Construction agreements for the new Glendale Nursing Home are in place, but adjacent open space won’t officially be granted parkland status until the building is completed.
The Schenectady County Legislature on Tuesday, Feb. 14, approved the inclusion of a Project Labor Agreement into bid documents for the construction of the new $50 million Glendale Home. Minority Leader James Buhrmaster cast the sole dissenting vote while Democrats all voted for the addition. Four legislators were absent from the meeting: Democrats Michael Petta, Jeffrey McDonald, Brian Gordon and Conservative Holly Vellano.
“The construction of the new Glendale Home will provide an improved facility for our most vulnerable and there will be a $50 million investment in our local economy,” said Legislator Angelo Santabarbara, D-Rotterdam. “The project will create local jobs and teach important skills to apprentice workers.”
The agreement would require all project bidders to hire 80 percent of workers through the union hiring hall. Contractors are allowed to use up to 20 percent of their own workers. A non-union construction firm can bid on the project, as long as the 80 percent hiring rule is followed.
“The dollars from this project will stay in the local communities,” Legislature Majority Leader Gary Hughes, D-Schenectady, said.
County Attorney Christopher Gardner described a PLA as a pre-bid contract between the construction project owner and the local building and construction trades council, which establishes the unions as the collective bargaining representative for all project workers. All parties involved in the construction project must adhere to the PLA, which supersedes all existing labor contracts.
County officials estimated the PLA would yield $737,800 in savings. An increased use of apprentices by 25 percent was estimated to save $400,000. Also, savings would come from reducing the number of holidays, the use of an Alternative Dispute Resolution for worker’s compensation and specifying the entire project as a building project.
Many local union members spoke favorably about the PLA and urged its passage.
“You listened and understood the critical role that the nursing home has played in the past and present and will play in the future of Schenectady County families,” Sara Couch, member of 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East. “Your positions have been both cost effective and compassionate. Despite what a minority of people argue, you understand that these two points are not mutually exclusive.”
Bob Mantello, president of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Local 2 New York and Vermont, said 200 of the 1,500 workers he represents live in Schenectady County. He touted the PLA for creating work opportunities for local residents.
“This project will ensure the protected dignity of our elderly allowing them superior care, which they certainly deserve and have earned throughout their lifetime here in Schenectady County,” Mantello said. “This is a true investment back into our community.”
Jason Planck, a Schenectady resident and disability advocate, claimed the county’s targets for the disabled and minority population aren’t properly addressed in the PLA. Planck also referenced a section of the agreement that allows the project manager to select “any qualified bidder” to award contracts.
“This means that a guarantee of the lowest bidder does not have to be achieved, thus violating the competitive bidding process that has been effective to protect public money,” Planck said.
Buhrmaster continued to voice his opposition to the entire project and questioned the need. After talking to private nursing homes within the county, he said he’s heard they are willing to take in more residents and are expanding.
He also urged the county to look into keeping people in their homes.
“The federal government and the state government right now are encouraging us to keep people in their homes, not in county-funded nursing homes,” Buhrmaster said. “We need to take care of our people and our residents, but not at our taxpayers’ expense and that is what we have here.”
He also pointed to Saratoga and Montgomery Counties getting out of publicly owned nursing homes, and to Albany County’s perennial reviews of the issue. He also questioned the nearly $750,000 savings figure quoted by county officials.
Open space to be preserved
The push to preserve the adjacent sledding hill and open space next to the Indian Kill Nature Preserve also reached a conclusion Tuesday, with legislators approving a formal parkland dedication upon construction of the new home. The home is planned to be done in April of 2014.
Concerns raised by legislators were addressed in the resolution, such as precisely laying the boundaries of the designated parkland. A portion of land behind the current home was excluded from the designation. The open space being preserved as parkland totals almost 20 acres.
Buhrmaster expressed support of the designation, which he has advocated for, but didn’t agree with the delayed designation.
“I feel bad that it is off two to three to four years,” he said. “We should be doing it today, right now, to go in effect immediately and not at the completion of the nursing home.”
Hughes echoed concerns of fellow legislators and said it would be “imprudent” to designate the land before the new facility is in place since there is a possibility of encroachment onto the land during the construction project.
County Attorney Christopher Gardner previously said the land could already be legally considered parkland due to its previous usage.
Hughes after the meeting explained why the designation is imprudent even if it is legally considered parkland in the county attorney’s opinion.
“Maybe it is just semantics,” Hugh said, “but if you are going to formalize it as we are … it seems to me to make that action effective once you are certain that nothing in the construction of the new home or demolition of the old home is going to put you in a situation in which you might have to encroach, even temporarily, on what you have now designated to be parkland.”
Legislature Vice Chairwoman Karen Johnson was the sole member voting against the designation.
“I don’t particularly object to this being parkland, but it has been obvious from the beginning that some of the strongest advocates for this have been the people whose backyard this faces,” Johnson said.
During her investigation into the matter, Johnson said she looked at Google Maps and what she saw was a “ball field” and “some buildings” on the property and other “private uses” of the property.
“I felt very strongly that the people who put this forward needed to reveal if they had any private use of the property and also come forward and explain to the council that they would assist us in removing those private uses,” Johnson said. “As a little bit of a protest that this hasn’t been resolved yet, I am going to vote ‘no.’”
Cedar Lane residents neighboring the property have previously said the land has been used for casual recreation purposes like walking or jogging.
Audrey Hughes, a Cedar Lane resident since 1966, said the land has never been used as a ball field and was baffled at Johnson’s statement.
“Through the years people have gone beyond their property lines to have vegetable gardens,” Hughes said. “That is the only unauthorized use of the property that I know of.”
