Monday, June 05, 2006

June 5, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Planning Board by James Hall

June 5, 2006

Cohocton Planning Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826

Planning Board Members:

The Cohocton Town Board is in a position to achieve a moratorium on litigation by placing a moratorium on approving a flawed and destructive Windmill Local Law. This statement is a simple statement of fact. The reason why our township is at risk rests solely upon the UPC proposal that will turn the agricultural character of our community into an industrial landscape. The solution that is within our grasp is also simple. Reject the proposed Windmill Local Law as it has been written and hammer out a sound and sane law that will protect our town, our residents, our landholders and all taxpayers.

The Cohocton Planning Board has the ability to recommend modifications or completely rewrite the windmill local law. The first step in this process of rational cooperation is to admit that no corporation has a right to our wind resources and that the self-determination of our home rule is a natural right of our citizens. Developers must be granted the privilege to enter a community. Therefore, you have the power to end this controversy now.

Since you have demonstrated the common sense to accept for review other windmill laws, modifications to the current proposal and specific recommendation to resolve fundamental issues, the Cohocton Planning Board is ready to forge a compromise that will protect the future for all of our families.

UPC does not live in Cohocton. We do. You and I should be able to agree that our prime responsibility is to the future of our community.

Rejecting the UPC proposal does not mean that all attempts to abandon a responsible alternative energy project would be the result. There are other developers, other concepts and better financial remuneration for Town government, landholders, residents and taxpayers.

The basic problem with the UPC project is its scope, scale and intrusion upon the property rights of our neighbors. Consider the following flaws as the central issues that need to be addressed and resolved in order to draft and pass a beneficial windmill law.

1) The height of any tower must be limited to the character of the region. A 500 foot code is meant to build a 500 foot tower. Why is that necessary? And more important why would these sized machines be desirable? Submitting a maximum 200 foot limit would mandate the use of smaller turbines which would automatically solve many of the adverse affects of monster wind turbines used only in ocean locations for obvious reasons. Size matters and in this case, larger = bigger problems.

2) The ultimate intentions of the developer are not publicly disclosed. UPC is segmenting numerous projects in the area to avoid the larger regional environmental impact. 41 and 17 turbine projects are currently proposed. However, 120 turbines have been revealed by a source intimate with the full range of the UPC project. Also what is to prevent further additions especially when eminent domain and condemnation could be used by the utilities industries under PSC authority? Submit that a specific restriction on the number of special use permits could be authorized. A low figure would allow for placement in locations removed from residential properties. By scaling down the number of turbines, the agricultural, residential and recreational character of our community can be preserved.

3) Setbacks from residential property that protect the health and safety of every citizen are the foremost duty requirement in drafting a windmill local law. Peer reviewed medical evidence supports a setback of 1.5 - 2.0 miles in order to minimize the serious impact of low frequency noise that posses the most grave health hazard to any person who lives too close to a wind turbine. With smaller sized turbines, fewer turbines used in a project and greater distant setbacks, the major factors that present the basis for future legal actions can be diminished.

In the strongest terms, if Cohocton really wants a windmill project, why not conceive, develop and organize a project that will pay a far greater financial return to the Cohocton community. While I personally oppose the erection of any industrial sized project, I would support a commercial venture based upon the C-BED model that would be managed, financed and owned by regional investors that have ties and commitment to the Finger Lakes and Western New York. As previously stated, my services would be available, at no charge, to write a business plan and put together an organization that would be able to develop an alternative energy project.

A window of opportunity now exists for serious dialogue, give and take and mutual cooperation. I implore that the Cohocton Planning Board has the wisdom to use this occasion to open up this review process and let in the fresh air of new thinking to transform an ugly controversy into a constructive community effort.

UPC refuses to downsize their project based upon the three crucial elements that are the main causes of our objection. Is their rush to break ground motivated solely by the lust for government subsidies? The fast tract for approving the current Windmill Local Law #2 will not heal the divisions in Cohocton. Only an open process with full community input and participation will produce the best law for OUR township. Forgo the pressures of special interests and perform your solemn duty to protect and serve all of Cohocton. We all can be good neighbors, but it takes a two way street to meet each other in friendship and mutual interests.

The future is now and you hold the keys to the kingdom. Will we walk together in a paradise of our own making or will we be condemned to a living hell designed for us by outside political scoundrels and international financiers? Do the right thing! Make the moral decision. Reject the UPC endorsed windmill law and write your own. If you do the Cohocton Planning Board will have our backing and support.

James Hall - June 5, 2006

No comments: