1. The lake is very, very shallow in the area of the proposed new park. It is too shallow for a dock, for a boat launching area, or for any swimming beyond wading by youngsters.

2. Extensive dredging probably would be necessary for full recreational use of the lake in this area. That would be very expensive, as well as ecologically unsound. It might be prohibited by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

3. Thousands of Canadian geese regularly harbor in the cove north of Clifton Creek in and near the proposed for park area. No testing has been done for fecal contamination of the water and shore. The coliform levels may be too high for public use.

4. The proposed parkland is in the floodplain. No one on the Village Board checked before entering this agreement on whether the Department of Environmental Conservation or the Army Corps would have any restrictions on public development of this protected land.

5. By state law, property given to the village as public parkland cannot be used for other purposes unless truly extraordinary measures are taken. If the land deeded to the village can’t be developed as a park, it would take an act of the NYS Assembly for this land to be sold off or used for any other purpose.

6. Why should Wells College retain the right to approve any developments made on land which they have given to the Village? [See Memorandum of Understanding # ]

7. Why should the College be allowed to dictate the insurance limits on the property they will lease to the Village? [M.O.U. # ]

8. What would be the approximate cost to the Village (mowing, trash removal) just to keep this proposed parkland as it is now?

9. What would be the approximate expense for additional development and staffing?

More to come...