Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just more failure from our progressive state government. We are the highest or almost highest taxed state in the nation. They are failing in their responsibility to maintain infastructure with the money we ALREADY GIVE THEM.
It includes aspects like the doubling of the national population since the 1960’s, when much of the current infrastructure was put into place and a decrease in federal funding of infrastructure, which peaked at 38% in 1977(now 25%). It also shows how the US compares to China and other developed countries.
It includes aspects like the doubling of the national population since the 1960’s, when much of the current infrastructure was put into place and a decrease in federal funding of infrastructure, which peaked at 38% in 1977(now 25%). It also shows how the US compares to China and other developed countries.
What part of the previous poster’s “high tax” quote did you not get? Other states may have poor infrastructure too but they have an excuse of not having enough money. NY gets a lot of money from taxes but still have very poor infrastructure. NY has no excuse.
What part of the previous poster’s “high tax” quote did you not get? Other states may have poor infrastructure too but they have an excuse of not having enough money. NY gets a lot of money from taxes but still have very poor infrastructure. NY has no excuse.
I read that and agreed. So, read what I wrote again.
Also, NY also has 20 million people in a land size that is 30th nationally. So, just to keep up with the infrastructure in NYC alone, will take a lot of funding between transit, roads, etc. Meaning, a lot of tax money is likely going to infrastructure that gets more use.
On the flip side, many other states if anything should also be able to keep up due to less people in state that are just as big, if bigger than NY in land size.
Then, we have to consider that the federal funding towards infrastructure has decreased from a high in 1977. So, that has to be considered as well.
Keep in mind that there are 7200 dams across the state and it looks like a big part of the issue is just getting out to inspect these dams. From the article: "New York is home to more than 7,200 dams. Some of the largest get regular inspections, upkeep and repairs precisely because the cost of a failure would be so high.
But thousands of dams in New York are rarely inspected and their conditions have not been formally assessed by state officials, who are ultimately responsible for protecting the public from expensive and potentially deadly flood emergencies, a Times Union investigation has found.
Of the dams that have been recently evaluated, state records indicate the safety of hundreds of the structures “cannot be assured” — including dozens in the Capitol Region.
Over 500 of the unrated dams also have not been assigned a hazard code, which determines how much damage would result from their failure.
As of June, 3,190 active dams in New York had not been inspected in the past 20 years, despite a state recommendation that they be examined at least once a decade. One hundred forty seven active dams have not been inspected in over 50 years, state records show, including three high-hazard dams in Saratoga County."
^ Sounds like you agree that the state has once again failed. federal fund has been dropping for 44 years, and the state hasn't adjusted?????
No, the state leaders do a terrible job, and operate mostly by politics, not priorities. NYC has much more infrastructure, and should be paying more than those that don't live there. Raise the subway fare!!
NYS seems to have plenty of money to fund failed solar plants and football stadiums, but not things that effect the majority of citizens
^ Sounds like you agree that the state has once again failed. federal fund has been dropping for 44 years, and the state hasn't adjusted?????
No, the state leaders do a terrible job, and operate mostly by politics, not priorities. NYC has much more infrastructure, and should be paying more than those that don't live there. Raise the subway fare!!
NYS seems to have plenty of money to fund failed solar plants and football stadiums, but not things that effect the majority of citizens
Do these dams impact the majority of the state's citizens though? Just a simple question, given where most people in the state live and where the vast majority of the dams are located.
Where the state has failed is in terms of getting people employed to inspect the dams.
On the flipside, what part does the federal government play, when the issue is as much a national issue and some could just as easily say that they also fund unnecessary missions, when they could invest in the nation's infrastructure?
To get back to dams, I've found out that 56.4% of the nation's dams are privately owned and this aspect wasn't addressed in the Times Union article, from what I saw.
"Without specific funding programs, many dam owners cite lack of funding as the reason maintenance and upgrades are deferred. As of 2019, over half (56.4%) of U.S. dams were privately owned. The remaining dams are divided among a variety of owners; among them, 20% are local, 4.7% are federal, while an almost equal figure, 4.8%, are owned by states. It should be noted that 42% of federal dams fall under the purview of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the Bureau of Reclamation. The smallest share of dams (2.4%) are held by public utilities. Identifying dam owners is critical as funding rehabilitation and repair falls to them."
So, this leads me to ask, how many of the dams across NY State are privately or even owned by municipalities? This 2018 report shows that 84% of the dams in the report are owned by "Other Owners": https://www.osc.state.ny.us/files/lo...cture-2018.pdf
Perhaps another part of the issue is actually with the private sector/other owners inspecting its dams as well and not just the state alone.
Do these dams impact the majority of the state's citizens though? Just a simple question, given where most people in the state live and where the vast majority of the dams are located.
Where the state has failed is in terms of getting people employed to inspect the dams.
On the flipside, what part does the federal government play, when the issue is as much a national issue and some could just as easily say that they also fund unnecessary missions, when they could invest in the nation's infrastructure?
To get back to dams, I've found out that 56.4% of the nation's dams are privately owned and this aspect wasn't addressed in the Times Union article, from what I saw.
"Without specific funding programs, many dam owners cite lack of funding as the reason maintenance and upgrades are deferred. As of 2019, over half (56.4%) of U.S. dams were privately owned. The remaining dams are divided among a variety of owners; among them, 20% are local, 4.7% are federal, while an almost equal figure, 4.8%, are owned by states. It should be noted that 42% of federal dams fall under the purview of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the Bureau of Reclamation. The smallest share of dams (2.4%) are held by public utilities. Identifying dam owners is critical as funding rehabilitation and repair falls to them."
So, this leads me to ask, how many of the dams across NY State are privately or even owned by municipalities? This 2018 report shows that 84% of the dams in the report are owned by "Other Owners": https://www.osc.state.ny.us/files/lo...cture-2018.pdf
Perhaps another part of the issue is actually with the private sector/other owners inspecting its dams as well and not just the state alone.
I'm sure a lot of dams are on farms, or personal residences, but every one of them, by being a part of a waterway, come under the jurisdiction of the state. They have FAILED in their duty. It's not surprising. This state funds all it's social programs, and then treats other priority items like infrastructure as an emergency that must be corrected. (up go our taxes). That is not leadership.
Here's another example. Buffalo just got $2.5 billion from Cuomo's "Buffalo Billion." NOW, they want another billion for a new football stadium. Why was this not incorporated in the Buffalo Billion?
I read that and agreed. So, read what I wrote again.
Also, NY also has 20 million people in a land size that is 30th nationally. So, just to keep up with the infrastructure in NYC alone, will take a lot of funding between transit, roads, etc. Meaning, a lot of tax money is likely going to infrastructure that gets more use.
On the flip side, many other states if anything should also be able to keep up due to less people in state that are just as big, if bigger than NY in land size.
Then, we have to consider that the federal funding towards infrastructure has decreased from a high in 1977. So, that has to be considered as well.
Keep in mind that there are 7200 dams across the state and it looks like a big part of the issue is just getting out to inspect these dams. From the article: "New York is home to more than 7,200 dams. Some of the largest get regular inspections, upkeep and repairs precisely because the cost of a failure would be so high.
But thousands of dams in New York are rarely inspected and their conditions have not been formally assessed by state officials, who are ultimately responsible for protecting the public from expensive and potentially deadly flood emergencies, a Times Union investigation has found.
Of the dams that have been recently evaluated, state records indicate the safety of hundreds of the structures “cannot be assured” — including dozens in the Capitol Region.
Over 500 of the unrated dams also have not been assigned a hazard code, which determines how much damage would result from their failure.
As of June, 3,190 active dams in New York had not been inspected in the past 20 years, despite a state recommendation that they be examined at least once a decade. One hundred forty seven active dams have not been inspected in over 50 years, state records show, including three high-hazard dams in Saratoga County."
You agreed but then went on to make excuses, you know, the very thing I said New York had no right to do.
You know, New York wasn’t always this incompetent and wasteful. Not long ago, New York was the largest state with the largest population and actually used that to its advantage. It was a can-do State back then. Now, it is a can’t-do State, even with more revenue than almost every state except California, it does so little with what it does get.
You agreed but then went on to make excuses, you know, the very thing I said New York had no right to do.
You know, New York wasn’t always this incompetent and wasteful. Not long ago, New York was the largest state with the largest population and actually used that to its advantage. It was a can-do State back then. Now, it is a can’t-do State, even with more revenue than almost every state except California, it does so little with what it does get.
I didn't make an excuse. I stated that the issue goes beyond NY State and dams, many of which are actually privately owned or are owned on a municipal, which answers the post above. So, there is or may be some responsibility on the part of local municipalities and private sector owners as well. I say that due to the information I found in regards to dam ownership.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
