Lack of Transparency and Respect for the Public

Metroplex is unaccountable and it has little respect for the public's right to know about how it makes its decisions.  The entire process of choosing a developer for the redevelopment of ALCO was done in secret.  Opposing submissions were not made public, review of submissions was done in secret, and the final decision was done in secret.  This is not the way an Authority should be run.  Any government that has the right to tax, spend, condemn land, initiate PILOT agreements on behalf of local governments needs to be elected and be completely transparent.  


Below is another example of the disdain Metroplex has for the public.  The documents that the public has a right to make comments on are not available on the Metroplex website, and the location and time for public meeting on the unavailable documents are not given.  


Metroplex tries to obfuscate their actions and limit public input as much as possible.






From their website:
"Alco Redevelopment Project: Resolution 623-10 — Hold Public Hearing for Alco DGEIS

In advance of the meeting, Clough Harbour & Associates distributed the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement regarding the redevelopment of the Alco site. The document establishes certain development thresholds which are then analyzed for cumulative impacts relating to traffic; construction noise, air emissions and waste removal; visual impacts; infrastructure requirements; and economic impacts in terms of job creation and expanding tax base. The DGEIS confers prospective development partners with a workable revitalization plan for the site, expedites the City and State permitting processes, and accessing the $4 million Restore NY grant already awarded for site preparation. Terresa Bakner, the Authority’s environmental attorney, added that the DGEIS is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2008. She reviewed the schedule for reviewing the DGEIS, accepting comments through March 11; holding a public hearing on March 1; and reviewing the final document by April 28. Mr. Golub moved Resolution 623-10; seconded by Mrs. Hutchison. Following discussion about site conditions and remediating soil contamination, Resolution 623-10 was unanimously approved."