TO: Batchellerville Bridge Action Committee Members
FROM: Peter VanAvery
DATE: August 27, 2002

The following letter appeared in the Schenectady Daily Gazette on Saturday, August 24, 2002:

Forget Study, Build New Batchellerville Bridge

A July 22 article on replacing the Batchellerville Bridge with a high-level bridge contained misleading statements and omitted some important facts.

I have been a seasonal resident of Edinburg for 45 years, and am interested in preserving the beauty of the Adirondack Mountains, which I love.

The article referred to OpenSacandaga.com (one of the groups calling for a study on the effects of replacing the bridge) as a "residents' group," when in fact it should be referred to as a "sailboaters' group." This fact is readily apparent if you go to the group's Web site. Further, the group's co-chairman, quoted in the article, is a member of the Mayfield Yacht Club and not a lake property owner. He has been a vocal supporter of the high bridge for reasons having nothing to do with economic impact.

A second group calling for the study, the Great Sacandaga Lake Association (GSLA), represents neither the interests of all lake owners (only 14 percent of all lake access permit holders are GSLA members) nor is unbiased in its call for the impact study. The GSLA vice president, also a Mayfield Yacht Club member, was allowed by the group to co-sign a letter urging the state to adopt the high bridge. Can you spell "conflict of interest"?

Finally, the article incorrectly refers to the state's decision to adopt a compromise, 42-foot vertical clearance (more than 48 feet at today's water level) as "lowering the planned Batchellerville Bridge." The fact is that a 42-foot vertical clearance bridge will be 50 percent higher than the current bridge, Many lake residents would have preferred that the state opt for an even lower structure, but are willing to compromise in order to keep the project moving ahead.

Calls for an economic impact study four years into the project by these so-called residents' groups are nothing more than a red herring to slow down the project at a time when the bridge is quickly deteriorating.

The state should move ahead at full speed with its Feb. 28 recommendation, and ignore the spinning going on by groups who are fronting for a few large sailboat owners who are only concerned with their own interests.

Bob Treat
Edinburg