|
|
|
|
Click to visit the
Official Town Site
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters to the Editor: How Con Ed Would Have Changed the Village
December 15, 2010
Dear Editor:
In reference to a letter to the editor on December3, 2010 about the village focusing on serious issues, the writer bemoans the fact that Con Ed's proposed hydroelectric plant was stopped.
As a contributer to the memorial boulder and an admirer of Mayor Donohue - and Joe Gross the current thankless mayor - I feel impelled to point out some facts. The Cornwall-on-Hudson reservoir would not exist now and the village would be fighting for water as New Windsor and Newburgh are.
The view of the face of Storm King, previously known as Butternut Hill, would have been forever scarred - especially the view from Mayor Donohue's house and those headed to 218 - which, when built, cost $1,000,000 per mile (the most ever spent on a road to that date) and is now one of the most beautiful roads in the world (and the site for countless car and motorcycle commercials).
The employment to build the plant required mostly labor from outside the area due to the complexities of construction.
There was a very real concern of dam breaks/leakage that was never fully addressed to say nothing of the impact on the Hudson after the heated water was returned to the river.
Cornwall-on-Hudson has always been a respite from the industry of new York City and New jersey. If you choose to live in a beautiful place, there is always a price to pay.
The revenue from the taxes would have always been welcome - but at what cost? Really?
And yes, this was the beginning of the global environmental movement. This movement generated support from EVERYWHERE - including the Sierra Club, clubs in Sweden and Germany as well as support from England - to say nothing of the Northeast United States. Pretty remarkable for a tiny village on the Hudson.
I hope this lays to rest this very old and beaten issue. Cornwall-on-Hudson is an incredible place to live. Enjoy the blessings you have.
James David Bell
Cornwall-on-Hudson
Comments:
|
Unfortunately, the issue is cyclical, universal, and will never rest.
There is always a price to pay for keeping a cap on development. Preserving open space and removing industry from a community for the sake of preserving 'the feel' of an area is a well and good when the economy is booming. As the price of everything continues to rise, taxes follow closely behind. Couple that with a poor economy and you will get a climate of buyer's remorse. Residents will balk at any tax increases and lament that there is no big industry to tax instead of them. Nobody wants another huge residential development, Wal-Mart or any other big box store in their neighborhood. To preserve the current ?feel?, the money has to come from somewhere. Unfortunately, that somewhere is the resident and will be for the foreseeable future.
Like it or not.
posted by J Klein on 12/16/10 at 9:07 AM
|
Add a Comment:
Please signup or login to add a comment.
|
 |
|
|
|
