There has not been much discussion on this, which since we live in New York State has got to make us leery of anything our politicians do, especially without much transparency.  Most of what is on-line just repeats the same story without much depth.  Here is a quick summary.

This is how Ballot Proposal 1 appears on the ballot: “Amendment to Allow Olympic Sports Complex In Essex County on State Forest Preserve Land”

It’s on the ballot in elections across the state because passing this proposal requires a change to the New York State Constitution. 

A “Yes” vote: Authorizes the existing Olympic sports complex (after the fact) and allows the state to acquire more protected land in the Adirondacks while regulating its development. 

A “No” vote: The Olympic sports complex remains in violation of the state constitution, meaning the state can’t develop it further without another amendment. 

History: 

The Mount Van Hoevenberg Olympic Sports Complex in Essex County, New York has long operated on forest preserve land, which should be “forever wild” under the state constitution as part of the vast Adirondack Park. This means it generally can’t be developed. 

But when it was first built — for the 1932 Winter Olympics — the state allowed the construction of the sports complex for holding the event, without amending the state constitution.  So, the sports complex has been in violation of the “forever wild” clause. Its facilities have so far made use of 323 acres of the 1,039 acres within the complex’s designated boundaries. 

If it passes, it authorizes the use of ski trails and related facilities in the sports complex.

New York state could only develop within the designated 323 acres of the 1,039 acres in the sports complex. The only developments allowed would be for trails and facilities such as access roads, parking lots, offices, small lodges and snowmaking equipment.   

New York could not use these acres to build hotels, condos, swimming pools, tennis courts, zip lines, off-road vehicles or other equipment or facilities of the sorts included in this bill.

To compensate for greater use of the sports complex land, 2,500 acres of forest land that’s now under a lesser form of protection would be added to Adirondack Park.

What supporters say: 

“This is the best-case scenario for both the human and ecological communities of the Adirondacks: it protects wildlands while an historic attraction continues to host world-class sporting events, drawing athletes and visitors from the region and around the world.” – Adirondack Council, environmental nonprofit

“This proposed amendment would help to right historical wrongs,” fixing the sports complex’s past mistakes and ensuring the site is managed properly going forward. — Protect the Adirondacks, environmental nonprofit

What opponents say: 

“New York’s ‘forever wild’ protections are not a suggestion. I oppose carving exceptions into the constitution for new construction on protected lands. Once we weaken these safeguards, it becomes easier to do it again.” — City Councilmember Robert Holden (Democrat, represents central and western-central parts of Queens)

“This doesn’t affect us directly, but opens the door to further encroachment on protected state lands, and the potential for government corruption.” — The Queens Village Republican Club, citing Councilmember Holden

You now don’t know a lot about this proposal but at least you won’t be completely surprised when you go to vote.