Empire Resorts hires chief restructuring officer

link to complete article is here:

http://www.catskillsnews.com/News/2009/April09/10/EmpRes_restruc-10Apr09.html

Part of the plan now includes keeping the current raceway and adjacent racino, in business, even if a second, smaller track opens at the planned new Concord complex, less than three miles away

MONTICELLO – Empire Resorts, the company that owns Monticello Gaming and Raceway, Thursday announced the appointment of Eric Reehl as chief restructuring officer.

His primary function will be to negotiate a restructuring of the company’s outstanding secured debt with representatives of the company’s note holders, who hold $65 million in convertible notes, and Bank of Scotland, which holds some $7.5 million in a revolving first mortgage credit facility.

Reehl said it is “in the best interest of all parties” to come to a quick settlement. He said Empire Resorts has a “solid asset base and significant growth potential given its existing cash flow from VGM and racing operations at the Monticello Casino and Raceway, future anticipated revenues from the Concord Hotel and Resort, the possibility of a St. Regis Mohawk tribe class III gaming project, and possible legalization of commercial gaming in Sullivan County.”

He said there is also the possibility of developing the 230 acre raceway site along with the expansion of gaming in the Catskills.

Reehl most recently served as one of three managing directors in corporate finance and asset backed lending at Plainfield Asset Management LLC.

UPSTATE NEW YORK

Golf and good food in Windham

BY MALERIE YOLEN-COHEN|Special to NewsdayApril 12, 2009link to complete article is here:https://www.newsday.com/travel/destinations/northeast/ny-trwintroweb1212637678apr09,0,3429818,full.story

The view from Pratt Rock in Prattsville, near Windham, New York in the Catskill Mountains. (Photo by Noah Finn, courtesy of the Catskill Mountain Region Guide)

Drilling opponents form area coalition

Representatives from grass-roots environmental groups in Chenango, Delaware and Otsego counties have formed CDOG, or Chenango-Delaware-Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group.

The common concern, the groups say, is that unlike traditional gas drilling in porous rocks, the gas sought in the Marcellus Shale formation is trapped too tightly within various types of stone layers to be extracted safely.

David Cyr, of Delhi, said Thursday that CDOG was organized just a few days after its founding members attended a Catskill Mountainkeeper-sponsored educational forum on gas drilling, held June 26 in Walton.

At the Walton forum, people from Colorado and Wyoming gave presentations on the negative social, economic and environmental consequences of horizontal gas drilling, which requires high-pressure hydrofracturing. That method uses water to break up rock, releasing gas within.

Cyr said CDOG is a work group that has provided numerous public information forums.

"Many other local grass-roots activist organizations have developed throughout New York state with a similar mission to oppose this thing so wrong that it should not ever be allowed anywhere," Cyr said. "CDOG is not the movement, but merely a small part of a growing movement."

Cyr said CDOG's mission is to inform the public of the great abuses that will occur, calling drilling the corporate/government planned exploitation of a particular resource.

Mike Bernhard, of Afton, said CDOG is creating a focal point for area groups that don't know each other but have a common goal.

"Someone from each group sits at CDOG when we meet once a month, but we are not a member organization and the meetings are not public," Bernhard said. "By having a lot of interaction, the people are working more efficiently." Bernhard said CDOG considers the environmentally sensible solution is to ban such gas drilling everywhere in the state.

"Our goals are very public, but our tactics are not in the public realm," Bernhard said.

For more information, visit www.Un-NaturalGas.Org.

___

Patricia Breakey can be reached at 746-2894 or at [email protected].

NYRI ‘suspends’ powerline application

FERC ruling decisive

link to complete article here:

http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/09-04-09/head1-nyri.html

By FRITZ MAYER

ALBANY, NY — In a dramatic and unexpected move, the lawyer for the company that has been seeking permission to build a powerline in the region for more than three years, suddenly said his company was withdrawing its application.

The stunning turn of events came in the midst of a hearing of the New York Public Service Commission (PSC), during which details for the 180-mile proposed line were being examined. The plan, proposed by New York Regional Interconnection (NYRI), was first announced in the spring of 2006. The news of the withdrawal came on April 3.

An administrative law judge hearing the case instructed NYRI to submit a letter regarding the withdrawal to all interested parties and to indicate whether the company intends to re-apply in the future. The letter in response, filed on April 6, said the company is “suspending” the application, and that, “At this time, NYRI has not made any decisions with respect to future actions or activities by the company.”

Troy Bystrom, a representative of Communities Against Regional Interconnection (CARI), a group of local and state governments and activists groups that have been fighting the project, called the wording of the letter “duplicitous” and accused NYRI of “playing games.”

Still, it’s not clear if the interested parties will formally object to the suspension or withdrawal, and if no objections are raised by April 13, the case will be officially closed by the PSC.

NYRI said the decision to withdraw was prompted by a ruling by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which was handed down on March 31. NYRI had asked FERC to re-examine the rules under which NYRI could recoup the costs of the $2 billion project.

In the complex world of the electricity in New York, the grid is operated by the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO), a non-profit organization. Under current NYISO rules, the cost of the powerline could be passed along only if 80 percent of the utilities that would receive electricity from the line agreed to the arrangement. In the case of NYRI, those utilities would have included Con Edison, which serves New York City. The problem was that Con Edison, which in the weighted system accounts for 21 percent of the utilities that would vote, had already declared that the NYRI project was unnecessary.

In early February, when NYRI asked for a rehearing or clarification on the grid rules, NYRI said if FERC ruled against the company, it might need to pull out of the project. Opponents called this a sign that the company was beginning to understand that it was losing the battle to build this powerline.

CARI spokesperson Eve Ann Shwartz wrote in a press release at the time, “NYRI’s latest threat to withdraw this project indicates that NYRI investors and backers see the handwriting on the wall.”

In response, NYRI attorney Len Singer denied that a negative decision from FERC would mean the end of the project, and said that investors, who had already spent nearly $20 million in engineering, legal and other costs, did not intend to abandon it. But that was directly contradicted when the FERC ruling made it impossible for investors to be certain the project would be profitable.

In a press release, NYRI explained that the March 31 FERC denial of their request to review the recently approved NYISO rules for transmission tariffs had created an unacceptable financial risk for NYRI’s investors. “Even if the NYRI project were to be sited by the PSC, NYRI would face the prospect of being unable to recover transmission costs from the ratepayers who would benefit from the project,” the company wrote.

CARI members hailed the withdrawal as an important victory. Politicians, including senator John Bonacic, assemblywoman Aileen Gunther and Sullivan County chairman Jonathan Rouis, applauded the development, as did Bill Douglas, executive director of the Upper Delaware Council.

A call to arms

The NYRI project, which was the successor to a proposal for a similar power line made by the Canadian firm Pegasus Power Systems, Inc. in October 2003, united politicians from across the political spectrum and allied them with citizen groups that sprang up along the length of the proposed power line that would have stretched from Utica to Orange County. There was anger at what was considered the arrogance with which NYRI executives operated when dealing with municipalities.

Early on, Bonacic railed against the company and the project and vowed to stop it. He helped secure funds from the New York Senate to form CARI, which spearheaded the legal fight against the powerline in Albany and Washington, D.C.

He also sponsored legislation signed into law in October 2006, which specifically prohibited NYRI from using the power of eminent domain to acquire land. Without eminent domain, the process of acquiring the land needed to site the line would become almost cost prohibitive. Some experts expected the law to be struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals, but it was not.

A federal judge in October 2007 dismissed NYRI’s lawsuit seeking to overturn the law. At the time, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said, “The ruling preserves New York’s right to make decisions on projects like NYRI based on our state’s environmental and energy needs, not on the desires of private companies or the federal government.”

The federal connection

For a while, it looked as if the federal government, specifically FERC, might have the final say in the matter of whether the line could be built. That’s because of provisions contained in the controversial Energy Policy Act of 2005, which gave FERC, under certain circumstances, the power to override decisions made by a state if the state should fail to give permits for a power line in a timely manner.

This, again, riled politicians and residents on both sides of the political spectrum. Some were angered that the Bush Administration gave too much to the energy companies with the energy act at the expense of the environment and other groups. Elsewhere on the political spectrum, others were angered because the powers given to FERC were seen as an intrusion into states’ rights by the federal government.

The application of the powers granted to FERC relied on a power line project being situated within National Interest Electricity Transmission Corridors (NIETC), which were later referred to as national corridors. These were areas, whose creation was stipulated by the energy act, where delivery of electricity was found to be significantly congested.

Congressman Maurice Hinchey introduced legislation in February 2007 in the House of Representatives that would have stripped the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) of the power to form national corridors and would have stripped FERC of the power to override state agencies. The measure did not pass.

On April 26, 2007, the DOE created two national corridors, one in the Southwest and one in the Northeast. The Northeast corridor covered eight states, including much of New York and Pennsylvania, and could have greatly enhanced the possibility of NYRI coming to fruition had the PSC turned down the proposal at the state level. However, the Northeast national corridor was so expansive that the uproar against the portions of the energy act that allowed the creation of it became a target of NYRI line opponents.

While measures to strip FERC of the power to override state agencies have not passed, and the expansive national corridor designations have been upheld in court, Hinchey and other lawmakers in Washington are still pressing the fight against the energy act, and they seem to be gaining support in Congress.

Senator Charles Schumer, who in July 2007 introduced legislation that would have dramatically lessened the authority of FERC to overrule state agencies regarding power line siting decisions, scheduled a news conference for April 8, when he was expected to renew his commitment to rolling back portions of the 2005 Energy Act.

April 9, 2009                                                                                                                 845-331-4466 (office)

                                                                                                                                      914-388-3573 (cell)

Hinchey Urges Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to

Abandon Efforts to Reverse Important Court Ruling Limiting

the Agency's Ability to Override States on Power Line Decisions

Washington, DC-- Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) today wrote to Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) urging the agency to reconsider and withdraw its recent petition to reverse a decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that directly impacts FERC's ability to override states in permitting electricity transmission lines.  FERC has appealed the February 2009 Piedmont Environmental Council v. FERC decision, in which the Fourth Circuit ruled FERC had overextended its jurisdiction regarding siting power lines over the objections of states in areas designated as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors or "National Corridors."  The Court ruled that FERC could not override decisions in cases where state regulatory authorities denied power line applications within a one-year time period, a ruling which had direct and significant impacts on projects such as the recently-withdrawn proposal by New York Regional Interconnect, Inc. (NYRI.)

Writing in the letter, Hinchey noted, "The Piedmont decision restored some much-needed balance to FERC's previous interpretation of its jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act...and rightfully limited FERC's ability to site transmission facilities in National Corridors in cases where a state permitting authority denied such an application within one year.  During the prior Administration, FERC made decisions regarding its siting jurisdiction in National Corridors that Congress never intended to grant to the agency, particularly overriding state permitting authorities on projects that are intrastate rather than interstate and that are considered and reviewed in a timely manner."

Hinchey also argued that FERC's effort was counterproductive to helping the United States meet its real energy needs,  noting, "As New York has seen clearly in its recent battle against the transmission lines proposed by New York Regional Interconnect, resources and time that could have and should have been used to make progress in ensuring electricity reliability in a thoughtful and environmentally respectful manner have been wasted fighting a poorly conceived project that could have benefited from FERC's previous interpretation of its jurisdiction." 

Hinchey voted against the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which created the National Corridors designation and gave FERC jurisdiction in permitting major transmission lines in some cases.  Hinchey subsequently fought the U.S. Department of Energy's efforts to designate most of New York State as a National Corridor and vehemently opposed the proposal by New York Regional Interconnect to build a 190-mile transmission line through New York State.  This opposition included working to block rate payer subsidies through FERC for the NYRI project and sponsoring legislation to eliminate provisions of the Energy Policy Act that established National Corridors and FERC's involvement in state power line proposals.

Commenting on the letter, Hinchey indicated, "While I am delighted that the citizens of New York State prevailed in stopping the NYRI power line, I remain deeply concerned that FERC has now taken steps to defend and reinstate the broken system and twisted logic that it tried to use to override state decisions on power line projects that are within the boundaries of one state.  Communities Against Regional Interconnect (CARI) and other groups deserve a great deal of credit for defeating NYRI and for successfully arguing the case before the Fourth Circuit.  FERC should recognize its mistake, withdraw its efforts to overturn that decision and begin to work cooperatively and productively with our state to achieve our common energy goals."

The text of the letter follows:

April 9, 2009

Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20426

Dear ChairmanWellinghoff:

            I am writing to urge you to reconsider and withdraw FERC's recent petition for rehearing of Piedmont Environmental Council v. FERC, Nos. 07-1651, et al., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 2944 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2009.)  As you know, this decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals clarified and limited FERC's jurisdiction in permitting electricity transmission facilities if denied by a state permitting authority within one year. 

            The Department of Energy's 2007 actions designating most of New York State as part of a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor or "National Corridor" was strongly opposed by New York State residents and many of its state and federal officials, including me.  Many New York residents and leaders remain justifiably concerned by the implications of this designation and continue to be alarmed by the possibility that FERC might permit electricity transmission projects that are located wholly in our state in cases in which the New York Public Service Commission has denied such permits based on lack of need or out of concern for the public interest.

            The Piedmont decision restored some much-needed balance to FERC's previous interpretation of its jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act § 216(b)(1)(C)(i), 16 U.S.C. §824(B)(1)(C)(i), and rightfully limited FERC's ability to site transmission facilities in National Corridors in cases where a state permitting authority denied such an application within one year.  During the prior Administration, FERC made decisions regarding its siting jurisdiction in National Corridors that Congress never intended to grant to the agency, particularly overriding state permitting authorities on projects that are intrastate rather than interstate and that are considered and reviewed in a timely manner. 

            I request that FERC withdraw its petition and begin to work with the respective state transmission siting authorities to set in place a more cooperative and productive process to advance the electricity reliability needs of our nation.  The decisions and action taken by the Department of Energy and FERC under the Bush Administration were not only confrontational to and dismissive of state siting authorities but also completely unproductive and harmful to the relationships between state and federal agencies that need to be fostered in order to meet our future energy needs in a sustainable and rational manner.  As New York has seen clearly in its recent battle against the transmission lines proposed by New York Regional Interconnect, resources and time that could have and should have been used to make progress in ensuring electricity reliability in a thoughtful and environmentally respectful manner have been wasted fighting a poorly conceived project that could have benefited from FERC's previous interpretation of its jurisdiction.  FERC's recent request for a rehearing will only serve to continue the animosity and distrust that has resulted from the agency's prior actions over the past several years.

            I thank you in advance for your consideration of this important matter and look forward to your response.  Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can provide any assistance on this or other matters.

                                                            Sincerely,

                                                            Maurice D. Hinchey

###

aryImgs[imgCounter] = "http://images.recordonline.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=TH&Date=20090408&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=904080346&Ref=AR&MaxW=200&MaxH=180&title=1&border=0"; aryCaps[imgCounter] = "<div class="caption"> </div>"; aryZooms[imgCounter] = "javascript: NewWindow(870,625,window.document.location+'&Template=photos&img="+imgCounter+"')"; bolImages=true; var isoPubDate = 'April 08, 2009' By Victor Whitman

BRIDGEVILLE — A longtime player in Sullivan County's casino quest is positioning itself to get back into the game, while a newcomer came to the county on Tuesday to tout its $1 billion casino project.

The St. Regis Mohawks, who in 2007 came the closest to landing a casino at Monticello Gaming & Raceway, only to have their hopes dashed early in 2008, appear poised to reboot efforts for a full-service casino in Monticello.

The tribe issued a news release Tuesday, indicating they are meeting with their former partner Empire Resorts and urging the feds to reconsider policies on off-reservation casinos. Former Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne refused to take 29 acres into trust for the casino, leading to a breakup between the tribe and Empire.

"We made it clear last year that we would patiently wait for a new administration to arrive in Washington and one that would hopefully revisit the injustices that were done to our tribe," Chief James Ransom said in a release. "That time has come."

Tribal leaders recently traveled to Washington to meet with Laura Daniel Davis, associate deputy secretary of the Interior, and presented her with the letter requesting Kempthorne's policy be rescinded.

They have not yet consummated a deal with Empire.

"At this stage, everything is preliminary," Chief Barbara Lazore said.

Meanwhile, the Seneca Nation of Indians met with town of Thompson and county officials on Tuesday, and have tentatively agreed to give $15 million annually to the county in return for local support for a proposed casino in Bridgeville.

A draft agreement has been drawn up whereby the Senecas would kick in that amount, which is identical to what other tribes, including the Mohawks, have agreed to pay. They would also pay an estimate of sales and hotel occupancy tax. Tribal leaders initially balked at such a payment.

"I am happy to see that they seem willing to come to terms when in the beginning they refused," Thompson Supervisor Tony Cellini said on Tuesday.

Seneca officials and their partner, Rotate Black Gaming, planned a presentation at Tuesday's Town Board meeting.

[email protected]

link to article is here:

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090408/NEWS/904080346

Seneca Nation casino proposal wins conceptual approval in Thompson

Rotate Black Gaming CEO John Paulsen exlplains the casino project. Listening is Town Board member Sharon Jankiewicz

THOMPSON – The Thompson Town Board Tuesday night voted to support in concept the plans for the Seneca Nation of Indians to build a gaming casino off Route 17 in the Bridgeville area.

The resolution said the support was contingent on the town and Sullivan County government reaching a memorandum of understanding.

When town government recently said it wanted the Nation to sign a local services agreement to give back to the communities, it refused, but Town supervisor Anthony Cellini told them the town would not support the venture without the agreement.

Nation officials came back to the town Tuesday with an agreement on a contract. They also briefed Sullivan County officials.

The Nation hopes to secure federal approval for the casino, not by way of the land in trust approval process, but by way of Congressional approvals. And, John Paulsen, CEO of RotateBlack, the development partner with the Senecas, said the approvals are a long shot, but they are confident.

 “We are dealing with a time of economic distress, and the nice thing about our proposal is that it creates 5,000 jobs but doesn’t cost the federal government or the state government a nickel,” he said. “We have investment partners here with the Seneca Nation to make this happen and if the Congress could put $700 billion into the economy for saving industries, then I hope they can put some land into Indian Country status that costs nothing.”

The project would include two million square feet of space, 6,000 slot machines, 120 table games, a 2½ acre indoor pool setting, 1,500 room hotel, 11 restaurants and 100,000 square feet of banquet space.

http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2009/April09/08/TThom_Seneca-08Apr09.html

Volunteers urged to clean stream banks

MARGARETVILLE – The Catskill Watershed Corporation is again supporting groups and individuals who clean litter and other debris from stream banks in their neighborhoods.

Youth and school groups, church organizations, civic and business associations, neighborhood groups and teams of friends are encouraged to scour stream and riversides for trash and to dispose of it properly.

The CWC will provide trash bags, gloves and tokens of appreciation for those who choose to serve their communities in this way. Call Mary Jane Oppenheimer at 845-586-1400 to arrange to get these items.

Volunteers might wish to do a cleanup in observance of Earth Day, April 22, or to coordinate their efforts with National Stream Clean-up Day sponsored by Trout Unlimited on June 13.  

American Rivers is also calling for groups to participate in a National River Cleanup effort this spring.  

http://www.catskillsnews.com/News/2009/April09/06/stream_clean-06Apr09.html