As children across New York State return to school this week, Steve and I return to writing our Wilderness and Waterslides blog after a brief hiatus. A few thousand of those children live in the Adirondack Park, and the schools they are returning to are funded in part by taxes New York State pays to local governments on the Adirondack Forest Preserve. A closer look at one of those communities shows why this practice is essential to maintaining the Park's marriage of public and private land.
Many towns and counties in the Adirondack Park contain a large percentage of state-owned land. Approximately 80% of the land in Hamilton County, for example, is owned by New York State. Until recently, the Hamilton County town of Raquette Lake operated a two-room public school for children in grades K-6. But declining enrollments made that arrangement impractical, and now the three elementary students who live in Raquette Lake must make a 45 minute journey each way to attend school in Indian Lake. The taxes New York pays on Forest Preserve lands allows Raquette Lake to pay for transportation and tuition for those students. It also allows the town and county to maintain the roads the children travel on, and the Raquette Lake School to stay open as a community meeting place. Throughout the Adirondack Park roads, schools, bridges, and public safety are supported by local taxes paid on state lands that require very few services in return. This makes it possible for permanent residents of the park to maintain viable communities under circumstances where this might otherwise be impossible.
Recently the arrangement has been threatened by the November of 2007 decision of acting state Supreme Court Justice Timothy Walker, who found the mix of payments and examptions made by New York on various types of state-owned land to be arbitrary and unfair, and ordered payments to municipalities stopped. Walker then stayed his own decision pending review by higher courts, but his action prompted Assembleywoman Theresa Sayward and State Senator Betty Little, both of whom represent Adirondack districts, to propose a moratorium on purchases of state land until the case is resolved. Senator Little argued that "enough is enough" suggesting that future state land acquisition would interfere with necessary development in the park. Environmental groups such as the Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks argued against the proposed moratorium as "counter to the best interests of Adirondack and Catskill residents" since "if the State cannot compete to acquire important lands coming on the market in near future, those very lands could be enrolled under the forest tax law by private landowners, who then receive an 80% tax exemption, thus forcing other landowners to be taxed more to be able to maintain local services."
As the events above illustrate, decisions about environmental policy are often made in the political arena where competing values interact in complicated ways. This sometimes leads environmentalists to yearn for a decision-making process that circumvents the messier aspects of democracy. In 1990 environmentalists thought they had such an opportunity when Mario Cuomo put together his Commission on the Adirondack Park in the Twenty-First Century. But the result was policy gridlock and political rancor on a scale unprecendented in the often-turbulent history of the Adirondack Park. If we wish to use the Adirondack Park as one of the world's oldest and largest experiments in marrying public and private land and derive policy lessons for those who would use such arrangements to protect nature in the modern world, we must examine its failures along with its successes. In future posts we will examine the failure of the Commission on the Adirondack Park in the Twenty-first Century with that in mind. Meanwhile we await a decision on Walker's ruling by the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court later this fall.
Many towns and counties in the Adirondack Park contain a large percentage of state-owned land. Approximately 80% of the land in Hamilton County, for example, is owned by New York State. Until recently, the Hamilton County town of Raquette Lake operated a two-room public school for children in grades K-6. But declining enrollments made that arrangement impractical, and now the three elementary students who live in Raquette Lake must make a 45 minute journey each way to attend school in Indian Lake. The taxes New York pays on Forest Preserve lands allows Raquette Lake to pay for transportation and tuition for those students. It also allows the town and county to maintain the roads the children travel on, and the Raquette Lake School to stay open as a community meeting place. Throughout the Adirondack Park roads, schools, bridges, and public safety are supported by local taxes paid on state lands that require very few services in return. This makes it possible for permanent residents of the park to maintain viable communities under circumstances where this might otherwise be impossible.
Recently the arrangement has been threatened by the November of 2007 decision of acting state Supreme Court Justice Timothy Walker, who found the mix of payments and examptions made by New York on various types of state-owned land to be arbitrary and unfair, and ordered payments to municipalities stopped. Walker then stayed his own decision pending review by higher courts, but his action prompted Assembleywoman Theresa Sayward and State Senator Betty Little, both of whom represent Adirondack districts, to propose a moratorium on purchases of state land until the case is resolved. Senator Little argued that "enough is enough" suggesting that future state land acquisition would interfere with necessary development in the park. Environmental groups such as the Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks argued against the proposed moratorium as "counter to the best interests of Adirondack and Catskill residents" since "if the State cannot compete to acquire important lands coming on the market in near future, those very lands could be enrolled under the forest tax law by private landowners, who then receive an 80% tax exemption, thus forcing other landowners to be taxed more to be able to maintain local services."
As the events above illustrate, decisions about environmental policy are often made in the political arena where competing values interact in complicated ways. This sometimes leads environmentalists to yearn for a decision-making process that circumvents the messier aspects of democracy. In 1990 environmentalists thought they had such an opportunity when Mario Cuomo put together his Commission on the Adirondack Park in the Twenty-First Century. But the result was policy gridlock and political rancor on a scale unprecendented in the often-turbulent history of the Adirondack Park. If we wish to use the Adirondack Park as one of the world's oldest and largest experiments in marrying public and private land and derive policy lessons for those who would use such arrangements to protect nature in the modern world, we must examine its failures along with its successes. In future posts we will examine the failure of the Commission on the Adirondack Park in the Twenty-first Century with that in mind. Meanwhile we await a decision on Walker's ruling by the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court later this fall.
No comments:
Post a Comment