If a person goes to a doctor for an illness, they expect the doctor to explore all the symptoms and with their experience they make a diagnosis and recommend a procedure for recovery. Be it surgery or medicine we respect their opinion because we trust them. Obviously if this doctor were to not look at what was ailing you and give you a diagnoses over the phone for something like surgery, would you still trust them? You would be a fool if you did. 

 The same thing applies to an elected and appointed official that represents a body of people. They were placed there to perform a duty to serve those people and when they speak on a subject without the facts, or regardless of the facts, they violate the trust that was bestowed them by the people. They should be ashamed of their actions, and they should be removed from their postilion. They no longer have face in the public's eye and they have shamed their colleagues. And the people wonder "do they have a hidden agenda?" Regardless the people's trust has been lost.

 In the past month we have seen this type of action, on many levels of local government. We find it very interesting how any of these officials can speak on e-Corp's behalf, when they have chosen to ignore the people they are supposed to represent, that have had problems with e-Corp's last project, the Stagecoach Storage Facility. Now maybe they would have a different opinion if the drilling rigs were running 24/7, 500 feet from their homes and their wives and children couldn't sleep because of the noise. Or if they came home to find fluids leaking from a containment pond where the slurry from the said rigs is to be caught and disposed of properly, now running unchecked across the road and in the ditches by their property, when all the workers on that rig had to do was look in that direction to see it leaking. They have called the DEC and their local legislatures repeatedly, but to no avail. E-Corp didn't even have the courtesy to install a muffler on the rigs and the DEC. didn't move until the neighbors started the calls and letters to the Governor, state legislators, and, at last Maurice Hinchey, who actually did something to ease the frustration. Maybe their tune would be a little different.

 The most incredible is when an elected official takes the report that e-Corp prepared for FEC (the Federal Energy Commission) and decided to ignore it and come up with his own facts.

 With the county office building fact-finding meetings for the residents,
many people are beginning to become aware of the governmental trumping tool "eminent domain." This was originally created for when the government wanted to build a building and the person that owned the property didn't want to sell. If it was proven that it is was for the better cause of the people, and all alternatives have been explored, that owner would lose their property and be paid a fair market value as compensation. This is not always the value of the home. Quite often the amount is more. 

 An example: an older fella was living in a home made of two trailers on one acre of land. The state offered him around $30,000 for his home. When he went to look for a new home in the area, there was none there at this price. He then told the state representative of this problem, and told them that he wanted to live in the area. They found him a home nearby, and he was happy with this. Although the state ended up paying close to $60,000 for the home, the old fella's request was reasonable. He wanted to stay in the area where he lived most of his life, and this house was the most modest one available.


 When the government uses eminent domain, the monetary compensation is generally reasonable. However when the government gives the public utilities status to a private company, it becomes a big leverage tool for this company to use to get their way. They have attorneys on large retainers to manipulate the system.

 We have seen this happen to the people of South Owego and Apalachin.
If owners were reluctant to lease their land to e-Corp for the storage facility, they were told of how eminent domain would be used on them and they would get nothing. This leverage allowed the company to run gas lines and build buildings on the properties without having to purchase the property. The compensation to the owners was only a few dollars per acre. And the owner is still expected to pay the taxes on his land regardless of whether he can use it or not. Does this sound fair? 

 There are still people that haven't signed, but the company still continues its project.

  Why is a company allowed to use this status and not be required to act in the same fashion as the government? This company will make millions of dollars in future years and the owner will never enjoy their land again.

 Be it for recreation or for income, it is gone. These companies must be held accountable, as our elected officials are or have the public utilities status that was granted to them rescinded. It shouldn't be up to the people to get a lawyer to fight this multimillion dollar corporation. It should be the people that gave them the status in the first place. They are elected to protect us. 

 Eminent domain should never be used as a bargaining chip for a company to take advantage of a situation, it should be used to fairly compensate a person for their loss, when all other alternatives have been exhausted, setting the price for leasing a parcel should be an option for the owner not the purchaser.