1 1 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY LEGISLATURE 3 COUNTY OF ONONDAGA 4 ------------------------------------------- 5 In the Matter of 6 LAKEVIEW AMPHITHEATER 7 ------------------------------------------- 8 SECOND PUBLIC HEARING in the above matter, conducted at the Onondaga County Court House 9 Legislative Chambers, Fourth Floor, 401 Montgomery Street, Syracuse, New York before, 10 JOHN F. DRURY, CSR, RPR, Notary Public in and for the State of New York, on August 26, 2014, 6:00 pm. 11 12 LEGISLATORS PRESENT: 13 14 J. RYAN McMAHON Chairman of Legislature 15 BRIAN F. MAY 1st District JOHN C. DOUGHERTY 2nd District 16 JAMES CORL, JR. 3rd District MICHAEL PLOCHOCKI 6th District 17 DANNY J. LIEDKA 7th District CHRISTOPHER RYAN 8th District 18 MARGARET A. CHASE 9th District KEVIN A. HOLMQUIST 10th District 19 PATRICK KILMARTIN 11th District DAVID H. KNAPP 12th District 20 DEREK SHEPARD, JR. 13th District CASEY JORDAN 14th District 21 MONICA WILLIAMS 16th District 22 Debbie Maturo Legislative Clerk 23 Reported By: 24 John F. Drury, CSR, RPR Court Reporter 471-7397 25 2 1 2 INDEX TO SPEAKERS 3 SPEAKERS PAGES 4 LLOYD WITHERS Onondaga Shoreline 4 5 HUGH KIMBALL 12 6 CHARLOTTE (Chuckie) HOLSTEIN 15 7 KATHARINE LEWIS Assoc Prof of Biology 19 8 BOB PAPWORTH 24 9 LES MONOSTORY Izaak Walton League 26 10 CONRAD STROZIK Izaak Walton League 33 11 ALMA LOWRY For Onondaga Nation 37 12 FRANK MOSES Audubon Society 44 13 BETH KINNE 49 14 JACK MANNO SUNY ESF/Neighbor Ond Nation 50 15 MARY THOMPSON Home Builders/Remodelers 53 16 LENDRA MONKEMEYER 55 17 CATHERINE LANDIS SUNY ESF Phd Student 58 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 Chairman 2 THE CHAIRMAN: Good evening. We'll 3 now call to order the public hearing on 4 the Draft Environmental Impact Statement 5 for the proposed amphitheater. To the 6 clerk, was this public hearing duly 7 published? 8 CLERK MATURO: It was. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. For the 10 record we have exits in the back of the 11 room, in the front of the room. If 12 everyone can please turn off their cell 13 phones at this time. I'd also, just a 14 reminder, this is our second public 15 hearing on the Draft Environmental 16 Impact Statement. We will have a public 17 hearing on October 1st at 6:00 p.m., at 18 the Geddes Town Hall on Woods Avenue in 19 the courtroom in regards to the 20 economics and potential bonding for this 21 project. 22 So today we're about the Draft 23 Environmental Impact Statement. So if 24 your comments tonight were about costs, 25 business plan, things of that nature, 4 1 Withers 2 tonight, now is not the appropriate time 3 to bring that up. But you will have an 4 opportunity to talk about that October 5 1st at 6 o'clock. 6 At this time is there any 7 Legislators wishing to speak before we 8 go into the comment period? Okay, 9 seeing none, let's start the comment 10 period. Our first speaker, and remind 11 everyone if we can keep our comments to 12 three to four minutes each. 13 Our first speaker is Lloyd Withers, 14 405 Bradford Parkway, Syracuse, New York. 15 LLOYD WITHERS: Good evening. Thank 16 you for extending the public comment 17 period for this Draft Environmental 18 Impact Statement. I was not able to 19 attend the first meeting. I'm glad to 20 have this opportunity to share these 21 thoughts with you. Some of you have 22 taken time to speak with me about this 23 plan and I very much appreciate your 24 interest. 25 Some of my comments will address 5 1 Withers 2 business matters, because certainly the 3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 4 requires discussion on those points. My 5 name is Lloyd Withers, and I started a 6 group that advocates for civic 7 improvement project called: Onondaga 8 Shoreline. Our mission is the return of 9 a parcel of clean land around Onondaga 10 Lake to the Onondaga Nation. 11 The proposed wastebed amphitheater 12 Draft Environmental Impact Statement has 13 many shortcomings. You know about the 14 health risks, and added expenses 15 associated with building on the Solvay 16 wastebeds and the Crucible landfill. 17 And as the County executive often 18 repeats, it is a much studied site. But 19 only because of the massive amounts of 20 toxic chemical waste that has been 21 dumped there. 22 Common sense alone would guide most 23 to a more suitable location for a public 24 amphitheater, especially given the fact 25 that an ideal location exists less than 6 1 Withers 2 a half a mile away at the nearby New 3 York State Fair Grounds. The Fair 4 Grounds provide a significantly less 5 expensive site for this facility, 6 especially given that it has the 7 infrastructure and services in place to 8 host the kind of events planned for the 9 amphitheater. Its Grand Stand is in 10 need of renovation, so directing state 11 funds there would serve to shift the 12 risk associated with this venture from 13 being borne primarily by County 14 residents, to being carried by the 15 entire state. Maybe more importantly 16 without losing any potential benefit to 17 Onondaga County, Solvay or the Town of 18 Geddes. The risks associated with this 19 project are real and are deserving of 20 full disclosure. 21 Deputy County Executive Bill Fisher 22 and a representative from SMG, the 23 OnCenter's management group provided the 24 Legislature with some insight into the 25 still unreleased business plan for the 7 1 Withers 2 project. They met with your Planning 3 and Economic Development Committee back 4 in March, where the minutes described 5 the following: 6 "Mr. Fisher stated that they have 7 also asked SMG for input on managing 8 amphitheaters. The Koka Booth 9 Amphitheater located in Cary, North 10 Carolina was built recently for less 11 than $20 million. They pull in 10 to 12 12 concerts per year, comparable to what is 13 seen at Darien Lake or CMAC. They are 14 on the water and well landscaped and 15 have open lawn seating. SMG has done a 16 good job managing this facility, 17 therefore the County Executive's office 18 asked them for their experience, cost to 19 build, operation costs, realistic goals 20 for a number of concerts. They are 21 currently looking at non-State Fair 22 concerts and are very encouraged by what 23 they have learned so far from SMG about 24 the business prospects." 25 Now, town of Cary, North Carolina, 8 1 Withers 2 is a suburb of Raleigh, Durham, Chapel 3 Hill area, which has a population of 4 roughly 2 million. Cary has made the 5 numbers from the operation of their 6 amphitheater public. In 2014 SMG was 7 projecting 77 events at Koka Booth 8 Amphitheater, not 10 or 12, with a total 9 projected attendance of 125,000 people. 10 Here's what SMG told the officials 11 of Cary about the upcoming year, that's 12 2014. "Presently, SMG is evaluating and 13 exploring other opportunities that may 14 assist the Amphitheater in reaching a 15 more positive bottom line in 2014. The 16 Amphitheater's profitability potential 17 can be influenced by factors such as 18 inclement weather, national economic 19 trends, competition in the market and 20 artist touring schedules." 21 It's important to note that Cary has 22 a much bigger population, more affluent 23 demographics, and a longer season with 24 better weather than does Onondaga 25 County. 9 1 Withers 2 THE CHAIRMAN: One minute. 3 LLOYD WITHERS: However, despite 4 those advantages Koka Booth Amphitheater 5 has lost money every year since its 6 opening in 2002, requiring the town to 7 keep it going with up to $900,000 of 8 annual financial support. 9 So what are the business prospects 10 for the amphitheater? What are those 11 costs to build, operation costs and 12 goals? Why has the SMG information that 13 was shared with the County Executive's 14 office not been shared with the public? 15 So, I can go through, more of my 16 time is being limited as you can hear, 17 so I'll get to some important items and 18 submit the comments for reading later. 19 The DEIS does not adequately address 20 the noise issue associated with this 21 facility. Clearly the noise from this 22 will, it has already shown to violate 23 the ordinances that are designed to 24 protect the people in Liverpool and 25 Lakeland, to protect their home 10 1 Withers 2 environment, their quality of life. 3 It's also very important to note 4 that this Legislative body hired FOCUS 5 Greater Syracuse to file a report about 6 the community's visions for Onondaga 7 Lake. They asked the public about 8 future use, things like adding a public 9 swimming area, developing an environmental 10 center, etc. And overwhelmingly, more 11 than 85 percent of the respondents said 12 what was most important to them was for 13 the County to maintain or reforest 14 natural areas. 15 The next most important option was a 16 completed pedestrian biking trail around 17 the entirety of the Lake. Essentially 18 the public you serve told you, through 19 your commissioned study, that maintaining 20 natural areas around the Lake was the 21 most important thing you could do, even 22 more important to them than completing 23 the much touted Loop the Lake Trail. 24 The County's formal recognition of 25 the Lake as a sacred site and the 11 1 Withers 2 community's clearly stated desire for 3 maintaining the Lake as a natural place 4 represents a real progress away from the 5 days when the industry used the Lake as 6 a waste dump, and our municipalities 7 used it as an open cesspool. 8 So when the Governor announced plans 9 to build an amphitheater on Solvay 10 Wastebeds 1through 8, effectively 11 preserving them to pollute the Lake for 12 generations to come, it came as an 13 affront to the public's clearly stated 14 desire for it to restored to a natural 15 setting. And simultaneously ignored 16 this body's formal recognition of 17 Onondaga Lake as a sacred site. 18 I would ask you to consider the 19 answer to this question: If your word 20 to our neighbor means nothing, if your 21 commitment to upholding the public's 22 interest can be outright rejected, then 23 why should anyone trust that you will 24 live up to your promises in the future? 25 The amphitheater is being planned 12 1 Kimball 2 for the wrong place and for the wrong 3 reasons. Please consider a more 4 suitable location, thank you. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, 6 Mr. Withers. Hugh Kimball, please. I 7 allowed Mr. Withers to go a little 8 longer because he wasn't here the last 9 time, so he had a lot to say. So we're 10 back on our three to four minute 11 schedule everyone. 12 HUGH KIMBALL: As lead agency under 13 SEQRA you are collectively filling the 14 role of a planning board, albeit a 15 really big planning board. SEQRA 16 requires that you follow a defined 17 process, and that process is not a 18 political process. It can and should be 19 however, a negotiating process. 20 To properly move through to a site 21 plan approval you should have a complete 22 plan before you, not a conceptual plan. 23 You need to understand that as a lead 24 agency you are not limited to saying yes 25 or no. In fact, as Mr. Holmquist put it 13 1 Kimball 2 so well, you do have the ability to make 3 it less worse. You also are not bound 4 by a timeline established by the 5 proponents. You have the right and the 6 duty to examine everything, and then ask 7 questions of the proponents and their 8 engineers, architects, and other 9 professionals involved. 10 Those questions certainly should 11 include many of the items raised by the 12 public: alternative locations, physical 13 dimensions, traffic concerns, and 14 environmental issues like noise, light 15 and all items that could affect public 16 health and safety. Protecting health 17 and safety is a prime obligation of a 18 lead agency. And the issue raised in 19 the article in the Post Standard on 20 Sunday on the problem of stabilizing the 21 waste and preventing corrosion of 22 pilings should get some attention from 23 you. 24 This is where the negotiating comes 25 in. You can request changes in the 14 1 Kimball 2 plans, and if you feel the issues are 3 serious enough, particularly in the 4 health and safety area, you can say, no. 5 The power to say no gives you the 6 ability to suggest changes and/or 7 mitigation of potential problems. I am 8 asking you to take your responsibilities 9 as lead agency seriously and do the job 10 SEQRA requires, and please consider cost 11 and potential environmental losses of 12 problems versus the social benefits 13 claimed by the proponents of this 14 proposal. 15 If you eventually reach the point of 16 moving on to funding issues, I hope you 17 will demand some studies that would 18 indicate that the project will operate 19 at least at a break even and will not 20 require taxpayers to make up the 21 deficits. Thank you. 22 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, 23 Mr. Kimball. Next we have Chuckie 24 Holstein from FOCUS. 25 CHARLOTTE (CHUCKIE) HOLSTEIN: Thank 15 1 Holstein 2 you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for 3 listening, County Legislator. I also 4 want to thank Lloyd Withers for 5 mentioning the FOCUS report because 6 that's what I'm here to talk about. 7 In the fall of 2011 County Executive 8 Mahoney contacted FOCUS and she asked us 9 if we could identify what the citizens 10 really want on the shoreline of Onondaga 11 Lake. FOCUS is supposed to be a citizen 12 engagement organization, and we have a 13 pretty broad outreach. We of course 14 said, yes, because in 1997 when FOCUS 15 went to the community to ask the 16 citizens their vision for the community, 17 one of the top preferences at Number 3 18 of 87 votes was a desire to have 19 Onondaga Lake clean, able for the public 20 to use in any way they desired. So we 21 went ahead and did our report. It's 22 here, and Mr. Chairman I have a copy for 23 you. 24 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 25 MS. HOLSTEIN: Actually I would like 16 1 Holstein 2 to give it to you now to refer to a 3 couple pages. The process we used was 4 interesting. Onondaga Lake has been 5 studied and studied and studied. So we 6 thought the first thing we needed to do 7 was to collect all of the studies that 8 had been done over the years. We went 9 back as far as 1928. We had 54 reports, 10 we had four capstones due to Maxwell 11 school, who analyzed those reports for 12 us. Interesting there was some really 13 wild ideas that came out. 14 The people wanted on the shoreline 15 of the Lake, some of you may have heard 16 they thought the airport should be 17 there; didn't end up there. A golf 18 course; we didn't get one. But those 19 were some of the ideas that we heard. 20 Following the research we did a 21 survey. Over 1,100 people responded. 22 They came from every zip code in the 23 County. There was as many men as there 24 were women, which was very interesting. 25 We didn't plan it that way, but that's 17 1 Holstein 2 how that shook out. We then did 3 individual interviews. Some of the 4 people here in the room today were 5 interviewed. 110 private interviews of 6 key stakeholders in Onondaga Lake. Our 7 report is the result of all of that. 8 So let me tell you a little bit 9 about the report. As I said to you, we 10 have 54 to look at, dating back 86 years. 11 So there was a lot that was going on. 12 The purpose of our report was to 13 identify the key concepts that are 14 applicable and desired today, and to 15 provide a road map for the County. We 16 did that in the process that I just 17 spoke to you about. 18 And the major thing I want to say to 19 you today and report is that when the 20 capstone students looked at all the 21 reports over all of the years, on page 7 22 Mr. Chair, they had divided the areas 23 into five areas: recreation, tourism, 24 health and education, transportation, 25 development, environment and community 18 1 Holstein 2 outreach and engagement. 3 And on the section on tourism, 4 health and education I'm going to read 5 from here. The public asked for 6 cultural events and displays along the 7 shoreline, including concerts and art 8 park and an amphitheater. So that was 9 their directly in writing for you. 10 There is another reference in the 11 Appendix on page 16, and I refer that to 12 you as well. 13 So I'm here to tell you that indeed 14 over the years the concept of concerts 15 on the Lake and amphitheater on the Lake 16 and certainly culture and art. But I 17 would be remiss if I didn't tell you 18 that the most important thing that was 19 said over and over again for 86 years, 20 including this past year, is keep the 21 Lake public. The public wants to have 22 access to that shoreline. They do not 23 want to see a lot of development on the 24 shore of the Lake. They want to be able 25 to get there to fish, to boat, to hike, 19 1 Lewis 2 to bike, to do all the things that you 3 can do outdoors. And Lloyd was right, 4 they want to keep the environment as it 5 always was. 6 And last but not least, included in 7 your book, in the folder, is a very 8 beautiful piece that was written by the 9 Onondagas: The Onondaga Nation for a 10 Clean Onondaga Lake. I submit everybody 11 should read this, it is beautifully 12 written, and it talks about how 13 wonderful the Lake was, is and can be. 14 So with that I am concluding. I'll 15 answer any questions. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Chuckie. We 17 may call on you in the future. Kathleen 18 Lewis, 530 Cumberland, professor of 19 biology at SU. 20 KATHERINE LEWIS: Good evening, I'm 21 as he said, my name is Kate Lewis, I'm 22 an associate professor of biology at SU. 23 My specialty is how the nervous system 24 grows. I mention that because it will 25 be what I say at the end. There are 20 1 Lewis 2 lots of things that concern me about 3 this project. I just wanted to mention 4 two. 5 The first is the obvious kind of I 6 think central thing of, you know, why 7 you actually do this, build an 8 amphitheater on this site? It's going 9 to cost over a huge amount of money. As 10 far as I can see there is no need. 11 There is no business plan. I know you 12 said not to address that, I'll make the 13 next meeting. There is no guarantee 14 it's not going to be a money thing and 15 continue to be a money thing. 16 As far as I understand, I may be 17 mistaken, but if I understand correctly 18 the Casino windfall money could be 19 otherwise spent on other things by this 20 Legislature is going to be used up for 21 this project. It could be used for 22 other things. Also it's not a good site 23 to build on. It's corrosive, it's toxic 24 and it's going to cost a lot of money. 25 I don't think it will be obvious until 21 1 Lewis 2 how much money it is going to cost. I 3 really worry because is it one of those 4 things the price is going to go up and 5 up and up. 6 But the thing I really want to 7 concentrate on today is the thing that 8 really I feel very passionately about, 9 and I'll explain why, is the health and 10 safety indication. Because the highly 11 toxic environment, it contains many, 12 many highly toxic chemicals. We know 13 about many of them. We know of many of 14 them, we know that there are 15 carcinogens, we know that there are 16 toxins in chemicals that are going to 17 impact adversely the development of 18 embryos, that are going to interfere 19 with normal human reproductive systems 20 and also the nervous system function. 21 Also I have a concern with the fact 22 that EPA said so far they do not 23 consider it a risk to young children. 24 But what I am concerned about, all the 25 chemicals we don't know about yet that 22 1 Lewis 2 are highly toxic. And I'll tell you 3 why. It's because in the last few 4 months in my lab we've been actually 5 looking at two chemicals. They are two 6 polyaromatic hydrocarbons. They look 7 very similar to DDT. But nothing is 8 known about them. So they're not on any 9 list of toxic chemicals, because no one 10 tested them to see if they're toxic. 11 They look similar to DDT. 12 We use fish eggs basically to do 13 this, and we have seen things I have 14 never seen before in twenty years of 15 working those fish embryos. Things that 16 absolutely horrify me. We see growth in 17 the brain, we see growth in other parts 18 of the body. We have been using these 19 chemicals to miniscule amounts. I mean 20 almost like negligible amounts. Lower, 21 by order of magnitude than we ever 22 thought we would have to go. And we 23 still see a few things that are highly 24 volatile. The things we see most 25 prominently is heart defect. Most of 23 1 Lewis 2 the embryos have heart defects and then 3 they die. The fish, while they might be 4 simpler than us, the embryos grow in a 5 similar way as the human embryo, 6 particularly heart development. 7 We use it now for a heart 8 development to see. You can look on 9 YouTube, you can Google, you'll find 10 lots and lots of things, so this really 11 concerns me. We thought they might be 12 toxic but we never expected to see 13 things like we've seen. These are just 14 two chemicals, the first two chemicals 15 we looked at. There might be other 16 chemicals there that also might be 17 toxic. We know these two particular 18 chemicals found in the Lake in the tar 19 pit, but because we know that Lake 20 disposed waste very likely on this site 21 as well. I don't feel this site has 22 been very well tested. Tested in a 23 couple places, but not evenly, the 24 chemicals are not there evenly. They're 25 not looking for some of the things that 24 1 Papworth 2 are toxic because we don't know they're 3 toxic yet. So that scares the people in 4 my lab working on that. That was the 5 major thing I wanted you to know about. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Lewis. 7 Next we have Bob Papworth, 228 Hampton 8 Road, Syracuse. 9 ROBERT PAPWORTH: Good evening. 10 Thanks once again. When my grandfather 11 was a boy he kept his rowboat tied up at 12 Harbor Brook. Rowed out in the evening 13 to catch perch on the Lake about 1890 or 14 1900s. Been a long time since we can to 15 do anything like that. 16 I wrote a memorandum to the County 17 Executive yesterday, I will briefly 18 summarize, I won't read the whole thing. 19 But the gist of it is, in the voluminous 20 record for the whole Onondaga Lake 21 Superfund project I cannot find any 22 information that suggests that thermal 23 treatment technologies have ever been 24 examined for use in any of the sub sites. 25 I have just recently obtained a 25 1 Papworth 2 proposal from a company called Noble 3 Metals Extraction, which is a mining 4 services company to help clean up the 5 lower Ley Creek sand plane. The idea is 6 they would build a plant here and remove 7 the toxic materials from the sand, 8 sterilize the sand and go back into the 9 environment. The toxic solution then 10 would be buried or hopefully treated 11 with some sort of thermal treatment. 12 On the EPA website there is a 13 document called the Citizens Guide to 14 Thermal Distortion. The document 15 concludes with this sentence. "Thermal 16 destruction is being used or has been 17 selected for use at over 70 Superfund 18 sites across the country." Why have we 19 not had it mentioned in connection with 20 Onondaga Lake? In any of the sub sites? 21 Had a chance to talk to Tracy Smith 22 just a few minutes ago, he's the DEC man 23 in charge of a lot of the projects. We 24 were talking about wastebeds 1 to 8 and 25 the sheer magnitude of it. It's 60 feet 26 1 Monostory 2 deep, a mile long and just enormous, 3 and it's full off chemicals. And nobody 4 really knows what to do with them right 5 now. But the point is that we haven't 6 pursued the topic of thermal treatment 7 and thermal destruction to figure out 8 whether there is a way to destroy those 9 chemicals. And I think we need to stop 10 and do that. I hate to see us just bury 11 it under an amphitheater or under any 12 kind of golf course or parking lot or 13 whatever, and just leave it there. So 14 that's the gist of it. And I'm still 15 working on it. Thank you. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Bob. Next 17 Frank Leskowski. Not here. Next is 18 Les Monostory. 19 LES MONOSTORY: Thank you for the 20 opportunity to speak again. Les 21 Monostory, I'm the founder and 22 vice-president of the Izaak Walton 23 Central New York Chapter and an original 24 board member of the Nine Mile Creek 25 Conservation Council. I'm also a 27 1 Monostory 2 retired environmental planner from the 3 County of Onondaga, 30 year career with 4 the Environmental Management Council and 5 the County Health Department. 6 Three major issues that I would like 7 to bring up. First is a statement that 8 was at the previous public hearing 9 basically indicating that Onondaga 10 County is not in compliance with the 11 SEQR Scoping and Environmental Impact 12 Statement preparation requirements for 13 the analysis of alternatives to the 14 subject site, the Lakeview Amphitheater 15 site. And this may put the County at 16 risk of an Article 78 lawsuit. 17 Second point is, as what Ms. Lewis 18 pointed out here, hazardous waste has 19 been deposited at the Crucible or at the 20 Crucible landfill site which is located 21 on the same wastebed where the proposed 22 Lakeview Amphitheater site is. And 23 underneath those wastebeds, as a matter 24 of fact there is a lovely illustration 25 of mid 20th century polluted water body. 28 1 Monostory 2 And you can see that the calcium 3 carbonate waste and unknown wastes that 4 were dumped into Onondaga Lake most 5 recently at the east loom and west loom 6 sites have underlaid the calcium 7 carbonates. 8 The third point is the article that 9 appeared in the newspaper this week, I 10 believe, and I think that it is very 11 instructive, helping to build an 12 amphitheater on a toxic waste bed, it 13 says, careful. Carefully means this is 14 going to be an expensive site to build, 15 ladies and gentlemen. And you're not 16 going to have a cost analysis for this 17 site until October 1st. To me that 18 doesn't make sense. 19 In effect, if the County Legislature 20 approves this site now, you're providing 21 someone a blank check in terms of 22 building this amphitheater site. So 23 because we haven't looked at 24 alternatives, such as the New York State 25 Fair. I can give you a lot of 29 1 Monostory 2 information, there is tons of 3 information on the history of hazardous 4 waste that has been deposited in 5 Onondaga Lake. 6 The first one I have here was 7 Onondaga Lake Management Conference in 8 1993. Declared the Onondaga Lake a Plan 9 for Action. Let me quote from just one 10 page on this. This is the section on 11 mercury and other industrial pollutants 12 and waste. It says, "Since the late 13 1800s the Onondaga Lake drainage basin 14 has been the site of extensive 15 industrial and chemical manufacturing 16 activities. Mercury discharges from 17 1947 until 1979 at several sites, the 18 LCP site, which is near Bridge Street, 19 also the one other site was Willis 20 Avenue site." Those are two sites that 21 manufactured mercury and other 22 chemicals. 23 The wastebeds themselves, what you 24 see on the wastebed site now is the 25 result of, those were liquid wastes put 30 1 Monostory 2 on the wastebeds, and it took decades 3 for those liquid wastes to sink down to 4 where they are now. We don't know how 5 much further they're going to sink. But 6 a little bit of history, some of these 7 salt wastes or calcium chlorides were 8 discharged as a pollution directly into 9 the Lake and certain of its tributaries 10 such as Nine Mile Creek, while the rest 11 were deposited and carried into land 12 areas, wastebeds located near the Lake. 13 Those are now called wastebeds 1 through 14 8. 15 The magnitude of salt discharges can 16 be gauged by the fact today there are 17 approximately 1,500 acres of wastebeds, 18 some as high as 8 feet above grade. 19 Studies conducted in the 1980s indicate 20 that over 4,000 tons of chloride were 21 entering Nine Mile Creek from the area 22 of the wastebeds. 23 Summit tar pits. The Summit tar 24 pits are the source of exotic smells 25 when you drive by 690, the village of 31 1 Monostory 2 Solvay during the summer. Also produced 3 were benzene and chlorinated benzene 4 products. Waste from the production of 5 those chemicals were deposited into the 6 waste lagoons, Summit tar pits which lie 7 approximately 200 feet from Onondaga 8 Lake. These lagoons contain 9 approximately 100 million gallons of tar 10 waste, which has been shown to 11 contribute benzene and chlorinated 12 benzene to the Lake. 13 The Onondaga Lake Superfund site, 14 this is from Region 2, EPA, consists of 15 the Lake itself, Onondaga Lake, to my 16 knowledge is the only Lake in the nation 17 designated as a Superfund site. 7 major 18 and minor tributaries and upland sources 19 of contamination into site -- 20 THE CHAIRMAN: One minute. 21 LES MONOSTORY: --called sub sites 22 of which there are 11. Including the 23 Crucible waste sites. There are two 24 Crucible waste sites, one was 3 25 and-a-half acres where the Honeywell 32 1 Monostory 2 Welcome Center is located now. They 3 received waste from the 1960s until 2011. 4 The Crucible landfill site on wastebed 5 8, which is where the amphitheater is to 6 be located, was operated for just over 7 10 years, covered 20 acres. I believe 8 that Onondaga County also used that for 9 a while to dispose of waste from the 10 Metro sewage plant. Not quite clear on 11 that. 12 But I also want to point out quickly 13 that of the sites that Honeywell is 14 cleaning up now there are designated 15 sites adjacent to the wastebeds and -- 16 got to find the right one here, it has a 17 map showing that the wastes that were 18 discharged from the Willis Avenue plant, 19 LCP Bridge Street plant and other 20 locations are located immediately 21 adjacent, they call them sediment 22 disposal site. They're numbered. And 23 one of them is adjacent to where the 24 Lakeview site is going to be at the 25 mouth of Nine Mile Creek. Honeywell is 33 1 Strozik 2 going to be clearing chemicals from that 3 site. The other is a site Number 3, 4 which covers the entire area from 5 basically Nine Mile Creek down to the 6 exit from 690 where the Honeywell 7 visitor site is located now. 8 So those sites at the base of the 9 wastebeds are being cleaned by Honeywell 10 at the present time due to the presence 11 of hazardous chemicals. And no one 12 knows what underlays the wastebeds that 13 you see in the picture over there from 14 the mid 20th century. Thank you. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, 16 Mr. Monostory. Next up Conrad Strozik, 17 Izaak Walton League, Cazenovia, New 18 York. 19 CONRAD STROZIK: Good evening, first 20 of all, I would like to point out that 21 Cazenovia, New York is Onondaga County. 22 I am a County resident, yes. Again, 23 good evening Mr. Chairman, members of 24 the Legislature, town officials, friends 25 and County residents concerned with 34 1 Strozik 2 Onondaga Lake. I am Conrad Strozik, a 3 retired engineer that spent most of my 4 career in manufacturing management. My 5 environmental background is presently 6 comprised by my position as President of 7 the Central New York Chapter of the 8 Izaak Walton League, an organization 9 having several of its members with past 10 and current involvement with Onondaga 11 Lake clean up programs and committees. 12 My personal past environmental 13 experiences have been with the Outreach 14 Committee of the Onondaga Lake 15 Partnership, the Citizens Advisory 16 Committee of the previous Onondaga Lake 17 Management Conference, and several town 18 and county environmental commissions and 19 councils. 20 So Onondaga Lake has been a key 21 element in my concerns for its clean up 22 and its improvement. But I have one 23 more item that makes Onondaga Lake 24 important to me. I grew up in Lakeland. 25 Many years ago, each morning as I walked 35 1 Strozik 2 to Lakeland School on a hill overlooking 3 the Lake, I saw Onondaga Lake spread out 4 in front of me. Onondaga Lake was part 5 of my home. So what happens to Onondaga 6 Lake is also a very personal issue for 7 me. 8 Today I'm not going to review the 9 many environmental, social and economic 10 concerns related to the amphitheater. 11 My colleagues, members of civic and 12 environmental groups and others have 13 already either written, spoken or will 14 speak on these concerns that I fully 15 support. 16 Instead, I'd like to bring up one 17 basic point. Why are we building an 18 amphitheater? To what degree will it 19 solve an existing county problem or 20 issue? If that problem or issue were 21 truly defined, then the county should 22 have first considered the alternatives 23 to solve that problem by using social, 24 economic and environmental considerations. 25 Doing so, the county would certainly 36 1 Strozik 2 have reviewed and considered 3 alternatives to building an amphitheater 4 and may have chosen a different solution 5 altogether. 6 It appears the county first solved 7 this unidentified problem by trying to 8 building an amphitheater. And then 9 decided to explain why by saying the 10 amphitheater will enhance the use of the 11 Lake. The County should have examined 12 alternative measures dealing with 13 enhancing the use of the Lake rather 14 than where to actually site the 15 amphitheater. Concert goers will not 16 enhance the use of the Lake. Nor will 17 the Lake enhance the performance of 18 Lakeside concerts. 19 Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you will 20 leave this hearing with the understanding 21 that there are many unanswered concerns 22 with building a Lakeside amphitheater. 23 I'd like to have you also leave with the 24 basic question that I raised. Why are 25 we building an amphitheater? Thank you. 37 1 Lowry 2 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Conrad. 3 Next up we have Alma Lowry, Jamesville, 4 New York, law office of Joe Heath, 5 attorney for the Onondaga Nation. 6 ALMA LOWRY: Good evening. Thank 7 you for the opportunity to speak to you 8 again about the proposed Amphitheater 9 Project. My name is Alma Lowry, I'm an 10 attorney working with the law office of 11 Joe Heath, speaking here tonight on 12 behalf of the Onondaga Nation. 13 The Nation has five written comments 14 in this matter and I hope you have a 15 chance to read those comments. I'm not 16 going to try to repeat them tonight 17 because they're lengthy. But I want to 18 highlight a couple of issues, primarily 19 related to the role of SEQR, and the 20 legislative role in trying to implement 21 this obligation with SEQR. 22 SEQRA requires that you, as the lead 23 agency, take a hard look at the 24 environmental impacts of the actions 25 you're about to take. Consider 38 1 Lowry 2 potential mitigation and identify 3 alternative strategies that might avoid 4 any harm that you've identified. If 5 there are environmental impacts your 6 obligation as lead agency under SEQR is 7 to balance those cost against the social 8 and economic benefits of the project. 9 Why economic matters are not a 10 matter to DEIS review? Because it leads 11 to the heart of it. Your DEIS, despite 12 all its inadequacies has found 13 unavoidable negative environmental 14 impacts, for which mitigation has not 15 been taken. That means that you have an 16 obligation to balance those costs 17 against economic and social benefits and 18 provide a reasonable elaboration for the 19 basis for your moving forward or not 20 with this project, as part of your 21 obligation. 22 There are some problems with the 23 ability to do that because the DEIS is 24 inadequate in several ways. It omits 25 the significant impacts on analysis, it 39 1 Lowry 2 repeatedly relies on undeveloped 3 mitigation measures and it fails to 4 consider a reasonable range of 5 alternatives. 6 I could talk about a number of 7 issues for which the environmental 8 analysis is lacking, I'm going to 9 highlight one that hasn't been mentioned 10 yet, impact on birds and wildlife. 11 Despite the continued presence of toxic 12 waste on wastebeds 1 through 8, birds 13 and wildlife have been drawn to this 14 area. Probably because this is part of 15 one of the last undeveloped or minimally 16 developed tracts of land along the 17 lakeshore. We know that there are Bald 18 Eagles, Ospreys, Common Terns and Common 19 Loons and on that have been seen on the 20 wastebeds. 21 We know that there are other 22 wildlife that has been identified by the 23 DEIS as using that area including 24 potentially the endangered bass. But 25 despite the presence of this wildlife, 40 1 Lowry 2 despite the intense construction of 3 these posts to the site, despite the 4 multiple large conference that can be 5 drawing thousands of visitors, along 6 with loud music in perpetuity, the DEIS 7 says there are minimal impacts on 8 wildlife either on or adjacent to the 9 site. Apparently this is because there 10 has been sporadic construction along the 11 lakeshore and all the wildlife is now 12 habituated to human presence anyway. 13 There is absolutely no analysis of 14 this statement. No evidence to support 15 the fact that wildlife has currently 16 habituated. There is no evidence or 17 analysis that shows that the intensive 18 human use that is being proposed for 19 this site is in any way comparable to 20 the sporadic scattered construction 21 that's been ongoing around the 22 lakeshore. But the DEIS says no impact. 23 We don't have an impact. They don't 24 think about the impact of chemicals, 25 pesticides on the site. They don't 41 1 Lowry 2 think about the fact of erosion, they 3 don't think about the impact of visitors 4 who are now drawn to the site by the 5 hundreds and thousands who might intrude 6 into otherwise previously undisturbed 7 area not really covered in the 8 environmental impact. That's not a hard 9 look at birds and wildlife impacts. 10 It's not. Not adequate. 11 Mitigation measures is another part, 12 DEIS is simply not accurate. The County 13 kicks the can down the road here, 14 stating that mitigation will be selected 15 by someone else, somewhere else, in yet 16 to be developed plans that one can't see 17 because they don't exist. 18 Landscape plans, construction plans, 19 landscape design plans, site remediation 20 plan which is not finalized yet, storm 21 water prevention plans. Again and 22 again, and again, the County says, yes, 23 it will be impacted, it will be taken 24 care of in some fashion with these 25 plans, the County says, which will be 42 1 Lowry 2 developed at some point. They will 3 comply with the law and no problem. 4 SEQR doesn't make sure you comply 5 with the law. SEQR asks you to look at 6 the environmental impacts of otherwise 7 legal projects. Make sure that those 8 costs are balanced against the benefits. 9 Finally, alternative analysis. SEQR 10 requires consideration of a reasonable 11 range of alternative projects that will 12 achieve the same or similar objectives 13 as the preferred alternative. In this 14 case defined oddly enough as hampering 15 public access to the lakeshore. Taking 16 advantage of the remediated area around 17 the Lake and sudden economic development 18 in Solvay, not really designed to -- not 19 really tied to a concert venue or to the 20 provisions creation of an amphitheater. 21 But those are the goals that are stated. 22 And they seem to be stated that way, to 23 support development of this particular 24 site rather than development of a viable 25 concert venue. 43 1 Lowry 2 If the goal is to obtain a viable 3 concert venue then you should consider 4 reasonable alternatives, like a site 5 closer to Inner Harbor or on the State 6 Fair Grounds, and these are excluded 7 from the DEIS. And if the goal you set 8 in the DEIS are really the goals of the 9 County, then you need to consider other 10 uses for this site that would meet those 11 goals. An environmental education 12 center, a wildlife viewing center. Be 13 true to what you say. 14 Let's think about all the ways we 15 can do that. But the DEIS doesn't do 16 that. As I said, despite the matters, 17 it recognizes unavoidable negative 18 impact on this problem, that means you 19 have to balance the costs to the 20 benefits, and without any information 21 about the economics of the project, 22 without any idea whether it is going to 23 be economically viable or provide 24 benefits within the amphitheater itself. 25 You get secondary economic benefits, I 44 1 Moss 2 don't see how the County can do that, I 3 don't see how you can meet these 4 obligations with this document. 5 The bottom line is the County needs 6 to go back and needs to revise the DEIS 7 and go through the process again to make 8 sure the SEQR obligations are met before 9 you decide whether or not you go forward 10 with this project. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Frank 12 Moses, Tennyson Avenue, Syracuse, New 13 York. 14 FRANK MOSES: Good evening everyone, 15 good evening, Chairman. Thank you for 16 the opportunity for allowing me to speak 17 this evening. The first part of what I 18 want to speak about tonight I hope are 19 as reflective as possible of the 20 Onondaga Audubon Society, who I've been 21 involved with for some time. I've also 22 spent 15 years in environmental 23 education. Worked for the DEC 24 environmental education camps. And 25 close to eight years in bird 45 1 Moss 2 conservation, part of that working for 3 Audubon, and now volunteering for the 4 Onondaga Audubon Society as the liaison 5 to Onondaga Lake. 6 During the opening of the West Shore 7 Trail Expansion we handed the County 8 Executive, the Onondaga Audubon Society 9 handed County Executive Mahoney a letter 10 asking for bird conservation development 11 standards, which highlighted things like 12 glass and bird collision mitigation, 13 light pollution reduction, facility 14 runoff and wastewater management, design 15 trap abatement. An example of that 16 would be having a low shimmer effect for 17 waterfowl. 18 The Onondaga Lake is recognized as a 19 New York State important bird area, 20 specifically for wintering waterfowl and 21 mentioned for Bald Eagle as well. In 22 2013 it was recognized by The National 23 Audubon Society as one of 23 projects, 24 one of its highest priority projects out 25 of over 2,500 important bird areas. And 46 1 Moss 2 part of that has been because of our 3 conservation, education programming 4 through the creation of the Onondaga 5 Lake Conservation Corps. 6 But I digress, the design trap 7 abatement was in relation to not having 8 a waterfowl get attracted to shimmering 9 pavement after a rain event. There is a 10 rain initiative, hopefully that would be 11 congruent where water would be porous 12 and not have the shimmer effect and not 13 trap our waterfowl. 14 And we also ask for habitat 15 enhancement for field and landscape 16 architecture and other potential 17 infrastructure, such as chimney swift 18 towers. And to reduce Bald Eagles and 19 other birds of conservation priority 20 disturbance. 21 And there is a lot of criticism with 22 this process and the Draft Environmental 23 Impact Statement, but I did want to 24 highlight some of the positive things. 25 So we submitted that letter during the 47 1 Moss 2 West Shore Trail Expansion, and then 3 further saw that the Draft Environmental 4 Impact Statement did include the 5 exploration of having bird-friendly 6 building design go into the project. 7 And also to look at having dark sky 8 initiatives during, and knowing that 9 would obviously be during when there 10 wouldn't be nighttime concerts, it would 11 be during when the amphitheater would be 12 in idle per se. 13 So, I did want to say that we as an 14 organization are recognizing that those 15 types of mitigation efforts are on the 16 right path. 17 And in regards to the analysis and 18 the assessment of the impact on wildlife 19 and birds, birds and other wildlife, we 20 are finding consensus that the Draft 21 Environmental Impact Statement is 22 inadequate, it's insufficient in terms 23 of measuring what type of impact this 24 project would have and what we would 25 lose in regards to birds, other wildlife 48 1 Moss 2 and their habitat. And I think it's the 3 idea if this project does go through we 4 need to have a clear assessment so we 5 can understand how to mitigate or 6 compensate for that loss of wildlife. 7 And with that, if there is an 8 amphitheater that does bring in 17,500 9 people to the waterfront, that gets to 10 enjoy the waterfront, then we would hope 11 that part of their enjoyment they would 12 be paying for through ticket sales, 13 whether it's a dollar off the ticket 14 that goes specifically and directly to 15 the conservation of Onondaga Lake as an 16 important bird area. 17 I hope I explained a few things, but 18 the gist is that we are happy with some 19 of the things we've seen in the right 20 path. We think we have a lot more 21 recommendations to make. We are not 22 happy with the Draft Environmental 23 Impact Statement and its ability to 24 assess the potential loss of habitat and 25 impact on birds and other wildlife. But 49 1 Kinne 2 we do see opportunity for a community to 3 give back to the Lake in the future 4 through this project. And we will be 5 submitting our comments, we have a board 6 meeting, so some of those comments might 7 be different from what I'm saying this 8 evening. I personally see a great 9 potential in terms of providing 10 sustainable revenue through this project 11 to go to bird conservation. And if it 12 does go through, this project, I would 13 hope that would be put in place. Thank 14 you. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Frank. Next 16 Bob Kinne, Seneca Turnpike. 17 BETH KINNE: Hello, I came because I 18 think it's a really important issue and 19 I'm against the proposed Amphitheater 20 Project. Toxic waste dump is not a good 21 place to build. Toxic waste should be 22 scientifically dealt with in order to 23 protect the public health. And I would 24 say too, wouldn't taxpayer money better 25 spent on our roads or water lines or 50 1 Manno 2 sewers? For the obvious that the roads 3 in the downtown area as well as other 4 areas of the city are in need of major 5 repairs. Although I'm not sure how you 6 go about what's deciding most important. 7 But a toxic waste dump doesn't seem like 8 a good choice. Thank you. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Beth. 10 Next we have Jack Manno of Avondale 11 Place, Syracuse, New York. SUNY ESF, 12 neighbor of Onondaga Nation. 13 JACK MANNO: Hello, thank you for 14 hearing us tonight. I'm a professor at 15 SUNY College of Environmental Science 16 and Forestry and I worked with the 17 Onondaga Nation over the last twenty 18 years on a variety of environmental 19 issues. 20 I believe we have a moral, sacred 21 and some day hopefully a legal 22 obligation to listen to and respect the 23 Onondaga People's voice about the 24 environmental impacts of this project. 25 They will persevere, as they always do. 51 1 Manno 2 But it will break their heart once 3 again. 4 On April 19, 2010 Onondaga County 5 Executive Joanne Mahoney joined Seneca 6 environmental leader Henry Lickers, 7 Onondaga Chief Jake Edwards, the 8 President of SUNY College of 9 Environmental Science and Forestry at 10 the time, Neil Murphy, and Andy Maxwell, 11 Syracuse Sustainability coordinator. 12 They were together at Syracuse Stage as 13 part of a program titled "Sacred Waters: 14 The Onondaga Nation's Vision for the 15 Future of Onondaga Lake." We've already 16 heard a little bit about that. I was 17 the host of that evening's event. 18 These are some of the words that 19 County Executive Joanne Mahoney shared 20 with the audience, she said, "We had the 21 opportunity to sit with the Chief Oren 22 Lyons on more than one occasion and get 23 a very good history and understanding of 24 what Onondaga Lake means to the 25 Haudenosaunee, and what it means really 52 1 Manno 2 to our entire community. It's the home 3 of western democracy, it's the basis of 4 the Constitution of the United States of 5 America, and there is so much history to 6 Onondaga Lake, we as a community should 7 be embracing it and not obviously using 8 it the way it's been used in the past. 9 I'm going to tell you the things 10 Onondaga County is going to do. One is, 11 we're going to continue to try to 12 understand the importance of Onondaga 13 Lake. I went with some of my team to 14 the Onondaga Longhouse. I had a 15 wonderful opportunity to hear from the 16 Onondagas about Onondaga Lake, and we 17 have formally brought the Onondaga 18 Nation into the conversation and made 19 them a real ongoing part of the 20 conversation about how we're going to 21 clean Onondaga Lake." 22 County Executive Mahoney, the 23 Onondaga Nation has spoken very clearly 24 that the rush to build an amphitheater 25 on top of mounds of potentially harmful 53 1 Thompson 2 wastebeds is the opposite of how 3 Onondaga Lake should be cleaned up. Be 4 true to the words of the County 5 Executive and stop the rush for 6 something that no one needs and which 7 your partners, the people of the 8 Onondaga Nation, have actively opposed. 9 In your job you have a sacred duty to 10 protect and restore the sacred waters of 11 Onondaga Lake. Thank you. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Jack. 13 Next we have Mary Thompson, Dewitt, New 14 York. Home Builders and Remodelers of 15 Central New York. 16 MARY THOMPSON: Thank you for having 17 me. I'm going to be very brief. You 18 guys certainly have a lot to think 19 about. I'm here in a different 20 capacity. I'm here as an event manager. 21 And I very much agree with the FOCUS 22 Greater Syracuse finding and keeping the 23 Lake public and making sure that the 24 citizens have access to the Lake. 25 Yet there is a lot, I'm really 54 1 Thompson 2 interested in a lot of the possibilities 3 that could happen with something like an 4 amphitheater. I spent more than 10 5 years at the OnCenter complex as their 6 director of events, administration. 7 And I was there right after we opened, 8 and we had to find different ways to use 9 the facility, to bring convention 10 dollars in, to bring different events 11 in. Because when that happens people 12 come in, they utilize the facilities, 13 they go to restaurants, they use hotels, 14 and there is an economic impact. 15 And so we're hopeful that this ties 16 into the Fair Grounds, the OnCenter and 17 a lot of the other event venues that 18 could really be utilized in a different 19 kind of way for the community. And 20 therefore, we can see some economic 21 impact. 22 The other thing is that we're really 23 excited about a lot of the neighborhood 24 revitalization. And I don't know that 25 there's been enough discussion about 55 1 Thompson 2 that. That that's really important and 3 it certainly is a critical issue to our 4 community. And so we're excited to see 5 more of that happening and excited to 6 see more discussion about that. 7 I also, before I sit down, I wanted 8 to say that I love Frank's idea using a 9 portion of the ticket sales as some sort 10 of a Lake conservation. And other 11 communities do that kind of item and I 12 think that's something we should 13 consider. So thank you. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you Mary. Next 15 we have Lendra Monkemeyer. 16 LENDRA MONKEMEYER: My name is 17 Lendra Monkemeyer, a graduate from SU. 18 I liked to volunteer for the city parks 19 as a tree steward, I love it, been doing 20 it for several years now. I think the 21 project, Amphitheater Project, needs to 22 be thought of more, as all the previous 23 speakers have mentioned. I just want to 24 show you some ideas that I have. 25 First of all, are you aware that the 56 1 Thompson 2 danger of benzene is very great. EPA 3 says they only allow drinking water 5 4 parts per billion. And can you imagine 5 how much that is? So I asked the 6 question, what is 5 parts per billion? 7 And I found out that if you have some 8 quarters, they go from, in a whole roll 9 of quarters they go from Chicago (meant 10 Detroit) all the way to Salt Lake City. 11 And only one of the quarters is 12 actually, 5 quarters would be the size 13 of the 5 part per billion, that long 14 line going from Detroit to Salt Lake 15 City. So you can see how from a little 16 benzene, how toxic it is. Also been 17 seen to hurt people. 18 First of all it comes out of the 19 soil and also it evaporates and it goes 20 into the nose. And the nose is directly 21 connected to the brain. Goes directly 22 to the brain, and probably people don't 23 think about the danger. If you put 24 something on your skin you can wash it 25 off. If you breathe it in, you can't 57 1 Thompson 2 wash it off. So I really think we 3 should be very very careful about what 4 we do with the benzene and clean it up 5 first. 6 And also we can look at, for change 7 a topic most happy idea let's look to 8 Rome. What did they do with their 9 amphitheater? They had a cover on it. 10 It was a roll-up cover. Maybe we can 11 implement that idea. Especially to go 12 into like Thorndon Park, maybe too 13 sunny, maybe we can put a cover over it, 14 it can roll up like they did in Rome. 15 So maybe let's think about more things 16 like that. And then also let's be very 17 careful to make sure that everything 18 works out and we do a thorough research 19 in every area. We want to keep animals 20 happy, the wildlife. 21 Just the other day I saw a deer two 22 blocks from SU. If we didn't build so 23 much or if we built in areas that were 24 already built it would be safer and let 25 animals have their right to life. I 58 1 Landis 2 just hope that you continue on the 3 project because I do like the idea of an 4 amphitheater. Many people like the 5 amphitheater over at Syracuse on the 6 east side. Shakespeare Place there it's 7 great. So I think everywhere you have 8 an amphitheater it's a great asset, so 9 let's do it, so it's very healthy for 10 everyone. Thank you. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Lendra. 12 This is the last speaker who signed up, 13 so if someone else wants to speak after 14 this speaker please, at this opportunity 15 come up and fill out a card. Catherine 16 Landis, SUNY ESF PhD student. 17 CATHERINE LANDIS: Thank you for 18 this opportunity to comment on this 19 project. I also grew up not in Lakeland 20 but in Westvale. Certainly remember 21 what the Lake was historically and also 22 feel a personal investment in what we do 23 with the Lake. 24 Also from my dissertation I'm 25 looking at the environmental history of 59 1 Landis 2 the Lake, so going back to a time when 3 the Lake was natural, when there were 4 wetlands, salt springs, forest all 5 around the Lake and very rich environment. 6 Things like salmon, passenger pigeons by 7 the million coming to salt springs. 8 So my history on Onondaga Lake 9 restoring that historical abundance and 10 I think that's entirely possible. So my 11 comments will be on the impact to 12 wildlife and habitat mainly, because 13 that's what I know about. 14 The Environmental Impact Statement 15 does point out that project area lies in 16 large relatively intact mostly 17 undeveloped area along Onondaga Lake, 18 that's 400 acres. And the loss of 20 19 percent of that habitat. And that's a 20 significant loss. Even the 21 Environmental Impact Statement does say 22 that. And as it was said earlier it 23 kind of dismisses that loss by saying 24 that wildlife, they can go elsewhere, or 25 they become accustomed to the lights and 60 1 Landis 2 to the music -- maybe not the music but 3 noise. 4 But again, it was pointed out it's 5 not really a comparable disturbance. 6 Currently the construction that's going 7 on now, the goal of that, my 8 understanding is, to remove as much as 9 possible, remove, remediate toxic 10 hazards and actually create habitat 11 whereas the amphitheater would be 12 destroying habitat. 20 percent of that 13 area permanently. 14 The other thing about that is so 15 conservation biology one of the tenants 16 is this idea of fragmentation. So that 17 you can lose that 70 acres, but it's not 18 only the 70 acres you're losing, it's 19 also you're impacting the surrounding 20 areas, you have stream side areas along 21 Nine Mile Creek, wetlands along the Lake 22 and Nine Mile Creek that they're 23 investing a lot of energy in restoring, 24 rebuilding. So there is a potential for 25 this contiguous habitat complex. A 61 1 Landis 2 forest wetland, aquatic and grassland 3 habitat. 4 And the wastebed area where the 5 amphitheater is planned for is not just 6 industrial, I mean it is an industrial 7 setting, industrial waste dump, but it's 8 also been healing over the past 60, 70 9 years. And now it's home to many birds. 10 There was a study in 2012-2013 by SUNY 11 ESF master students found 59 species of 12 birds in what he described as a thriving 13 bird community. So the habitat issue I 14 think is really tremendously important 15 And was not adequately addressed in the 16 DEIS. 17 So I think that, you know, as I 18 mentioned, we're investing millions of 19 dollars to restoring the habitat along 20 that side of the Lake, which is 21 relatively natural. And to build a 22 facility of this size that would attract 23 this many people would seriously 24 undermine the efforts that are going on, 25 not to actually restore that habitat and 62 1 Landis 2 renaturalize that part of the Lake. So 3 just in terms of planning, I think we 4 would be better off clustering 5 development so that if you're going to 6 build an amphitheater, consider other 7 sites like as has been mentioned the 8 Grand Stand or consider sites where it's 9 already developed, the other side of 10 Onondaga Lake and leave that side of the 11 Lake, let it heal, let it renaturalize, 12 let the habitat enhancements that are 13 happening now, let those coalesce. And 14 listen to the public voice that wants 15 Onondaga Lake to be a natural place. 16 Thank you. 17 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any other 18 speakers? Now declare the comment 19 period closed. Is there any additional 20 comments from members of the 21 Legislature? Seeing none, public 22 hearing is closed. 23 [Conclusion of public hearing]. 24 * * * * 25 63 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 This is to certify that I am a Certified. 4 Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and 5 for the State of New York, that I attended and 6 reported the above entitled proceedings, that I 7 have compared the foregoing with my original 8 minutes taken therein and that it is a true 9 and correct transcript thereof and all of the 10 proceedings had therein. 11 12 _______________________ 13 John F. Drury, CSR, RPR 14 15 Dated: September 3, 2014 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25