A.2747

A.2747 of 2007 (Morelle) would create a trail fund for All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) along with several new regulations on their use as a form of concessions to environmentalists such as state aid for enforcement and training. Despite years of compromise and deal making in the background the Assembly nor the Senate have been able to come up with a bill that is acceptable to majorities of both bodies.

There have been several bills on this topic in the past including S.1980 of 2001. This bill set out the modern concept of a state-funded trail system on private land balanced with tougher enforcement penalties against riders who left the trails or trespassed on private or state land. This bill was tweaked by the Assembly Program and Counsel Staff (particularly Chris DeLuice and later Brendan Holmes) and was introduced as A.8920 (2003-2004) and A.4137 (2005-2006) – a bit with the concession that the bill would go nowhere – and that Morelle's support for the bill would be tepid.

A.2747 and it's predecessors is a compromise between environmentalists and riders that nobody really like. Environmentalists like the Residents Committee to Protect the Adirondacks did not approve of any kind of state trail fund being created even on private land. They would prefer tougher regulations against ATV trespass and the DEC to close existing trails on state lands. This bill would do provide for impoundments of trespasser's ATVs along with substantial enforcement funds (25% of the ATV registration fee would go to enforcement).

This bill would not address the issue that some environmentalists cared about most: the complete descression of the (Governor Pataki's) Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation to put ATV trails where ever the DEC felt appropriate. Some environmentalists felt that ATV routes had no place in the park and were even doubtful about continuing to keep open existing trails on easements the state had purchased from International Paper and other logging companies.

Rider groups like NYSORVA and Franklin ATV Riders (FAR) liked the proposal insofar as they would be getting the trail fund that the state had been proposing since Governor Cuomo's State of the State Address in 1986. They would have preferred that the trail fund be used for projects both public and private, but where happy to see funds for private trail projects, along with those on easement lands along with county and local projects. They did not object to the new regulations on ATVs as long as they did not interfere with the Commissioner's ability to put trails on state reforested land wherever he or she sees fit.

In 2004, Governor Pataki mentioned a trail fund in his State of the State address. He also included an appropriation for it in his 2004 budget and sent riders notices of the proposed fee increase through the state DMV. That year, NYSORVA had a rally to promote ATV issues to legislators. Morelle among others spoke at that rally, ensuring riders that their bill was a priority.

In reality though, both environmentalists and riders were going straight at each other and the Assembly didn't want to be part of the controversy. A conscious choice was made by Program and Counsel to keep A.2747 as it stood and not promote or oppose the bill. The Assembly preferred to let the Senate take the heat for the bill. Negotiations between riders and environmentalists were called off and the bill languished in the Assembly Codes committee (opposition to it there is unknown).

Politically, this is a difficult bill to do. Not only is their stiff ideological divisions on both sides of the issue, ATV riders lack the lobbying skill that other groups like the farmers and environmentalists have. Likewise, the largely rural constituency that supports an ATV trail fund is poorly represented in the Assembly with few Democratic Assembly members representing rural areas. Morelle's own constituency in suburban Rochester is largely indifferent to an ATV trail system if not oppositional to the prospect of having ATVs on public lands.

A.5884

A.5884 of 2005-2006 (Koon) would prohibit the open burning of solid waste in towns with populations less then 20,000. This allows farmers and other rural residents to burn trash in "burn barrels" which some environmentalists call highly destructive to the environment—and until 2005 called the Burn Barrel Ban a key environmental bill.

Most New England states already ban the practice (some since the 1960s), but the unique political culture in New York makes such a bill impractical. This exemption was specifically put in the state Clean Air Act in 1965 as a compromise with Upstate Republicans. The Clean Air Act would not have passed had burn barrels been prohibited in the law.

As this bill regulates directly what people can or can not do in their backyards from Albany, it strikes deep into many rural people's hearts. Simply said, people in the North Country or Western New York don't want to be told by Albany what they can or can not do on their farms. The farm bureau has for years opposed this bill, claiming it's another unfunded mandate on farms.

This bill has passed the Assembly repeatedly since it's introduction in 1994 (and possibly earlier) but has never been considered in the State Senate. According to Mark Hansen, spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, the Senate supports local regulation of trash burning and that his house will not support a statewide ban on burn barrels.

A.2485

A.2485 of 2007 (Morelle) would mandate that the the DEC complete a mileage survey of existing snowmobile trails in the Adirondack Park before the new Master Plan for Snowmobiling in the Adirondacks goes into effect. This issue was brought up in 2004 when the state held the required hearings over a new plan for snowmobile trails in the Adirondacks and activists wanted to know how many miles of existing trail there were.

The Adirondack Park Agency allows for 700 miles of snowmobile trail. Some environmentalists claim that there is more then 700 miles of trail while some snowmobilers point out that existing maps show far less then the permitted in 700 miles.

There is little known opposition to this bill. It would overcome a lot of the controversy with the Snowmobile Master Plan for the Adirondacks, and hopefully allow the DEC with the Office of Parks and Historic Preservation to finalize the plan.

A.2407

A.2407 of 2007 (Morelle) would provide a $500 tax credit for the purchase of 4-stroke snowmobiles. 4-stroke engines are significantly cleaner then the common 2-stroke engines used on many older snowmobiles. 2-stroke engines do not use valves and as mix oil and fuel together to keep the engine lubricated, creating massive amounts of pollution when rode. 2-strokes are simpler, lighter weight and didn't require a trans axle to provide power over a wide variety of speeds.

This bill would seem like it would be quickly passed, except that it costs money and the benefits to the state are questionable as even the memo admits. New York does not have the air quality issues of Yellowstone National Park, and while 2-stroke machines are stinky and polluting particularly in valleys and other places that trap in emissions, their statewide air quality impact is relatively minor. Likewise, a tax credit or giving state money to buy a more powerful snowmobile is on nobody's list of state spending priorities.

The EPA will in 2009 essentially require the same thing (cleaner four stroke engines) that this bill will encourage in the interim. It probably was better bill years ago then when reintroduced today.

A.1982

A.1982 of 2007 (Lupardo) would regulate outdoor wood boilers and would “establishes outdoor wood-burning devices shall be operated only between May first through September thirtieth; establishes that outdoor wood-burning devices shall not be operated within seven hundred feet of certain locations; establishes that outdoor wood-burning devices shall not be installed or operated within two hundred feet of certain residences”.

This bill is interesting as it would be the first attempt at statewide regulation of outdoor wood boilers. This devices have been of considerable controversy in suburban areas for their obnoxious wood smoke emissions, but also are increasingly popular for use on farms and other places where people have access to large amounts of cheap wood (many people use a dozen cords of wood per season with these devices avoiding use of all oil to heat their houses).

While this bill is not going anywhere, it does bring with it an interesting discussion of outdoor wood boilers and the conflict between rural areas and urban areas.