“’Passing the buck’ is welcomed.” These days; when the meanings of so many words and statements have become twisted and subverted in a mocking, “in-group” way: This piece changes “buckshot” to “bills” – guns to money becomes “robbery” — and what better definition of corruption?
A chapter in “Tompkins County and Tammany Hall” will deal with the ongoing attempts to get traffic management on the rural roads running through our hamlet.
When we tried to get the County to stop the flood of aggressive and lawbreaking industrial trucks short-cutting through Lansingville [by posting a 4-ton weight limit for non-local deliveries] – they first claimed there weren’t any – then posted a 20-ton weight limit.
We emailed every County Legislator; trying to find out who was responsible for this decision; but no one would respond.
The voters of Tompkins County have no say in the running of the county. Zoning Codes and decisions were based on the “visions” and “reimaginings” of Comprehensive Plans; themselves created without meaningful public participation or oversight.
This closed door decision making has been granted the respectability of legislation with Form Based Codes.
The defining characteristic of Form Based Codes is the power it gives government authorities to decide what people are allowed to do — and what they MUST do.
People can fight zoning decisions; but they can’t fight Form Based Codes. Fait accompli.
There are no real public meetings in Tompkins County – no meaningful public participation in the decision making process. In the rare instances where questions from the public are allowed – they are deflected with irrelevant, partial or unresponsive answers.
There is never any discussion or deliberation – the voting follows without a minute’s pause – exactly as planned – for the benefit of the county’s rich and powerful interests.
They’re not even called “meetings” they’re called “hearings” – it’s an event where members of the public can sign in, and talk for 2-minutes [timed] – to a group of authorities who have already made up their minds and are merely waiting for you to stop talking. People who don’t attend are labeled as “not wishing to participate.”
It’s the kind of government that’s sweeping the country — and sweeping away anything that stands in its path.
One of a series of punch lines. They will probably appear as a page in the book, rather than in the bumper sticker format. Writing these “humorous” pieces relieves a little of the tension I build up while working on the “Tompkins County and Tammany Hall” book — and the growing feeling that it’s too late for change — as we move from a functional dictatorship to a factual dictatorship.
I thought of a number of things to say; but I don’t think I could make the point any clearer.
“Everything’s transparent on the surface” is a good way to describe government in New York State; because every ethical and public “empowering” policy is no more than a screen for covering up their “quid pro quo” deal making agenda. Tompkins County’s overwhelmingly liberal government gains strength from an increasingly gerrymandered redistricting and the representation of a huge student population; who have no voice in policy and no knowledge what goes on in the county — everything comes from the elite urban center of Cornell’s “dog eat dog shit” bureaucracy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT?
Who are they really helping?
While New York State will only disclose that living in an Agricultural District may expose residents to “activities that cause noise, dust and odors,” the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has expressed the opinion that laws in an Agricultural District “may be inadequate for ensuring the safety of our environment and for protecting citizens from serious injury.”
The current New York Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice helps rural real estate agents sell properties, protects the image of Industrial Farming, and ensures higher assessments for taxing authorities, but its blatant non-disclosure of modern farming methods and iniquitous Agricultural Laws encourage prospective buyers to assume the risks of “serious injury” and financial disaster for themselves and their families — without being made aware that these risks even exist.
New York State refuses to take reasonable steps to ensure that prospective rural property buyers understand the financial and health risks of living in an Agricultural District; so that they are in a position to make an informed decision.
Updating New York’s Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice is an essential step in obtaining Social Justice for the rural community.
05/20/2019 – a detailed letter pleading the case for the health and well-being of the rural community and requesting help in disclosing the risks of living in an Agricultural District was sent to County and State representatives and oversight authorities by Certified Mail.
All of them either did not respond, responded flatly that they “had no authority” or passed it off to another department where it was never heard of again.
The following text is from the letter:
“I am writing you to request that you update the New York State Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice to ensure that prospective buyers understand the financial and health risks of living in an Agricultural District so that they are in a position to make an informed decision.
From the NYS Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice:
‘This disclosure notice is to inform prospective residents that the property they are about to acquire lies partially or wholly within an agricultural district and that farming activities occur within the district. Such farming activities may include, but not limited to, activities that cause noise, dust and odors.’
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit [Mather v. Willet Dairy] in finding against plaintiffs suffering from the effects of manure off-gassing that included brain damage in one child and the surgical removal of eyelids in an adult commented:
‘We recognize that limiting citizen suits in this respect can cause serious injury to persons living near environmental dangers if the DEC and other environmental regulatory agencies are unable to monitor and sanction polluters effectively before compliance deadlines. Given that Willet Dairy had more than seven years before it was required to comply fully with its permit, that means no citizen could have brought a suit over that entire time for CWA violations. Such regulatory agencies may be unable to ensure that polluters are acting in accordance with their compliance schedules, given the numerous violations likely to occur. Consequently, limiting the ability of ‘private attorneys general’ to bring suit until after compliance deadlines may be inadequate for ensuring the safety of our environment and for protecting citizens from serious injury. But that is the remedy that Congress has provided and to which we are bound.’
Manure lagoons have been shown to harbor and emit over 400 VOCs and toxic gases [including Hydrogen Sulfide and Methane], more than 150 dangerous pathogens [including E. coli, Cryptosporidium and Anthrax], growth hormones, heavy metals, antimicrobials and antibiotics.
Particulate matter from agricultural sources contains up to 100 times the amount of bacteria and fungi as normal air.
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cites the threat of antibiotic resistance:
‘When animals are given antibiotics for growth promotion or increased feed efficiency, bacteria are exposed to low doses of these drugs over a long period of time. This is inappropriate antibiotic use and can lead to the development of resistant bacteria.’
‘Resistant germs from the animal gut can also get into the environment, like water and soil, from animal manure.’
Although decades of scientific reports have expressed concern for the health of neighbors impacted by agricultural activities and cited the need for further investigation, no comprehensive or long-term studies have ever been made.
Many Agricultural District wells have been polluted through manure spills and other agricultural activities. Buyers need to be informed that well owners are solely responsible for the safety and quality of their well water [and that remedies, such as reverse osmosis and drinking bottled water are very expensive.]
Prospective buyers need also to be made aware that ‘satellite’ lagoons containing millions of gallons of liquid manure may be constructed next to rural residences on any land owned or bought by a farm and at the sole discretion of the farmer.
And that in an Agricultural District the ‘right of use and enjoyment’ of the buyer’s property will be effectively subordinated to any agricultural activity designated as a ‘sound agricultural practice’ by the New York Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets.
From the NYS Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice:
‘Prospective purchasers are urged to contact the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets to obtain additional information or clarification regarding their rights and obligations under Article 25-AA of the Agricultural and Markets Law.’
Looking for clarification of risks associated with living in an Agricultural District, I called the number listed on the Ag and Markets webpage. I was answered by an operator at the NYS Dept. of Ag and Markets Call Center. The operator was surprised and said she didn’t get calls about this. After a couple of minutes of research, she forwarded me to Land and Water Resources where someone there put me through to another party to answer my questions. He stated it was a ‘complicated law’ and spoke of ‘farmers seeking protection’ from towns and neighbors and restrictive laws.
When I pressed him about the health risks, he stated everything was on a ‘case by case’ basis, and if I identified the parcel there might be some hazardous material sheets, but I should really get in touch with the Agricultural District Coordinator from Cornell Cooperative Extension. Recognizing the name of the Coordinator, and having had issues with that person’s assertion that nobody but farmers deserved to live in North Lansing, I stopped the bureaucratic handoff at this point.
According to real estate professionals; this disclosure notice is not presented to a prospective buyer until the time the contract for the offer is being drawn up.
Given the late timing of its presentation, the lack of meaningful disclosure within the Notice itself, and my inability to ‘obtain additional information or clarification regarding their rights and obligations’ — the NYS Agricultural District Disclosure Form and Notice is a document whose purpose is to limit the warranty of prospective buyers without their knowledge.
If this is an oversight, it can be fixed. If it’s deliberate, it’s an unconscionable contract.
Please let me know what steps you plan to take to correct this.”
An unconscionable contract is one that is so one-sided or so unfair that it shocks the conscience. The two main factors that determine unconscionability are both present:
Bargaining power, i.e., oppression – One party will have bargaining power over another party if the disadvantaged party is less knowledgeable in the industry: The increased scope of modern agricultural methods and their serious documented impact on property owners in an Agricultural District is never mentioned.
Unfair terms, i.e., surprise – Another example of unfair terms would be hidden language found in the contract. Such hidden language will almost always constitute unfairness, particularly if the disadvantaged party was unaware of the verbiage in the agreement: The overriding policy of Agricultural Law; that it can subordinate the “right of use and enjoyment” of your property, remove the right of remediation of damage, and the protection of your family from any action deemed a “sound agricultural practice” is never even hinted at in the form’s 150 word gloss-over.
08/25/2019 – I emailed the text of the letter [with a copy of the Agricultural Disclosure form attached] to the members of the County Legislature.
After an initial positive response and an indication of willingness to at least add a supplemental County disclosure statement, everything went silent.
11/19/2019 – I received an email stating that the Legislature had handed the matter over to the local Board of Realtors and the County Ag and Farm Protection Committee, both of whom were referred to as the “stakeholders,” and that my “concerns and suggestions” had been “passed on.” The prospective rural property buyers — in spite of the size of their vested interest, and being the most directly affected; were never referred to as being stakeholders — they were never mentioned at all.
Just as in the Deadly Drift herbicide complaint, the decision to take any action was left in the hands of the same people who had the most to lose if any action on the misconduct was taken. No “conflict of interest” concerns were ever expressed by any County Legislator.
It’s the same pattern of behavior that “people in a position of public trust” in New York State exhibit on every rural issue. It’s the boot mark of Urban Colonialism.
Deadly Drift – Gone, but not forgotten – like a blight in the life of a tree – leaves a permanent mark in its growth. Every chapter in this book contains evidence that points in the same direction – evidence that cannot be refuted by facts – because there are no facts that contradict.
In these days: where “equitability” replaces equality, and any evil can be excused with the assurance of a greater goodness — our revered figures of human worth and equality are arranged like a jury of bobble heads: always nodding, but never allowed to speak.
And like the often cited “necessary evil,” or TDML’s “necessary” pollution; is the corruption and cronyism displayed in the pages of this book something that you’ve come to terms with? And if so; does that reflect your sophistication? Or your inhumanity?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DEADLY DRIFT
If there’s a law; and nobody enforces it: Does it actually exist?
Contrary to the media disclosures and quick condemnation that accompanies any health debilitating activity in our cities; the health and well-being of rural residents is of no importance to authorities, the media, or those who perpetrate the injury.
As you read this narrative; think about how differently these acts of misconduct would be treated if they occurred in a metropolitan or suburban setting.
This incident marked a turning point in my life. After many years of pursuing Rural Social Justice through public hearings, letters, speeches and chasing bureaucratic shadows within the law; I had cause to call on the regulatory and clear-cut legislative intent of County, State, and Federal authorities. This chapter recounts how these people “in a position of public trust” answered that call.
The narrative has been organized into a timeline for clarity; and the names have been withheld to keep the focus on their positions and public responsibilities. Everything is fully documented — it’s their actions that tell the story.
I was outside on my rider mower, when a high-clearance agricultural boom sprayer entered an adjoining field to the north and sped towards me; spraying me with a cloud of a chemicals.
[These agricultural boom sprayers are designed to ride through fields, above weeds and crops. A typical specification for one of these machines would be: 12 ft. high x 28 ft. long x 12 ft. wide without boom, and 90-120 ft. wide with boom extended. Weight 35,000 lbs. Road speed with boom folded 30-40 mph. Spray application speed with boom unfolded up to 25 mph. A large piece of equipment to use in an area only 300 feet wide.]
At the age of 66; my back stiffens up while seated on the mower and I was unable to get off and move quickly.
I could smell the chemicals as I breathed them in through my mouth and nose.
I immediately went inside and cleaned up and then called the dairy farmer who was renting that field from me to complain – he told me that Helena Chemical was spraying Roundup on that field.
A short time later I received a call from someone at Helena Chemical who informed me that they had spoken with the applicator, but they were rushing to spray before the rain came, and I should take off my clothes and shower — there was not even an apology.
Already cleaned up; with a beer and something to eat; I thought I had put the whole incident behind me.
I became aware that I was standing in the middle of the bathroom vomiting all over myself, the toilet and the bathroom floor – and I didn’t even care – I remember getting down on my knees and pushing towels around the floor for a while to clean it up, and feeling completely disconnected from what I was doing – then I went back to bed for 24 hours. More than my stomach was outraged – I did not have a bowel-movement for a week afterwards.
I didn’t realize at the time how much my physical well-being affected my mental outlook: but after a week or so; my thoughts turned from my interior condition to the conditions of my herbicide poisoning.
As I felt better; I grew angrier at being sprayed, and more worried about any long term effects.
In spite of advice from neighbors; I submitted a herbicide poisoning complaint to the NYSDEC through their website.
Recounting the incident online brought a number of emotions to the surface; but I tried to keep it a fair and accurate description of the events — it later became evident that I was the only one with that concern.
Two NYSDEC personnel showed up unannounced: one of them interviewed me while the other took photos outside. I was informed some weeks later that the investigation had been concluded and the case had been disposed; but that if I wanted to see the report; I would need to make a FOIL [Freedom of Information Law] request.
It was my fault.
Government oversight agendas make use of a standard set of fallback protocols to short-circuit complaints and maintain business as usual: Discredit the Person, Discredit the Facts, Discredit the Situation, and It’s Legal Anyway. See if you can spot them in this NYSDEC investigative report [names have been withheld, “***” represents redacted text]:
Complaint Form
Facts and Information provided by Complainant
The following information was received through the DEC website “Report an Environmental Violation Online” or sent directly by the complainant to an OPP dispatch mailbox:
Who Did It: Helena
What Occurred: 1 was mowing my lawn, when 1 noticed a large high-clearance ag sprayer racing down the adjacent field towards me. It passed me only a few feet [less than 30 ft.] away and covered me with a strong smelling cloud [I was down wind in a 20 mph wind according to my weather station.] I immediately went inside and tried to clean up, but there was nothing I could do about what 1 had already breathed in and absorbed through my nasal passages, and then called the farmer, J– C–, who was renting the land. Through the windows I could see the boom sprayer flying around the fields which surround my house on three sides. [There are dead patches in my lawn where overspray has killed the grass.] J– told me it was herbicide/”round-up’, and a short while later someone from Helena called and told me they had spoken with the applicator, but they were rushing to spray before the rain came, and I should take off my clothes and shower — there was not even an apology.
Early Sunday morning, the diarrhea started, followed by fairly severe vomiting a couple of hours later. It took over a week before my digestion seemed back to normal, but the anger still remains.
When Did It Occur: On Saturday, June 3, 2017 in the afternoon [around 3:00 pm]
County: Tompkins Municipality: Lansing
Location Or Address: ___ Lansingville Road
How Did It Occur: Reckless endangerment through arrogance and unsafe application of poison by licensed company.
Additional Details: I’m sure they’ll do it again — they’re protected by Ag Law.
Date of Submittal: 06/17/2007
On Saturday, June 17th, at approximately 1500hrs, ECO E– and 1 met with *** at *** residence. A statement was received from
*** indicating that *** leases *** land. approximately 10.5 acres, to J– C– for agricultural work. *** stated that on June 3rd, specialized spraying farm equipment sprayed pesticides in a reckless manner by traveling at a high rate of speed, spraying in high winds (20mph from the North read from *** weather station), and by spraying past the cornfield, into *** |adjacent lawn. *** stated that *** was sprayed with the pesticide. and has been violently sick for the following week. *** contacted J– C– who said that the chemical was an herbicide, and *** was later contacted by Helena advising *** to remove *** contaminated clothes and shower if *** was sprayed. Overspray of herbicide was found on the south and east edge of the property.
Upon questioning, *** did not seek medical attention for the spraying and I advised *** to do so. *** did not provide an answer for why *** did not report the incident immediately. *** expressed *** views on farming and that| *** was politically active against farming.
06/25/2017 08:05:31
On Wednesday, June 21st, 2017, I visited the C– Farm located on L– H– Rd, T/Lansing. J– C– was on vacation, but a farm worker provided the details and contact information for A– M– at Helena Chemical. The farm also provided a basic map of pesticide application areas, but was not able to provide a lease for the ___ Lansingville Rd property. 1 contacted A– and he agreed to meet on Thursday.
On Wednesday. I visited *** as *** was able to find a copy of the lease of the the property Upon investigation of the lease, the lease provided no boundaries or physical descriptors, additionally *** stated that the lease covered 8.5 acres, but *** was leasing the remaining 2 acres on a verbal agreement with J– C–. The residence and leased farm land are all on one tax parcel. On this visit, I noticed other areas of *** Lawn had dead grass. And **** stated that *** had used roundup herbicide on his lawn.
07/15/2017 14:09:13
On Thursday, the 22nd, I met with A– M– of Helena Chemical, applicator # C___. A– had all required, paperwork and licenses. No previous violations with Helena Chemical. A– was aware of the complaint and disputed the wind speed and high speed of the tractor and stated that the tractors must travel at 12 mph as the dosage rate is fixed.
Helena Chemical was issued Warning No. 20910 for application of pesticide to non-target area, 6NYCRR 325.2(a)
The complainant was contacted via telephone and notified of the outcome of the investigation.
Case closed!
From negative statements intended to discredit my testimony: “*** did not seek medical attention” – “did not provide an answer for why” – “did not report the incident immediately”; to the ludicrous and false claim that I stated I had used roundup herbicide on my lawn, the whole report seems designed to give the impression that I am evasive, if not an outright liar, acting out of malice and hate. It’s a very interesting and revealing response from an NYSDEC investigation that did not even ascertain the wind speed at the time of a herbicide drift complaint.
After dismissing my poisoning; the report spends time quibbling about boundaries and leases. The boundaries were clearly demarked, and unchanged for 20 years
Killing a 3 or 4 foot wide swath of lawn against the strong north winds that were gusting that afternoon would require a boom spraying placement well inside the visible boundaries — a placement that is not consistent with the careful application of herbicide at a speed of “12 mph.”
At no point did the NYSDEC’s investigation document the actual weather conditions — instead, they merely noted that the applicator “disputed the wind speed”. The local NOAA weather station recorded winds of 13-16 MPH with wind gusts of 17 to 23 MPH during that time period – consistent with my own weather station readings. And as I found out later; these boom sprayers are equipped with wind gauges in order to monitor wind conditions while spraying; making it even more suspicious that no actual numbers ever appeared in the report.
The investigators never asked the applicator how, with an unobstructed view from an elevated, glass paneled operator’s cabin, he missed seeing me on a rider mower, and continued spraying; driving past me upwind at a distance of less than 50 feet.
And maybe the most egregious aspect; the NYSDEC investigation never made any mention of the restrictions and conditions of this chemical’s application under Federal law, or under their own regulatory oversight. The exact chemical brand name was never revealed; but the EPA registration document for “Glyphosate 41%” states:
DIRECTIONS FOR USE
It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.
“Do not apply this product in a way that will contact workers or other persons, either directly or through drift. Only protected handlers may be in the area during application.”
“Wind – Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2-10 mph.”
“Sensitive Areas – The pesticide must only be applied when the potential for drift to adjacent sensitive areas (e.g. residential areas, bodies of water, known habitat for threatened or endangered species, non-target crops) is minimal (e.g. when wind is blowing away from the sensitive areas).”
Further research uncovered additional cautions from leading Agricultural colleges:
University of Minnesota Extension – When is it too Windy to Spray?
• “Always measure wind speed and direction before, during, and after the application. Always follow label information, but in general, wind speeds of 3 to 7 mph are preferable. Spray at low wind velocities (less than 10 mph).”
Perdue University Extension – Reducing Spray Drift from Glyphosate and Growth Regulator
• “Spray when the wind speeds are less than 10 MPH.”
• “Spray when the wind direction is away from sensitive areas”
Montana State University Extension – Avoiding Pesticide Drift
• “Spray when the wind speed is 10 mph wind or less.”
Michigan State University Extension
• “Professional pesticide applicators carry windspeed gauges to determine if windspeed are within acceptable limits There is no magic number for windspeed though ten miles per hour is a common rule of thumb as a limit for spraying.”
• “One the most important cautions on contact herbicide labels is avoid drift.”
University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Research & Extension – Mitigating Pesticide Spray Drift
• “Most labels recommend not applying pesticides when wind is gusty or speed is greater than 10 mph. It is recommended for applicators to regularly and accurately measure wind speed to ensure proper spray deposition.”
What was Helena Chemical’s motivation? It’s the date of the incident that provides an answer. Roundup is sprayed to kill all the vegetation in a field before the corn is planted; and June 3rd is very late for Central New York. That spring was extremely wet, not just in the amount of rain, but in the frequency of showers. In “rushing to spray before the rain” and fulfil contracts within the short window of dry weather; Helena Chemical deliberately ignored government safety and application regulations.
The NYSDEC did not follow even the basic guidelines for an investigation, and never explored the reasons for the event or tried to identify the immediate and underlying causes.
After this door slamming result to my complaint; I posted the NYSDEC report in a detailed blog about my poisoning,
There was only one response; then no further communication. No action was ever taken.
While I investigated other Rural Social Justice issues; the need to make another attempt at resolving my own herbicide drift issue grew.
I requested local weather records from NOAA for the day of the incident, and took photos of the incident location from the adjoining field that demonstrated an unobstructed view of that location — even at ground level.
I researched label instructions and application regulations and guidelines from authoritative sources [some of which have already been noted.]
In recounting my poisoning incident to others, I found that incidents of herbicide drift and its effects were not uncommon in the community. While one resident mentioned seeing herbicide drifting onto clothes hung out to dry, another was unaware that herbicide had been sprayed and made no connection to the nausea and other symptoms that he experienced until later. Some spoke of the high rate of cancer in their family, and some agreed to come forward and testify.
The NYSDEC report was reviewed by G– V–, a laboratory and field scientist with twelve years of inspection experience with the NYS DOH and The Cortland County Health department, where he held the title of Environmental Laboratory Consultant and Sanitarian, respectively. He noted the following:
“The first being an investigative report should be FACTUAL, not INTERPETIVE, as in “Expressed views that was politically active against farming.” The second was the use of an exclamation point at the end of “case closed” which to me is highly unprofessional, and may be presenting a bias.”
My plan was to send an unignorable and fully documented account of the incident to authorities: persuading them to take action.
All of them either did not respond, responded flatly that they “had no authority” or it “did not fall under their jurisdiction” — or referred everything to the NYSDEC for a self-investigation of its own misconduct.
A letter from the Regional Director of the NYSDEC with results of that investigation was forwarded to me, with a cover letter, from my State Representative.
The NYSDEC response ignored all the evidence while presenting unsubstantiated arguments for their position:
“DEC has reviewed this matter. For the reasons set forth below, DEC believes that the initial investigation in June 2017 was thorough and the decision not to pursue administrative or criminal enforcement against Helena was proper.”
“While it appears that the complainant would like stronger laws, the complaint about DEC’S investigation can only be answered from the perspective of the then current laws and regulations.”
The Regional Director even added the text of the regulation that “provides the requirements for use and application of pesticides” — but never explained why the then current regulations were inadequate, or provided any actual figures for the wind speed, pesticide drift, wind direction or proximity to human habitation needed to pursue regulatory enforcement.
The applicator’s compliance with Federal label instructions, and the contents of those instructions, was never mentioned. The points brought up by the DOH expert, and all other questions concerning the quality and intent of the original NYSDEC investigation, were never answered or even acknowledged.
The entire response did not include one fact that could be used to hold the Regional Director or the NYSDEC to account for their decisions.
Another spring – I heard loud back-up “beeps” and looked out the window. A high wheel herbicide boom sprayer was carefully backing up, and then moving forward, in the small section of field next to where I was sprayed. This process was repeated for several minutes. It was the first time I had ever seen this behavior, or heard a back-up warning — then I looked across the street and saw someone photographing this display.
If only they had the same level of concern for the health and safety of rural residents.
There are many tricks that a City-centric social system can use to reimagine all the surrounding land for their own use and profit. The Urban Colonialism paradigm presents a top to the bottom, centrally controlled structure for urban gain.
The next time their “experts” come to address issues in your rural town or village; remember where they are coming from — and who will ultimately benefit from their solutions.
Even the Consumer Price Index is based solely on Urban consumers and workers – there is no “us.”
The Urban Colonialism Road Trip game mirrors the efforts made to establish thru-cutting truck weight limits and traffic enforcement in a rural hamlet already overrun with reckless and lawless industrial and commuting traffic.
The actual documented story that will appear in “Tompkins County and Tammany Hall” is, frankly, unbelievable: after two years of efforts to bring traffic management to our rural roads — we have been unable to even find out who makes these decisions.