We purchased our home on the south shore of Lake Ontario in Greece, New York, in September 2004. We have 2 concerns about the proposed 2014 Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River regulation. The first is the proposed higher lake level, which, by itself, can cause damage for some homeowners, and coupled with high wind can lead to extensive property damage. The 2nd concern is the multiple costs for property restructuring to homeowners and municipalities, due to high water, or high water-wind damage.

We read your 2014 plan. None of your information or data addresses the impact of wind on high water levels. I have often marveled at how Lake Ontario can be calm and still, and then turn on a dime – developing white caps and then huge waves in a matter of a few minutes.

The impact of high wind and waves can be unbelievable. For example, a week after we moved into our home, there was a tremendous amount of wind out of the northwest and very high waves. Afterwards, we found zebra muscles stuck to the north side of the house – which is 175 feet away from the lake. This past winter (2013), a wind storm blew the tops of waves, forming ice balls the size of large marbles, hurling them, covering the bottom third of the yard. In March of this year (2014), high waves and wind carried a large tree and rocks larger than my foot, over the 6-foot high breakwall and up the lawn. During that same storm, a smaller rock was propelled 175 feet, shattering a porch window.

As I look at your Lake Ontario water level chart for September 2004, December 2012, and March 2013, I see that the lake levels were 246+, 243.8, and 244.8 feet, respectively, for the above examples of wind and wave force. There was very little cost for repairs. If the Joint Commission allows the Lake Ontario water level to be as high as 248 feet in any quarter, I can’t even imagine what kind of damage and cost would potentially be incurred during high waves and wind.

My second concern is who pays for restructuring to prevent property damage from potentially higher water levels? The out-of-pocket capital required to beef up an existing breakwall or install a new one is thousands of dollars. How many lake homeowners have that kind of money? Your proposal suggests a restructuring figure of 1.94 million dollars. This amount seems naïve, as it is a really, really small amount of money, when you consider that thousands of lake home owners will be affected. The only option would be for lake homeowners to sell. The value of lake property would be strenuously depreciated. How many people would want to buy a lake home at that point?

Those of us on the lake pay very high taxes. If lake houses don’t sell or sell for far less, there goes the tax base, which would logically shift to non-lake homeowners to share the tax burden. United States and Canadian citizens are slowly getting back on their feet after the recession. A plan to raise the Lake Ontario water level incurs a huge financial burden for individuals and municipalities. The 2014 Regulation Plan should not be allowed. Bobbie Majka & Patti Follansbee