HOW RLRD came into being - by Thomas Debolski.

One of the most significant events in the history of Rushford Lake was a change in its ownership in 1981.

The article that follows is a personal account by Mr. Thomas Debolski of how the Rushford Lake Recreation District came into being that year.

The reservoir now known as Rushford Lake first filled behind the Caneadea Dam in the spring of 1928. It was created to store water that could be released during drier periods of the year when it was desirable to increase the flow of the Genesee River. By increasing the flow of the river at these times, more electricity could be generated at the hydroelectric plants owned by Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation(RG&E). The dam, located in the narrow gorge of Caneadea Creek not far from the Genesee River, is ideally situated to capture water from more than 62 square miles of the creek's drainage area.

The ratio of land area draining to the reservoir compared to the reservoir's surface area is quite high -on order of about 72 to 1. It was to RG&E's advantage to have a site with such a high ratio because it meant that whenever large amounts of stored water were released to the Genesee River there was good potential for the drainage area to replenish the reservoir in a rea­sonably short period of time.

Recreation was not intended as a primary use or a major purpose for creating the dam and its reservoir. In fact, during the very early years of its existence, there was no compelling reason to keep the reservoir full during the summer months. If RG&E's goal originally had been to always have a full reservoir during summer months and thereby maximize opportunities for recreational use, the Caneadea Dam would probably have been designed differently---with a much wider spillway, for example. When the reser­voir is full, a wide spillway would have made it much easier to naturally keep a stable lake level in response to large influxes of water from the more than 62 square miles of land draining to the reservoir.

From the standpoint of electric generation, RG&E really needed more than one reservoir like Rushford if it hoped to maintain a higher flow in the Genesee River during extended periods of dry weather. That more reservoirs like Rushford were not constructed is largely due to the fact that it became easier and cheaper for RG&E to generate electricity by building power plants that use steam pressure to turn electric generators. Coal was readily available as fuel to heat water and convert it to steam pres­sure.

By the time Caneadea Dam was nearing its 50th anniversary of existence, recreation had unquestionably become a major use of the lake or reservoir. Extensive development of private properly around the lake had occurred to the point that the Town of Rushford was among the top four townships in Allegany County in terms of the assessed value of properly. Today, the Town of Rushford's portion of the Lake District easily accounts for two-thirds or more of all properly taxes collected in the Town.

Despite all the pluses that Rushford Lake brought (and still brings) to the region from an economic standpoint, RG&E had come to regard Rushford Lake and the Caneadea Dam as white elephants. In general, the company wanted to reduce its overall liability. Management did not feel that the value of the electricity it generated from the water released through the dam provided sufficient compensation for the local taxes they paid as a result of the assessment on the Caneadea Dam or for the costs associated with periodic repairs to the dam. Then there was the necessity of having one or more employees available on short notice to oper­ate the dam's valves and spillway in response to rain storms and snowmelt. There was also time and manpower spent keeping some sort of control over docks and looking into other requests for use of the lake and adjoining land.

By 1978, RG&E had decided to divest itself in any way it could of its ownership of the Caneadea Dam and Rushford Lake. It approached State agencies (such as the New York State Office of Parks and Recreation) and local levels of government to see if one of them would be willing to take over the facilities. No level of government wanted the responsibilities associated with ownership. RG&E also considered selling the dam and lake to an individual or private corporation. One rumor was that a private developer might permanently lower the lake 20 feet, dropping the reservoir level to the bottom of the spillway, and then sell lots for construction of additional cottages on the exposed portion of the lake bed. RG&E strongly intimated that it would seek to remove the dam and eliminate the lake in its entirety if no other solution could be found. Needless to say, there was a great deal of concern among landowners as to what was to become of Rushford Lake.

Into this situation stepped Mr. Thomas Debolski, author of the article that follows. At the time, he was President of the Rushford Lake Landowners Association, the group formed in the past to represent and promote the interests of the lake's properly owners to RG&E. Mr. Debolski's day job at this time was High School Principal of the Salamanca School District. The Landowners Association in general and Mr. Debolski in particular, deserve special recognition for the extensive amount of time and energy spent in seeking a solution to preserve Rushford Lake for the continued use of adjoining landowners and the public in general. It also fell to the Association the burden of paying for the extensive legal services needed to successfully negotiate a solution.

Mr. Debolski was originally very reluctant to write this article, probably because he did not want to sound like he was tooting his own horn. The truth is that the story of creation of the District needed to be recorded from the perspective of someone who was there in the thick of things, front and center. Mr. Debolski gives a number of people credit for help in creating the Rushford Lake Recreation District. There is no doubt that former Assemblyman Daniel Walsh is at the head of the list, but many others played a vital role. For example, he mentioned to me that Mr. Alfred Tucker should have been given recognition for convincing the Boards of the Towns of Caneadea and Rushford that accepting and participating in the creation of a lake district was the best solution avail­able under the circumstances.

Change is often resisted. For example, a School District and at least one Town in this case were accustomed to receiv­ing a significant amount of tax revenue from RG&E by virtue of the assessed value on the Caneadea Dam; if the dam should no longer be considered privately owned, it would come off the tax roles. Furthermore, both the Towns of Rushford and Caneadea were naturally reluctant to be drawn into any new arrangements that might legally add to their responsibilities and liabilities.

There is no question that the primary stakeholders in the Rushford Lake Recreation District are the properly owners within the boundaries of the District. For this they must bear an additional assessment in their January tax bills to fund the opera­tion expenses of the District. Nevertheless, we all benefit in some way from the continued existence of Rushford Lake, and we can be thankful Mr. Debolski was willing to get so deeply involved when the situation required that someone do so.

My name is Thomas F Debolski, and I have been a summer resident of the Rushford Lake area since 1960. I was on the Board of Directors of the Rushford Lake Landowners Association (RLLA) beginning in 1964. I served as President of this organi­zation from 1970 through 1984, the element of time during which Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (RG&E) gave up ownership of Caneadea Dam and Rushford Lake. In the fall of 1976,1 was notified by Mr. Ed Bailey, Manager of RG&E's Fillmore office, that there were plans for transferring, selling, or demolishing the dam and facilities in the near future.

Upon hearing this, I immediately took three steps. First, I contacted RG&E of our interest in getting all the facts con­cerning the situation. Second, I called the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to get information on what legal process would have to be followed if RG&E should propose to demolish the dam. Third, I informed the Directors of the RLLA by mail of my intent to explore the situation and to meet with them when necessary to get their input.

As spring of 1977 approached, I felt it necessary to meet in Rochester with officials of RG&E, hence the people directly in charge of the situation. I met with Granger Green, Executive Vice President, as well as with RG&E's Supervisor of Electric Transmissions. The President of RG&E, Mr. Harry Saddock introduced himself but did not remain at the meeting because he had a previous commitment. Accompanying me was one of our RLLA Directors, Mr. Herbert Eastmer. We were told that RG&E was plan­ning on seeking some entity or person to take over ownership of the dam and its reservoir. If this effort failed, RG&E would demol­ish the dam since it was of little importance to them.

The Directors of the RLLA met at their annual dinner meeting in May of 1977. I relayed to them the status of the situa­tion to this point. They instructed me to keep abreast of things and to proceed exploring all aspects. They also felt we should inform landowners attending our annual informational meeting about the facts secured to date. You can easily guess what the reac­tion was among landowners at that meeting in June when they heard about RG&E's plans. I tried to tell them that the situation was not something that could be resolved to our satisfaction overnight.

At a meeting in the fall later that year, the Directors instructed me to prepare to retain a lawyer and to set up a com­mittee to streamline deliberations so that it would not be necessary to call special meetings of all the Directors. To the best of my recollection, the following were appointed to the Committee:
Mr. Roy Newhard, RLLA Vice President
Mr. James Hock, RLLA Director
Mr. Walter Weirich, RLLA Director
Mr. Gerald McGlynn
Mr. Donald Goold
Mr. William Szabo
Mr. Fred Pavlock
Mr. Donald Gold, Vice President of M&T Bank in Buffalo
Honorable Jeremiah Moriarly, New York State Supreme Court Judge

Sewing as consultants were Mr. Floyd Ryan and his brother Larry, President of the bank in Nunda, NY. Both of these gentlemen were stockholders in RG&E and gave us some access to the RG&E administration. Under advisement of Judge Moriarly, we secured the services of Howard Rosenhock who was an associate in the Buffalo branch of the Albany based law firm of Jaeckle, Fleishman, and Mugel.

During the summer of 1977 we learned that there were at least three parties interested in purchasing the dam and associated facilities from RG&E. They included an energy group based in Fillmore, NY and two different unnamed individuals. At a later date, Floyd Ryan told me that he was one of the individuals and that by intervening he hoped he would be in some position to contribute to a solution favorable to the interest of the RLLA.

By the summer of 1978, many facts had materialized. Floyd Ryan obtained information about another facility in upstate New York where an electric company had turned over a dam and reservoir to the surrounding landowners. It was called Goodyear Lake and was located near Oneonta, NY. Floyd arranged to use his private aircraft and fly Herb Eastmer and I along with Floyd's son Jon to the Goodyear Lake area. We saw that Goodyear Lake was a smaller facility than Rushford, but we did gather some information that was useful. If I remember correctly, Goodyear Lake involved only one Town and was administered under a "Township of Accord" rather than through creation of any special lake district. The Rushford Lake situation was complicated by the fact the lands and facilities lie in two Townships, Rushford and Caneadea.

I should mention at this time that Pauline Canfield was RLLA Secretary and served as a non-voting member of our Committee. In 1975 Pauline and I met with Mr. George Holdridge, the predecessor to Mr. Bailey as manger at RG&E's office in Fillmore. RG&E's Fillmore office handled most matters relating to Rushford Lake, and Mr. Kendall Aldrich was the administrator of Rushford Lake affairs. Manager Holdridge asked for our cooperation in numbering all docks on Rushford Lake. He directed Mr. Aldrich to give us assistance and clerical help in this project. This entire exercise provided us with a census of about 80% of the landowners around the lake and later gave us a database we could draw upon to inform them about the status of our efforts. We also used it to seek a voluntary assessment of $25. from landowners to provide funds to pay for the services of our lawyer who was already deeply involved in the case. Later in 1978, the Board of Directors authorized our Committee to explore the possibility of buy­ing the lake outright. The Committee knew this would be a HUGE (!) undertaking, but we proceeded as requested by the Board of Directors.

We went to Rochester again, twice that summer, to obtain all the information RG&E would give us on their responsibili­ties for maintenance of the dam, on the taxes they paid, and on anything else that pertained to the dam and lake. Our lawyer advised us to deal with the tax issues first. With the Committee's approval, our lawyer and I next went to the Board of Education at Rushford. The Rushford School District encompassed all the area in which the dam and lake existed. Being a school administrator, I asked my school's business manager, Mr. Joseph Greer, to give me some guidance as how to approach the Rushford School Board. He did an in-depth investigation into the financial situation of the Rushford District.

We then made an appointment to meet with the School Board who had essentially already made up their minds about what they would accept in terms of taxes if we, the landowners, should obtain ownership from RG&E. They naturally wanted to retain a 100% assessment or tax structure on the dam and other facilities for an unlimited number of years. We did not agree with this.  If we were to establish ourselves as a completely private entity as had been done at Goodyear Lake, then we would indeed have been responsible for continuing to pay the taxes RG&E was paying. Regardless, we were not in a position at the time to make any agreement with the Rushford School Board.

We then went to the Town Board of Rushford and then the Town Board of Caneadea. Mr. Fred Morris was Supervisor for the Town of Rushford and Mr. Alfred Tucker the Supervisor for the Town of Caneadea. At these meetings, Mr. David Pullen of Fillmore represented both Towns. No agreements were made with the Town Boards, but recommendations, which will become apparent later, were taken into consideration.

In light of the concerns regarding taxation raised by various boards we had met, I felt it advisable to contact Assemblyman Daniel Walsh, majority leader of the New York State Assembly and a personal friend of mine. I asked him for sugges­tions on how our group might proceed in obtaining ownership of the Rushford Lake facilities. In some respects it was like looking into a crystal ball because he brought to my attention how we could form a district and operate similarly to a fire district where the financial considerations of the district are the responsibility of the property owners within the district. At the time the State of New York was attempting to sell Cuba Lake and surrounding parcels of land to the people leasing those parcels from the State and who owned the cottages sitting on those parcels. Creation of a lake district was a major aspect of plans under consideration for settling the Cuba Lake matter.

Formation of a lake district requires specific legislation passed by both houses of the New York State Legislature and then signed by the Governor. However, Assemblyman Walsh did not represent the Rushford-Caneadea area in the New York State Legislature so he put me in touch with the person who did, Assemblyman Kenneth Willard of Nunda, NY. I asked for an appointment with Assemblyman Willard to seek his active support and participation. He told me he did not want to get directly involved. He did agree to support any proposal we could set up with the help of Assemblyman Walsh.

A group of us met with our lawyer to seek guidance as to how we were to proceed. He suggested that we work close­ly with Assemblyman Walsh and work out preliminary details for creation of a lake district. After meeting with Assemblyman Walsh over a period of time, it was decided that a Rushford Lake District might be included in the same legislation being drafted to create a Cuba Lake District.  First, however, Assemblyman Walsh urged us to get both the Towns of Rushford and Caneadea behind any pro­posal. For one thing, we might need to make use of the bonding and insurance capabilities that were available to the two Towns. Once again we approached the respective town boards for their input, but both Boards would only agree to participate as interested parties without any commitments.

With the failure to receive active support from the School Board and the two Town Boards for our proposal, I took it upon myself to meet with Assemblyman Walsh again and pursue the making of a lake district for Rushford. Meanwhile, the plans to create a Cuba Lake District had hit a major snag. It was personally conveyed to me by a representative of the Seneca Nation that the Nation was challenging the State of New York's claim to the south end of Cuba Lake. We immediately decided it was prudent to divorce any lake district for Rushford from the original plans for Cuba Lake because the Seneca Indians' challenge was likely to lead to a long, drawn-out court proceeding and delay the entire legislative package. By working to establish the Rushford Lake District through a totally separate piece of legislation, we were on our way to becoming the first lake district created in New York State. I must give Assemblyman Walsh tremendous credit. The amount of time he worked on our behalf cannot be evaluated.

During the course of all our deliberations, we kept landowners informed as much as possible. We needed both moral and monetary support for our efforts. To make it easier for landowners to be kept on top of the situation, I held special informational meetings in Rushford, Buffalo, Rochester, and Olean as needed.
Creation and passage of legislation to establish a lake district was not the only work to be done. We needed to get the School Board and the two Town Boards to agree to accept the limits on our tax responsibility to them. The Lake District would no longer be considered a private entity and therefore it would not be subject to the same tax rules as RG&E was. We first went to the School Board and explained to them how over a period of three years the State would reimburse them for the first year's loss of the taxes paid by RG&E and how the removal of the assessed value of the dam from the tax rolls would be countered in time by an increase in per pupil aid paid to the School District by the State. Since it would take time for the State aid to be adjusted in the School District's favor, we proposed to supplement their tax revenues and to do it for a period of five years in an amount that decreased by 20% each year after the first year. After our presentation that night, it took the Board of Education at least two hours to reach a decision and finally accept our formula.

The Town Board of Rushford on the other hand came to the conclusion that their loss of tax revenues that RG&E was paying to the Town was minimal and that they could write off the loss. The Town of Caneadea was not in the same position. The dam was located in their township and the tax loss they incurred by removal of the assessed value of the dam from their tax rolls created a significant hole in their budget. We agreed to help the Town adjust to this loss by compensating them for a period of 10 years. The amount we would pay the Town would decline by 10% in the second year of the agreement and an additional 10% each year thereafter such that the District would have zero liability after the tenth year. The projected amounts of compensation for the Rushford School District and the Town of Caneadea would be paid from any money RG&E paid the Lake District for a water release.

Our RLLA Board of Directors approved the agreements that we had worked out with the School District and the Towns. The next step was for the Town Boards of Rushford and Caneadea to accept the property (the Caneadea Dam, the lakebed of Rushford Lake and associated property) from RG&E on behalf of the newly created Rushford Lake Recreation District.  In minimal satisfaction of the standard legal wording in agreements involving change in ownership of property, RG&E was to officially receive just one dollar.

The resolution creating the Rushford Lake Recreation District passed both houses of the State Legislature and then became law when it was signed by Governor Hugh Carey on April 21,1981.  The law specified that a Commission of five members be appointed as follows: one representative appointed by each of the two Town Boards, one permanent (year round) resident of the Rushford Lake Recreation District, and two part-time (summer) residents. The first Commission formed in the spring of 1981 with Donald Goold representing the Town of Rushford, Gerald McGlynn representing the town of Caneadea, and Walter Weirich, Roy Newhard and Kenneth Skinner filling the three chairs reserved for lake residents.

The law mandated that at least one permanent and the two part-time residents be elected thereafter. The purpose of requiring at least one permanent resident was that this individual plus the two representatives from the Towns would most likely be able to form a quorum to decide matters when an emergency required a quick response. The first election was held in the summer of 1981. At that point, the following individuals serving on the Commission were Mr. Goold, Mr. McGlynn, Mr. Weirich, Mr. Newhard and Mr. James Hock.

The new Commission had much work to do to make the District a workable solution.  Financial considerations in the agreement with RG&E had to be taken into account and the agreements on taxes made with the School Board and the Caneadea Town Board had to be implemented.  The Lake District would receive over a limited number of years a stipend of $200,000. per year from RG&E for water released through the dam in the fall and spring. The agreement allowed for the lake to remain full from spring until at least the first Monday after Labor Day.

I had worked hard on this matter with Mr. Goldstein, lawyer for RG&E, because I had felt it was most important. The water agreement between the District and RG&E had a term of twenty years. In the first fifteen years there was a condition that if the volume of water released by the District was not equivalent to the $200,000. payment, the District would receive a reduction in compensation during the final five years of the agreement. In my mind RG&E was very helpful in making this overall agreement. It not only helped to insure that they would receive the amount of water they wanted at the time of the year they wanted it but also provided a significant amount of money to help the District to immediately meet its financial obligations. In addition, it contributed to the District's ability to start a "rainy day fund" ...to set aside a kitty of money for future dam repairs and emergencies.

The Commission could not give all concerns consideration at one time. I had one that I thought needed immediate attention. It was to carefully decide upon a policy at the very beginning that would govern issuance of dock permits thereafter. Prior to formation of the District, the RLLA had worked on a plan for numbering docks to the point that what needed to be done was to put the issuance of permits on hold until a clear and consistent body of rules and procedures could be developed. Requests for docks on rights-of-way used by residents not having property abutting the lake particularly needed to be resolved on a case by case basis. The situation unfortunately did not get addressed then even though some Commissioners agreed with me about the need for doing so. Today we can look back on how dock and right-of-way issues have seriously backlogged the work of the Commission and resulted in lawsuits.

Many people asked me why I did not take a seat on the Commission when it was first formed, and an appointment was offered to me. The main reason I did not accept an appointment was the fact that the RLLA was in debt to the amount of at least $20,000. This was the result of legal expenses we incurred while negotiating with RG&E. The assessments we requested from resi­dents around the lake were voluntary. It was a tough job to collect money once formation of the District had settled the status of the lake. I must give credit to all or Association Directors as well as to some other residents who worked hard to retire the debt. With the debt paid in full and the Lake District a reality, I felt it time to resign my position as President of the RLLA Administrative responsibilities in my school district also made it necessary for me to do so. Before resigning, I brought forth the importance of the RLLA remaining strong in enrollment so that it could bring forth items of interest to the Commission and so that it could be a unified force for landowners when needed in the future.

Looking back, it was a long road from 1976 to 1981, and even beyond, and I must thank all those who helped so much along the way. I express special thanks to Pauline Canfield who served as our organization's secretary for many years. Without her dedica­tion our goals might never have been achieved. I also want to thank all the members of our Committee and the Directors who sup­ported our cause. To the Rushford School Board and the Town Boards of Rushford and Caneadea, I want to say a special thank you for the cooperation you extended to help make the District what it is today. The year 2006 marks the 25th Anniversary of the Rushford Lake Recreation District and so, to all lake residents I say "God Bless ...enjoy your District to the fullest".

Sincerely,
Thomas F. Debolski
August 2005

Click Here to download as PDF