear some of the land, plant some grass, and put out a few picnic tables. Click here for Regan’s portfolio of images.