No word yet on latest Route 7 $ hopes

7/20/2011

By David Avitabile

While they still await word on a huge federal grant, Schoharie County supervisors are looking to other venues for funding the Route 7 water and sewer project.
Alicia Terry, head of the county planning office, told supervisors Friday morning that the county has not received answer back on a $2.575 million federal EDA grant to help fund the $7.8 million project.
She said she was taking the lack of an answer as a good sign.
The project has been turned down twice in prior EDA grant rounds.
While officials wait for the answer on that grant, Ms. Terry said they are seeking funds through two other sources, the state and the NYPA.
With the announced closing of Summit Shock, the state is making two pots of money available in an Economic Transformation and Facility Redevelopment Program, she said.
One will offer tax credits for businesses and the other will have $50 million available.
The rules and regulations for that program have not yet been announced but the county is ready to apply for $4.1 million in funding for the Route 7 project, she said.
In addition to the state funds, the county has applied for funding under the NYPA community support program for $5 million in grants, including $2.5 million for the water and sewer project.
In addition to funding for the Route 7 project, the county is asking for $1.5 million to develop the IDA site in Cobleskill and $1 million for a revolving loan fund for businesses.
In other action on the Route 7, supervisors approved, in a split vote, an intermunicipal agreement between the county and the Town of Cobleskill outlining the details of the engineering and design study to be performed on the project.
The county last month agreed to spend $325,000 to pay for engineering, design and legal costs. The Town of Cobleskill will pay $25,000.
The $325,000 is part of the $2 million already committed to the project by the county.
Supervisors Friday also approved transferring $325,000 to the Route 7 fund.
Four supervisors voted against the resolution.
Larry Bradt of Carlisle said he voted against it because no proposals were sent out to other firms for engineering services. Several other supervisors agreed.