Ms. Kain indicated that the city hoped to acquire the land “for free.”

After her presentation, Ms. Kain provided a diagram of the proposed use (click here for the diagram) should the city take possession, including potential consolidation of municipal offices, recreational facilities and a business incubator.

How unfortunate that Senator Larkin, County Executive Edward Diana, and even Mayor Nick Valentine and Councilwoman Regina Angelo could not have foreseen this dramatic turn of events three years ago, when there was a tsunami of lobbying going on for certain potential sites for the Newburgh branch campus of Orange County Community College.  Read about that background here, here, and here.

The citizens certainly knew that the Armory was the cheapest site, with the most available parking, back in 2006.  Yet for some mysterious reason, the site was not politically expedient.

For old time’s sake, here’s a slide from Antony Takahashi’s powerpoint presentation, which compared the alternative sites:

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.

Joshua Smith introduced the speakers and gave an overview of the history of the Orange County Community College Site Selection Committee, which was commissioned by the County to select the best site, but was never consulted for a final recommendation and has not been involved in this process since February 2006. Smith spoke about college enrollment trends, drawing from his professional expertise as a community college president and chancellor.

Antony Takahashi gave a presentation drawing from his expertise as a financial analyst, comparing the costs of the various sites. He based his analysis on the best information that is publicly available.

Carla Decker, President of the Newburgh Historical Society, read a prepared statement from the Newburgh Historical Society affirming its mission to preserve the historic nature of the streetscapes of Newburgh, which is its greatest asset.

Following the presentations the legislators spoke and fielded questions. There was overwhelming support for the Armory Site, and questions about why there has been no serious effort by our elected officials to make this site available sooner.

During the discussion two of the three City of Newburgh appointees to the siting committee expressed support for the Armory site.

Posted below are four short clips from the first hour of the informational meeting, in addition to the slides of Takahashi’s powerpoint presentation. Additional excerpts from the meeting, including further public comment and discussion at the end, will be posted shortly.

Joshua Smith presents background information on Orange County, New York’s demand for public higher eduction. Demographic shifts and lack of investment in maintenance has led to the present situation–major rennovation and investment in facilities is required in order to meet community needs.

Bill Lahey identifies the proponents of the Broadway site and explains why the project is behind schedule:

“I submit to you that what has delayed this project by six months is the fact that we’re tied up on this site that the legislature probably doesn’t want, by people who won’t give it up.”

Audience member expresses gratitude to Chairman Lahey for taking the time to “do the homework” necessary to determine the best site for OCCC.

Audience member questions Armory availability, and Chairman Lahey responds with his awareness of that status.

City of Newburgh Industrial Development Agency:
Mayor Nicholas Valentine, Chairman
Councilwoman Regina Angelo
Martin Boone
Councilman George Bowles, Jr.
Councilman Salvatore Cracolici
Councilwoman Mary Ann Leo-Dickinson
Darren McCurry

On July 31, 2006, four documents were recorded and filed with the Orange County Clerk’s Office in Goshen, New York.

Document 1: Deed transferred from the City of Newburgh Industrial Development Agency to 132 Broadway Associates, LLC
File #20060082551, Deed C/BK 12218 PG 0527, Recorded/Filed 07/31/2006/14:31:07 [Bold emphasis below is added by The Newburgh Advocate]

WITNESSETH, that the Grantor [CITY OF NEWBURGH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY], in consideration of $10.00, and other good and valuable consideration, paid by the Grantee [132 BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LLC], does hereby remise, release and quitclaim upon the Grantee, is successors, or assigns of the Grantor forever,

ALL those certain plots, pieces or parcels of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being in the State of New York, County of Orange, and the City of Newburgh, more particularly described on Schedule A…

Schedule A lists:

1. 8-12 Lander St. (SBL:30-3-22)
2. 14-16 Lander St. (SBL: 30-3-21)
3. 132-134 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-24)
4. 136 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-25)
5. 138 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-26)
6. 140 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-27)
7. 142 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-28)
8. 142A Broadway (SBL: 30-3-29)
9. 144 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-30)
10. 148 Broadway (SBL: 30-3-32)
11. 6-8 Johnston St. (SBL: 30-3-33)
12. 14A-16 Johnston St. (SBL: 30-3-37)

The Grantee [132 Broadway Associates] herein shall undertake, at its sole cost and expense, to construct a building (or buildings) with approximately one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet in the aggregate suitable for commercial, light industrial, office, educational, and/or retail use, or a combination thereof, in accordance with the performance schedule attached hereto and made a part here of as Schedule B together with an area of public space approved by the City of Newburgh (such construction is hereinafter referred to as the “PROJECT”). IDA shall cooperate fully with the Grantee herein in any and all applications, proceedings and appeals made or prosecuted by or on behalf of the Grantee herein in connection with the PROJECT, and IDA agrees to execute and deliver all documents, consents or authorizations reasonably required of IDA by any governmental authority with respect thereto.

Schedule B states:

PROJECT Progress Benchmarks

1. Complete demolition of buildings – 90 days from June 30, 2006.
2. Receipt of Planning, Zoning and ARC approvals – 180 days from June 30, 2006
(GRANTEE [132 Broadway Associates, LLC]) must apply for same within 60 days of June 30, 2006).
3. Issuance of Building Permit – 9 months from June 30, 2006.
4. Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for all of PROJECT – 30 months from June 30, 2006. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be acceptable provided it is replaced with a permanent Certificate of Occupancy within sixty (60) days of its issuance.

CITY OF NEWBURGH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
By: [signed] Robert H. McKenna
Administrative Director

As of the date which is thirty (30) months from June 30, 2006, if it is determined upon an inspection by the City of Newburgh Code Compliance Supervisor that the performance requirements of said Schedule B have not been completed timely or the completion time for such has not been extended by IDA in writing, the Grantee [132 Broadway Associates, LLC] herein shall, within ten (10) business days fro the service of a notice of said determination upon it… reconvey good and marketable title to the property described in Schedule A herein to IDA.

…TOGETHER with all right, title and interest if any, of [the IDA] in an to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof,
TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the Grantor in and to the said premises,
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the Grantee, its heirs, successors and assigns forever.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the day and year first above written.

Document 2: Mortgage between MORTGAGOR: 132 Broadway Associates, LLC; Gemma Development Company, LLC; 10 Johnston Street Associates, LLC; RAC Development of Newburgh, LLC; AND the City of Newburgh Industrial Development Agency and MORTGAGEE: Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company
File #20060082552, Mort/BK 12218 PG 0534, Recorded/Filed 07/31/2006/14:31:07 [Bold emphasis below is added by The Newburgh Advocate]

(b) The obligations and agreements of the Agency contained herein or therein shall not constitute or give rise to an obligation of the State of New York or the City of Newburgh, New York, and neither the State of New York or the City of Newburgh, New York shall be liable thereon… Neither the members of the Agency, nor any person executing this Mortgage on its behalf shall be liable personally under this Mortgage nor recourse shall be had for the payment of the principal or interest on the indebtedness evidence by the note or any claim based on the mortgage or otherwise in respect hereof, or based upon or in respect to this Mortgage or any modification of or supplement hereto against any past, present or future member, officer, agent or employee, as such, of the Agency or any successor or political subdivision, either directly or through the Agency or any such successor, all such liability of such members, officers, agents (except for the Borrower), servants and employees being, to the extent permitted by law, expressly waived and released by the acceptance hereof and as part of the consideration for the execution of this Mortgage. Any judgment or decree shall be enforceable against the Authority only to the extent of its interest in the property and any such judgment shall not be subject to execution on or by a lien on assets of the agency other than its interest in the property.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Mortgage has been duly executed by Mortgagor the day and year first above written. [June 30, 2006]
132 BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Manager/Member

GEMMA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

10 JOHNSTON STREET ASSOCIATES, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

RAC DEVELOPMENT OF NEWBURGH, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

37. PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE AGENCY. Notwithstanding any other terms or conditions contained in this Mortgage:
(a) This Mortgage is execute by the Agency solely for the purpose of subjecting its rights to the rights of the Mortgagee and for no other purpose. All representations, covenants, warranties are hereby deemed to have been given by the Borrower and not by the Agency.

27. (c) Upon the happening of an Event of Default, whether or not foreclosure proceedings have been instituted, Mortgagor shall, upon demand, surrender possession of the Premises to Mortgagee.

26. ENVIRONMENTAL, REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND INDEMNIFICATION. Mortgagor represents and warrants, and continues to represent and warrant as long as this Mortgage is in effect, to Mortgagee that (a) to the best of Mortgagee’s knowledge, Mortgagor and the Premises are in compliance with each statute, regulation or other law and each judgment, order or award of any court, agency or other governmental authority or of any arbitrator (individually an “Environmental Requirement”) relating to the protection of any water, water vapor, land surface or subsurface, air, fish, wildlife, biota or other natural resources or governing the use, storage, treatment, generation, transportation, processing, handling, production or disposal of any chemical, natural or synthetic substance, waste, pollutant or contaminant (collectively “Regulated Materials”), (b) Mortgagor has not been charged with, or has received any notice that such Mortgagor is under investigation for, the failure to comply with any Environmental Requirement, nor has Mortgagor received any notice that Mortgagor has or may have any liability or responsibility under any Environmental Requirement with respect to the Premises or otherwise, (c) to the best of Mortgagee’s knowledge, the Premises have ever been used for (i) the storage, treatment, generation, transportation, processing, handling, production or disposal of Regulated Materials, except as permitted by law, (ii) a landfill or other waste disposal site or (iii) military purposes, (d) no underground storage tanks are located on the Premises, (e) the environmental media at the Premises do not contain Regulated Materials beyond any legally permitted level, (f) to the best of the Mortgagee’s knowledge, there has never been any release, threatened release, migration or uncontrolled presence of any Regulated Materials on, at or from the Premises or, to the knowledge of the Mortgagor, within the immediate vicinity of the Premises and (g) Mortgagor has not received any notice of any such release, threatened release, migration or uncontrolled presence… If at any time Mortgagor obtains any evidence or information which suggests that potential environmental problems may exist on, at or about the Premises, Mortgagee may request Mortgagor, at Mortgagor’s own cost and expense, to conduct and complete investigations, studies, sampling and testing with respect to the Premises requested by Mortgagee. Mortgagor shall promptly furnish to Mortgagee copies of all such investigations, studies, samplings and tests. Mortgagor shall (a) conduct and complete all such investigations, studies, samplings and testing, and all remedial, removal and other actions necessary with respect to the Premises, in accordance with all applicable Environmental Requirements and promptly furnish to Mortgagee copies of all documents generated in connection therewith and (b) defend, reimburse, indemnify and hold harmless Mortgagee, its employees, agents, officers and directors, from and against any claims, demands, penalties, fines, liabilities, settlements, damages, costs or expenses of whatever kind or nature, known or unknown, contingent or otherwise, arising out of, or in any way related to, the violation of, or other liability or responsibility under, any Environmental Requirements, or the release, threatened release, migration or uncontrolled presence of any Regulated Materials on, at or from the Premises including attorney and consultant fees, investigation and laboratory fees, court costs and litigation expenses…

CITY OF NEWBURGH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
By: [signed] Robert H. McKenna
Administrative Director

WITNESSETH, to secure (a) the payment of indebtedness in the principal sum of ONE MILLION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE THOUSAND ($1,483,000.00) DOLLARS, lawful money of the United States, together with interest thereon and other charges with respect thereto, to be paid according to certain demand note, dated on or about June 30, 2006, made and delivered by Mortgagor to Mortgagee or (the “Note”)… Mortgagor hereby mortgages to Mortgagee, as continuing and collateral security for the payment of any and all indebtedness, liabilities and obligations of Mortgagor to Mortgagee… the premises described on the attached Schedule A. [Note; same properties listed in Schedule A above.]

Document 3: General Assignment of Rents between ASSIGNOR: 132 Broadway Associates, LLC, and ASSIGNEE: Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company
File #20060082554, A/LR/BK 12218 PG 0601, Recorded/Filed 07/31/2006/14:31:07 [Bold emphasis below is added by The Newburgh Advocate]

WHEREAS, Assignee desires to grant Assignor a conditional license to collect and use the income derived form the Premises and to take certain leasing actions in the ordinary course of business.

4. …monies in the amount of $1,483,000.00 were loaned thereon and the mortgage tax was duly paid.
Mortgage tax paid $15,571.50.

4. LICENSE TO TAKE CERTAIN LEASING ACTIONS.

(b) The license granted by Assignee under this Section 4 does not extend to… (iv) the grant of any option to purchase any part of the Premises or any right of first refusal or (v) any Leasing Action that results in a Lease (A) to an affiliate of any Assignor, (B) with a rental rate which is less than a reasonable market rental rate, (C) permitting prepayment of rent more than one month in advance or (D) demising more than twenty percent (20%) of the rentable space of the Premises or such higher or lower percentage as Assignee may from time to time agree to in writing…

255 AFFIDAVIT OF EXEMPTION, GENERAL ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS, June 30, 2006

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor has executed this Assignment as of the day and year first above written.

132 BROADWAY ASSOCIATES
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Manager/Member

Document 4: Mortgage Consolidation Modification and Extension Agreement between 132 Broadway Associates, LLC; Gemma Development Company, LLC; 10 Johnston Street Associates, LLC; RAC Development of Newburgh, LLC; the City of Newburgh Industrial Development Agency AND Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company
File #20060082553, M AG/BK 12218 PG 0565, Recorded/Filed 07/31/2006/14:31:07 [Bold emphasis below is added by The Newburgh Advocate]

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, the Mortgagee is the owner and holder for the value of the following Mortgages, together with the notes or other evidences of indebtedness secured thereby, to wit:

1. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $30,000.00 dated May 24, 2005 and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on June 6, 2005, in Liber 11866 of Mortgages at Page 377, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $30,000.00.

2. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $293,500.00 dated June 23, 2004 and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on July 14, 2004, in Liber 11554 of Mortgages at Page 911, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $293,500.00.

3. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $293,500.00 dated June 23, 2004, and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on July 14, 2004, in Liber 11554 of Mortgages at Page 911, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $293,500.00.

4. Mortgage given by the Mortgagor to 132 Broadway Associates, LLC bearing even date herewith in the principal sum of $1,483,000.00 which is intended to be recorded simultaneously herewith.

WHEREAS, the Mortgagor has executed and delivered to the Mortgagee its Restated Non-Revolving Grid Note in the principal sum of $2,100,000.00 which Note is secured by the mortgages referred to and consolidated herein, with interest as stated in said Note and to be paid in accordance with said Note…

3. …a certain Mortgage Modification and Extension Agreement dated as of June 30, 2006, was entered into between MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS TRUST COMPANY, as mortgagee, and 132 BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LLC, as mortgagor, and is to be recorded simultaneously herewith, with regard to the following mortgages:

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements of the parties, and for the purpose of carrying out the intention above expressed, the Mortgages and the Mortgagor hereby mutually covenant and agree as follows:

That the liens of the said Mortgages, hereinabove mentioned, hereby are spread, consolidated and coordinated so that from and after the date hereof the same are hereby consolidated into one Mortgage covering the premises herein described, running concurrently as one Mortgage, and constituting a single first lien upon the premises mortgage in the amount of $2,100,000.00…

CITY OF NEWBURGH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
By: [signed] Robert H. McKenna
Administrative Director

2. RESTATED NON-REVOLVING GRID NOTE

Simultaneously herewith, the Mortgagor shall make and execute a Consolidated Mortgage Note in the principal amount of TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND NO/100 ($2,100,000.00) DOLLARS to the Mortgagee.

RAC DEVELOPMENT OF NEWBURGH, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

3. MATURITY DATE

All of the principal, interest and any other charges that are owned under the Mortgages, and the Restated Non-Revolving Grid Note must be paid in full by December 31, 2006.

10 JOHNSTON STREET ASSOCIATES, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

36. MISCELLANEOUS. This Mortgage is absolute and unconditional…

GEMMA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Member

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Mortgage has been duly executed by Mortgagor the day and year first above written.

In the Presence of:

MAUFACTURERS AND TRADERS TRUST COMPANY
By: [signed] Mark Stellwag, Admin. Vice President

132 BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LLC
By: [signed] Robert Carchietta, Manager/Member

255 AFFIDAVIT, MORTGAGE MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION AGREEMENT

4. That new money in the amount of ONE MILLION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE THOUSAND AND NO/100 ($1,483,000.00) DOLLARS was loaned thereon and the mortgage tax in the amount of $15,571.50 was duly paid.

1. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $30,000.00 dated May 24, 2005 and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on June 6, 2005, in Liber 11866 of Mortgages at Page 377, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $30,000.00. MORTGAGE TAX PAID $315.00
2. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $293,500.00 dated June 23, 2004 and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on July 14, 2004, in Liber 11554 of Mortgages at Page 911, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $293,500.00. MORTGAGE TAX PAID $3,082.00
3. Mortgage made by Mortgagor to Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, in the principal sum of $293,500.00 dated June 23, 2004, and recorded in the Orange County Clerk’s Office on July 14, 2004, in Liber 11554 of Mortgages at Page 911, on which there is now due and owing the unpaid principal sum of $293, 500.00. MORTGAGE TAX PAID $3,082
4. Mortgage given by the Mortgagor to 132 Broadway Associates, LLC bearing even date herewith in the principal sum of $1,483,000.00 which is intended to be recorded simultaneously herewith.

All notes and Mortgages were combined, consolidated and made equal and coordinate liens on the above-described premises without priority of one over the other to constitute one first Note and Mortgage and single lien for the total sum of TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND NO/100 ($2,100,000.00) DOLLARS upon said premises, which shall be paid with interest, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said note and Mortgage.

See also the article in this week’s Mid-Hudson Times.