POSTED BY: CINCINNATUS
Universal Free Press
ALBANY, N.Y. — Tension between  upstate and downstate has been brewing for decades, and the blatant liberalism of Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo is throwing fuel on the fire.

Some New York conservatives are proposing to cut up the state into upstate and downstate largely self-governing regions.new-amsterdam2

The November 2014 elections showed how strong feelings can run even in a normally blue state such as New York. Here, the more conservative upstate region overwhelmingly voted for Republican-Conservative Rob Astorino for governor. But upstate was trumped mostly by the strongly liberal and densely populated New York City and downstate counties. Cuomo was re-elected governor for a second term.

A number of disappointed conservatives reportedly flocked to help push a proposal that would divide New York into upstate and downstate autonomous regions while retaining a token state government — New Amsterdam and New York respectively.

The project John Bergener, who leads the New Amsterdam project, said currently the New Amsterdam project volunteers are encouraging local and state legislators to support the move, but, failing that, the people of the state have a right to vote in 2017 for a constitutional convention.  Bergener is co-coordinator of the Capital Region chapter of the Upstate Conservative Coalition, which launched the website http://www.newamsterdamny.org/.

Among the disputed issues, are gun rights (the widely unpopular SAFE Act), the state economy and regulations, Common Core, Cuomo’s fracking moratorium, school choice, abortion and LGBT issues. See the recent story: NY Gov Boycotts North Carolina Over Anti-LGBT Law.

Many upstate residents are upset over the recent refusal by Cuomo to lift a 6-year-old de facto moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas. The industry is booming in neighboring Pennsylvania but been blocked in an upstate region, which is struggling from the loss of manufacturing jobs.

Related:  DHS And Congress - Bringing Us Open Borders, Invasion, Insecurity, Terrorism And Lawlessness
Powered by Inline Related Posts
The Cuomo administration is waiting until next year for the results of a state health study, but Bergener told the Washington Times recently that those in the Southern Tier and other areas that would benefit from oil and gas drilling suspect a political motivation.

“The theory is that our current governor doesn’t want upstate to grow because then you’d get more Republicans,” Bergener said.

Upstate conservatives also were steamed over the governor’s Jan. 17 declaration that pro-lifers “have no place in the state of New York.”

The rationale of the New Amsterdam project is that upstate, which constitutes most of the state, is generally conservative with moderate liberalism mixed in and consists of small- to medium-size communities in rural and suburban settings. Downstate, which, in the plan, includes New York City in a total of nine counties, is much more liberal. So New Amsterdam would include all counties except New York, Westchester, Suffolk, Bronx, Kings, Queens, Richmond, Nassau and Rockland.

In a nutshell, the plans involves a token state government limited to a 3 percent sales tax with an executive, legislature and judiciary and such agencies and laws that would apply statewide. Each autonomous region would have the same three-part structure as the state and agencies that would deal with three-fourth of the laws. Regional legislators also would be in the state legislature.

Adoption of the plan requires amending the state constitution either by the state legislature passing the amendment twice, with an election of legislators in between, and putting it before the voters in 2017, or the people voting for a constitutional convention in 2017, as they are entitled to do by law.

Related:  Disney Worker Fired, Forced To Train Foreign Replacement - Criminal Fraudulent Abuse
Powered by Inline Related Posts
Bergener said the two-regions proposal would be much easier than splitting New York into two states, which would require an act of Congress.

“The main rationale is economics because upstate is being killed” by high taxation, overregulation, unfunded mandates, bureaucracy and duplication, Bergener said. That includes regulations which apply to one region but not to the other, or are outdated.

“What we are trying to do is to give more power to the people at the local level,” he said.

Upstate is less prosperous and populous than the NYC region. About 7 million of the state’s 19 million residents would be in the proposed New Amsterdam.

“It’s an unusual idea,” Bergener told the Times. “I’ve searched and I can’t find anyone else who’s tried this before. So we’re the first.”
[color=red][/color]
http://universalfreepress.com/2016/conservatives-propose-divide-new-york-state/[face=Arial][/face]

Upstate is funded by NYC, not the other way around.

Quoted Text

Upstate NY grabs more than it gives in Upstate-Downstate fight over tax dollars.
New York City contributed more than 45 percent of the state’s taxes and other revenues: $32.8 billion
in 2010.
But it only received 40 percent of the money the state passed out. Upstate counties contributed
24 percent of the state’s taxes and revenues but received 35 percent of the state money that was
doled out in 2010, according to the study.
If Upstate took in as much as it paid out, it could lose as much as much as $9 billion.

Bergener must not have searched long or hard enough.  This is NOT a new idea.  It has been proposed a number of times including in the early 1970's by NYC Mayor Lindsay.  

I would object to the "upstate section" being named New Amsterdam.  The Dutch settlement was limited other ethnic groups had a much greater impact.  Heck, we could name the "upstate section"  Iroquois Nation -- at least that would be more accurate and relevant . .since the Iroquois Nation actually populated and governed much more of upstate than the Dutch did.

Finally, the reason that past efforts to divide the state have failed is that it would be -- let us be frank -- economically stupid for upstaters.

of course it won't happen...........the elites will make sure of it.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Upstate is funded by NYC, not the other way around.

NYC types have a stranglehold on the Adirondack park.... without that, upstate could commercialize 1/3 of it and make mucho tax income.
In addition, where do you think NYC get most of its water? upstate reservoirs. Start charging NYC for the upstate resources it uses and you'll see that revenue gap come down quickly.... and then we can talk about the ridiculous mandates, all driven from the pols in NYC.

Quoted from bumblethru

of course it won't happen...........the elites will make sure of it.

Lets hope they do...
Or Bumbler's taxes will skyrocket, and his services will be cut.

Quoted from 55tbird

NYC types have a stranglehold on the Adirondack park.... without that, upstate could commercialize 1/3 of it and make mucho tax income.
In addition, where do you think NYC get most of its water? upstate reservoirs. Start charging NYC for the upstate resources it uses and you'll see that revenue gap come down quickly.... and then we can talk about the ridiculous mandates, all driven from the pols in NYC.

The 6 Million Acres of the Adirondack Park is 1/2 private and 1/2 state owned.

Quoted from Box A Rox

The 6 Million Acres of the Adirondack Park is 1/2 private and 1/2 state owned.

who cares about the ratio? The FACT is the state severely restricts what the private land owners in the park can do with THEIR property.
APA rules supersede ANYTHING the municipalities want to do also. They live on scraps and on the seasons while NYC'ers ramble up the Northway in their SUV's to walk and hike nature trails. The communities were there BEFORE the APA was established, but need to adhere to the APA's whims

Quoted from 55tbird

who cares about the ratio? The FACT is the state severely restricts what the private land owners in the park can do with THEIR property.
APA rules supersede ANYTHING the municipalities want to do also. They live on scraps and on the seasons while NYC'ers ramble up the Northway in their SUV's to walk and hike nature trails. The communities were there BEFORE the APA was established, but need to adhere to the APA's whims

LOL!
I wonder if Tbird lives in a town or city with ZONING?  You know ZONING that regulates thing like fences, dogs,
swimming polls, restrictions against growing goats, home size and so much more.

Some people look at the Adirondacks and see a resource to be sold.
Others see the beauty of OUR Adirondacks.
(BTW, I spent most of the afternoon hiking in the Adirondacks today. Jockeybush Lake)

Quoted from Box A Rox

LOL!
I wonder if Tbird lives in a town or city with ZONING?  You know ZONING that regulates thing like fences, dogs,
swimming polls, restrictions against growing goats, home size and so much more.

Some people look at the Adirondacks and see a resource to be sold.
Others see the beauty of OUR Adirondacks.
(BTW, I spent most of the afternoon hiking in the Adirondacks today. Jockeybush Lake)

You really want to compare typical town zoning with APA zoning? It's laughably obvious you haven't tried to build on open land in the park.
For example, the APA, not the town your land resides, gets involved on how many trees you can cut down TO PUT A DRIVEWAY IN!

A good number of these lots have been owned or been passed down thru generations before the APA was even thought of.... but yet, the APA and people like you call the Adirondacks "THEIRS" and put restrictions on what can be built, even on approved building lots.

But of course your idea of "using" YOUR Adirondacks involves running your hydrocarbon puking jet ski and snowmobile...but as long as you get to do what you want, f everyone else....a convenient environmentalist, and typical liberal hypocrite.

Quoted from 55tbird

You really want to compare typical town zoning with APA zoning? It's laughably obvious you haven't tried to build on open land in the park.
For example, the APA, not the town your land resides, gets involved on how many trees you can cut down TO PUT A DRIVEWAY IN!

A good number of these lots have owned or been passed down thru generations before the APA was even thought of.... but yet, the APA and people like you call the Adirondacks "THEIRS" and put restrictions on what can be built, even on approved building lots.

But of course your idea of "using" YOUR Adirondacks involves running your hydrocarbon puking jet ski and snowmobile...but as long as you get to do what you want, f everyone else....a convenient environmentalist, and typical liberal hypocrite.

So.... say I might understand your rant if I...  OWNED A CAMP INSIDE THE PARK FOR 30 YEARS...
Which was also subject to the Sacandaga Regulating District???
So then I'd understand???  

Quoted from Box A Rox

So.... say I might understand your rant if I...  OWNED A CAMP INSIDE THE PARK FOR 30 YEARS...
Which was also subject to the Sacandaga Regulating District???
So then I'd understand???  

The HRBRRD has NO say on anything above their high water marker...except when it comes to leech field setback to it...and since you can't build anything below the high water marker, that point is moot. They can say what is installed or put in anything below it... docks, buoys, launches, etc.... but let's face it, money talks... a lot of it.
When William J Cole built his house 20 years ago, it was built on land that I KNOW was not cleared to the extent it is now...amazing, isn't it?... or how about the beautiful seawall that is on the shore of an estate that is across the lake from Sinclair pt? I wonder how much graft that took?

And since your camp is 30 years old, I stand by my statement you don't have a clue how restrictive the APA is....TODAY

Quoted from 55tbird

The HRBRRD has NO say on anything above their high water marker...except when it comes to leech field setback to it...and since you can't build anything below the high water marker, that point is moot. They can say what is installed or put in anything below it... docks, buoys, launches, etc.... but let's face it, money talks... a lot of it.
When William J Cole built his house 20 years ago, it was built on land that I KNOW was not cleared to the extent it is now...amazing, isn't it?... or how about the beautiful seawall that is on the shore of an estate that is across the lake from Sinclair pt? I wonder how much graft that took?

As since your camp is 30 years old, I stand by my statement you don't have a clue how restrictive the APA is....TODAY

First or all, it's NOT the high water line, it's the taking line, where private land joins HRBRRD land.  They are not the same thing.

If you want to build a retaining wall on the lake, you apply for a permit and submit a plan.  If they approve it,
you can build.
On my camp land, the Regulating District Land was eroding badly.  The District built their own retaining wall out of
rip-rap which ended up being from 10' high to almost 20'.

I applied to take down a large pine tree on my permit area.  The District checked out the tree and
approved the cut.  No bribes, no money talks, just apply and get permission.

To do any beach work where my camp was, required approval from the District, then approval from the
Army Corps of Engineers.  You seem to have some kind of "freedom" complex on this issue.  
There are rules and following those rules, (like zoning) seems to be your problem.

Quoted from Box A Rox

First or all, it's NOT the high water line, it's the taking line, where private land joins HRBRRD land.  They are not the same thing.

If you want to build a retaining wall on the lake, you apply for a permit and submit a plan.  If they approve it,
you can build.
On my camp land, the Regulating District Land was eroding badly.  The District built their own retaining wall out of
rip-rap which ended up being from 10' high to almost 20'.

I applied to take down a large pine tree on my permit area.  The District checked out the tree and
approved the cut.  No bribes, no money talks, just apply and get permission.

To do any beach work where my camp was, required approval from the District, then approval from the
Army Corps of Engineers.  You seem to have some kind of "freedom" complex on this issue.  
There are rules and following those rules, (like zoning) seems to be your problem.

You are arguing semantics... I call it the high water line, you call it the taking line, for my purposes they ARE the same thing. you can't build below it...period...

I applied TWICE to take down pine trees that would allow me to complete a road to the beach...I was turned down..twice.. I am supposed to wrap around the existing trees to get things out of the water in the fall... I should just poison the trees like everyone else does that gets denied.

But again, I am not talking about the regulating district OR town zoning... I am talking about the APA and THEIR restrictions... what about that don't you get?????