County divided on casino revenue

CANTON — A St. Lawrence County lawmaker objected Monday to a revised Mohawk casino compact spending plan, saying officials did not try hard enough to press the Legislature's originally agreed-upon plan to state officials.

"I can't support this until someone has an actual conversation with the state about the plan that was approved by this body," said Legislator Peter W. FitzRandolph, D-Canton.

Lawmakers last fall agreed to a plan to spend the money, which was forwarded to the state's Empire State Development Corp. for approval. Empire State Development requires parties getting a share of casino revenue from the state's gaming compact with the Akwesasne Mohawk Casino — St. Lawrence and Franklin counties and the towns of Brasher and Massena — to develop expense plans that meet state approval before the money is released.

The state requires the money to be spent on economic development, job creation or gambling addiction treatment.

Legislator Vernon D. "Sam" Burns, D-Ogdensburg, Economic Development and Strategic Planning Subcommittee chairman, said state officials questioned whether one project on the list — paving the Waterman Hill section of County Route 29 on the Canton-Pierrepont town line for $265,329 — actually met the criteria.

Raymond H. Fountain, county Economic Development Office director, said he had prepared a justification for the project, but the state lowered the county's share of the money and a disagreement ensued over how much revenue was available. The county's response had not been sent, Mr. Fountain said.

Rather than fight with the state, Mr. Burns's committee drafted a plan that removed the Waterman Hill project and restored several other projects that were taken out of the original plan by lawmakers. In the end, the county will get $1,262,507 rather than the $1 million expected, but not for the list of projects approved by legislators.

"I have a problem with not trying to accomplish the will of this board," Mr. FitzRandolph said. "When a board determines that a project meets the criteria for economic development, it's incumbent upon the people who communicate with the state about why that is."

Mr. Burns, one of several legislators who warned last fall that the state could reject some projects on the list for not meeting economic development criteria, said Empire State Development officials have the final say in how the county spends the money.

"I think we should direct our efforts toward what Empire State Development says is considered economic development," he said. "To be accused of not carrying out the board's wishes is downright wrong."

Legislators took no action on the revised plan, directing Mr. Fountain to get a final answer from the state about the Waterman Hill project. One legislator said the board should still come up with a plan to spend the $262,507 the county did not originally expect.

"We have money that is not tied to any project," said Legislator Frederick S. Morrill, D-DeKalb Junction. "We have to move forward."