The Newburgh Advocate

According to the agenda for the Orange County Legislature’s Regular Session, this afternoon at 3:30 p.m. there will be several competing resolutions on the docket.

From the Physical Services Committee and the Ways and Means Committee, agenda item number 7 to be discussed and voted upon is:

Resolution of the Orange County Legislature selecting “the Key Bank/Maple Building” as the proposed site for the Orange County Community College facilities in the City of Newburgh and directing JMZ Architects and Planners, P.C. to complete its study

Also on the agenda is item number 8, from the Education and Economic Development Committee, which reads:

Resolution of the Orange County Legislature selecting “the Broadway site” as the proposed site for the Orange County Community College facilities in the City of Newburgh and directing JMZ Architects and Planners, P.C. to complete its study

The question of where to site the Orange County Community College is a major decision, as what is at stake is over $30 Million of New York State Taxpayers’ Money, over $30 Million of Orange County Taxpayers’ Money, in addition to potential other expenses by City of Newburgh residents, as well as $10 Million of privately donated funds.

Hours of effort, consideration and debate have already been expended by our hardworking Orange County Legislators as they attempt to make the best possible decision. As they move forward at this point, The Newburgh Advocate wishes to restate questions that have arisen during this process.

1. What is the cost of Eminent Domain?

It remains true that the Broadway Site is the only site that would require additional demolition in Newburgh’s Historic District, Eminent Domain and Relocation of Displaced Families. This would not only be required for the initial construction of the College, but also for any additional expansion, expansion which has already been unanimously approved by the Legislature as part of OCCC’s master plan.

On March 25, 2006, more than six months ago, a Neighbors Meeting was held in the City of Newburgh by citizens of the City of Newburgh to discuss the OCCC site selection. At that meeting one city resident raised this point:

AUDIENCE QUESTION: We are not divisive [about the college site], it is coming from our city. The majority of the people who are living there [at the Broadway site] would have to be displaced. Déjà vu: my family was displaced by Urban Renewal. People who are directly affected will benefit, [but] the people who are most affected, will they benefit?

Previously, on March 22, 2006, the City of Newburgh held a Public Hearing about the College. Instead of posting minutes from that meeting, the City issued a “Summary Report” that listed thematically the concerns that were raised and the City administration’s response. This is their response regarding Eminent Domain/Displacement:

The City strongly feels that the urban campus design model will minimize the need for relocation of current residents. Should relocation be required, however, it is the County’s responsibility to ensure that high quality, affordable alternative housing is identified for any Newburgh residents who may be displaced as a result of this project. These residents will be called upon to make sacrifices which deserve the utmost respect and attention of all parties involved. The City of Newburgh is prepared to utilize all of its resources and efforts to identify opportunities for relocation in support of the County’s efforts in this regard. This must be done early in the project and in collaboration with residents.

Then, as now, there has been the question of a “suburban” vs. “urban” campus. However, bear in mind that the entire City of Newburgh is, in fact, URBAN, and that the entire city can be walked from one side to the other in about twenty minutes.

2. The City of Newburgh held a press conference yesterday—the day before the Legislative vote—with new cost estimates for Broadway.

What took the city so long to come up with “new” cost estimates? The mayor was on the siting committee and could have provided “new figures” six months ago.

3. Why was the Site Selection Committee removed from the process of evaluating and recommending the best site?

The Site Selection Committee was carefully chosen with a diverse group of experts to take an objective look at the various sites. Orange County residents spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover the expenses of this Committee, including consultants’ work with considerable expertise. However, the Site Selection Committee has not been a part of the process since February 2006 and was never consulted for a final recommendation.

Most likely the Site Selection Committee Members were chosen not only for their expertise but also for their critical thinking skills. Critical thinking is a crucial skill in good decision-making, especially when so many millions of dollars are at stake and the impact of a decision affects so many in the long-term. Thus it may be worthwhile to consider one of the hallmarks of critical thinking, being reasonable:

Be on the lookout for reasonable and unreasonable behaviors — yours and others. Look on the surface. Look beneath the surface. Listen to what people say. Look closely at what they do. Notice when you are unwilling to listen to the views of others, when you simply see yourself as right and others as wrong. Ask yourself at those moments whether their views might have any merit. See if you can break through your defensiveness to hear what they are saying. Notice unreasonableness in others. Identify times when people use language that makes them appear reasonable, though their behavior proves them to be otherwise. Try to figure out why you, or others, are being unreasonable. Might you have a vested interested in not being open-minded? Might they?

One of the hallmarks of a critical thinker is the disposition to change one’s mind when given good reason to change. Good thinkers want to change their thinking when they discover better thinking. They can be moved by reason. Yet, comparatively few people are reasonable. Few are willing to change their minds once set. Few are willing to suspend their beliefs to fully hear the views of those with which they disagree. How would you rate yourself?

Questions you can ask to discipline your thinking:
What precise question are we trying to answer?
Is that the best question to ask in this situation?
Is there a more important question we should be addressing?
Does this question capture the real issue we are facing?
Is there a question we should answer before we attempt to answer this question?
What information do we need to answer the question?
What conclusions seem justified in light of the facts?
What is our point of view? Do we need to consider another?
Is there another way to look at the question?
What are some related questions we need to consider?
What type of question is this: an economic question, a political question, a legal question, etc.?

4. Why has the Armory Site not been considered, especially in comparison to the promotion of the Broadway Site?

Back in March, 2006, at the Neighbors Meeting, there was overall consensus that the Armory would be most desirable as it provided the most space, there were no Eminent Domain, Displacement, or Historic Demolition issues, and it was and remains the cheapest site:

QUESTION: [The] right deal seems to be obvious. I don’t know why you’re considering anything else. [With regards to the Armory] What more could you ask for? 40 acres right across the street.

WE ARE GOING TO HOLD YOU RESPONSIBLE.

No choice – Where this should go.

One citizen even suggested the Broadway Site be removed from consideration at that point.

QUESTION: Could the controversial site [Broadway] be removed [from consideration]?

LEGISLATOR: It’s not controversial to us.

Six months later, at the second Neighbors Meeting on this issue held at the Newburgh Free Library September 23, 2006, there was once again widespread consensus that the Armory was the best site.

Antony Takahashi, a financial analyst, provided an cost comparison of the various sites, with the cheapest in order being first the Armory, then Key Bank, and the most expensive by far being the Broadway Site.

5. What about Economic Development?

One of the arguments sometimes mentioned in support of one site over the other is potential Economic Development.

From a cursory review of the academic literature regarding Community Colleges and Economic Development, when academic researchers consider the potential positive effects to the local economy of Community Colleges the economic impact is measured in terms of the increase in “Human Capital”—i.e., the increased earnings and contributions of a more educated workforce—the Community College students/alumni themselves.

There is no question that Community Colleges have an extraordinarily important role to play in terms of meeting the educational needs of our County’s residents and transforming lives through greater earnings potential, better critical thinking skills, etc.

However, arguments put forth so far that one site vs. another will contribute to greater “economic development” in terms of retail or restaurants or construction jobs have been anecdotal and not supported by citations or economists.

It is the economic development of the students, in terms of increased capital, that is well-documented and supported by years of peer-reviewed academic research.

Quoting from Economic development, human capital theory and the community college., By: Hlavna, Deborah P., Community College Review, 00915521, Spring92, Vol. 19, Issue 4:

Economic Development and the Community College
Community college collaboration with business and industry for the training of the work force and the economic development of the community are among the important recent developments in the community college movement (CFCC, 1988). One example of this partnership is the pairing of business and industry with the community college to offer literacy education.

Literacy training is a form of general training that benefits not only the current employer but future employers as well as society at large. According to Breneman and Nelson (1981), individuals who are literate are less likely to require income transfers (welfare, food stamps, rent subsidies) from the government to survive. In the case of literacy training, though the current employer benefits, the benefits to society as a whole can normally be considered to exceed those that will accrue to the employer. Society will now have an individual who will be more productive and adaptable to the changes occurring in his/her environment. Some of the reasons adults may lack literacy skills could be due to a previous failure of the public school system, a lack of available schooling, or undiagnosed learning disabilities. In cases such as these, society has a responsibility to be fair (equitable) and offer a second chance. Therefore, literacy should be subsidized by the community college for business, industry and society.

Customized/contract training courses that are offered by the community college for the benefit of business and industry fall into the category of firm-specific training. These customized/contract training courses prepare students with a fairly narrow range of job skills and, according to human capital theory, these courses should be financed either by the business or a combination of the business and the employee who is enrolled in the course (Breneman & Nelson, 1981; Flanagan et al., 1989). Society does benefit from the increased productivity of the labor force. In turn, this increased productivity may be translated into higher company profits and business expansion. This business expansion would be accompanied by the employment of more workers and an expansion of the community college tax base and the accompanying increased taxes received from that tax base (Breneman & Nelson, 1981; Flanagan, et al., 1989; Kalamas & Warmbrod, 1987). In a time of economic downturn, firms with highly trained and productive employees are reluctant to lay off these highly skilled employees (Flanagan et al., 1989).

This results in benefits to society in the form of a lower unemployment rate and lower income transfer payments. For the community college to subsidize the educational activity of specific customized training in the same amount as general training creates a dilemma. Although society does benefit from more productive workers, it is not equitable or efficient to ask taxpayers, as well as other competing companies, to subsidize the competition. Since one company receives the primary benefit of the educational activity, the efficiency principle requires that the business or industry support these customized/contract courses to the extent of covering the full costs of the programs and that includes all of the developmental costs of the course, overhead, student tuition, and instructor salaries (Breneman & Nelson, 1981; Grubb & Stern, 1989; Pincus, 1986). If the customized/contract training courses are a part of a concerted economic development strategy of the area, then it may be appropriate for the community college to subsidize some of the costs as long as it is determined that the social benefits exceed the costs (Breneman & Nelson, 1981). This is a decision that is not made by the community college alone.

Other economic development activities–such as small business and data base development–benefit specific employers and the local community as well. These activities expand the tax base, reduce public expenditures for income transfers and improve the quality of life. On grounds of efficiency, the local community college should pick up the majority of the costs of those services offered (Breneman & Nelson, 1981; Kalamas & Warmbrod, 1987).

Economic development activities do have a place at the community college. General training activities that give individuals skills which will improve their current and future job performance and prospects are economic development activities that complement the mission of the community college: to help people improve job skills and prepare for employment. According to human capital theory, these educational skills are transferable to other employers and, as a result, it is not in the best interest of the business to pay for this form of training. These forms of economic development activities need to be subsidized by the community college. Firm-specific training activities should not be subsidized by the community college and, in turn, by the taxpayers of that area unless they are part of a specific economic development strategy. Community college economic development activities should not benefit one employer at the expense of other employers. Customized/contract courses should be offered but the employer/s and/or potential students should cover all of the costs of developing and offering the courses.

Community colleges are an important component in the economic development process and human capital theory and economic theory justify their involvement. Care should be taken, however, to assure that economic development activities are for the benefit of the total community college district.

In conclusion, it may be prudent, before committing millions of dollars of County taxpayers’ money and future money to investing in one particular site over another, to consider the following:

SCEINTIFIC METHOD:
III. Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method

As stated earlier, the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist’s bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing an hypothesis or a theory, the scientist may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes “common sense” and “logic” tempt us into believing that no test is needed. There are numerous examples of this, dating from the Greek philosophers to the present day.

Another common mistake is to ignore or rule out data which do not support the hypothesis. Ideally, the experimenter is open to the possibility that the hypothesis is correct or incorrect. Sometimes, however, a scientist may have a strong belief that the hypothesis is true (or false), or feels internal or external pressure to get a specific result. In that case, there may be a psychological tendency to find “something wrong”, such as systematic effects, with data which do not support the scientist’s expectations, while data which do agree with those expectations may not be checked as carefully. The lesson is that all data must be handled in the same way.

Please note, additional pertinent video footage from public meetings has been posted here.

Postscript: What is a Suburb?

The City administration’s contention that the Armory is “suburban” while the other sites are “urban” is yet to be supported by definition or documentation. Consider the following notes on suburbs while viewing the maps below of the three potential sites, and the sites in context.

Suburbs are inhabited districts located either inside a town or city’s outer rim or just outside its official limits (the term varies from country to country), or the outer elements of a conurbation.

The presence of certain elements (whose definition varies amongst urbanists, but usually refers to some basic services and to the territorial contiguity) identifies a suburb as a peripheral populated area with a certain autonomy, where the density of habitation is usually lower than in an inner city area, though state or municipal house building will often cause departures from that organic gradation. Suburbs have typically grown in areas with an abundance of flat land near a large urban zone, usually with minimal traditions of citizens clustering together for defence behind fortified city walls, and with transport systems that allow commuting into more densely populated areas with higher levels of commerce.

Inhabitants of these areas generally identify with the central city, and often consider themselves to be inhabitants of the central city. Indeed, neighbourhoods within a city proper that share physical and social characteristics with the suburbs as already described — such as a relatively low residential density and a scarcity of industrial properties — are also often called suburbs.

Typically, many post-World War II American suburbs have been characterized by:

* Lower densities than central cities, with single-family homes predominating.
* Zoning patterns that separate residential and commercial development as well as different intensities and densities of development.
* Shopping malls and strip shopping centers instead of a downtown shopping district.
* Streets lined by off-street car parking or vegetation instead of buildings.
* A predominantly white or middle- or upper-class population, with notable exceptions in various older cities (e.g., Ford Heights, Illinois, a predominantly black suburb of Chicago and a municipality with one of the lowest per capita incomes in the U.S).
* A street network designed to conform to a hierarchy, including residential streets that curve and often end in cul-de-sacs, in place of the grid pattern common to most central cities and pre-World War II suburbs.
* Ready access to freeways or tollways.
* Limited access to public transit, often requiring a long walk, several transfers, and generally poor and infrequent service.
* The importance of public space reduced in favor of private property.
* Low crime-rate.
* Low traffic-rate & low pollution.

THE SITES CONSIDERED

Wideshot of the City of Newburgh with the three potential sites marked with red thumbtacks.

The Keybank Site, currently endorsed by two of the three Orange County Legislature Committees that made recommendations on site selection.

The Broadway Site, endorsed by one of the three Orange County Legislature Committees.

The Armory Site.