With apologies to Red Creek, the Erie Canal is the most important waterway in Gasport. It made us who we are and is a key tourism and recreation destination. Its future is now up in the air after the State Comptroller's damning report about the State Thruway Authority. Here's an abbreviated version of The Buffalo News article...
Shifting of canal cost stirs concern
By Dan Herbeck
Two major questions were raised Sunday about a proposal by New York’s comptroller to take responsibility for the state canal system away from the Thruway Authority. According to lawmakers, the move would cut the authority’s annual expenses by $80 million, but the proposal faces two difficult questions:
• Would such a change be legal?
• How would the state continue to finance the cost of maintaining, developing and promoting the historic 524-mile canal system?
“Whether you take the canal away from the Thruway Authority or not, you still have an $80 million expense that has to be paid,” said State Sen. George D. Maziarz, RNewfane. “Any way you pay for it, the canal system has to remain a priority. It’s one of the crown jewels of our history and our tourism industry, especially in Western New York.”
Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli admitted he doesn’t know how the state would finance the canal move during a Buffalo news conference about the Thruway Authority’s financial practices. DiNapoli said several options — including privatization of parts of the canal system and asking the federal government to take it over — should be considered. “There are a lot of questions here, and it’s not going to be a quick overnight solution,” Di- Napoli said.
The comptroller said the state needs to closely examine all the Thruway Authority’s spending — including canal expenses — before moving forward with toll hikes that have been proposed for this year, 2009 and 2010.
Tolls already rose by 10 percent Jan. 6, and the other proposed hikes are projected to cost motorists an additional $520 million over a five-year period, DiNapoli said. Criticizing the agency’s financial practices, DiNapoli said the authority needs to perform “a comprehensive, top-to-bottom analysis” of its operations before hitting motorists with toll increases.
DiNapoli suggests removing the canal system from the Thruway Authority’s operations is one cost-cutting measure that could help the authority avoid toll hikes. But he admitted that he doesn’t know how the state would pay for the canal system if it were taken away from the Thruway Authority. DiNapoli was surrounded by nine state legislators and one federal lawmaker — Rep. Brian M. Higgins, D-Buffalo — as he announced his audit results, his opposition to toll hikes and his proposal to remove the canal system from Thruway Authority control.
Three of the lawmakers who attended Sunday’s news conference said they are thankful that DiNapoli raised the canal issue for discussion. But all three — Maziarz, Assemblywoman Francine DelMonte, D-Niagara Falls; and State Sen. Dale M. Volker, R-Depew — said it is also important to make sure the canal system remains a high state priority.
Both Maziarz and DelMonte said DiNapoli’s canal system proposal could face some major legal hurdles. Both noted that the canal system was transferred from the state Department of Transportation to the Thruway Authority in 1992, after the transfer was approved by voters in a statewide referendum.
“You might need to have another state referendum to take it away from the Thruway Authority,” Maziarz said. “There are a lot of legal questions you’d have to look at.”
As comptroller, DiNapoli has the right to suggest such a move but no power to enact it, lawmakers said.
Funding the upkeep and operations of the canal system is an issue that lawmakers will have to deal with, whether Di- Napoli’s suggestion is followed or not, DelMonte said.
“It’s not like we’re going to shut down the canal system,” she said. “It’s there, and it’s an asset we need to maintain.”
Shifting of canal cost stirs concern
By Dan Herbeck
Two major questions were raised Sunday about a proposal by New York’s comptroller to take responsibility for the state canal system away from the Thruway Authority. According to lawmakers, the move would cut the authority’s annual expenses by $80 million, but the proposal faces two difficult questions:
• Would such a change be legal?
• How would the state continue to finance the cost of maintaining, developing and promoting the historic 524-mile canal system?
“Whether you take the canal away from the Thruway Authority or not, you still have an $80 million expense that has to be paid,” said State Sen. George D. Maziarz, RNewfane. “Any way you pay for it, the canal system has to remain a priority. It’s one of the crown jewels of our history and our tourism industry, especially in Western New York.”
Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli admitted he doesn’t know how the state would finance the canal move during a Buffalo news conference about the Thruway Authority’s financial practices. DiNapoli said several options — including privatization of parts of the canal system and asking the federal government to take it over — should be considered. “There are a lot of questions here, and it’s not going to be a quick overnight solution,” Di- Napoli said.
The comptroller said the state needs to closely examine all the Thruway Authority’s spending — including canal expenses — before moving forward with toll hikes that have been proposed for this year, 2009 and 2010.
Tolls already rose by 10 percent Jan. 6, and the other proposed hikes are projected to cost motorists an additional $520 million over a five-year period, DiNapoli said. Criticizing the agency’s financial practices, DiNapoli said the authority needs to perform “a comprehensive, top-to-bottom analysis” of its operations before hitting motorists with toll increases.
DiNapoli suggests removing the canal system from the Thruway Authority’s operations is one cost-cutting measure that could help the authority avoid toll hikes. But he admitted that he doesn’t know how the state would pay for the canal system if it were taken away from the Thruway Authority. DiNapoli was surrounded by nine state legislators and one federal lawmaker — Rep. Brian M. Higgins, D-Buffalo — as he announced his audit results, his opposition to toll hikes and his proposal to remove the canal system from Thruway Authority control.
Three of the lawmakers who attended Sunday’s news conference said they are thankful that DiNapoli raised the canal issue for discussion. But all three — Maziarz, Assemblywoman Francine DelMonte, D-Niagara Falls; and State Sen. Dale M. Volker, R-Depew — said it is also important to make sure the canal system remains a high state priority.
Both Maziarz and DelMonte said DiNapoli’s canal system proposal could face some major legal hurdles. Both noted that the canal system was transferred from the state Department of Transportation to the Thruway Authority in 1992, after the transfer was approved by voters in a statewide referendum.
“You might need to have another state referendum to take it away from the Thruway Authority,” Maziarz said. “There are a lot of legal questions you’d have to look at.”
As comptroller, DiNapoli has the right to suggest such a move but no power to enact it, lawmakers said.
Funding the upkeep and operations of the canal system is an issue that lawmakers will have to deal with, whether Di- Napoli’s suggestion is followed or not, DelMonte said.
“It’s not like we’re going to shut down the canal system,” she said. “It’s there, and it’s an asset we need to maintain.”
