That speaks to her interpretation of the 2011 race, which she actually shares with Helsmoortel: that Myers’ win was entirely the result of opposition to the proposed 40-unit affordable housing project Dickinson’s Keep, which Helsmoortel supported. Ciarlante said she was responsible for organizing a grassroots effort against the project and Myers was the beneficiary of it.
“A lot of us feel like we were dismissed after she was elected,” she said. “I think she’s burned a lot of bridges and alienated a lot of people and a lot of people that supported her in the past aren’t working for her.”
In particular, she said she was disappointed Myers didn’t get involved to stop another proposed affordable housing project in the village (Country Meadows, on North St., last before the village Planning Board in winter). She said Myers told the group to organize a petition but did little as supervisor to show the state the town opposed such projects. She contrasts this with her impromptu 2011 visit to the state official responsible for awarding funding for subsidized housing projects, in which she made the case for the community’s opposition. That official said he had “no idea” the community was against Dickinson’s Keep.
She also wanted to clarify that she wasn’t convinced to run by Conservative Chairman George Heidcamp. The claim made by some is that Heidcamp made sure Ciarlante got the Conservative nomination to spoil things for Myers because of a personal vendetta between the two, which boiled over in letters to the local papers earlier this year in which Heidcamp called the supervisor’s actions “ignorant and incompetent” and Myers responded that Heidcamp is a well-known “bully” who needed to be called out.
She said she called then-Vice Chair Heidcamp before the Republican Caucus to inquire about the Conservative nomination process. She’d already decided to run.
She had nothing but praise for Heidcamp.
“He did not get me to run, not at all,” she said. “But when a decision is made by the Conservative Party he honors that and works very hard to implement that. I can’t imagine working with a better chairman; I think he’s fantastic.”
Grants
On one point, Ciarlante differs strongly with Helsmoortel and Myers. While the past and present supervisors are well disposed toward grants from government and organizations as a great way to offset local taxes and frequently boast about the non-existent or limited taxpayer expenditure involved in large projects aided by such grants, Ciarlante believes many come with strings attached.
She cites the town’s membership in the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), which names cluster housing and open space as goals– ideas she views as limiting individual property rights which were included in the town’s Comprehensive Plan (2013) and Zoning Law (2008), the former put together with the help of a consultant paid for with a grant. “Instead of the Town Board making those decisions they’re being deferred to other organizations that are not elected,” she said.
Regarding the ICLEI, Helsmoortel explained: “ICLEI is about power and renewable energy. They assisted us in an energy audit. Through them we were able to switch providers and save thousands of dollars.”
Water meters for the Glasco Water District is another example, but for different reasons. She believes the town’s decision to purchase 1800 new “smart meters” was unnecessary, driven by the promise of a grant that paid for more than half the expense. But that still leaves nearly $400,000 the town had to borrow to replace many perfectly good meters. (A better move would have been to purchase lead-free meters as-needed.)
Myers called the idea of local control being given up “ridiculous… [Ciarlante] only showed up when there were cameras and microphones. If she attended work groups she would have seen the local debate. Building on slopes, casinos, public housing [were all debated]. The town of Saugerties is very self-directed.”
She said while many criticize the water meters, nobody has criticized the new sewer press, which was a major part of the grant.
“Let’s say a couple years down the road the grinder will go out,” she said. “Then we end up spending 100 percent. That’s ludicrous to forego an opportunity like that. When you have an opportunity for essentially free money, why would you give that up?”
But Ciarlante would take issue with the term “free money.” She says there’s a logical disconnect between the complaints of local officials about the state increasing its mandates and the unfettered pursuit of grant money. “How can you complain about your taxes when you’re asking for that money?”
She said that while she’d scrutinize grants more closely, she’d still apply for them when it makes sense. “I’m not putting an absolute to anything,” she said. “I’m not going to tie my hands to something especially if something is needed.”
Helsmoortel and Myers both say fewer grants will mean one thing: higher local taxes.
