What's Up — or Rather, Down — With Toronto Reservoir?

We're well into summer (OK, I know in my last post I stated summer started just two days ago, but that was about the weather, not the calendar) and Toronto Reservoir, the second largest recreational lake in the county, is still way, way down. In fact, the once grand 800 acre lake seems like a puddle of its former self. I didn't take the photo on the left above on the road to the reservoir, but standing about 50 feet from the 'shore' on what was the lake bottom last year. The "road" has been rutted in by boaters towing their boats from the public access point on Moscoe Road to the receding water's edge. The photo on the right shows floating docks belonging to homeowners at the Chapin Estate lying like beached whales on the dry lake bottom.

Over the winter, the lake level was very low, but it didn't raise a whole lot of eyebrows. Lakes are often drawn down over the winter here, although not as much as we saw last winter at Toronto. And with a cover of snow, a lake bottom is as good as a frozen lake surface for snowmobiling and cross country skiing. The first article about concern about the lake drawdown on Toronto, in fact, didn't appear in the Times Herald Record, until March 31st. While Alliance Energy indicated in the article that the draw down was in compliance with NY DEC and FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Requirements), the general feeling among people I talked to was that with the spring snow melt and rain, Alliance would return to a 'normal' level in time for the summer boating season.

That hasn't happened, as you can see clearly from the photos above taken July 6th. The situation has become of such concern, that in early June local politicians held a meeting about it (also attended by Steve Dubrovsky, one of the developers of Chapin, as well as a representive of the recently formed 'Home Owners on Toronto' group). (Times Herald Record article about that meeting.)

Alliance Energy has been pretty mum about the situation, and did not return calls or emails asking for comment from the Record. Alliance did comment for an April article in the Sullivan County Democrat, where the company indicated that it's priority is electrical generation. In a Feb. 10th letter to Town of Bethel Supervisor Dan Sturm, the company stated "the concept of operating the Toronto Reservoir to increase the tax base of the town or the property values for any individual development project is not lawful and would not be in the interest of all the public."

So, what's up with Toronto? Is the low lake level simply a matter of dam maintenance requirements and lower than normal precipitation earlier this year (which resulted in a very low snow pack)? Or is Alliance Energy holding the water level in Toronto "hostage" to get something it wants?

That "something" pops up in conversation here as one of two things. First is a sharp reduction in the assessed values of the reservoirs and dams by township assessors. In 2007, soon after completing the purchase of Mirant-NY Gen for $5.1 million, Alliance sought huge assessment reductions. In Bethel Township (where Toronto Reservoir is located), Alliance wanted the assessments on their 1,600 acres (which includes the reservoir) cut from $3 million to $500,000. It seems that Alliance didn't win that battle, as the 2008 assessment on Toronto (including the dam) stood at $2,514,067. Now the chickens may be coming home to roost, although in the Democrat article Alliance denied that the drawdown had anything to do with it's tax litigation/

 The second "something" relates to the requirement that Alliance under it's FERC license provide two points for public recreational access to Toronto Reservoir. Because the reservoirs were built with federal money, public access is mandated. For years, there have been two access points — one at the end of Moscoe Road, and a second near the dam, which was accessed via a rutted dirt road from Pine Grove Road south of Smallwood. That second access crossed property that was to become the Chapin Estate development. Woodstone Development, the owners of the Chapin Estate, wanted that access closed so the entire community could be behind secured gates. Over the course of a few years there were heated battles in the courts between Woodstone and local activists fighting to maintain public access. In the end, Woodstone won. So Woodstone barricaded access, but FERC still requires Alliance to provide it to keep its license, which puts Alliance in a tough position. So the second possible scenario is that Alliance wants to use the lake level as leverage to get Woodstone to reopen access and get FERC off its back.

It would put minds at ease if Alliance would just issue a statement about why the lake is low — dam repairs, low snow pack, below normal rain in May, whatever. Also, there's quite a bit of debate here about whether Toronto has historically been 'low', or how the lake level has varied, during which seasons, etc. Personally, I'd like to see some historical data of the lake level, month by month, going back a couple of decades. I'm sure it exists, either with Alliance or the DEC.

At that political pow wow in June about Toronto, one idea floated was having the county buy the reservoir. That's actually a great idea. But I think there's about as much chance of that happening as me waking up in the morning with a full head of hair. Even if the county had the money — which it doesn't — buying the reservoir to bring the lake level back up would be seen as primarily benefiting the Chapin homeowners on Toronto. It would be spun here as another bailout of the wealthy, and could be political suicide for the county legislators who approve it.

I could see it floating, but only if there was a major concession on public access by Chapin, possibly beyond reopening access to the area near the dam. Even though Chapin has been great for the tax coffers and the image of Sullivan County, there isn't a lot of popular goodwill to tap. The bruising battle to close off the second public access to Toronto is widely viewed here, rightly or wrongly, as a land grab by the wealthy few and a denial of a right to the not-so-wealthy, the technical property rights aspects of the court case not withstanding.

It's in the county's interest to do whatever it takes to get the lake level back up, which will help keep property values up at Chapin and property taxes flowing in from those multi-million dollar houses.

But I wonder whether that will happen. Even if Alliance brings Toronto back up, under the current scenario there is no guarantee it will stay back up. There needs to be some fundamental change in the ownership or the agreements and regulations that govern the lake levels on Toronto to instill confidence that the lake you see today (well, not today exactly) is the lake you'll see tomorrow. The county should find a way to buy the reservoir (and while they're at it, Swinging Bridge too) to maintain the long term viability of these jewels in our crown of lakes.

Comments

[Q.]

A nice thoughtful post.

Great photos! Not exactly for the brochures and billboards through.

Q1a,b,c:

What is your opinion of those homeowners that now have mudfront property at Chapin and otherwise which they purchased ($350,000"s+ for vacant land or homes in the $800,000's+) on Toronto Reservoir and grieving their assesment? Do they have a case? And if so, who then picks up the tab for the decrease tax revenue?

Q2a,b:

It's gotta be tough to show trophy second home properties in this current economic climate -granted.

However, what happens when you have an appointment and your clients now see lovely wetlands with blue herons and mallards (good for the Rachel Carson devotees) - but not exactly what one expects when what they thought would be a "deep crystal clear mountain lake with blue water lapping at your dock only steps from your hand crafted home?

Or, do you just bypass these properties until the water - if and when - gets refilled?

Thank you.

Q.

[David Knudsen]

Q, regarding Q.1, if property values decrease then, yes, homeowners likely do have a case to grieve their assessments. Establising value, however, may be difficult if there aren't sales to provide comps for the assessor. At Swinging Bridge, the lake was drawn down for 2 years for dam repairs, and a number of homeowners successfully grieved their assessments. Who picks up the tab? When the total assessed value of a township decreases and the budget stays the same, then the tax levy goes up, affecting all property owners.

Regarding Q.2, Toronto is a tough sell with the water level down, as was Swinging Bridge when the lake was drawn down for the repair there. I've had more interest this year in non-lakefront houses and lots there than lakefront ones. With non-lakefront, the lake isn't as critical a component of value. The prices for non-lakefront properties are substantially less expensive, which may be appealing in these economic times. And if you're taking your quad to play at the lake, it isn't such a big deal whether you access the lake at the shoreline or drive another hundred yards across a meadow to reach the water's edge.

I actually think Toronto is very pretty right now, with the acres of green meadow grass gently sloping down to the water. It's quite nice for swimming, because the slope at the current water edge is much more gradual than when the water is near the high water mark. And as for public access, it also is better. You can drive right to the water's edge, lay out a picnic on the grass and have a great day. And because folks are parking right at the water's edge, the limited parking available at the end of Moscoe Road isn't an issue.

[Rod]

Dave - I looked for sarcasm in your above reply when you started talking about the green meadows, but didn't detect any - at least they planted grass this year where the lake used to be. Better than the mud. That was definitely a good move.

One has to wonder Where were the title companies in all of this? If Alliance isn't doing anything illegal, shouldn't the title companies have raised red flags at this exact possibility?

[rr]

You're dealing here with a very dangerous game. This body of water does NOT stand alone. It connects with others and will in turn adversely impact them. Call a limnologist and ask him to describe to you what is really at stake here. You don't think the surrounding water table will be impacted by this? What was once a lake is now a meadow and you like that aesthetic, do you?

[David Knudsen]

rr, I'm not the one managing the reservoir or making the decisions. I just said I thought the meadows that have sprouted between the shoreline and the water's edge are kind of pretty. In my opinion, they are. That doesn't mean they should be permanently maintained there.

Rod, I don't think the grass was planted. The same thing happened over at Swinging Bridge. Meadow grasses just kind of grew.

[rr]

Alliance denies anything is out of the ordinary. The FERC license allows it to draw the reservoir down to 1,170 feet mean sea level, and the company maintains the current level is above this minimum. The normal draw-down is 1,188 feet msl.

........

Is this still their position?

[Brad]

Isn't this the lake/reservoir where the $4 million home was recently sold. Also, I am curious why Alliance would think their tax assesment should be lowered to $500,000 if they they just paid over $5,000,000 a few years ago? (I assume from your post they are the same pieces of property).

In terms of the reservoir access, perhaps a compromise would be to expand the Moscoe road access (with better parking and perhaps a picnic area) and to then close the other access at the Dam. I have been down that road a long time ago, and it was not a good access point for boats anyway. Of course, I suppose some people liked to use that area for fishing from the dam, but more likely a place for kids to drink from what I could tell.

Brad

[Rod]

'Meadow grasses' - your a master of language, that's for sure, David. Next we will see a listing - "Have your own two million dollar house with lake views accented with meadow grasses. Act Now. Won't last."

[Rod]

david, would you mind changing 'your' to 'you're', please?"

[quentin]

Poetic justice.
$4 million dollars you say.

[fondue]

yes...for acres and acres of green meadow grass...

~fondue

[JW]

David,
you can find the water levels for Toronto at the USGS website
They post them each year. I pulled the numbers from 1993-2007. The lowest average water height is 1,190.68 (almost 20ft higher than it is today!) and the average high is 1,215.97!
To me this proves that Alliance Energy has purposely drawn down the water level well below what could/should be normally expected. A fundamental change is needed and should be brought about by our elected officials. Whether you're a "rich Chapin resident" or the "average local Joe" we are all suffering.

[David Knudsen]

JW, interesting stats. How did you find them on the USGS website? I've been banging around on geodata.gov on the Inland Water databases listed and can't pull up Toronto, even using the gage number, 01433100. Any help would be much appreciated.

[JW]

David, sorry for the delay. simply go to google, then enter the following in the search window. USGS 01433100
It returns all the different years (PDF files) and the water levels.
I have a spreadsheet if you want it listing the years from 1993-2008

[ed richards]

has this not been a public passage fpr more than 7 years? I was taught that if somebody traveresd your property on a regular basis to gain acces to public area's it becomes a public rite of way .how does someone go about taking away the public rite of way .one that has been in afect for 50+ years !! it must be nice to have enought money (power) too do what ever you want. maybe i will buy two pices of property one on each side of the road an erect a toll. waite the indians were going to do that and the goverment said that they could'nt. not enough power (money)