This is the last entry in a series about the parallels of misinformation locally and nationally that led me to write Systems out of Balance.
In 2009 the DEP announced that they were granting tentative approval to the Yale Farm Golf Course. On April 29, 2009 the public hearing for North Canaan Inland/Wetlands was to be reopened once again. On April 27, two days before “show time,” the applicants withdrew the application, bringing the long process to a close with the outcome desired by the opponents.
In retrospect, I never had anything against a world class golf course in concept. Neither did my organization, HVA. That is not the perception of the Yale Farms applicants, of course, and perhaps not that of their supporters. The applicants made a bizarre attack on HVA once by pointing out we gave an award to a golf course up in Massachusetts. Apparently that proved our opposition to their golf course was arbitrary and malicious.
The golf course in Massachusetts earned our award by committing to all the best environmental practices for managing a golf course. We weren’t giving out awards to the Yale Farm developers any time soon because they fell short of their “environmentally sensitive” criteria. Their layout proved to have a statistical bias towards infringing on watercourses and slope gradients from 10-15%. They could have committed to constructing the golf course with toothbrushes and we still would have had a problem with where they located the holes on 780 acres of property.
Though I have no automatic objection to golf courses in concept, there were two concerns about this particular golf course that went beyond my misinformation battle. First, would a golf course located in headwaters have a severe impact on the hydrology? Would wells, fish habitat, water flow, etc. be impacted? That is outside my field of expertise. As someone with only rudimentary knowledge about hydrology I can say it is a possibility; based on their record of misinformation in the fields I analyzed I can say their word alone to the contrary cannot be trusted. That is the extent of my input on that concern.
I have even less specific expertise in the other matter of concern, yet you do not have to be an expert to conclude that northwest Connecticut was not cut out to be a mecca for golf enthusiasts. No one thought a golf course alone was economically viable, the biggest reason why everyone, not just GIS specialists, thought the Yale Farm applicants were hiding something. Which leads us to their explanation to why they withdrew their application after they finally received tentative approval from the DEP.
They claimed that their golf course was no longer economically feasible. Some doubt this as their real reason for pulling out, offering a variety of alternatives. The feds still were not pleased with the applicants or their layout, and 2009 ushered in a new administration. The Attorney General for Connecticut proclaimed he would fight the golf course even if the state DEP approved it, and there were a variety of reasons offered for why the applicants did not want a fight at this level. There was speculation that once one town commission finally received information on prudent and feasible alternatives the applicants would have to go to the drawing board once again and reopen the hearing for all commissions in all towns.
Let us take the applicants at their word, that they withdrew their application on the verge of reopening a public hearing for a town commission because they no longer thought the golf course was economically viable. This would make them the only people that thought the 2008 crash was responsible for their failed concept. Virtually everyone else knew that world class golf course in northwest Connecticut, sans a housing component, was no more viable in 2003 than 2009. I suggest that the Yale Farm developers are dumb as posts if they only came to this realization now. This level of business acuity would have made Bush II the more business savvy of the pair that once owned the Texas Rangers.
A more plausible explanation would be that when their golf course only concept failed the applicants would have had an albatross to hang around the necks of the town commissions. The housing component might then have been approved even if void of suitable merit. This is a similar strategy as used by large financial institutions of late, and no one is calling them dumb — some other names, perhaps, but not dumb.
Approving the golf course application early without holding them accountable for misinformation would have brought in tax dollars to compensate the towns for the hundreds of thousands of dollars we had to spend in the process. Yet we either would have a failed golf course on our hands or have opened ourselves to a subtle form of extortion (depending on how dumb or smart you believe the applicants are).
This is a metaphor for what the country as a whole faces (I know, here comes that metaphor thing again). Do we prioritize wealth or information as the ultimate guide for our decisions? Answer that question one way and we commit ourselves to greed, where ultimately the few benefit at the expense of the many. Answer that another way and we pursue merit, with our economic system remaining in balance over the long term.
I expect the Yale Farm applicants to come back again. They even might present a development proposal this time that satisfies their own criteria, something I may not like but involves no misinformation. Do I then regret the obstruction I caused on a land use I could accept?
I believe we have come to a point where we cannot afford to pick and choose. We should not prioritize the most wealth for guiding our decisions with some things and the best information for others. We should not be greedy in some select ways while otherwise advocating merit. The time has come to always choose merit and, if that is our desire, to necessarity choose wisdom and harmony as well.
Great series, Kirk. And seemingly the only complete work on the YFGC battle. Thanks for being a key player in the effort to stop it, for the sake of truth, if not more…