UPDATE July 6, 2021 at 4:30 p.m.: Assembly Minority Leader Will Barclay released the following statement:
“The decision by the Port Authority to delay construction of the new warehouse is appropriate and welcome news in the community. I’m pleased that the public response seems to have made a difference. Hopefully, a collaborative resolution can be reached that strikes a balance between responsible expansion and maintaining the integrity of the Lake Ontario waterfront.”
UPDATE July 6, 2021 at 1 p.m.: Mayor Billy Barlow released the following statement regarding the Port Authority’s pause in construction:
“Before Mr. Scriber and the Port Authority ever want to belligerently misrepresent a project and infer that I know of projects before they happen, they should fact check their own meeting minutes, plans and drawings. The obnoxious structure they are building is not what they proposed and is one of the worst, most unintelligent decisions I have ever witnessed. We are still strongly looking at an injunction, and we will stay the course to keep them honest. Contrary to Mr. Scriber’s statement last week, the port authority did not properly go through the legal process, and we will be exposing more of that in the coming days.
I appreciate the port authority board for considering adjustments to the project to make it a more appropriate and a better fit for the community. The City of Oswego is more than a port, it is a community, and the port needs to understand that.”
UPDATE July 6, 2021 at 11 a.m.: William Scriber released the following statement:
“The board of the Port of Oswego Authority held a meeting today with site engineers and contractors to respond to public reaction to reduced visibility of the Oswego lighthouse from East First Street affected by the construction of a new warehouse at the Port.
The board authorized a delay in construction to confer with site engineers to evaluate what options may exist to possibly modify the existing warehouse plan.
The review will take into account the feasibility and cost of possible modifications, while adhering to the priorities of ship accessibility, the capacity to meet customers’ needs and maintain Port revenue. Ultimately, the Port has to maintain its commercial viability.
The board’s decision on when to resume construction, following the review of all options for potential modification, is expected by week’s end.”
OSWEGO – In the matter of days, a massive metal structure appeared along the East side’s skyline, stemming from the Port of Oswego’s plan to expand its grain center, despite complaints from Oswego residents and the city’s mayor, Billy Barlow.
The full plan, titled the Central New York Regional Agricultural Export Center Expansion, was announced in November 2019 with a statement from Gov. Andrew Cuomo who awarded $15 million in state funding toward its construction. According to that release, the funds will “support the construction of a new storage dome, a storage silo, a tunnel and belt conveyor system, as well as a control center and USDA sampling laboratory for agricultural products.”
In another document from 2020, the Port Authority deemed the improvements to be necessary, as it said “under the No Action alternative, the Authority will no longer be able to handle grain for export.” Despite this plan and its importance, Barlow said he was not aware of anything more than a “comprehensive vision.”
“The information I was privy to back in 2019 was a general comprehensive plan, the renderings and the overall concept of the port’s mission for the coming years,” Barlow said. “If you look at any organization, you have a comprehensive plan and that’s the vision, and then you have individual projects within that plan. Beyond that comprehensive vision, I don’t believe I was privy to any individual projects, certainly not about this project being in this exact location of this size.”
Barlow also criticized the Port Authority and said that issues like these are “weeded out” via an approval process before construction starts.
“Now the port is going to say, ‘We aren’t subject to local approval’ and that is true, but what they are subject to is that actual [approval] process and after that process, they can still move forward with their plans,” Barlow said. “The planning [and] zoning boards determine if the building is appropriate in a given location, they determine if the use is appropriate, they clearly identify and vet any positive or negative impact that projects have.”
While the Port Authority did not go through approval with the city, it did go through a public comment period, through the state. Today, July 1, Assembly Minority Leader Will Barclay said in a press release that he expressed his opposition through a letter dated November 5, 2020 but never received a response back from William Scriber, the executive director of the Port Authority. In the letter, Barclay wrote that he does not support the current plan “to build an expansive grain storage facility and grain elevator … [that] exceeds 180 feet in height.”
“I am hopeful that following today’s public hearing and comments received, that you are considering a modification of the plan,” Barclay said in the 2020 letter. “Many residents and organizations expressed concern for preservation of the watershed view.”
Barlow went on to add that the Port Authority owns a lot of the waterfront land on the East side but “do nothing with” it. He cited a large slab of concrete along Mercer Street as one of these open areas.
The Port Authority, however, does not have to follow city guidelines or processes due to the fact that it is a state agency and Barlow acknowledged that, but he wanted to see the Port Authority go through such a process to see how the local government and citizens would react. With such a negative reaction by businesses and residents alike, Barlow wanted to see the Port Authority build the structure elsewhere.
“I’m not against the building, but I am against the location, I’m against the size, I’m against the negative impact it has on the community,” Barlow said.
In a press release responding to Barlow’s comments, calling the facility “ignorant and irresponsible,” Scriber wrote that the mayor was “briefed on the project in February 2019.” Scriber added that in the November press release from the same year, Barlow said “I’m thrilled to see Governor Cuomo and the State of New York place such a focus and make a sizable investment in the Port of Oswego.”
While Barlow did make those comments, he reiterated that it was based on the news of investing into Oswego, not the new structure.
“Of course I love to see state investment at the port, and I like to see the port expand,” Barlow said. “But you can’t take that money and use it to do harm to everyone else in the community.”
Moving forward, the city is considering legal action in the form of a temporary restraining order or pending injunction to halt construction, but Barlow said he needs to gather more information first.
“It would go to the courts, and the city would have to prove some sort of tangible detriment to the community, which we think we could do,” Barlow said. “Now there are some legalities I’m still learning about … So it’s a decision I’m going to have to make. When you involve legal, there are some financial implications involved, so we are gathering a whole bunch of information and we’ll keep working through the weekend and early next week. I am going to have to make a decision soon”
After being contacted for more information, Scriber and the Port Authority declined to comment, stating that it will “stand by [its] statement” sent out yesterday, June 30, which is provided below:
Statement from William Scriber June 30: “The construction and plans for our new grain storage building have been public for more than a year and the Port of Oswego Authority has been entirely transparent in sharing its plans. The state DOT announced this project more than a year ago, and the Mayor of Oswego was briefed on the project in February 2019.
In a November 2019 press release from the state on the port’s expansion project, the mayor was quoted: ‘I’m thrilled to see Governor Cuomo and the State of New York place such a focus and make a sizeable investment in the Port of Oswego. The Port of Oswego is a major economic driver to the Oswego community and this investment will ensure continued growth and expansion in the future.’
As a state authority we went through all legal channels and posted information on this and other projects on our website and our social media in advance. This storage unit has to hold 14,000 metric tons of product and be accessible to be loaded from a ship. The Port of Oswego Authority is committed to the economic betterment of Oswego, Oswego County and the region. We recently announced studies and plans that are proceeding on a performing arts center, and we’re working cooperatively with the H. Lee White museum to build a beautiful, new museum.
Oswego is the Port City. The city is here because the Port was here. Our success is the city’s success and the region’s success.”
The capitalists will always value their precious economic activities over and above all else. The port director presents his variation of “what’s good for General Motors is good for America” capitalist apologetics. Economic growth is unsustainable public policy. We’re running out of atmosphere. Stop building stuff. Let the city breathe. The Port should be shut down permanently for aesthetic reasons alone. Can’t look at the view, can’t walk by the lake at the fort, because some capitalists need to constantly expand their operations. The American people are increasingly sick of it … sick of the whole unjust capitalist system … hence the skyrocketing popularity of socialism despite decades, more than a century even, of nonstop anti-socialist propaganda from the American state and media (Wilson’s Red Scare was now more than 100 years ago). So, very simply, shut down the Port, and all its unnecessary capitalist hustle and bustle, and do something peaceful and beautiful with the land.
Only impacts the hotel of which Barlow is a good friend…need I say more. That building means more good paying jobs. If you want to see the lighthouse then go down to the lake it’s right there. The mayor should be more concerned with seeing the river. It has become over grown during his tenure. Can’t see the lights on the dam and it’s getting worse on the west side… trim your property as you have homeowners getting fines every day for not trimming theirs…
It is ignorant and egotistical of Scriber not to recognize that Oswego’s citizens would hate the obstruction of the city’s iconic landmark, the lighthouse. What is good for the port authority is NOT necessarily good for Oswego. The mayor has brought so much new development to the city and has s realized so many improvements and beautification plans, it is simply shameful for the port to place this monstrosity at the water’s edge. Move the d**n building, Bill Scriber! Put your money where your mouth is! You talk about beautifying the waterfront with a performing arts center out of one side of your mouth, and ugly it up in reality. Recognize your big mistake, fix it, amd move on.
An Oswegonian by birth and proud of it