Ladies & Gentlemen:
Below is a summary of a hearing conducted on March 29, 2007, by the US Senate Finance Committee. This summary should show you:
1. How friendly the Senate Finance Committee leaders (Baucus-D; Grassley-R) is to the wind and other renewable energy industries.
2. How intent the renewable (particularly wind) industries are on getting the Production Tax Credit extended for a long period (5 years or more). NOTE THAT THE PTC IS NOW UP TO $0.02 PER KWH. Extension of the Wind PTC and further expansion of state Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) or adoption of a national RPS (Which Senator Bingaman fully intends to achieve) will make it increasingly difficult for you to protect yourselves against the spread of "wind farms."
Therefore, you may want to think seriously about letting your Senators and Representative in Washington know you views on the wind PTC and on RPS. If you decide to do so, I suggest that you consider contacting both the Members' offices in Washington AND their local offices which they typically have established around their respective states or districts.
There is no assurance that your communications will make any difference. It has become increasingly clear that the folks in Washington don't really care about the needs, wishes and option of ordinary citizens, consumers and taxpayers and that their full allegiance is to themselves, first, and to big money contributors second. Nevertheless, expressing your views either directly to them -- or via letters to editors, etc. -- is one of the few alternatives available.
If you are inclined to contact them, consider, fax, telephone calls, emails and letters. Please don't expect a meaningful written response. Remember that few in Washington REALLY understand what is important in the REAL world outside Washington. However, many communications could at least begin to have an impact.
Glenn Schleede
Friday, March 30, 2007
More proof of a 25% reduction in property values from the prospects of wind turbines
Another Cohocton Property Owner with a 25% loss in property value from an independent real estate appraisal, directly because of the prospects of the UPC industrial wind turbine project.
Just what will the values be if the towers are built? Can affected property be sold at any price?
(Click to view the video)
Just what will the values be if the towers are built? Can affected property be sold at any price?
(Click to view the video)
Noisy Wind Turbines Disrupt Sleep, Devalue Property
Reprinted from the Watertown Times, 3/18/07
I have seen on the Internet that wind farms are being proposed for Cape Vincent and several other communities in Jefferson County, New York. I thought you might like to hear my experiences living half a mile from a wind farm in Deeping St. Nicholas, UK [England].
We had no concerns when the wind farm was planned and built. We read some of the criticisms and could not believe that there would be any problems for us.
Where we live, unless there is nighttime cultivation [farming] occurring, it is very quiet at night and readings [sound measurements] support this. It was therefore a shock in the first week the turbines were operating [August 2006] to find ourselves being woken at around 4:30 every morning with noise and a persistent hum. This is so intense as to prevent us sleeping.
We soon realized that the problem also occurred in the evenings, with a specific wind direction. The noise and whoosh is so intrusive that sitting outside is no longer possible when the wind is in the wrong direction (which amounts to 60 degrees of the compass).
The “hum” of the low frequency is very disconcerting, particularly when trying to sleep. It is present 24/7, even when the turbines are not rotating. It is not a pure tone and is a sound that draws attention to itself particularly when the house is quiet. The noise and hum have now impeded on our life to a point that our lifestyle and our ability to enjoy our home and garden have been destroyed.
Our house has now been significantly devalued by the wind farm, and we can no longer sleep in it every night because of the noise. We have had to rent another property five miles away to sleep in, when the wind is in the wrong direction.
The crux of our problem seems to be that not enough research has been done on the impact of placing wind turbines near residential property and the effects of aerodynamic modulation and low frequency noise on residents—especially when there is a group of turbines interacting with each other’s air streams, combining with coastal inshore winds. We found that the computer modeling and all the pre-assessment work did not forewarn us of what was to come, really because not enough is known or understood about these machines and how they behave in different locations.
Jane Davis
Spalding, Lincolnshire, UK [England]
• Westville just passed a pro-windfarm ordinance
• Burke and Brandon, under heavy pressure from a wind energy company,
are each considering a pro-windfarm ordinance
• Bellmont and Chateaugay both passed pro-windfarm ordinances and
appear to be on the point of issuing turbine permits
• Clinton, Ellenburg, and Altona all passed pro-windfarm ordinances and
are about to be sued in the NYS Court of Appeals for permitting wind
turbines in residential areas
• Malone and Bangor have banned all industrial wind turbines
Paid for by We Oppose Windfarms
I have seen on the Internet that wind farms are being proposed for Cape Vincent and several other communities in Jefferson County, New York. I thought you might like to hear my experiences living half a mile from a wind farm in Deeping St. Nicholas, UK [England].
We had no concerns when the wind farm was planned and built. We read some of the criticisms and could not believe that there would be any problems for us.
Where we live, unless there is nighttime cultivation [farming] occurring, it is very quiet at night and readings [sound measurements] support this. It was therefore a shock in the first week the turbines were operating [August 2006] to find ourselves being woken at around 4:30 every morning with noise and a persistent hum. This is so intense as to prevent us sleeping.
We soon realized that the problem also occurred in the evenings, with a specific wind direction. The noise and whoosh is so intrusive that sitting outside is no longer possible when the wind is in the wrong direction (which amounts to 60 degrees of the compass).
The “hum” of the low frequency is very disconcerting, particularly when trying to sleep. It is present 24/7, even when the turbines are not rotating. It is not a pure tone and is a sound that draws attention to itself particularly when the house is quiet. The noise and hum have now impeded on our life to a point that our lifestyle and our ability to enjoy our home and garden have been destroyed.
Our house has now been significantly devalued by the wind farm, and we can no longer sleep in it every night because of the noise. We have had to rent another property five miles away to sleep in, when the wind is in the wrong direction.
The crux of our problem seems to be that not enough research has been done on the impact of placing wind turbines near residential property and the effects of aerodynamic modulation and low frequency noise on residents—especially when there is a group of turbines interacting with each other’s air streams, combining with coastal inshore winds. We found that the computer modeling and all the pre-assessment work did not forewarn us of what was to come, really because not enough is known or understood about these machines and how they behave in different locations.
Jane Davis
Spalding, Lincolnshire, UK [England]
• Westville just passed a pro-windfarm ordinance
• Burke and Brandon, under heavy pressure from a wind energy company,
are each considering a pro-windfarm ordinance
• Bellmont and Chateaugay both passed pro-windfarm ordinances and
appear to be on the point of issuing turbine permits
• Clinton, Ellenburg, and Altona all passed pro-windfarm ordinances and
are about to be sued in the NYS Court of Appeals for permitting wind
turbines in residential areas
• Malone and Bangor have banned all industrial wind turbines
Paid for by We Oppose Windfarms
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Mary Ellen Jones on the loss of her home to the UPC Project
Listen to the sincere distress of our neighbor, Mary Ellen Jones. Betrayed by surrounding farmers, Ms. Jones expects to lose her life's saving. This is the end result when UPC leaseholders put greed over the health and safety of their fellow citizens. Time to put people before avarice!
Shame on you, Mr. Dyckman, Mr. and Mrs. Schwingel . . . Not one word said in your own defense at this meeting. If you are so proud of your support for this wind project, why are you silence about your role in this scheme to defraud your neighbors?
Another reason to vote for a new town council this November!
(Click to view the video)
Shame on you, Mr. Dyckman, Mr. and Mrs. Schwingel . . . Not one word said in your own defense at this meeting. If you are so proud of your support for this wind project, why are you silence about your role in this scheme to defraud your neighbors?
Another reason to vote for a new town council this November!
(Click to view the video)
Cohocton Planning Board gets the facts from Robert Strasburg
Below is a link to a video of me appealing to the Town of Cohocton Planning Board to restrict the wind developer working in our Town to put up wind turbines from encompassing my entire 10 acre parcel within the danger zone of the turbine ice throw and blade throw area.
Please take a moment to view this video and learn what is coming for the Finger Lakes area unless we all get involved in our local politics and insist that our representatives write laws that protect their citizens. Your Town may be next! Click on the link below to view the video.
(Click to view video)
Please take a moment to view this video and learn what is coming for the Finger Lakes area unless we all get involved in our local politics and insist that our representatives write laws that protect their citizens. Your Town may be next! Click on the link below to view the video.
(Click to view video)
Moratorium considered for wind power by Elmer Ploetz
The members of the Hamburg Town Board say they didn't know BQ Energy was looking to expand its wind turbine project south from Lackawanna into Hamburg.
Representatives from BQ Energy say they didn't know the Town Board was considering imposing a moratorium on wind energy in Hamburg.
The Town Board took a first step in that direction Monday night, setting an April 23 public hearing for a moratorium that would halt any wind development for up to six months.
The moratorium, if approved, would be retroactive to Monday night.
"Right now we're not prepared to accept an application based on the laws we have," Councilman D. Mark Cavalcoli said.
Officials said the town's current wind ordinance dates to 1989, to a different generation of technology. BQ's turbines in Lackawanna have 255-foot towers with 153-foot blades, reaching a full height of nearly 410 feet.
Mark Mitskovski, project manager for BQ in Lackawanna, said the company is exploring its options along the Lake Erie shore. Placement of future towers will depend, in part, on measurements taken at the eight towers that are nearly complete. "The area that we're talking about [is] the area that's been excavated by Gateway," Mitskovski said after the meeting, as he pointed to a map of the Hamburg shoreline. "We're really talking about extending along the front of this," he said, pointing near where the water meets the land.
Mitskovski argued against a moratorium, saying it would be detrimental in dealing with investors. He said it also could cause delays because some of the engineers and other professionals might move on to other projects rather than have their contracts extended.
"We have no interest in trying to railroad a project down your throats," Mitskovski told the board.
Representatives from BQ Energy say they didn't know the Town Board was considering imposing a moratorium on wind energy in Hamburg.
The Town Board took a first step in that direction Monday night, setting an April 23 public hearing for a moratorium that would halt any wind development for up to six months.
The moratorium, if approved, would be retroactive to Monday night.
"Right now we're not prepared to accept an application based on the laws we have," Councilman D. Mark Cavalcoli said.
Officials said the town's current wind ordinance dates to 1989, to a different generation of technology. BQ's turbines in Lackawanna have 255-foot towers with 153-foot blades, reaching a full height of nearly 410 feet.
Mark Mitskovski, project manager for BQ in Lackawanna, said the company is exploring its options along the Lake Erie shore. Placement of future towers will depend, in part, on measurements taken at the eight towers that are nearly complete. "The area that we're talking about [is] the area that's been excavated by Gateway," Mitskovski said after the meeting, as he pointed to a map of the Hamburg shoreline. "We're really talking about extending along the front of this," he said, pointing near where the water meets the land.
Mitskovski argued against a moratorium, saying it would be detrimental in dealing with investors. He said it also could cause delays because some of the engineers and other professionals might move on to other projects rather than have their contracts extended.
"We have no interest in trying to railroad a project down your throats," Mitskovski told the board.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
UPC Wind Management, LLC Company Information and Contacts
Jigsaw provides business contact and company information for UPC Wind Management, LLC and other public and private companies. With over 5 million business contact records within 400,000 + companies, Jigsaw allows you to target key decision makers by rank, industry, department and geography. Search Jigsaw's company directory for UPC Wind Management, LLC business contact information and get executive's name, title, email and phone.Get business contact information at UPC Wind Management, LLC or other Energy & Utilities companies, at C-level, VP, Director and Manager level in any department at any company.
Billionaire Tom Golisano says his new company will keep more money in host towns
Amid references to his hockey team and jokes that fired up the nearly 200 in attendance, billionaire Tom Golisano, owner of the Buffalo Sabres and founder of the successful Paychex company out of Rochester, promoted his newest entrepreneurial endeavor, Empire State Wind Energy, on Monday night at the Albion Senior High School.
It wasn’t the first occasion politicians and residents of Orleans County had gathered to hear heads of companies pass on details related to the often controversial topic of wind turbines. But, according to Golisano and his business partner Keith Pitman, their plan is different.
(Click to read entire article)
It wasn’t the first occasion politicians and residents of Orleans County had gathered to hear heads of companies pass on details related to the often controversial topic of wind turbines. But, according to Golisano and his business partner Keith Pitman, their plan is different.
(Click to read entire article)
CWW letter to Cohocton Planning Board - March 26, 2007
March 26, 2007
Cohocton Planning Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826
Dear Planning Board members:
Pursuant to NYS law, the Cohocton Planning Board as "Lead Agency" for the Canandaigua Power Partners I - Pine Hill/Lent Hill Project is required not to take any "ACTION" which includes review of site plans before the Final EIS is accepted and certified.
Therefore, in order to follow NYS SEQRA regulations, this March 26, 2007 "Special Meeting" of the Cohocton Planning Board needs to be adjourned and postponed.
The citizens and property owners that appear at this meeting represent just a small portion of residents that oppose the manner of conduct and intentional violations of Cohocton and NYS statures by this planning board.
Your insistency in reviewing specific maps and site plans for 12 - 15 turbines at this March 26, 2007 meeting constitutes a legal ACTION. This action places the Town of Cohocton and members on the Planning Board at personal risk for additional litigation.
The SEQRA process is clear. This board consistently fails to adhere to SEQRA. It has been acknowledged by the chairman that he takes his instruction from Whiteman, Osterman and Hanna law firm. This admission proves there is no independent attempt to understand the process.
Proper notice to adjacent property owners and towns has not been fulfilled. General Municipal Law, section 239-nn, took effect July 1, 2006, and requires notification to any adjacent municipalities whose boundary is within 500 feet of the property that is the subject of the action. Review of specific site plans IS AN ACTION.
It has been disclosed by the Town Clerk that the special use permits for all 36 turbines are already prepared and in the possession of code enforcement office. How can there be any confidence in objectivity, fairness and a serious review if the planning board coordinates their schedule and institutes special meetings to examine plans, when the very special use permits for these site locations are already drafted?
Cordially,
Steve Trude - President CWW
Cohocton Planning Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826
Dear Planning Board members:
Pursuant to NYS law, the Cohocton Planning Board as "Lead Agency" for the Canandaigua Power Partners I - Pine Hill/Lent Hill Project is required not to take any "ACTION" which includes review of site plans before the Final EIS is accepted and certified.
Therefore, in order to follow NYS SEQRA regulations, this March 26, 2007 "Special Meeting" of the Cohocton Planning Board needs to be adjourned and postponed.
The citizens and property owners that appear at this meeting represent just a small portion of residents that oppose the manner of conduct and intentional violations of Cohocton and NYS statures by this planning board.
Your insistency in reviewing specific maps and site plans for 12 - 15 turbines at this March 26, 2007 meeting constitutes a legal ACTION. This action places the Town of Cohocton and members on the Planning Board at personal risk for additional litigation.
The SEQRA process is clear. This board consistently fails to adhere to SEQRA. It has been acknowledged by the chairman that he takes his instruction from Whiteman, Osterman and Hanna law firm. This admission proves there is no independent attempt to understand the process.
Proper notice to adjacent property owners and towns has not been fulfilled. General Municipal Law, section 239-nn, took effect July 1, 2006, and requires notification to any adjacent municipalities whose boundary is within 500 feet of the property that is the subject of the action. Review of specific site plans IS AN ACTION.
It has been disclosed by the Town Clerk that the special use permits for all 36 turbines are already prepared and in the possession of code enforcement office. How can there be any confidence in objectivity, fairness and a serious review if the planning board coordinates their schedule and institutes special meetings to examine plans, when the very special use permits for these site locations are already drafted?
Cordially,
Steve Trude - President CWW
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
A LETTER FROM MARS HILL by Diane Radell
My name is Diane Radell. I live 600 feet from a windmill in Mars Hill, ME. UPC has lied from the get go about their project. From noise to what an eyesore their project would look like. These things are 26 stories high, throw ice, and make horrible noises.
Two years ago our town council decided to sign a deal with "Evergreen Wind Power" which is really a UPC LLC. Keep in mind LLC stands for a limited liability company. After going to the meetings town residents were told, "...there is nothing we can do about the windmills coming to town because the windmills would be placed on private land..."
Two years went by and all of sudden in the dead of the winter work begins on this project. These people blasted causing damage to our homes, and now 28 windmills are on top of the mountain.
The closest windmill is two acres from my property. When these things run they make horrible noise, they vibrate the house. My home and land has lost 15-40% of the market value.
Currently the neighbors and I around this mountain have formed an association to deal with the noise issues. It is very difficult to find legal counsel about this matter because UPC has paid off many attorneys in the area. This company, UPC, is really part of General Electric of Boston.
Do whatever it takes to keep them from getting in your town. They lied about the noise, the way these things look, the impact on the environment.
STOP your town council from putting these atrocities in. You can do this with legal counsel. Do not let it happen to your town. Go to your legislature to make laws about these windmills because they will put them in your back yard if they can.
Two years ago our town council decided to sign a deal with "Evergreen Wind Power" which is really a UPC LLC. Keep in mind LLC stands for a limited liability company. After going to the meetings town residents were told, "...there is nothing we can do about the windmills coming to town because the windmills would be placed on private land..."
Two years went by and all of sudden in the dead of the winter work begins on this project. These people blasted causing damage to our homes, and now 28 windmills are on top of the mountain.
The closest windmill is two acres from my property. When these things run they make horrible noise, they vibrate the house. My home and land has lost 15-40% of the market value.
Currently the neighbors and I around this mountain have formed an association to deal with the noise issues. It is very difficult to find legal counsel about this matter because UPC has paid off many attorneys in the area. This company, UPC, is really part of General Electric of Boston.
Do whatever it takes to keep them from getting in your town. They lied about the noise, the way these things look, the impact on the environment.
STOP your town council from putting these atrocities in. You can do this with legal counsel. Do not let it happen to your town. Go to your legislature to make laws about these windmills because they will put them in your back yard if they can.
Portugal’s EDP to buy U.S. Horizon Wind Energy
Energias de Portugal (EDP) said it has agreed to buy U.S. wind-park company Horizon Wind Energy from Goldman Sachs to enter the U.S. market and strengthen its position in renewable energy.
EDP did not give a value for the deal, but said the equity of Horizon totaled about $2.15 billion and it has debt of around $180 million. The acquisition would be adjusted for investments, which are estimated at $600 million, EDP said.
EDP said the acquisition would be funded by debt and proceeds from a tax equity partner. EDP gave no details, but said the debt and proceeds from the equity partner “are both fully underwritten.”
Filipa Ferreira, an analyst at Lisbon Brokers, said the total investment would cost slightly more than 1 billion euros which “considering the capacity in operation and the pipeline of expected capacity is not expensive.”
“We see this purchase as very positive, it is a purchase in a market with strong growth and high potential,” Ferreira said.
Horizon has 559 gross megawatts of operating wind projects and another 997 MW under construction due to be completed by the end of this year.
“Horizon also has a strong pipeline of projects in several stages of development in 15 different states across the country, with combined aggregate generating potential of over 9,000 MW,” EDP said.
EDP said the purchase would make it a leading global renewables player with expected wind power generation in operation of 3,800 megawatts by the end of 2007.
EDP did not give a value for the deal, but said the equity of Horizon totaled about $2.15 billion and it has debt of around $180 million. The acquisition would be adjusted for investments, which are estimated at $600 million, EDP said.
EDP said the acquisition would be funded by debt and proceeds from a tax equity partner. EDP gave no details, but said the debt and proceeds from the equity partner “are both fully underwritten.”
Filipa Ferreira, an analyst at Lisbon Brokers, said the total investment would cost slightly more than 1 billion euros which “considering the capacity in operation and the pipeline of expected capacity is not expensive.”
“We see this purchase as very positive, it is a purchase in a market with strong growth and high potential,” Ferreira said.
Horizon has 559 gross megawatts of operating wind projects and another 997 MW under construction due to be completed by the end of this year.
“Horizon also has a strong pipeline of projects in several stages of development in 15 different states across the country, with combined aggregate generating potential of over 9,000 MW,” EDP said.
EDP said the purchase would make it a leading global renewables player with expected wind power generation in operation of 3,800 megawatts by the end of 2007.
Robert C. Strasburg II letter to the Cohocton Planning Board - March 26, 2006
Robert C. Strasburg II
60 Maple Ave.
Cohocton, New York 14826
Email rcs2nd@frontiernet.net
Phone 585-384-9318
Cell 585-703-1299
Fax 585-384-9318
March 26, 2007
Town of Cohocton Planning Board
Cohocton, NY 14826
Re: Wind farm development adjacent to my property at 4609 Pine Hill Road, Cohocton, NY TX. Map # 6-1-20.2
Chairman Ray Schrader and members:
I am an American and my landowner rights as such are being violated on a level indicative of a dictatorship. I am going to present some information that I ask you to review and consider concerning the inappropriate placement of wind turbines just off my property line.
Section § 274-b. of the NYS Town Law says:
Approval of special use permits.
4. Conditions attached to the issuance of special use permits. The authorized board shall have the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed special use permit. Upon its granting of said special use permit, any such conditions must be met in connection with the issuance of permits by applicable enforcement agents or officers of the town.
According to the above stated law, you as the Planning Board have the right to make conditions that attach to your approval of any site plan.
If you look on the maps provided by the developer and locate turbine numbers 4 & 5 which are just south of Pine Hill Road, you will see the parcel of land my wife and I own just north of those turbines. The owner is incorrectly noted as Steven Snyder. I did not receive a letter from the developer as an adjacent landowner. How many others did not receive a letter because this developer does not have their facts strait? My wife and I intend this land to be used for investment and a possible site for our future home after we sell our home in the Village.
You will notice that the 1500 foot delineation marks from these respective turbines engulf every square inch of our property. To protect our property utilizing the 1500 foot setback part of Local Law #2, my wife and I applied for a building permit and we were granted one by the former Code Enforcement Officer Curt Helf which was then revoked by the current Code Enforcement Officer under instruction of the Town Board.
Although this revocation of our building permit was discriminatory, when we appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals, we were again thwarted by Jack Zigenfus as he had the Town attorney prepare a letter for the ZBA chairwoman to sign refusing to hear our appeal. We are now engaged in the filing of an article 78 against all this discriminatory activity and we are petitioning the Planning Board not grant any special use permit until we have a chance to have our case heard in Court.
We are all members of the same Town and you have been given the charge of proper planning to protect the rights of your fellow citizens. Jack Zigenfus and the developer planning to install these turbines have not considered my right to build on my own land valid.
Under the guise of helping America with our energy need the developer has craftily formulated a plan to distribute propaganda supporting their false claim that what they are doing is going to make a difference in meeting Americas need for reliable electricity.
I am not going to argue the credibility of their claim. If you have an interest on this subject, there is sufficient evidence readily available to you that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that even after all the millions of dollars of our tax dollars being high jacked for this scam, if they are successful in perpetrating this fraud, all their turbines will amount to a contribution of less that 2% to our energy needs. What they will have successfully done, if you allow this, is to bilk the American Taxpayers of Billions of Dollars and make themselves filthy rich while we are left sacrificing what is a cherished right of any democracy… the right to own land and be reasonably protected by our government from seizure of our land for Corporate enrichment. Stop this seizure of private land. If you do not have time now to do what is right, when you finally realize what you have cooperated in doing… it will be too late.
These ravenous developers have joined with international funding sources to steal our rights by victimizing small Towns laden with board members that have no clue of what high finance, accelerated depreciation schedules, carbon credits, risk evasion schemes, N.Y.S.E.R.D.A tax credits, etc. are and what they really mean relative to the scope of this fraud. You are being duped into thinking you are doing something good for America. WAKE UP AND EDUCATE YOURSELVES AS TO WHAT IS BEING DONE TO YOU! YOU ARE PARTY TO THE NEXT ENRON SCANDAL!
These ravenous pigs have not left me one square inch of my property in which I can build on! Is it not interesting that we as American are spending Billions of Dollars to establish a Democracy in Iraq while you unsuspecting members of this Board are being manipulated to give away the very rights our soldiers are dying to give to others? Now I say unsuspecting because I believe that all of you except for Ted Walker are unaware of this. Ted, in my opinion, is aware of it, but because his family is in line to receive some of this treason money, he has joined forces with the scoundrels to make this happen. The burden lies on the rest of you that are not bought and paid for to educate yourselves to what is going on right in front of your eyes and you are taking an active role in!
Think about this: David Storms from 58 Maple Avenue right here in Cohocton is now oversees fighting to help the Iraqi’s establish democracy. He is a young man that was raised in this Town, now 19 years old and putting his life on the line to help foreigners gain what we have and you are being duped into giving away!
Meredith, I speak personally to you now. You started coming to the Town Board meetings months ago because you have a neighbor that was raising pigs and farm animal’s right next to your home and you did not like it. It was interrupting your life because of the smell and the nuisance of it all. You came to the meetings fighting mad, looking for justice and you are still actively involved in trying to establish laws that will protect you. What about my wife and me? Not only do my neighbors want to influence my property negatively with their choices, they want to seize my land and make it unfit to build on! Compare my plight with yours; am I not also suffering wrongfully? Should there not be better laws to protect me? What if this was your Mother that this was being done to? Are you going to be a part of giving away blood bought American rights to enjoyable privacy without the nuisances from neighbors dominating every moment of their life?
Ray, now I speak to you. You have heard the leaseholders stand up and say they should have the right to do what they want on their property. Are they the only landowners in this Town? What about my right to enjoy my property? What about yours? Under your leadership as chairman, shouldn’t your Board be engaged in planning for all the residents? What if this was your property they were seizing? The gluttonous pigs have not left me one inch of my property to build a house on… NOT ONE! If you do not have the character to lead this board correctly into protection that includes all… my wife and I petition your resignation. If you do not have the courage to be what you need to be in this position, please have enough courage to remove yourself! I prefer that you stay and do what is right! Your father called me the other day and you should sit and talk to him about what being an American is all about… HE GETS IT! Who do you trust more as a mentor, Jack Zigenfus and Wayne Hunt, or your own Father? Are you going to cave to the influence of these gluttonous developers and the pressure of the misguided Town Board?
Freda, now I speak to you. You live across the street from where David Storms grew up. Your grandsons frequent his house. What is his service worth to you? What are the American landowner’s rights that were bought and paid for with American lives worth to you? You have raised two sons that are police offices sworn to uphold the rights of Americans. What are you going to do now that you are faced with the choice of protecting those rights?
My wife and I petition this Planning Board to stop this seizure of private property for corporate enrichment. The Planning Board felt that a 1500 foot setback was the minimum that each private landowner should experience from these turbines from any dwelling. Stop this rapid assault by this developer, declare that the Town is going to give six months for each landowner to consider if they want their entire property protected from the influence of these turbines. If a landowner does not want to sigh off his right to be free from the negative influences of these turbines on his property, demand that the developer move each turbine back 1500 feet from his/her property line before issuing a special use permit.
Do not allow yourself to be part of urinating on these rights that were bought and paid for with American blood.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Strasburg II
60 Maple Ave.
Cohocton, New York 14826
Email rcs2nd@frontiernet.net
Phone 585-384-9318
Cell 585-703-1299
Fax 585-384-9318
March 26, 2007
Town of Cohocton Planning Board
Cohocton, NY 14826
Re: Wind farm development adjacent to my property at 4609 Pine Hill Road, Cohocton, NY TX. Map # 6-1-20.2
Chairman Ray Schrader and members:
I am an American and my landowner rights as such are being violated on a level indicative of a dictatorship. I am going to present some information that I ask you to review and consider concerning the inappropriate placement of wind turbines just off my property line.
Section § 274-b. of the NYS Town Law says:
Approval of special use permits.
4. Conditions attached to the issuance of special use permits. The authorized board shall have the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed special use permit. Upon its granting of said special use permit, any such conditions must be met in connection with the issuance of permits by applicable enforcement agents or officers of the town.
According to the above stated law, you as the Planning Board have the right to make conditions that attach to your approval of any site plan.
If you look on the maps provided by the developer and locate turbine numbers 4 & 5 which are just south of Pine Hill Road, you will see the parcel of land my wife and I own just north of those turbines. The owner is incorrectly noted as Steven Snyder. I did not receive a letter from the developer as an adjacent landowner. How many others did not receive a letter because this developer does not have their facts strait? My wife and I intend this land to be used for investment and a possible site for our future home after we sell our home in the Village.
You will notice that the 1500 foot delineation marks from these respective turbines engulf every square inch of our property. To protect our property utilizing the 1500 foot setback part of Local Law #2, my wife and I applied for a building permit and we were granted one by the former Code Enforcement Officer Curt Helf which was then revoked by the current Code Enforcement Officer under instruction of the Town Board.
Although this revocation of our building permit was discriminatory, when we appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals, we were again thwarted by Jack Zigenfus as he had the Town attorney prepare a letter for the ZBA chairwoman to sign refusing to hear our appeal. We are now engaged in the filing of an article 78 against all this discriminatory activity and we are petitioning the Planning Board not grant any special use permit until we have a chance to have our case heard in Court.
We are all members of the same Town and you have been given the charge of proper planning to protect the rights of your fellow citizens. Jack Zigenfus and the developer planning to install these turbines have not considered my right to build on my own land valid.
Under the guise of helping America with our energy need the developer has craftily formulated a plan to distribute propaganda supporting their false claim that what they are doing is going to make a difference in meeting Americas need for reliable electricity.
I am not going to argue the credibility of their claim. If you have an interest on this subject, there is sufficient evidence readily available to you that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that even after all the millions of dollars of our tax dollars being high jacked for this scam, if they are successful in perpetrating this fraud, all their turbines will amount to a contribution of less that 2% to our energy needs. What they will have successfully done, if you allow this, is to bilk the American Taxpayers of Billions of Dollars and make themselves filthy rich while we are left sacrificing what is a cherished right of any democracy… the right to own land and be reasonably protected by our government from seizure of our land for Corporate enrichment. Stop this seizure of private land. If you do not have time now to do what is right, when you finally realize what you have cooperated in doing… it will be too late.
These ravenous developers have joined with international funding sources to steal our rights by victimizing small Towns laden with board members that have no clue of what high finance, accelerated depreciation schedules, carbon credits, risk evasion schemes, N.Y.S.E.R.D.A tax credits, etc. are and what they really mean relative to the scope of this fraud. You are being duped into thinking you are doing something good for America. WAKE UP AND EDUCATE YOURSELVES AS TO WHAT IS BEING DONE TO YOU! YOU ARE PARTY TO THE NEXT ENRON SCANDAL!
These ravenous pigs have not left me one square inch of my property in which I can build on! Is it not interesting that we as American are spending Billions of Dollars to establish a Democracy in Iraq while you unsuspecting members of this Board are being manipulated to give away the very rights our soldiers are dying to give to others? Now I say unsuspecting because I believe that all of you except for Ted Walker are unaware of this. Ted, in my opinion, is aware of it, but because his family is in line to receive some of this treason money, he has joined forces with the scoundrels to make this happen. The burden lies on the rest of you that are not bought and paid for to educate yourselves to what is going on right in front of your eyes and you are taking an active role in!
Think about this: David Storms from 58 Maple Avenue right here in Cohocton is now oversees fighting to help the Iraqi’s establish democracy. He is a young man that was raised in this Town, now 19 years old and putting his life on the line to help foreigners gain what we have and you are being duped into giving away!
Meredith, I speak personally to you now. You started coming to the Town Board meetings months ago because you have a neighbor that was raising pigs and farm animal’s right next to your home and you did not like it. It was interrupting your life because of the smell and the nuisance of it all. You came to the meetings fighting mad, looking for justice and you are still actively involved in trying to establish laws that will protect you. What about my wife and me? Not only do my neighbors want to influence my property negatively with their choices, they want to seize my land and make it unfit to build on! Compare my plight with yours; am I not also suffering wrongfully? Should there not be better laws to protect me? What if this was your Mother that this was being done to? Are you going to be a part of giving away blood bought American rights to enjoyable privacy without the nuisances from neighbors dominating every moment of their life?
Ray, now I speak to you. You have heard the leaseholders stand up and say they should have the right to do what they want on their property. Are they the only landowners in this Town? What about my right to enjoy my property? What about yours? Under your leadership as chairman, shouldn’t your Board be engaged in planning for all the residents? What if this was your property they were seizing? The gluttonous pigs have not left me one inch of my property to build a house on… NOT ONE! If you do not have the character to lead this board correctly into protection that includes all… my wife and I petition your resignation. If you do not have the courage to be what you need to be in this position, please have enough courage to remove yourself! I prefer that you stay and do what is right! Your father called me the other day and you should sit and talk to him about what being an American is all about… HE GETS IT! Who do you trust more as a mentor, Jack Zigenfus and Wayne Hunt, or your own Father? Are you going to cave to the influence of these gluttonous developers and the pressure of the misguided Town Board?
Freda, now I speak to you. You live across the street from where David Storms grew up. Your grandsons frequent his house. What is his service worth to you? What are the American landowner’s rights that were bought and paid for with American lives worth to you? You have raised two sons that are police offices sworn to uphold the rights of Americans. What are you going to do now that you are faced with the choice of protecting those rights?
My wife and I petition this Planning Board to stop this seizure of private property for corporate enrichment. The Planning Board felt that a 1500 foot setback was the minimum that each private landowner should experience from these turbines from any dwelling. Stop this rapid assault by this developer, declare that the Town is going to give six months for each landowner to consider if they want their entire property protected from the influence of these turbines. If a landowner does not want to sigh off his right to be free from the negative influences of these turbines on his property, demand that the developer move each turbine back 1500 feet from his/her property line before issuing a special use permit.
Do not allow yourself to be part of urinating on these rights that were bought and paid for with American blood.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Strasburg II
Hans Daatselaar letter to the Cohocton Planning Board - February 6, 2007
February 6, 2007
Town of Cohocton Planning Board
Cohocton, NY 14826
To whom it may concern'-
My name is Hans Daatselaar and I reside at XXX Dutch Hill Road in Cohocton, New York. This letter and the pages that follow will go into record for possible future legal action concerning the proposed "Dutch Hill Wind Project" being developed by UPC and Canandaigua Power Partners II.
I am writing this letter to record my concerns and objections pertaining to the Dutch Hill DEIS. Copies of this letter will be sent to several government agencies, UPC and the Cohocton Planning Board. As the "so called" lead agency in the SEQRA process, I can only hope all the planning board members have thoroughly read the entire DEIS and are willing and able to make sound decisions without interference from UPC, Jack Zigenfus or other town board members.
My primary concern is the proposed location of turbine #1, the cumulative effect of turbine #2 as well as the proposed access road and buried inter-connect running along my property line. The proposed location for turbine #1 is roughly (using maps prepared by ESS Group Inc. for UPC) 1,500 feet west of my house and sighted on top off a hill which is 200 feet above the elevation of my house. Add 200 plus 420 (turbine height) and turbine #1 and #2 will loom 620 feet above and upwind of my home.
Please keep this very important fact in mind as you read why I feel turbine #1 needs to be eliminated or relocated.
Sincerely,
Hans Daatselaar
(Page 1 of 5)
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CCWWmembers%5CHansCPB032707.rtf
Town of Cohocton Planning Board
Cohocton, NY 14826
To whom it may concern'-
My name is Hans Daatselaar and I reside at XXX Dutch Hill Road in Cohocton, New York. This letter and the pages that follow will go into record for possible future legal action concerning the proposed "Dutch Hill Wind Project" being developed by UPC and Canandaigua Power Partners II.
I am writing this letter to record my concerns and objections pertaining to the Dutch Hill DEIS. Copies of this letter will be sent to several government agencies, UPC and the Cohocton Planning Board. As the "so called" lead agency in the SEQRA process, I can only hope all the planning board members have thoroughly read the entire DEIS and are willing and able to make sound decisions without interference from UPC, Jack Zigenfus or other town board members.
My primary concern is the proposed location of turbine #1, the cumulative effect of turbine #2 as well as the proposed access road and buried inter-connect running along my property line. The proposed location for turbine #1 is roughly (using maps prepared by ESS Group Inc. for UPC) 1,500 feet west of my house and sighted on top off a hill which is 200 feet above the elevation of my house. Add 200 plus 420 (turbine height) and turbine #1 and #2 will loom 620 feet above and upwind of my home.
Please keep this very important fact in mind as you read why I feel turbine #1 needs to be eliminated or relocated.
Sincerely,
Hans Daatselaar
(Page 1 of 5)
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CCWWmembers%5CHansCPB032707.rtf
Monday, March 26, 2007
Is Green Good? by Saul Singer
Global warming has become a religion not only in the sense of intolerance toward dissent, but also as the animating moral crusade of our age. Here too, it is not harmless, if environmentalism is allowed to trump ethics. Our children should not be taught that the height and essence of being good is to be green.
I’m all for preserving the environment. I would even pay a premium for a hybrid car — not to stop global warming, but simply to cut down on unhealthy and unpleasant smog. But all this should be at the level of good hygiene, not religion. To do good, one must first do no harm. Global-warming extremism, by harming the poorest of the poor and by substituting for real moral causes, fails this test.
(Click to read entire article)
I’m all for preserving the environment. I would even pay a premium for a hybrid car — not to stop global warming, but simply to cut down on unhealthy and unpleasant smog. But all this should be at the level of good hygiene, not religion. To do good, one must first do no harm. Global-warming extremism, by harming the poorest of the poor and by substituting for real moral causes, fails this test.
(Click to read entire article)
Cohocton Planning Board "Special Meeting" Monday, March 26, 2007
All are invited and encouraged to attend a premature review of the first twelve turbine site plans for the UPC/Canandaigua Power Partners I - Pine Hill/Lent Hill Project.
No “ACTION” is legally able to be taken by the “Lead Agency” while the SEQR is in process. The Cohocton Planning Board intends to hold an unlawful meeting to review these site plans. Another example of the flagrant disregard of NYS law that is the normal practice in Cohocton.
Express your outrage and support for CWW in our ongoing efforts to require that lawful standards need to be observed and followed. Meeting will start at 7:00 PM at the Atlanta Court Office.
No “ACTION” is legally able to be taken by the “Lead Agency” while the SEQR is in process. The Cohocton Planning Board intends to hold an unlawful meeting to review these site plans. Another example of the flagrant disregard of NYS law that is the normal practice in Cohocton.
Express your outrage and support for CWW in our ongoing efforts to require that lawful standards need to be observed and followed. Meeting will start at 7:00 PM at the Atlanta Court Office.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Brawn With the Wind by Kate Galbraith
What is Goldman Sachs doing in rural Texas? Probably some of its bankers have wondered that themselves, when they find they're three hours from the nearest latte.
One of Goldman's subsidiaries, Houston-based Horizon Wind Energy, is constructing a $600 million, 400-megawatt wind farm in the boonies west of Dallas. Financiers of other wind-power projects and explorations, spread across central and west Texas, include Wells Fargo; JPMorgan Chase; Macquarie, Australia's largest investment bank; and John Deere's credit division, which already has close ties to rural America.
(Click to read entire article)
One of Goldman's subsidiaries, Houston-based Horizon Wind Energy, is constructing a $600 million, 400-megawatt wind farm in the boonies west of Dallas. Financiers of other wind-power projects and explorations, spread across central and west Texas, include Wells Fargo; JPMorgan Chase; Macquarie, Australia's largest investment bank; and John Deere's credit division, which already has close ties to rural America.
(Click to read entire article)
Saturday, March 24, 2007
USFWS letter to UPC - Vermont Hearings
UPC's lawyer wanted it thrown out but the board found it relevant and ordered the VT ANR (Agency of Natural Resources) back for the last day of hearings on the 29th.
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CAgencies%5CUSFWS_letter%5B1%5D.pdf
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CAgencies%5CUSFWS_letter%5B1%5D.pdf
Friday, March 23, 2007
Baboon Behavior Behind Wind Projects
Most baboons live in hierarchical troops of 5 to 250 animals.
Wikipedia encyclopedia presents this description:
"Baboons can determine from vocal exchanges what the dominance relations between individuals are. When a confrontation occurs between different families or where a lower-ranking baboon takes the offensive, baboons show more interest in the exchange than exchanges between members of the same family or when a higher-ranking baboon takes the offensive. This is because confrontations between different families or rank challenges can have a wider impact on the whole troop than an internal conflict in a family or a baboon reinforcing its dominance.[1]"
On a visit to the Kruger National Park in South Africa in 1980, a band of these monkeys proceeded to attack our vehicle as it drove down a public road. The experience was most threatening since the rabid behavior of these primates attempted to intimidate any human they came across. Not a stellar example of the majesty of the wild kingdom. Civilization is not a concept that has filtered down the food chain to savage beasts. Was this park the natural habit of this species or were they mere predators looking for an easy prey?
Baboons have rough spots on their protruding hindquarters, called ischial callosities. These callouses are nerveless, hairless pads of skin which are present to provide for the sitting comfort of the baboon. Their diet is omnivorous. They are foragers and are active at irregular times throughout the day and night. They can raid human dwellings. So cites Wikepedia.
Wonder if anyone sees the resemblance in the tactics and behavior of the transnational wind developers? Reflect upon the mode of stealth attack used to infiltrate our communities and the barbaric and vicious intimidation used to silent resident opposition. Just who is the predator? The faceless marauders gang together to cave up the quarry and assign territories to the varied LLC's shell companies used to steal your resources, defecate upon your land, assault your homes and attack your family.
Thirty years ago Afrikaners knew how to rid themselves of hostile baboons. They exported them to zoos . . . Now that these monkeys have been let loose upon society, what lesson can be learned from this struggle for the survival of the fittest?
Look to the Monkey's Paw, which is a classic horror story apparently written by W.W. Jacobs,, first appearing in Harpers Monthly in 1902. The story begins with a quotation "Be careful what you wish for, you may receive it" - unfortunately attributed by the author to Anonymous.
Wikepedia offers this summary account:
"The story opens with the second owner of the monkey's paw, Sergeant Major Morris - who came into possession of it upon the death of its first owner - giving the talisman to Mr. White of Laburnum Villa. It is worth noting that a Laburnum is a poisonous plant, perhaps intended by Jacobs as an omen of death. Heedless of the Sergeant's warnings about the cursed nature of the paw, Mr. White, encouraged by his wife, carelessly asks for £200. His wish is granted, but in a horrific manner: he receives a payment of £200 as the result of the death of his son Herbert, who is fatally crushed by industrial machines at his workplace. Jacobs does not describe the grim accident in the story, preferring to report the incident through a company representative, arguably increasing the incident's horrific qualities.
Following their son's funeral, the Whites settle into a dull, depressed existence. One night, Mrs. White, seized by a sudden idea, tries to convince her husband to wish their son back to life. At first he refuses, but once again allows himself to be swayed: he wishes his son back to life. Nothing happens, and the couple, crushed by the disappointment, prepare to retire to bed. Later, they are shocked to hear a knocking at the door, whereupon the wife realizes that Herbert had to journey from the cemetery where he was buried to their house, accounting for the delay. She rushes downstairs to open the door, nearly hysterical with joy. Mr. White, meanwhile, has been seized by terror, recognizing the horrible creature that must wait upon their doorstep (he, unlike his wife, has seen the body prior to its burial, and was able to identify it only by the clothing). Desperately groping for the cursed paw, he makes a third wish, and the knocking at the door ceases. The exact details of the third wish are not revealed, but, responding to his wife's cry of disappointment; he staggers downstairs to join her, looking out at the empty street outside their home."
Those industrial machines crushed the son. Greed for a fantasy desire invited the monkey's paw to grant their wish. Family lament longed to restore tranquility after the stark consequence from that wish. The family home was never the same - much as our own neighborhood environment will never be made whole.
What the White's wished for brought them a living hell. Much like what is in store for towns that invite in industrial wind developers, the monkey's paw brings with it a terrible outcome. Allowing baboons to enter our communities has already developed a depressed existence for everyone who cares about a balance in the natural order. Taming the monkeys means shipping them out of our neighborhoods. The freak show that the wind developers peddle has Enron written all over it. The promise of local benefits at the price of living with industrial machines is too high for any sensible person to covet.
Accepting the allure of the siren's call brings the noise of turbine tyranny. It is analogous to making a bargain with the devil.
When a baboon becomes uncontrollable and not even fit for display in a menagerie, society often demands that the monkey meets the same fate as Herbert. Be careful what you wind project proponents wish for; you may be wishing upon your own Monkey's Paw. Inviting baboons into your township makes you no better then bestial developers. You may be willing to seal your own fate, but you have no right to condemn us to your nightmare.
SARTRE - March 23, 2007
Wikipedia encyclopedia presents this description:
"Baboons can determine from vocal exchanges what the dominance relations between individuals are. When a confrontation occurs between different families or where a lower-ranking baboon takes the offensive, baboons show more interest in the exchange than exchanges between members of the same family or when a higher-ranking baboon takes the offensive. This is because confrontations between different families or rank challenges can have a wider impact on the whole troop than an internal conflict in a family or a baboon reinforcing its dominance.[1]"
On a visit to the Kruger National Park in South Africa in 1980, a band of these monkeys proceeded to attack our vehicle as it drove down a public road. The experience was most threatening since the rabid behavior of these primates attempted to intimidate any human they came across. Not a stellar example of the majesty of the wild kingdom. Civilization is not a concept that has filtered down the food chain to savage beasts. Was this park the natural habit of this species or were they mere predators looking for an easy prey?
Baboons have rough spots on their protruding hindquarters, called ischial callosities. These callouses are nerveless, hairless pads of skin which are present to provide for the sitting comfort of the baboon. Their diet is omnivorous. They are foragers and are active at irregular times throughout the day and night. They can raid human dwellings. So cites Wikepedia.
Wonder if anyone sees the resemblance in the tactics and behavior of the transnational wind developers? Reflect upon the mode of stealth attack used to infiltrate our communities and the barbaric and vicious intimidation used to silent resident opposition. Just who is the predator? The faceless marauders gang together to cave up the quarry and assign territories to the varied LLC's shell companies used to steal your resources, defecate upon your land, assault your homes and attack your family.
Thirty years ago Afrikaners knew how to rid themselves of hostile baboons. They exported them to zoos . . . Now that these monkeys have been let loose upon society, what lesson can be learned from this struggle for the survival of the fittest?
Look to the Monkey's Paw, which is a classic horror story apparently written by W.W. Jacobs,, first appearing in Harpers Monthly in 1902. The story begins with a quotation "Be careful what you wish for, you may receive it" - unfortunately attributed by the author to Anonymous.
Wikepedia offers this summary account:
"The story opens with the second owner of the monkey's paw, Sergeant Major Morris - who came into possession of it upon the death of its first owner - giving the talisman to Mr. White of Laburnum Villa. It is worth noting that a Laburnum is a poisonous plant, perhaps intended by Jacobs as an omen of death. Heedless of the Sergeant's warnings about the cursed nature of the paw, Mr. White, encouraged by his wife, carelessly asks for £200. His wish is granted, but in a horrific manner: he receives a payment of £200 as the result of the death of his son Herbert, who is fatally crushed by industrial machines at his workplace. Jacobs does not describe the grim accident in the story, preferring to report the incident through a company representative, arguably increasing the incident's horrific qualities.
Following their son's funeral, the Whites settle into a dull, depressed existence. One night, Mrs. White, seized by a sudden idea, tries to convince her husband to wish their son back to life. At first he refuses, but once again allows himself to be swayed: he wishes his son back to life. Nothing happens, and the couple, crushed by the disappointment, prepare to retire to bed. Later, they are shocked to hear a knocking at the door, whereupon the wife realizes that Herbert had to journey from the cemetery where he was buried to their house, accounting for the delay. She rushes downstairs to open the door, nearly hysterical with joy. Mr. White, meanwhile, has been seized by terror, recognizing the horrible creature that must wait upon their doorstep (he, unlike his wife, has seen the body prior to its burial, and was able to identify it only by the clothing). Desperately groping for the cursed paw, he makes a third wish, and the knocking at the door ceases. The exact details of the third wish are not revealed, but, responding to his wife's cry of disappointment; he staggers downstairs to join her, looking out at the empty street outside their home."
Those industrial machines crushed the son. Greed for a fantasy desire invited the monkey's paw to grant their wish. Family lament longed to restore tranquility after the stark consequence from that wish. The family home was never the same - much as our own neighborhood environment will never be made whole.
What the White's wished for brought them a living hell. Much like what is in store for towns that invite in industrial wind developers, the monkey's paw brings with it a terrible outcome. Allowing baboons to enter our communities has already developed a depressed existence for everyone who cares about a balance in the natural order. Taming the monkeys means shipping them out of our neighborhoods. The freak show that the wind developers peddle has Enron written all over it. The promise of local benefits at the price of living with industrial machines is too high for any sensible person to covet.
Accepting the allure of the siren's call brings the noise of turbine tyranny. It is analogous to making a bargain with the devil.
When a baboon becomes uncontrollable and not even fit for display in a menagerie, society often demands that the monkey meets the same fate as Herbert. Be careful what you wind project proponents wish for; you may be wishing upon your own Monkey's Paw. Inviting baboons into your township makes you no better then bestial developers. You may be willing to seal your own fate, but you have no right to condemn us to your nightmare.
SARTRE - March 23, 2007
Another Wind Turbine Battle - Town of Gorham, NY
Speak up, Town of Gorham residents! Your silence is being taken as an endorsement for something that should be considered an industrial application in an agricultural district.
The town has drafted a law concerning commercial wind farms. The Town of Gorham wants to protect the aesthetics of the east side of the lake at the expense of the rest of the Town.
The Farmland, Open Space, and Resource Conservation Plan adopted in June 2005 has objectives that include “preserve the rural character of the Town”, “protect scenic views important to the community”, and “retain high-quality farmland for continued agricultural use”. A wind farm is in direct opposition to these objectives.
The preferred wind zone covers a large area from Routes 247 to 245, along County Rds. 17 and 18, Lake to Lake Rd., DePew Rd., Mumby Rd., Phelps and Conklin Rds. It surrounds Marcus Whitman high school and two Mennonite schoolhouses. Most of our town officials live either in the hamlet of Gorham or outside of this preferred area.
The law in its present form allows turbines with a maximum height of 400 feet, with a setback of minimum one and a half times that height from the neighboring property. We have visited the Wethersfield Wind Farm in Wyoming county, where the turbines are nearly 300 feet tall. We feel that a bare minimum setback of 1500 feet (or more) should be enforced, like our neighboring townships.
Noise levels are to be at 50dbA at the property line where a turbine is located. The noise under the Wethersfield turbines was deafening, like the sound of helicopters. We drove approximately 1/4 to 1/2 mile upwind from the turbines and still heard what a local resident referred to as “barking”. The noise was like the constant, repetitive howl of a hound dog.
An average of ten minutes a day of shadow flicker would be “acceptable”. Proper set back and placement of the turbines would eliminate intrusive flicker. Another concern is increased lightning strikes which can cause power surges.
We are not against alternative energy sources. We do believe, however, that any wind farm should be strictly regulated. We have seen more uproar over junk cars and barking dogs. You can tow the clunker to the junk yard, the dog can go up on the porch. What are you going to do about wind turbines except to say, “if we had only known...”?
Jeff & Debbie North
3175 County Rd. 18
Town of Gorham
The town has drafted a law concerning commercial wind farms. The Town of Gorham wants to protect the aesthetics of the east side of the lake at the expense of the rest of the Town.
The Farmland, Open Space, and Resource Conservation Plan adopted in June 2005 has objectives that include “preserve the rural character of the Town”, “protect scenic views important to the community”, and “retain high-quality farmland for continued agricultural use”. A wind farm is in direct opposition to these objectives.
The preferred wind zone covers a large area from Routes 247 to 245, along County Rds. 17 and 18, Lake to Lake Rd., DePew Rd., Mumby Rd., Phelps and Conklin Rds. It surrounds Marcus Whitman high school and two Mennonite schoolhouses. Most of our town officials live either in the hamlet of Gorham or outside of this preferred area.
The law in its present form allows turbines with a maximum height of 400 feet, with a setback of minimum one and a half times that height from the neighboring property. We have visited the Wethersfield Wind Farm in Wyoming county, where the turbines are nearly 300 feet tall. We feel that a bare minimum setback of 1500 feet (or more) should be enforced, like our neighboring townships.
Noise levels are to be at 50dbA at the property line where a turbine is located. The noise under the Wethersfield turbines was deafening, like the sound of helicopters. We drove approximately 1/4 to 1/2 mile upwind from the turbines and still heard what a local resident referred to as “barking”. The noise was like the constant, repetitive howl of a hound dog.
An average of ten minutes a day of shadow flicker would be “acceptable”. Proper set back and placement of the turbines would eliminate intrusive flicker. Another concern is increased lightning strikes which can cause power surges.
We are not against alternative energy sources. We do believe, however, that any wind farm should be strictly regulated. We have seen more uproar over junk cars and barking dogs. You can tow the clunker to the junk yard, the dog can go up on the porch. What are you going to do about wind turbines except to say, “if we had only known...”?
Jeff & Debbie North
3175 County Rd. 18
Town of Gorham
Wind project is going to court by LUCAS BLAISE
March 22, 2007
BEEKMANTOWN — Reaffirming their complaints, the West Beekmantown Neighborhood Association has filed suit against nearly everyone involved in the wind-power issue here.
The non-profit group, which has more than 100 members, filed the Article 78 petition seeking a court hearing.
The lawsuit names the Beekmantown Zoning Board of Appeals, Beekmantown Town Council, Beekmantown Codes Enforcement Officer Allan Corron, Clinton County Planning Board and Windhorse Power LLC.
Each was included, according to the document, to give the court full jurisdiction over all involved in the decision.
EVENTS UNFOLD
On Jan. 31, the Beekmantown Zoning Board unanimously OK'd the project, an action needed to overturn the Clinton County Planning Board's vote not to approve the project.
The decision allows the wind-power-harvesting company to set up to 13 turbines within the bounds of a conditional-use permit. The 10-month construction process will set up 80-meter-tall turbines across land owned or leased to Windhorse Power.
The permit seeks to govern the project under strict considerations that the plan proposed to the Zoning Board remain unchanged throughout the construction process and during production.The association wasn't pleased with the decision.
"We want to see this project not allowed," Neighborhood Association Co-President Ted Klaudt said."We have maintained all along that this is an industrial project and it has no role in a residentially zoned area.
"The Zoning Board allowed the project under the "essential services" provision and agreed with Saratoga Associates' recommendation that it posed little to no threat of detriment to the area.
"We disagree with their considerations," Klaudt said. "If this project is allowed the way it has been approved, it opens up any place in Beekmantown. That's not just Rand Hill."
LAWSUIT ALLEGATIONS
The association asserted throughout the document that the Zoning Board acted illegally by "failing to comply with the requirements" of the state environmental quality review and by considering Windhorse as an essential service based on Corron's recommendation.
The lawsuit also takes issue with the use of an alternate Zoning Board member.
The document quotes the law: "The chair of the ZBA may designate an alternate to substitute for a member when such a member is unable to participate because of a conflict of interest on an application or matter before the board.
"The group contends that during meetings, alternate Zoning Board member Jerome Davis was allowed as a sixth member of the board and made and challenged determinations and that no members were removed for a conflict of interest.
COURT DATE
All these matters and other information from the defendants will be given to the court in a May 11 hearing.
"We will address the issues before the court," said Windhorse partner John Warshow, adding, "There was an almost identical appeal against the Noble project, and that project was allowed recently.
"The recent court decision rejected a similar lawsuit over the Noble Environmental wind project in the towns of Altona, Clinton and Ellenburg.
"We were confident after the (zoning) board meeting," Warshow said. "After reading the Noble appeal, we are more confident.
"Klaudt is also expecting to win.
"We're pretty confident," he said, adding that in regard to their attorney, James Brooks, "He's a very experienced attorney and has been dealing with land-use issues for a number of years.
"The final decision will be made in court.
"It's out of our hands now," Klaudt said.
BEEKMANTOWN — Reaffirming their complaints, the West Beekmantown Neighborhood Association has filed suit against nearly everyone involved in the wind-power issue here.
The non-profit group, which has more than 100 members, filed the Article 78 petition seeking a court hearing.
The lawsuit names the Beekmantown Zoning Board of Appeals, Beekmantown Town Council, Beekmantown Codes Enforcement Officer Allan Corron, Clinton County Planning Board and Windhorse Power LLC.
Each was included, according to the document, to give the court full jurisdiction over all involved in the decision.
EVENTS UNFOLD
On Jan. 31, the Beekmantown Zoning Board unanimously OK'd the project, an action needed to overturn the Clinton County Planning Board's vote not to approve the project.
The decision allows the wind-power-harvesting company to set up to 13 turbines within the bounds of a conditional-use permit. The 10-month construction process will set up 80-meter-tall turbines across land owned or leased to Windhorse Power.
The permit seeks to govern the project under strict considerations that the plan proposed to the Zoning Board remain unchanged throughout the construction process and during production.The association wasn't pleased with the decision.
"We want to see this project not allowed," Neighborhood Association Co-President Ted Klaudt said."We have maintained all along that this is an industrial project and it has no role in a residentially zoned area.
"The Zoning Board allowed the project under the "essential services" provision and agreed with Saratoga Associates' recommendation that it posed little to no threat of detriment to the area.
"We disagree with their considerations," Klaudt said. "If this project is allowed the way it has been approved, it opens up any place in Beekmantown. That's not just Rand Hill."
LAWSUIT ALLEGATIONS
The association asserted throughout the document that the Zoning Board acted illegally by "failing to comply with the requirements" of the state environmental quality review and by considering Windhorse as an essential service based on Corron's recommendation.
The lawsuit also takes issue with the use of an alternate Zoning Board member.
The document quotes the law: "The chair of the ZBA may designate an alternate to substitute for a member when such a member is unable to participate because of a conflict of interest on an application or matter before the board.
"The group contends that during meetings, alternate Zoning Board member Jerome Davis was allowed as a sixth member of the board and made and challenged determinations and that no members were removed for a conflict of interest.
COURT DATE
All these matters and other information from the defendants will be given to the court in a May 11 hearing.
"We will address the issues before the court," said Windhorse partner John Warshow, adding, "There was an almost identical appeal against the Noble project, and that project was allowed recently.
"The recent court decision rejected a similar lawsuit over the Noble Environmental wind project in the towns of Altona, Clinton and Ellenburg.
"We were confident after the (zoning) board meeting," Warshow said. "After reading the Noble appeal, we are more confident.
"Klaudt is also expecting to win.
"We're pretty confident," he said, adding that in regard to their attorney, James Brooks, "He's a very experienced attorney and has been dealing with land-use issues for a number of years.
"The final decision will be made in court.
"It's out of our hands now," Klaudt said.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
UPC has posted important special use permits information - MUST READ
Welcome to Cohocton Wind, the new economic development wind power production facility in the state of New York. Committed to the wind business and our communities in common, Cohocton Wind is developing, financing, building and operating this wind farm to promote a developing economy through the fastest growing and cleanest energy in the world.
Please click here for Cohocton Wind's complete Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), accepted December 2006.
Please click here for Dutch Hill's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), accepted December 2006.
Cohocton Permit Application Package (03/01/07)
Cohocton Permit Application Appendix I
Site PlanUPC Wind is happy to post the site plans for our Cohocton Wind Project. By clicking on the following links you will find the documents UPC Wind submits to the Cohocton Planning Board for review throughout the permitting process.
These site plans are the initial set of preliminary draft project drawings and were produced to give the Town of Cohocton an example by which to comment. These plans are subject to change both before they are reviewed by the Planning Board and its consultants, and throughout the project permitting process.
Please click here for Cohocton Wind's complete Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), accepted December 2006.
Please click here for Dutch Hill's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), accepted December 2006.
Cohocton Permit Application Package (03/01/07)
Cohocton Permit Application Appendix I
Site PlanUPC Wind is happy to post the site plans for our Cohocton Wind Project. By clicking on the following links you will find the documents UPC Wind submits to the Cohocton Planning Board for review throughout the permitting process.
These site plans are the initial set of preliminary draft project drawings and were produced to give the Town of Cohocton an example by which to comment. These plans are subject to change both before they are reviewed by the Planning Board and its consultants, and throughout the project permitting process.
Cohocton Wind Watch Announces the Introduction of the CWW merchandise store
Cohocton Wind Watch announces a new feature - The CWW merchandise store. Requests have been received to provide CWW memorabilia. The goal is not to derive profit form sales revenue, but to offer a convenient and easy way to purchase items of interest.
New logo designs and selections will be added.
Note that a signup for the CWW Newsletter box is on the right column. Adding your email address to this database will allow the receipt of a monthly newsletter that will update new items from the CWW store and important announcements on the progress of Cohocton Wind Watch projects.
If you have any questions send your inquiries to: cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com
Thanks for your continued support for CWW, especially for those who have contributed to the CWW Legal Fund.
New logo designs and selections will be added.
Note that a signup for the CWW Newsletter box is on the right column. Adding your email address to this database will allow the receipt of a monthly newsletter that will update new items from the CWW store and important announcements on the progress of Cohocton Wind Watch projects.
If you have any questions send your inquiries to: cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com
Thanks for your continued support for CWW, especially for those who have contributed to the CWW Legal Fund.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
PSC DECLARATORY RULING ON REVIEW
In a Joint Petition filed on January 3, 2007, Scottish Power plc (Scottish Power), PPM Energy, Inc. (PPM) and Iberdrola, S.A. (Iberdrola) (collectively, Joint Petitioners) request issuance of a Declaratory Ruling finding that transfers of ownership interests in Scottish Power, the indirect parent of Flat Rock Windpower LLC (Flat Rock) and Flat Rock Windpower II LLC (Flat Rock II), need not be reviewed under Public Service Law (PSL) §70. Flat Rock and Flat Rock II are the owners and operators of an approximately 321 MW wind-powered electric generation facility located in Lewis County, New York (the Maple Ridge facility). No responses to the petition were received CASE 07-E-0009 -2- within the 21-day period prescribed under the Rules of Procedure, 16 NYCRR §8.2(c), which expired on January 24, 2006.1
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CAlice%5C364_07E0009DR.pdf
C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5Csartre%5CMy%20Documents%5CWindFarm%5CAlice%5C364_07E0009DR.pdf
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Centerville Citizens Challenge Wind Farm Law
LAW OFFICE OF GARY A. ABRAHAM
170 No. Second Street
Allegany, New York 14706
716-372-1913; fax is same (please call first)
gabraham44@eznet.net
www.garyabraham.com
March 18, 2007
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
Centerville Citizens Challenge Wind Farm Law
Lawsuit filed in Allegany County Supreme Court seeks nullification
A group of landowners in the Town of Centerville filed suit Friday alleging the town board worked hand-inhand with Noble Environmental Power, LLC, to craft a local law that accommodates Noble’s proposed Centerville Windpark, but without looking at the environmental impacts. The project would add at least 60 wind turbines, each about fifty stories high, to Noble’s Bliss Windpark in the Town of Eagle. Sixty-seven wind turbines have already been approved in Eagle. A comparable wind farm is planned by Noble in the Town of Farmersville in Cattaraugus County.
According to Dennis Gaffin, a professor at Buffalo State College and president of Centerville’s Concerned Citizens, “Many of us knocked ourselves out finding the most objective studies of noise and other effects of industrial wind turbines and submitted our research to the town board, but they said they would not look at it until later, when Noble submits a formal application.” Noble approached the town board with a proposal in January 2006, and paid for an environmental attorney to draft a law the board enacted last November.
George Ellis, a member of the citizens group, thinks the town board was misled. “I’m a farmer. Supervisor Sardina thinks a wind farm will save farming in Centerville. I think he and the farmers got snookered.”
“These are primarily investment schemes taking advantage of lucrative tax breaks,” according to the group’s attorney Gary Abraham. “The public pays billions in lost taxes and there is little regulation except at the local level. Landowners get a small rental payment if a wind turbine is operated on their land. But the value of property all around them plummets.”
The Centerville town board decided a 1,000-foot buffer to a dwelling is safe, except hunting camps are excluded from the protection. “That’s not enough” for Cheryl Sporysz, a member of the group suing the town. “My neighbors signed easements with Noble that allow a wind turbine within 500 feet of my property. Most independent studies recommend a setback of one mile. If Noble gets its way, I’ll have to stay away from the area between my house my property line.”
“We believe we can show the buffer areas required under the town law were determined by the easement agreements Noble made with landowners well in advance of the local law. In fact the town board reduced the buffer and excluded hunting camps that were protected in an earlier version of the law when Noble complained,” according to Mr. Abraham. “State law requires environmental review at the earliest possible time in the development of a project, but here the town decided to do no review until after buffer distances are in place.”
Contact: Gary A. Abraham, Esq.
170 No. Second Street
Allegany, New York 14706
716-372-1913; fax is same (please call first)
gabraham44@eznet.net
www.garyabraham.com
March 18, 2007
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
Centerville Citizens Challenge Wind Farm Law
Lawsuit filed in Allegany County Supreme Court seeks nullification
A group of landowners in the Town of Centerville filed suit Friday alleging the town board worked hand-inhand with Noble Environmental Power, LLC, to craft a local law that accommodates Noble’s proposed Centerville Windpark, but without looking at the environmental impacts. The project would add at least 60 wind turbines, each about fifty stories high, to Noble’s Bliss Windpark in the Town of Eagle. Sixty-seven wind turbines have already been approved in Eagle. A comparable wind farm is planned by Noble in the Town of Farmersville in Cattaraugus County.
According to Dennis Gaffin, a professor at Buffalo State College and president of Centerville’s Concerned Citizens, “Many of us knocked ourselves out finding the most objective studies of noise and other effects of industrial wind turbines and submitted our research to the town board, but they said they would not look at it until later, when Noble submits a formal application.” Noble approached the town board with a proposal in January 2006, and paid for an environmental attorney to draft a law the board enacted last November.
George Ellis, a member of the citizens group, thinks the town board was misled. “I’m a farmer. Supervisor Sardina thinks a wind farm will save farming in Centerville. I think he and the farmers got snookered.”
“These are primarily investment schemes taking advantage of lucrative tax breaks,” according to the group’s attorney Gary Abraham. “The public pays billions in lost taxes and there is little regulation except at the local level. Landowners get a small rental payment if a wind turbine is operated on their land. But the value of property all around them plummets.”
The Centerville town board decided a 1,000-foot buffer to a dwelling is safe, except hunting camps are excluded from the protection. “That’s not enough” for Cheryl Sporysz, a member of the group suing the town. “My neighbors signed easements with Noble that allow a wind turbine within 500 feet of my property. Most independent studies recommend a setback of one mile. If Noble gets its way, I’ll have to stay away from the area between my house my property line.”
“We believe we can show the buffer areas required under the town law were determined by the easement agreements Noble made with landowners well in advance of the local law. In fact the town board reduced the buffer and excluded hunting camps that were protected in an earlier version of the law when Noble complained,” according to Mr. Abraham. “State law requires environmental review at the earliest possible time in the development of a project, but here the town decided to do no review until after buffer distances are in place.”
Contact: Gary A. Abraham, Esq.
"What You Leave Is Who You Are" by Don Sandford
In past months I heard about or witness firsthand the partisan grandstanding performances of Councilman Hunt. At meetings on industrial wind turbines, his ties and support of Yes Wind and UPC was certainly obvious. He has shown that he is a man that cared very little about protecting the future or improving the town for all its' people. At our town board meetings, board members were silent and stone-walling time after time our questions. Now we are no longer allowed to speak, a policy obviously intended to silence us.
(Click to read entire letter)
(Click to read entire letter)
Monday, March 19, 2007
Town extends wind delay by Patricia Breakey
Approximately 100 people attended the Meredith Town Board meeting Tuesday, where Sue Bailey presented petitions with 770 signatures opposing industrial wind turbines, Supervisor Frank Bachler said Friday.
Bachler said the crowd overflowed the town meeting room, which can only accommodate about 50 people.
The board passed a resolution to extend the moratorium on the erection of wind turbines for three months after the current one-year moratorium expires April 3, Bachler said. A public hearing on the extended moratorium will be held at 7 p.m. March 27 at the Meredith Town Hall.
The Meredith Town Planning Board has been working on a document addressing wind-turbine regulations for a year. Bachler said the Planning Board met Monday and voted to hand the document over to the Town Board.
Bachler said the proposed regulations prohibit industrial wind turbines.
Rosemary Nichols, a land-use attorney, is reviewing the document, he said. After Nichols’ review, the two boards will hold a series of joint meetings with her to discuss and possibly revise the proposed regulations.
Bachler said Bailey presented the board with the original petitions and an alphabetical list of the names on the petition.
The petition is in opposition to industrial-scale wind turbines but supports small turbines for individual or town projects, he said.
Bachler said the crowd overflowed the town meeting room, which can only accommodate about 50 people.
The board passed a resolution to extend the moratorium on the erection of wind turbines for three months after the current one-year moratorium expires April 3, Bachler said. A public hearing on the extended moratorium will be held at 7 p.m. March 27 at the Meredith Town Hall.
The Meredith Town Planning Board has been working on a document addressing wind-turbine regulations for a year. Bachler said the Planning Board met Monday and voted to hand the document over to the Town Board.
Bachler said the proposed regulations prohibit industrial wind turbines.
Rosemary Nichols, a land-use attorney, is reviewing the document, he said. After Nichols’ review, the two boards will hold a series of joint meetings with her to discuss and possibly revise the proposed regulations.
Bachler said Bailey presented the board with the original petitions and an alphabetical list of the names on the petition.
The petition is in opposition to industrial-scale wind turbines but supports small turbines for individual or town projects, he said.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
James Hall letter to NYS Governor Eliot Spitzer - March 18, 2007
March 18, 2007
Eliot Spitzer
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
RE: Senator James Alesi’s call for 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbines in NYS
Governor Spitzer,
Now is the time to demonstrate bi-partisan leadership. Cohocton Wind Watch and a statewide alliance of citizen groups ardently urge you to implement the enactment of an indefinite moratorium on industrial wind turbines in NYS. The body of empirical evidence that has developed over the last several years proves that public safety risks from industrial wind turbines places New York state residents in severe danger.
Wind turbine LLC’s have abandoned all pretense of responsible development. Regulatory agencies have not fulfilled their responsibility for meaningful oversight. Ignored is the tragic experience of Europe from years of dangerous siting of projects adjacent to residential properties. The rezoning amendments that are being passed by corrupt local town governments demonstrates that wind developers can buy the best laws that their lawyers can draft.
Your professional career as attorney general was based upon protecting citizens from abuses of unethical cronyism and illicit economic conduct. Now as Governor of the great state of New York, you have the power to put a stop to the fraud that masquerades as productive alternative energy. Upstate and Western New York is being assaulted by destructive projects that will drain the public treasury while imposing a death sentence upon the communities that are being forced to host the latest Enron scam.
Surely your staff has researched that these foreign companies operate a scheme to defraud local communities! Such a hoax could not exist unless government provides political cover to push through and ignore prudent regulatory standards. The pattern of deceit is obvious and the selective benefactors of state subsidies and obscene tax treatments are being protected by dishonest politicians, furthering the financial interests of faceless LLC’s.
We seek a meeting with your staff to discuss your support for the kind of all-inclusive moratorium on all current and future wind projects that Senator Alesi proposed. NYS needs to formulate a comprehensive and balanced public policy for alternative energy generation. We appeal to you to get out front on this statewide issue and signal your leadership by putting a halt to ill-conceived wind project.
Appreciate your written reply with an approved appointment date to meet with several groups committed to the protection of our environment and property rights of local residents.
Cordially,
James Hall – Cohocton Wind Watch
Eliot Spitzer
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
RE: Senator James Alesi’s call for 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbines in NYS
Governor Spitzer,
Now is the time to demonstrate bi-partisan leadership. Cohocton Wind Watch and a statewide alliance of citizen groups ardently urge you to implement the enactment of an indefinite moratorium on industrial wind turbines in NYS. The body of empirical evidence that has developed over the last several years proves that public safety risks from industrial wind turbines places New York state residents in severe danger.
Wind turbine LLC’s have abandoned all pretense of responsible development. Regulatory agencies have not fulfilled their responsibility for meaningful oversight. Ignored is the tragic experience of Europe from years of dangerous siting of projects adjacent to residential properties. The rezoning amendments that are being passed by corrupt local town governments demonstrates that wind developers can buy the best laws that their lawyers can draft.
Your professional career as attorney general was based upon protecting citizens from abuses of unethical cronyism and illicit economic conduct. Now as Governor of the great state of New York, you have the power to put a stop to the fraud that masquerades as productive alternative energy. Upstate and Western New York is being assaulted by destructive projects that will drain the public treasury while imposing a death sentence upon the communities that are being forced to host the latest Enron scam.
Surely your staff has researched that these foreign companies operate a scheme to defraud local communities! Such a hoax could not exist unless government provides political cover to push through and ignore prudent regulatory standards. The pattern of deceit is obvious and the selective benefactors of state subsidies and obscene tax treatments are being protected by dishonest politicians, furthering the financial interests of faceless LLC’s.
We seek a meeting with your staff to discuss your support for the kind of all-inclusive moratorium on all current and future wind projects that Senator Alesi proposed. NYS needs to formulate a comprehensive and balanced public policy for alternative energy generation. We appeal to you to get out front on this statewide issue and signal your leadership by putting a halt to ill-conceived wind project.
Appreciate your written reply with an approved appointment date to meet with several groups committed to the protection of our environment and property rights of local residents.
Cordially,
James Hall – Cohocton Wind Watch
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Wayne Hunt's Ethics on Public Display
The Hornell Tribune published the following report:
Hartsville approves wind law - Opponents walk out when Cohocton councilman compares them with those opposing civil rights (click to read entire article)
If this diatribe by Wayne Hunt isn't more proof of his delusional viewpoint what is? "He called out the "NIMB Ys," which stands for'. "Not In My Back Yard," criticizing their tactics in opposing wind farms. Hunt compared them to people who fought the civil rights movement in the 1960s and 1970s, and said they are "always with us." . . . "Hunt said. "Doing this smacks of hometown terrorism."
Republicans should be embarrassed by there deranged comments. Opponents of industrial wind project seek the same protection for ALL residents. Hunt demonstrates he only want "civil rights" for UPC and leaseholders. Ronald Reagan would cast stones at this kind of idiocy. Hunt is a desperate man in need of serious professional help.
As for terrorism, just what should you call the invaders that assault your home territory with the intention to harm your family and destroy your homestead.
Hunt is the "mad hatter" and our Alice will show him that his wonderland is paved with rocks that even UPC will not be able to move.
Republicans need to rethink their core traditional values. Wayne's World is a very sick place and will prove the undoing of the GOP in Cohocton come this November.
By the way Wayne, want to explain why you were a guest of local law enforcement the other day? Surely you weren’t in training for your own version of terrorist acts ???
James Hall
(POST your response on the Reform Cohocton FORUM)
Hartsville approves wind law - Opponents walk out when Cohocton councilman compares them with those opposing civil rights (click to read entire article)
If this diatribe by Wayne Hunt isn't more proof of his delusional viewpoint what is? "He called out the "NIMB Ys," which stands for'. "Not In My Back Yard," criticizing their tactics in opposing wind farms. Hunt compared them to people who fought the civil rights movement in the 1960s and 1970s, and said they are "always with us." . . . "Hunt said. "Doing this smacks of hometown terrorism."
Republicans should be embarrassed by there deranged comments. Opponents of industrial wind project seek the same protection for ALL residents. Hunt demonstrates he only want "civil rights" for UPC and leaseholders. Ronald Reagan would cast stones at this kind of idiocy. Hunt is a desperate man in need of serious professional help.
As for terrorism, just what should you call the invaders that assault your home territory with the intention to harm your family and destroy your homestead.
Hunt is the "mad hatter" and our Alice will show him that his wonderland is paved with rocks that even UPC will not be able to move.
Republicans need to rethink their core traditional values. Wayne's World is a very sick place and will prove the undoing of the GOP in Cohocton come this November.
By the way Wayne, want to explain why you were a guest of local law enforcement the other day? Surely you weren’t in training for your own version of terrorist acts ???
James Hall
(POST your response on the Reform Cohocton FORUM)
Hartsville approves wind law - Opponents walk out when Cohocton councilman compares them with those opposing civil rights
Hartsville approves wind law
Opponents walk out when Cohocton councilman compares them with those opposing civil rights
By ROB MONTANA
HARTSVILLE — Most of Thursday's public hearing on Hartsville's wind energy law was calm. Until comments from a Cohocton official sent four people out the door.
That didn't stop the Hartsville town board from accepting the law, as well as issuing a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review process. Town Attorney David Pullen was quick to point out the negative declaration was simply for the law, not for wind projects.
Just before the end of the public hearing — which lasted around ; an hour and a half, and drew around 25 people — Cohocton Councilman Wayne Hunt addressed those in attendance. He called out the "NIMB Ys," which stands for'. "Not In My Back Yard," criticizing their tactics in opposing wind farms. Hunt compared them to people who fought the civil rights movement in the 1960s and 1970s, and said they are "always with us."
"They were convinced our society could not survive if we sent black children to school with our white ones and property values would go into the toilet if we let blacks move into our neighborhoods," he said. "They were here in the '80s when New York state put community homes in our towns for the mentally handicapped who were then housed in development centers. Those institutions were converted to state prisons.
"NIMBYs were convinced that community homes would be mismanaged, their presence in our neighborhoods would drive real estate values into the Dumpster and the prisons would bring lawlessness and crime to our rural areas," Hunt added. "The NIMBYs are here tonight, driven by the same emotion that drives all NIMBYs: F-E-A-R."
He said what separates the opponents of the past and the ones that currently exist is that they have been successful in driving local officials out of office. "In the past, they did not employ tactics that drove elected officials out of their offices," Hunt said. "Doing this smacks of hometown terrorism. If you doubt me, look at your own town board.
"I did not know your now-absent town supervisor, but I was briefly acquainted with George Prior," he added. "He is a gentleman; thoughtful, considerate and dedicated to the prospect of wind-powered electricity. I can tell you, it was a dark day when he was driven from your board."
Four people who oppose having a wind farm in the town — including the most vocal one, Steve Dombert — got up and left during Hunt's speech, while former Deputy Supervisor George Prior nodded in agreement with what Hunt was saying. His comments got a round of applause from those who were left when
he finished.
"I want to note that Mr. Hunt called us and asked to speak tonight," said Deputy Supervisor Gene Garrison, clarifying what brought Hunt to the meeting. "We did not contact him."
When contacted this morning, Dombert said he left the meeting because Hunt "is a radical."
"If you don't share his views he calls you a 'home grown terrorist,'" Dombert said in an e-mail. "Give me a break. He should confine himself to causing trouble in his own hometown."
As for the wind law, he said it should have been done much sooner.
"It should have been the very first action in November of '05 when we were repeatedly told 'the board can do nothing,"' Dombert said. "Better late than never." When asked what his next course of action would be, he responded "Who knows?"
At the start of the hearing, Pullen addressed the crowd, saying the wind law was necessary for the town to be able to exert any control over a potential wind farm.
"This is not a local law to allow or not allow windmills in the Town of Hartsville," he said. "Whether you like windmills or hate windmills, this law — or another one like it — is, in my opinion, essential."
Pullen also said past allegations the wind law was developed with the help of Airtricity were false, and that he hadn't spoken to anyone from Airtricity until Thursday morning when a company representative contacted him to talk about the law. He said Hartsville's law came from a model law, with some additions made to it.
"I saw this law and set it aside for use with towns I work with," he said. "If anything, we have made more stringent some of the standards."
Richard Stephens asked some questions about wording in the law, particularly with how it dealt with small wind turbines, which he is considering for his Call Hill property. Resident Joyce DeWall, wife of highway superintendent Tom DeWall and mother of former supervisor Amy Emerson, asked why the setbacks had been increased from 1,000 feet to 1,200 feet.
Pullen explained the town determined that after hearing the Steuben County Industrial Development Agency was planning to adopt that as a standard. He said that anyone wishing to do a wind project in town would have to meet the town's standards and the IDA's standards.
"Our law is mirroring the county guidelines," added Councilman Jim Perry.
Dombert asked about the town board's ability to grant waivers, and wanted to know if the town could force residents to grant easements.
"I'm not aware of any authority for the town to compel an easement for a private company," Pullen responded.
He was then asked if eminent domain could come into play.
"They can do it for a town purpose, but I don't see any town purpose," Pullen said. "At this point the wind energy company would have to get easements, and they do not have eminent domain powers.
"I have never heard any hint from the town board they would want to use eminent domain power," he added, "and most town boards are almost diametrically opposed to eminent domain."
Opponents walk out when Cohocton councilman compares them with those opposing civil rights
By ROB MONTANA
HARTSVILLE — Most of Thursday's public hearing on Hartsville's wind energy law was calm. Until comments from a Cohocton official sent four people out the door.
That didn't stop the Hartsville town board from accepting the law, as well as issuing a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review process. Town Attorney David Pullen was quick to point out the negative declaration was simply for the law, not for wind projects.
Just before the end of the public hearing — which lasted around ; an hour and a half, and drew around 25 people — Cohocton Councilman Wayne Hunt addressed those in attendance. He called out the "NIMB Ys," which stands for'. "Not In My Back Yard," criticizing their tactics in opposing wind farms. Hunt compared them to people who fought the civil rights movement in the 1960s and 1970s, and said they are "always with us."
"They were convinced our society could not survive if we sent black children to school with our white ones and property values would go into the toilet if we let blacks move into our neighborhoods," he said. "They were here in the '80s when New York state put community homes in our towns for the mentally handicapped who were then housed in development centers. Those institutions were converted to state prisons.
"NIMBYs were convinced that community homes would be mismanaged, their presence in our neighborhoods would drive real estate values into the Dumpster and the prisons would bring lawlessness and crime to our rural areas," Hunt added. "The NIMBYs are here tonight, driven by the same emotion that drives all NIMBYs: F-E-A-R."
He said what separates the opponents of the past and the ones that currently exist is that they have been successful in driving local officials out of office. "In the past, they did not employ tactics that drove elected officials out of their offices," Hunt said. "Doing this smacks of hometown terrorism. If you doubt me, look at your own town board.
"I did not know your now-absent town supervisor, but I was briefly acquainted with George Prior," he added. "He is a gentleman; thoughtful, considerate and dedicated to the prospect of wind-powered electricity. I can tell you, it was a dark day when he was driven from your board."
Four people who oppose having a wind farm in the town — including the most vocal one, Steve Dombert — got up and left during Hunt's speech, while former Deputy Supervisor George Prior nodded in agreement with what Hunt was saying. His comments got a round of applause from those who were left when
he finished.
"I want to note that Mr. Hunt called us and asked to speak tonight," said Deputy Supervisor Gene Garrison, clarifying what brought Hunt to the meeting. "We did not contact him."
When contacted this morning, Dombert said he left the meeting because Hunt "is a radical."
"If you don't share his views he calls you a 'home grown terrorist,'" Dombert said in an e-mail. "Give me a break. He should confine himself to causing trouble in his own hometown."
As for the wind law, he said it should have been done much sooner.
"It should have been the very first action in November of '05 when we were repeatedly told 'the board can do nothing,"' Dombert said. "Better late than never." When asked what his next course of action would be, he responded "Who knows?"
At the start of the hearing, Pullen addressed the crowd, saying the wind law was necessary for the town to be able to exert any control over a potential wind farm.
"This is not a local law to allow or not allow windmills in the Town of Hartsville," he said. "Whether you like windmills or hate windmills, this law — or another one like it — is, in my opinion, essential."
Pullen also said past allegations the wind law was developed with the help of Airtricity were false, and that he hadn't spoken to anyone from Airtricity until Thursday morning when a company representative contacted him to talk about the law. He said Hartsville's law came from a model law, with some additions made to it.
"I saw this law and set it aside for use with towns I work with," he said. "If anything, we have made more stringent some of the standards."
Richard Stephens asked some questions about wording in the law, particularly with how it dealt with small wind turbines, which he is considering for his Call Hill property. Resident Joyce DeWall, wife of highway superintendent Tom DeWall and mother of former supervisor Amy Emerson, asked why the setbacks had been increased from 1,000 feet to 1,200 feet.
Pullen explained the town determined that after hearing the Steuben County Industrial Development Agency was planning to adopt that as a standard. He said that anyone wishing to do a wind project in town would have to meet the town's standards and the IDA's standards.
"Our law is mirroring the county guidelines," added Councilman Jim Perry.
Dombert asked about the town board's ability to grant waivers, and wanted to know if the town could force residents to grant easements.
"I'm not aware of any authority for the town to compel an easement for a private company," Pullen responded.
He was then asked if eminent domain could come into play.
"They can do it for a town purpose, but I don't see any town purpose," Pullen said. "At this point the wind energy company would have to get easements, and they do not have eminent domain powers.
"I have never heard any hint from the town board they would want to use eminent domain power," he added, "and most town boards are almost diametrically opposed to eminent domain."
UPC Letter to Property Owner - Review of Site Plans Schedule 1 Wind Trubines - Pine Hill
TOWN OF COHOCTON PLANNING BOARD
Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC [OR Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC] Wind Turbine Site Plan Applications
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that the Town of Cohocton Planning Board will hold a special meeting on March 26, 2007 at the Town of Cohocton Court Facility, 19 Main Street, Atlanta, NY 14808, at 7:00 p.m. The purpose of the meeting will be to review site plans prepared by Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC [OR Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC], relating to "Industrial Windmills" and "Industrial Windmill Facilities" proposed on the properties listed by address and tax map number on Schedule 1, annexed hereto.
You are receiving this notice as an adjacent landowner to a proposed location of project related improvements and will be given an opportunity to comment at the March 26, 2007 Planning Board meeting. You may inspect a copy of the site plans to be reviewed on March 26, 2007, at Town Hall, 15 South Main Street, Cohocton, New York 14826.
___________________________________________________________
If you received one of these letters or if you own property next to or near the proposed Pine Hill - Lent Hill UPC Industrial Wind Turbines, call Cohocton Wind Watch at: (585) 534-5581.
This review meeting is unlawful at this time. It is important that you attend this March 26, 2007 Cohocton Planning Board special meeting and submit your opposition to these site plans.
Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC [OR Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC] Wind Turbine Site Plan Applications
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that the Town of Cohocton Planning Board will hold a special meeting on March 26, 2007 at the Town of Cohocton Court Facility, 19 Main Street, Atlanta, NY 14808, at 7:00 p.m. The purpose of the meeting will be to review site plans prepared by Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC [OR Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC], relating to "Industrial Windmills" and "Industrial Windmill Facilities" proposed on the properties listed by address and tax map number on Schedule 1, annexed hereto.
You are receiving this notice as an adjacent landowner to a proposed location of project related improvements and will be given an opportunity to comment at the March 26, 2007 Planning Board meeting. You may inspect a copy of the site plans to be reviewed on March 26, 2007, at Town Hall, 15 South Main Street, Cohocton, New York 14826.
___________________________________________________________
If you received one of these letters or if you own property next to or near the proposed Pine Hill - Lent Hill UPC Industrial Wind Turbines, call Cohocton Wind Watch at: (585) 534-5581.
This review meeting is unlawful at this time. It is important that you attend this March 26, 2007 Cohocton Planning Board special meeting and submit your opposition to these site plans.
List of the UPC Site Towers for review on March 26, 2007
This is the List of the UPC Site Towers that will be the location for review by the Cohocton Planning Board at a special meeting on Monday, March 26, 2006
Below are the phone numbers and Tax Map # of the property owners with a UPC lease
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Funk Charles R. /McCormick Cindy (585) 534-9021
Graham Judith (585)534-5206
Kastberg Jan (585) 865-4092
Miller Gregg C. /White Miller Cheryl (585)624-3891
Moore Gerald /Moore Dorothy (585) 384-5944
Nelson John S. /Nelson Patricia F. (315) 232-3450
Schwingel Douglas Schwingel Susan (585) 534-5194
Schwingel Douglas /Schwingel Susan (585) 534-5194
Wolcott Roger /Wolcott Linda (585) 534-5191
Below are the phone numbers and Tax Map # of the property owners with a UPC lease
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Dyckman (585)534-5434
Funk Charles R. /McCormick Cindy (585) 534-9021
Graham Judith (585)534-5206
Kastberg Jan (585) 865-4092
Miller Gregg C. /White Miller Cheryl (585)624-3891
Moore Gerald /Moore Dorothy (585) 384-5944
Nelson John S. /Nelson Patricia F. (315) 232-3450
Schwingel Douglas Schwingel Susan (585) 534-5194
Schwingel Douglas /Schwingel Susan (585) 534-5194
Wolcott Roger /Wolcott Linda (585) 534-5191
Friday, March 16, 2007
Ecogen attorney Robert Burgdorf - Town of Italy Public Hearing
Ecogen attorney Robert W. Burgdorf at the 3/12/07 Town of Italy Public Hearing.
(Click to view video clip)
(Click to view video clip)
James Hall letter to NYS Senator Alesi - March 16, 2007
March 16, 2007
Honorable NYS Senator James Alesi
220 Packett’s Landing
Fairport, NY 14450
(585) 223-1800
RE: Statewide 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development
Senator Alesi,
Yesterday you announced on WHAM radio your call for a statewide 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development. Cohocton Wind Watch represents a broad bi-partisan coalition of residents and property owners from the Finger Lakes region. Many of our supporters have residency in your 55th Senate District, while also owning real property in area townships that have been targeted by foreign LLC’s for industrial wind turbines.
CWW commends your courageous stand on the largest political scandal since Enron. It comes as no surprise that the wind industry has several ex Enron executives behind the veil of corporate secrecy. Up to this point our elected officials have failed to protect significant public safety concerns coming out of ill-conceived and disastrous wind projects.
Citizen groups and voters will come to your support as your initiative develops traction in the media and in the corridors of Albany. It has not yet been substantiated that Western New York has the consistency or wind velocity to warrant the wholesale rezoning of agricultural, residential and recreational land use for a government subsidized policy that only enriches shady developers.
The culture of collusion and corruption has become the norm all over NYS. The same sordid drill takes place in every township where our CWW members have visited and interacted with area residents. Our appeals for a full scale statewide investigation into a pattern of bribery, lies and dishonesty, has fallen upon deaf ears. District attorneys, attorney generals and politicians on all levels refuse to do their public duty. Laws are being broken and innocent families are being forced off their own property.
It has not been proven that any usable electricity can be generated during summer when “Downstate” usage rises. The electric grid cannot safely accommodate the intermittent surges and spikes to the infrastructure. Winter wind generation has no market for excess capacity, but the wind developers have a sweetheart deal to force the public to pay for wind turbine generation even when the current will not be used.
Inadequate setbacks from public roads and unconscionable siting next to residential properties are glaring shortcomings in every developer written local windmill law that are being foisted upon the residents.
All these rational and sensible reasons demand a comprehensive and coordinated assessment by all federal, state and county level regulatory agencies that have an asserted obligation to follow existing environmental laws and SEQR review. If there is a place for industrial wind turbine generation, a C-BED community based model that forms a true economic partnership with the local communities is the proper approach.
CWW supports intelligent alternative energy solutions that are based upon efficient technology and sound economics. Faceless anonymous developers of these industrial wind projects have invaded rural hamlets and ignore both of these balanced conditions. Responsible public policy must protect the property rights of all citizens and not favor subsidized corporate welfare schemes. Agriculture landowners are not farming another crop when they sign leases to erect 500 feet industrial machines that inflict severe health hazard upon their neighbors.
Having served as a legislative aide to a former Senator from your district in the early 1970’s I am well aware of the political pressures that are exerted upon elected representatives. Albany can be a very hostile atmosphere towards bold and moral leadership. CWW requests the opportunity to schedule a meeting with yourself and staff to facilitate an organized citizen network that will vocally support your call for an 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development in NYS.
Our current and future legal actions seek recourse and relief. But it is not our goal to make public policy in the courts, but to focus on the legislative and regulatory process to formulate prudent and reasonable community safeguards. CWW is engaged with several concerned citizen groups across the state. We are dedicated and diligently work towards enacting legitimate government oversight and land use zoning enforcement. A judicious interactive dialogue would be useful in order to build a statewide consensus on alternative energy generation.
Visit the Cohocton Wind Watch site – http://cohoctonwindwatch.org/
Please let us assist your moratorium efforts to help gain widespread support. Greatly appreciate your courageous and honorable leadership.
Cordially,
James Hall
Honorable NYS Senator James Alesi
220 Packett’s Landing
Fairport, NY 14450
(585) 223-1800
RE: Statewide 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development
Senator Alesi,
Yesterday you announced on WHAM radio your call for a statewide 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development. Cohocton Wind Watch represents a broad bi-partisan coalition of residents and property owners from the Finger Lakes region. Many of our supporters have residency in your 55th Senate District, while also owning real property in area townships that have been targeted by foreign LLC’s for industrial wind turbines.
CWW commends your courageous stand on the largest political scandal since Enron. It comes as no surprise that the wind industry has several ex Enron executives behind the veil of corporate secrecy. Up to this point our elected officials have failed to protect significant public safety concerns coming out of ill-conceived and disastrous wind projects.
Citizen groups and voters will come to your support as your initiative develops traction in the media and in the corridors of Albany. It has not yet been substantiated that Western New York has the consistency or wind velocity to warrant the wholesale rezoning of agricultural, residential and recreational land use for a government subsidized policy that only enriches shady developers.
The culture of collusion and corruption has become the norm all over NYS. The same sordid drill takes place in every township where our CWW members have visited and interacted with area residents. Our appeals for a full scale statewide investigation into a pattern of bribery, lies and dishonesty, has fallen upon deaf ears. District attorneys, attorney generals and politicians on all levels refuse to do their public duty. Laws are being broken and innocent families are being forced off their own property.
It has not been proven that any usable electricity can be generated during summer when “Downstate” usage rises. The electric grid cannot safely accommodate the intermittent surges and spikes to the infrastructure. Winter wind generation has no market for excess capacity, but the wind developers have a sweetheart deal to force the public to pay for wind turbine generation even when the current will not be used.
Inadequate setbacks from public roads and unconscionable siting next to residential properties are glaring shortcomings in every developer written local windmill law that are being foisted upon the residents.
All these rational and sensible reasons demand a comprehensive and coordinated assessment by all federal, state and county level regulatory agencies that have an asserted obligation to follow existing environmental laws and SEQR review. If there is a place for industrial wind turbine generation, a C-BED community based model that forms a true economic partnership with the local communities is the proper approach.
CWW supports intelligent alternative energy solutions that are based upon efficient technology and sound economics. Faceless anonymous developers of these industrial wind projects have invaded rural hamlets and ignore both of these balanced conditions. Responsible public policy must protect the property rights of all citizens and not favor subsidized corporate welfare schemes. Agriculture landowners are not farming another crop when they sign leases to erect 500 feet industrial machines that inflict severe health hazard upon their neighbors.
Having served as a legislative aide to a former Senator from your district in the early 1970’s I am well aware of the political pressures that are exerted upon elected representatives. Albany can be a very hostile atmosphere towards bold and moral leadership. CWW requests the opportunity to schedule a meeting with yourself and staff to facilitate an organized citizen network that will vocally support your call for an 18 month moratorium on industrial wind turbine development in NYS.
Our current and future legal actions seek recourse and relief. But it is not our goal to make public policy in the courts, but to focus on the legislative and regulatory process to formulate prudent and reasonable community safeguards. CWW is engaged with several concerned citizen groups across the state. We are dedicated and diligently work towards enacting legitimate government oversight and land use zoning enforcement. A judicious interactive dialogue would be useful in order to build a statewide consensus on alternative energy generation.
Visit the Cohocton Wind Watch site – http://cohoctonwindwatch.org/
Please let us assist your moratorium efforts to help gain widespread support. Greatly appreciate your courageous and honorable leadership.
Cordially,
James Hall
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Wind laws pass in Howard: Code of Ethics, planning board alternates also OK'd, but not without vocal opposition
HOWARD - Complaints were the rule - not the exception - at a trio of public hearings in Howard Wednesday night.
The town board hosted three public hearings on Local Laws 1-3 - code of ethics, and amendments to the town's planning board and wind energy laws - and nearly 100 people showed up to voice their opinions.
After dealing with public comments for around two hours, the board approved all three local laws unanimously.
The wind law amendments changed the way permits will be approved, taking the power from the town board and giving it to the planning board, which town Attorney Tom Reed said was done as a result of a lawsuit against the town that alleged conflict of interest by board members that had ties to a proposed wind farm in Howard.
Other amendments to the wind law, which was approved February 2006, also added agricultural districts, which had been omitted from the previous law, and allowed for a licensing fee to be charged for permits.
(Click to read entire article)
The town board hosted three public hearings on Local Laws 1-3 - code of ethics, and amendments to the town's planning board and wind energy laws - and nearly 100 people showed up to voice their opinions.
After dealing with public comments for around two hours, the board approved all three local laws unanimously.
The wind law amendments changed the way permits will be approved, taking the power from the town board and giving it to the planning board, which town Attorney Tom Reed said was done as a result of a lawsuit against the town that alleged conflict of interest by board members that had ties to a proposed wind farm in Howard.
Other amendments to the wind law, which was approved February 2006, also added agricultural districts, which had been omitted from the previous law, and allowed for a licensing fee to be charged for permits.
(Click to read entire article)
United States - Wind Resource Map
The map below illustrates the average wind resources available across the country. Of course, the actual wind resource on your site will vary depending on such factors as typography and structure interference.
Firm seeks new Maine wind farm
BANGOR, Maine – The company that built New England's largest wind farm in Mars Hill, which went on line earlier this year, is seeking state approval to go ahead with an even larger project in a remote area of eastern Maine.
Evergreen Wind Power LLC has filed an application with the Land Use Regulation Commission to build 38 towers on Stetson Mountain in northern Washington County, between Danforth and Springfield. The $100 million project would generate about 57 megawatts for the New England power grid.
The Stetson Mountain project would be larger than one on Mars Hill Mountain in northern Maine, which has 28 turbines and a capacity for 42 megawatts of power, enough to provide the power needs for 45,000 average Maine homes.
Maine's land-use board, which regulates development in the state's unorganized territory, moved in January to reject a proposed 30-turbine wind farm on Redington and Black Nubble mountains in western Maine. Commissioners cited its proximity to the Appalachian Trail and noted that the development area is a habitat for several endangered species.
A separate proposal calls for 44 turbines in Kibby Township, near the Canadian border in western Maine. The application by Alberta-based TransCanada is pending before LURC.
Evergreen Wind Power LLC of Bangor, a subsidiary of UPC Wind Management of Newton, Mass., says in its application before LURC that the Stetson project is not in a high-value scenic area. The application says the turbines would be visible on the horizon from Baskahegan Lake near Brookton, about nine miles away, and from a small portion of a scenic byway along U.S. Route 1.
The company estimates that the turbines will help to reduce air pollution by 100,000 tons per year. LURC's staff will evaluate Evergreen's application for completeness before beginning a formal review.
Gov. John Baldacci has identified wind power as an important component of efforts to reduce the state's and region's dependence on power plants that emit greenhouse gases and contribute to global warming.
Evergreen Wind Power LLC has filed an application with the Land Use Regulation Commission to build 38 towers on Stetson Mountain in northern Washington County, between Danforth and Springfield. The $100 million project would generate about 57 megawatts for the New England power grid.
The Stetson Mountain project would be larger than one on Mars Hill Mountain in northern Maine, which has 28 turbines and a capacity for 42 megawatts of power, enough to provide the power needs for 45,000 average Maine homes.
Maine's land-use board, which regulates development in the state's unorganized territory, moved in January to reject a proposed 30-turbine wind farm on Redington and Black Nubble mountains in western Maine. Commissioners cited its proximity to the Appalachian Trail and noted that the development area is a habitat for several endangered species.
A separate proposal calls for 44 turbines in Kibby Township, near the Canadian border in western Maine. The application by Alberta-based TransCanada is pending before LURC.
Evergreen Wind Power LLC of Bangor, a subsidiary of UPC Wind Management of Newton, Mass., says in its application before LURC that the Stetson project is not in a high-value scenic area. The application says the turbines would be visible on the horizon from Baskahegan Lake near Brookton, about nine miles away, and from a small portion of a scenic byway along U.S. Route 1.
The company estimates that the turbines will help to reduce air pollution by 100,000 tons per year. LURC's staff will evaluate Evergreen's application for completeness before beginning a formal review.
Gov. John Baldacci has identified wind power as an important component of efforts to reduce the state's and region's dependence on power plants that emit greenhouse gases and contribute to global warming.
Arkwright Town Board passes wind energy law
ARKWRIGHT — The ayes carried the vote Tuesday night, passing the local law governing wind energy development in the Town of Arkwright.
But, it wasn’t unanimous.
Councilmen Jeff Dietrich and Roger Prince voted no while Councilmen Larry Ball and Dan Dietzen were joined by Supervisor Fred Norton in voting yes.
Prior to the vote, Dietrich introduced an amendment that called for extending the setbacks, which was in keeping with a petition presented to the board signed by 84 town residents.
Dietrich said the proposed changes followed guidelines established by wind energy trade associate Windustry and by New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA).
(Click to read the entire article)
But, it wasn’t unanimous.
Councilmen Jeff Dietrich and Roger Prince voted no while Councilmen Larry Ball and Dan Dietzen were joined by Supervisor Fred Norton in voting yes.
Prior to the vote, Dietrich introduced an amendment that called for extending the setbacks, which was in keeping with a petition presented to the board signed by 84 town residents.
Dietrich said the proposed changes followed guidelines established by wind energy trade associate Windustry and by New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA).
(Click to read the entire article)
Wind turbines could force family to leave Fairfield home by Bryon Ackerman
FAIRFIELD — If wind turbines are built in this northeastern Herkimer County town, one family may be forced to move.
Lisa Sementilli's 11-year-old daughter Alisha has central auditory processing disorder, which means Alisha hears fine but can't concentrate when she is around background noise.
Doctors have suggested that Alisha live at least one-and-a-half miles from any wind turbine, but Hard Scrabble Wind Farm towers planned in Fairfield would be less than half a mile away, Lisa Sementilli said.
"If they come, I have to move," she said. "I'm not going to put my daughter in any harm."
(Click to read entire article)
Lisa Sementilli's 11-year-old daughter Alisha has central auditory processing disorder, which means Alisha hears fine but can't concentrate when she is around background noise.
Doctors have suggested that Alisha live at least one-and-a-half miles from any wind turbine, but Hard Scrabble Wind Farm towers planned in Fairfield would be less than half a mile away, Lisa Sementilli said.
"If they come, I have to move," she said. "I'm not going to put my daughter in any harm."
(Click to read entire article)
Freedom awaits next step on wind farm effort by CRAIG CROSBY
FREEDOM -- Competitive Energy Services has not given up hope for erecting wind turbines on Beaver Ridge, but neither is the company committed to fighting another round.
Competitive Energy is mulling its options after the board of appeals last week revoked the company's permit to erect three electricity- generating wind turbines on the ridge. The Portland-based company is considering all of its options, from appealing to Waldo County Superior Court to abandoning the project altogether, said project manager Andy Price.
"Obviously we're disappointed that the project the town has clearly stated it would like to be built in their town was not allowed to go forward," Price said. "The appeals board overturned a very carefully considered decision by the planning board."
(Click to read entire article)
Competitive Energy is mulling its options after the board of appeals last week revoked the company's permit to erect three electricity- generating wind turbines on the ridge. The Portland-based company is considering all of its options, from appealing to Waldo County Superior Court to abandoning the project altogether, said project manager Andy Price.
"Obviously we're disappointed that the project the town has clearly stated it would like to be built in their town was not allowed to go forward," Price said. "The appeals board overturned a very carefully considered decision by the planning board."
(Click to read entire article)
Wind farm would be N.E.'s largest
AUGUSTA - The company behind New England's largest wind farm is seeking regulatory approval for an even bigger, $100 million wind-energy project in a remote corner of northern Washington County.
Evergreen Wind Power LLC hopes to build 38 wind turbines on Stetson Mountain, a rural ridgeline that runs along Route 169 between the communities of Danforth and Springfield. The company said the turbines could be operating by the beginning of next year.
Each of the turbines would measure nearly 400 feet from base to blade tip. Collectively, they would generate approximately 57 megawatts of electricity for the New England power grid, according to an application filed with the Land Use Regulation Commission. The LURC staff is reviewing the application for completeness.
As proposed, the project is even larger than the company's Mars Hill Wind Farm, which came on line earlier this year. That would make the Stetson Mountain project the largest wind farm in New England, although another company is seeking LURC approval for a 44-turbine farm in northern Franklin County near the Canadian border.
(Click to read entire article)
Evergreen Wind Power LLC hopes to build 38 wind turbines on Stetson Mountain, a rural ridgeline that runs along Route 169 between the communities of Danforth and Springfield. The company said the turbines could be operating by the beginning of next year.
Each of the turbines would measure nearly 400 feet from base to blade tip. Collectively, they would generate approximately 57 megawatts of electricity for the New England power grid, according to an application filed with the Land Use Regulation Commission. The LURC staff is reviewing the application for completeness.
As proposed, the project is even larger than the company's Mars Hill Wind Farm, which came on line earlier this year. That would make the Stetson Mountain project the largest wind farm in New England, although another company is seeking LURC approval for a 44-turbine farm in northern Franklin County near the Canadian border.
(Click to read entire article)
"The Hired Hand Who Was Gone With The Wind" - Wind is one 'employee' whose resume doesn't stand up to examination
Editor,
I am writing in response to a letter from Roger Thurber in the February 19th edition of the Daily News. Among his praises for electric power, he refers to electricity as "the cheapest hired hand" that he could hire on the farm. Let's examine the wind power he favors so much in just those terms - as an employee, or "hired hand", of the electrical grid.
Wind power is intermittent, so this hired hand would show up, and leave, at any given time. This would happen so often that you really couldn't rely on this hired hand to get the job done. Consequently, you would have to keep other hands working at the same time (reliable, reserve power plants). In fact, if you tried to look up references on this hired hand, you wouldn't be able to find any proof that he had done any work at all, despite the great estimates he had given you on the amount of work he 'might' do.
Now, since this hired hand sees himself as something really special, he expects that he will be given special treatment on taxes, and anywhere he lives he feels he deserves a special agreement (PILOT - Payment In Lieu Of Taxes). Perhaps this hired hand feels he deserves this special treatment because he is over 100 years old. Over the course of those 100+ years, the utilities would tell him that we need power that works all the time, not one that comes and goes with no warning!
However, this hired hand has now found friends in Albany. With his pockets full of our tax dollars, he is now a very popular guy. In Albany, you don't need to show how much work you did elsewhere, just how much you might do. Of course, his new friends really like the fact that he won't be living in Albany, the Adirondacks, Catskills, or any area downstate for that matter! Some hired hand! Only a politician would accept his resume.
Mr. Thurber also stated that he was disappointed that opponents of wind energy had offered no other non-polluting alternatives, and challenged those that are skeptical of wind promises to live without electricity. Luckily, with our fine utility crews we do not suffer that fate often. Utilities are not politicians - they don't accept hired hands that don't work all the time. Whether it is a crew restoring power, or a power plant that is producing power, you need to be dependable and work non-stop! Perhaps an equal challenge would be to run a farm on just wind power. I can hear it now, "Quiet down girls! We will run the milking machines when the wind comes up ... maybe tomorrow!"
As for suggestions on other non-polluting sources of electricity, you are assuming that wind energy contributes to savings on the grid for us to compare to. We know this hired hand is getting a huge paycheck. Can you show us what work he did to deserve that paycheck? It would take very little to outperform this intermittent resource. There are many more dependable options, such as hydro (which due to outdated laws is still being sold to municipal power companies for 2 cents per kilowatt hour while the grid is being forced to buy wind at 9 cents per kilowatt hour - how do you figure this will make for "the cheapest hired hand" available?), geothermal, and most appropriate for our rural areas, methane digesters, which are already being used very successfully in Wyoming County. These are all dispatchable forms of power - hired hands that can be called on when needed.
What about conservation? If our government took all the subsidy money (our tax dollars) that is being funneled into the pockets of the likes of Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and GE to fund this bogus hired hand's paycheck, and instead, funneled that money back to every tax-paying citizen to subsidize the installation of proper insulation and energy-efficient appliances in EVERY person's home, CO2 emissions would actually be enormously reduced! EVERY TAXPAYER, AND THE ENVIRONMENT, WOULD TRULY BENEFIT!
To point the finger of responsibility in the right direction, a more appropriate question to ask is: Why have the multi-billion dollar corporations seeking to exploit our areas not provided a complete listing of alternatives to our Town Boards in their DEIS's as they are supposed to do? That's right - these corporations are required to provide a complete listing of alternatives in their Draft Environmental Impact Statements, but they neglect to fulfill this obligation hoping that they will not be called on it. The answer here my friend, is that these multi-billion dollar corporations do not want to fulfill this requirement. Why would they want to educate anyone about any other possible alternatives when their goal is their bottom line, not what's actually best for our rural/residential areas and the environment?!
Lastly, Mr. Thurber warned us that wind turbines would be declared a utility. The State separates the laws for transmission lines and power plants. Of course, the wind proponents use the criterion for transmission facilities as their basis for utility treatment. This is both mistaken and a bit ironic - they are trying to utilize the portion of the law that is for non-productive parts of the utility grid. Hmmm ... wait a minute ... NON-PRODUCTIVE ... perhaps this is the right portion of the law after all!
Part of this law is that you have to show how you are filling a need of the community. Sure hope they accept estimates, or all the "hired hand's" claims - or is this when we finally get some real numbers?!? We are further warned in Mr. Thurber's letter that if wind farms are granted "utility status", this would mean that your land could be used without your permission. Ummm ... isn't that what is already happening when they are determining setbacks from non-participating neighbors' residences?!? Actually, the utility treatment as he described simply means that we would ALL now be non-participants! How does it feel?
In short, the people who are skeptical of this subsidy-driven, corporate rush to sell this old technology as "that which will save us all", simply want proof that it actually works - like a real hired hand would have to if he expected to keep his job! Furthermore, we want our property lines respected! And finally, we want our State to use OUR tax dollars as intended - for REAL services - not as a bribe to accept questionable technology in our towns, and not to accept some "hired hand's" boasts of what he 'might' be able to do just because he's the latest fad with lots of money - OUR money - in his pockets! Show us this "hired hand's" work record - Show us proof!
Sincerely,
Mary Kay Barton, Perry
I am writing in response to a letter from Roger Thurber in the February 19th edition of the Daily News. Among his praises for electric power, he refers to electricity as "the cheapest hired hand" that he could hire on the farm. Let's examine the wind power he favors so much in just those terms - as an employee, or "hired hand", of the electrical grid.
Wind power is intermittent, so this hired hand would show up, and leave, at any given time. This would happen so often that you really couldn't rely on this hired hand to get the job done. Consequently, you would have to keep other hands working at the same time (reliable, reserve power plants). In fact, if you tried to look up references on this hired hand, you wouldn't be able to find any proof that he had done any work at all, despite the great estimates he had given you on the amount of work he 'might' do.
Now, since this hired hand sees himself as something really special, he expects that he will be given special treatment on taxes, and anywhere he lives he feels he deserves a special agreement (PILOT - Payment In Lieu Of Taxes). Perhaps this hired hand feels he deserves this special treatment because he is over 100 years old. Over the course of those 100+ years, the utilities would tell him that we need power that works all the time, not one that comes and goes with no warning!
However, this hired hand has now found friends in Albany. With his pockets full of our tax dollars, he is now a very popular guy. In Albany, you don't need to show how much work you did elsewhere, just how much you might do. Of course, his new friends really like the fact that he won't be living in Albany, the Adirondacks, Catskills, or any area downstate for that matter! Some hired hand! Only a politician would accept his resume.
Mr. Thurber also stated that he was disappointed that opponents of wind energy had offered no other non-polluting alternatives, and challenged those that are skeptical of wind promises to live without electricity. Luckily, with our fine utility crews we do not suffer that fate often. Utilities are not politicians - they don't accept hired hands that don't work all the time. Whether it is a crew restoring power, or a power plant that is producing power, you need to be dependable and work non-stop! Perhaps an equal challenge would be to run a farm on just wind power. I can hear it now, "Quiet down girls! We will run the milking machines when the wind comes up ... maybe tomorrow!"
As for suggestions on other non-polluting sources of electricity, you are assuming that wind energy contributes to savings on the grid for us to compare to. We know this hired hand is getting a huge paycheck. Can you show us what work he did to deserve that paycheck? It would take very little to outperform this intermittent resource. There are many more dependable options, such as hydro (which due to outdated laws is still being sold to municipal power companies for 2 cents per kilowatt hour while the grid is being forced to buy wind at 9 cents per kilowatt hour - how do you figure this will make for "the cheapest hired hand" available?), geothermal, and most appropriate for our rural areas, methane digesters, which are already being used very successfully in Wyoming County. These are all dispatchable forms of power - hired hands that can be called on when needed.
What about conservation? If our government took all the subsidy money (our tax dollars) that is being funneled into the pockets of the likes of Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and GE to fund this bogus hired hand's paycheck, and instead, funneled that money back to every tax-paying citizen to subsidize the installation of proper insulation and energy-efficient appliances in EVERY person's home, CO2 emissions would actually be enormously reduced! EVERY TAXPAYER, AND THE ENVIRONMENT, WOULD TRULY BENEFIT!
To point the finger of responsibility in the right direction, a more appropriate question to ask is: Why have the multi-billion dollar corporations seeking to exploit our areas not provided a complete listing of alternatives to our Town Boards in their DEIS's as they are supposed to do? That's right - these corporations are required to provide a complete listing of alternatives in their Draft Environmental Impact Statements, but they neglect to fulfill this obligation hoping that they will not be called on it. The answer here my friend, is that these multi-billion dollar corporations do not want to fulfill this requirement. Why would they want to educate anyone about any other possible alternatives when their goal is their bottom line, not what's actually best for our rural/residential areas and the environment?!
Lastly, Mr. Thurber warned us that wind turbines would be declared a utility. The State separates the laws for transmission lines and power plants. Of course, the wind proponents use the criterion for transmission facilities as their basis for utility treatment. This is both mistaken and a bit ironic - they are trying to utilize the portion of the law that is for non-productive parts of the utility grid. Hmmm ... wait a minute ... NON-PRODUCTIVE ... perhaps this is the right portion of the law after all!
Part of this law is that you have to show how you are filling a need of the community. Sure hope they accept estimates, or all the "hired hand's" claims - or is this when we finally get some real numbers?!? We are further warned in Mr. Thurber's letter that if wind farms are granted "utility status", this would mean that your land could be used without your permission. Ummm ... isn't that what is already happening when they are determining setbacks from non-participating neighbors' residences?!? Actually, the utility treatment as he described simply means that we would ALL now be non-participants! How does it feel?
In short, the people who are skeptical of this subsidy-driven, corporate rush to sell this old technology as "that which will save us all", simply want proof that it actually works - like a real hired hand would have to if he expected to keep his job! Furthermore, we want our property lines respected! And finally, we want our State to use OUR tax dollars as intended - for REAL services - not as a bribe to accept questionable technology in our towns, and not to accept some "hired hand's" boasts of what he 'might' be able to do just because he's the latest fad with lots of money - OUR money - in his pockets! Show us this "hired hand's" work record - Show us proof!
Sincerely,
Mary Kay Barton, Perry
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Hamlin board approves wind farm moratorium
(March 13, 2007) — HAMLIN — By a vote of 3-0, the Town Board on Monday approved a one-year moratorium on wind farm development, giving a nine-member town committee time to research wind farms and make recommendations.
"This moratorium will give our committee time to thoroughly discuss the facts without the fear of a developer coming in tomorrow" asking for a project approval, said Supervisor Denny Roach.
One board member, Paul Rath, abstained. He is a landowner in Hamlin and has been approached by a wind power company. Another board member, David Rose, was out of town.
Developers haven't yet asked the town to approve a wind farm. However, Massachusetts-based Competitive Power Ventures Inc. negotiated some land-lease agreements with property owners and built two 200-foot-tall meteorological towers in the town's northwest quadrant late last year. The towers will collect wind speed and direction information for up to 18 months. That information will tell the company if Hamlin is a good spot for wind power.
Residents living there say they don't want to look at a bunch of 400-foot-tall eyesores, don't want the noise a wind farm would bring to their rural neighborhood and worry about the effect such a farm so close to Lake Ontario could have on migratory birds.
"I see a moratorium as one step in a long line of steps the town will take in regards to wind towers," said Matt McDonald, a Cook Road resident.
More than 100 people attended the hearing and overwhelmingly urged the board to pass the moratorium.
Linda Morey of Moscow Road opposed the moratorium. "An individual has the right to request a property use in any way they see fit," she said. "I don't think it's fair."
The wind tower committee is expected to make its recommendations to the Town Board in December.
"This moratorium will give our committee time to thoroughly discuss the facts without the fear of a developer coming in tomorrow" asking for a project approval, said Supervisor Denny Roach.
One board member, Paul Rath, abstained. He is a landowner in Hamlin and has been approached by a wind power company. Another board member, David Rose, was out of town.
Developers haven't yet asked the town to approve a wind farm. However, Massachusetts-based Competitive Power Ventures Inc. negotiated some land-lease agreements with property owners and built two 200-foot-tall meteorological towers in the town's northwest quadrant late last year. The towers will collect wind speed and direction information for up to 18 months. That information will tell the company if Hamlin is a good spot for wind power.
Residents living there say they don't want to look at a bunch of 400-foot-tall eyesores, don't want the noise a wind farm would bring to their rural neighborhood and worry about the effect such a farm so close to Lake Ontario could have on migratory birds.
"I see a moratorium as one step in a long line of steps the town will take in regards to wind towers," said Matt McDonald, a Cook Road resident.
More than 100 people attended the hearing and overwhelmingly urged the board to pass the moratorium.
Linda Morey of Moscow Road opposed the moratorium. "An individual has the right to request a property use in any way they see fit," she said. "I don't think it's fair."
The wind tower committee is expected to make its recommendations to the Town Board in December.
Wind power rejected by Bovina board by Patricia Breakey
BOVINA CENTER The Bovina Town Board adopted a local law Tuesday banning industrial and residential wind-energy systems, but the decision wasn’t unanimous.
Councilman Randall Inman cast the only dissenting vote in a 3-1 decision after stating that the Alliance for Bovina "distorted the truth and used scare tactics to sway public opinion" about wind energy.
A final public hearing, held before the board convened a special meeting to adopt the proposed local law, brought out a crowd of about 50 people.
Ten people commented on the law, suggesting changes that should be made before the board made a final decision.
Marian Jardine, a longtime Bovina resident and former teacher, said, "I am against passage (of the law) because I would like to see wind turbines. I am concerned when we have a nice, clean way of producing energy. Producing energy by burning wood, like the project at the college in Delhi, is much worse than the noise or whistling."
Ed Rossley said the board had done its job, but suggested that the law should have provisions for special permits for residential wind systems, rather than "saying no completely."
Carver Farrell added "limiting right for residents to generate their own energy is not good for this town."
Neil Bevilacqua said the wording of the law contained "nimbus, fuzzy terms." He added that "descriptions of what might happen in the future should be clearer."
Luke Dougherty said he didn’t agree with banning residential wind systems when "we need alternative solutions to the energy crisis."
Kevin Brown said people should have a right to have a backup energy system to use at their residence. He added that in 10 years, "wind power is going to be a public utility, whether people like it or not."
Larry Karam, Alliance for Bovina spokesman, said he believed the board had come to the right decision but added that the wording of a section allowing small wind-energy conversion systems for farms might allow the installation of multiple wind turbines.
Peter Henner, Alliance for Bovina attorney, lauded the board for consulting with special land-use attorney Rosemary Nichols but then offered to reword the section dealing with farm wind-energy systems.
Each of the Bovina Town Board members read prepared statements outlining their reasoning on the proposed law before the vote.
Councilman Charles McIntosh said he hoped that the town had not "let an opportunity slide away."
He said the benefits of wind power might outweigh the disadvantages, but he was voting for the law because the material presented to the board showed that a large majority of town residents were opposed to industrial turbines and that there was not a clear majority in favor of residential systems.
"Majority rules," McIntosh said. "I hope the divisiveness stops in Bovina and we can continue to live and work together as a community."
Councilman Ken Brown said the board it had been a long and difficult year filled with intimidation and accusations.
"I must place my support with the majority point of view," Brown said.
Karen Brain, wife of the late Councilman Roger Brain, read a statement he prepared before his death Jan. 29.
Brain had written that the insinuations and accusations made during the hearings on the issue of wind power had made him question whether it was worth serving the community in an elected position.
"We did not deserve all we went through during the process," Roger Brain wrote.
Councilman Randall Inman cast the only dissenting vote in a 3-1 decision after stating that the Alliance for Bovina "distorted the truth and used scare tactics to sway public opinion" about wind energy.
A final public hearing, held before the board convened a special meeting to adopt the proposed local law, brought out a crowd of about 50 people.
Ten people commented on the law, suggesting changes that should be made before the board made a final decision.
Marian Jardine, a longtime Bovina resident and former teacher, said, "I am against passage (of the law) because I would like to see wind turbines. I am concerned when we have a nice, clean way of producing energy. Producing energy by burning wood, like the project at the college in Delhi, is much worse than the noise or whistling."
Ed Rossley said the board had done its job, but suggested that the law should have provisions for special permits for residential wind systems, rather than "saying no completely."
Carver Farrell added "limiting right for residents to generate their own energy is not good for this town."
Neil Bevilacqua said the wording of the law contained "nimbus, fuzzy terms." He added that "descriptions of what might happen in the future should be clearer."
Luke Dougherty said he didn’t agree with banning residential wind systems when "we need alternative solutions to the energy crisis."
Kevin Brown said people should have a right to have a backup energy system to use at their residence. He added that in 10 years, "wind power is going to be a public utility, whether people like it or not."
Larry Karam, Alliance for Bovina spokesman, said he believed the board had come to the right decision but added that the wording of a section allowing small wind-energy conversion systems for farms might allow the installation of multiple wind turbines.
Peter Henner, Alliance for Bovina attorney, lauded the board for consulting with special land-use attorney Rosemary Nichols but then offered to reword the section dealing with farm wind-energy systems.
Each of the Bovina Town Board members read prepared statements outlining their reasoning on the proposed law before the vote.
Councilman Charles McIntosh said he hoped that the town had not "let an opportunity slide away."
He said the benefits of wind power might outweigh the disadvantages, but he was voting for the law because the material presented to the board showed that a large majority of town residents were opposed to industrial turbines and that there was not a clear majority in favor of residential systems.
"Majority rules," McIntosh said. "I hope the divisiveness stops in Bovina and we can continue to live and work together as a community."
Councilman Ken Brown said the board it had been a long and difficult year filled with intimidation and accusations.
"I must place my support with the majority point of view," Brown said.
Karen Brain, wife of the late Councilman Roger Brain, read a statement he prepared before his death Jan. 29.
Brain had written that the insinuations and accusations made during the hearings on the issue of wind power had made him question whether it was worth serving the community in an elected position.
"We did not deserve all we went through during the process," Roger Brain wrote.
Hornellsville considers pros, cons of wind farm by RYAN WESTERDAHL
ARKPORT - The Hornellsville town board discussed the benefits and drawbacks of a wind farm at its meeting night.
With the Steuben County towns of Howard and Hartsville set to vote this week on wind laws developed for these communities, Hornellsville is still in the talking phase. Hornellsville still has a moratorium on wind farm development in place.
One opponent of Howard's wind farm - Howard resident Eric Hosmer- was on hand at the meeting. He spoke about the impact of the turbines- usually between 400-450 feet tall - particularly the sound the windmills make.
When spinning, the blades can make a pulsing or squeaking sound, Hosmer said, adding the sound was similar to bass coming from a stereo. He also raised concerns about the impact of electromagnetic fields created by the turbines on children living nearby. Strong fields can cause health problems in developing children, Hosmer said. The turbines also may create a visual effect known as a “flicker,” where light and shadow alternate rapidly.
Residents that allow construction of turbines on their property are paid by wind farm companies, but Hornellville resident Barbara Kull was skeptical of the trade-off.
“What if you're living right under it?” she said. “Does money make up for that?”
Supervisor Ken Isaman said Hornellsville would take people's concerns into account when a wind law is drafted.
“What we've got to do is develop a law that's bulletproof on both sides,” he said.
The board agreed to obtain a written proposal from Buffalo lawyer Dan Spitzer, a specialist in wind energy issues. Spitzer has helped draft wind laws for several townships.
In other business, Steuben County Commissioner of Public Works Vincent Spagnoletti introduced the county's new Highway Engineer, Peter Messmer. Messmer, who graduated from Cornell's Civil Engineering program, has had extensive experience in the field of rural road design.
“[He] is widely known as one of the top rural road design engineers in New York state,” said Spagnoletti in a letter. “We are fortunate to have him with us.”
With the Steuben County towns of Howard and Hartsville set to vote this week on wind laws developed for these communities, Hornellsville is still in the talking phase. Hornellsville still has a moratorium on wind farm development in place.
One opponent of Howard's wind farm - Howard resident Eric Hosmer- was on hand at the meeting. He spoke about the impact of the turbines- usually between 400-450 feet tall - particularly the sound the windmills make.
When spinning, the blades can make a pulsing or squeaking sound, Hosmer said, adding the sound was similar to bass coming from a stereo. He also raised concerns about the impact of electromagnetic fields created by the turbines on children living nearby. Strong fields can cause health problems in developing children, Hosmer said. The turbines also may create a visual effect known as a “flicker,” where light and shadow alternate rapidly.
Residents that allow construction of turbines on their property are paid by wind farm companies, but Hornellville resident Barbara Kull was skeptical of the trade-off.
“What if you're living right under it?” she said. “Does money make up for that?”
Supervisor Ken Isaman said Hornellsville would take people's concerns into account when a wind law is drafted.
“What we've got to do is develop a law that's bulletproof on both sides,” he said.
The board agreed to obtain a written proposal from Buffalo lawyer Dan Spitzer, a specialist in wind energy issues. Spitzer has helped draft wind laws for several townships.
In other business, Steuben County Commissioner of Public Works Vincent Spagnoletti introduced the county's new Highway Engineer, Peter Messmer. Messmer, who graduated from Cornell's Civil Engineering program, has had extensive experience in the field of rural road design.
“[He] is widely known as one of the top rural road design engineers in New York state,” said Spagnoletti in a letter. “We are fortunate to have him with us.”
UPC seeks 40 turbines on Sevenmile by RODGER NICHOLS
With wind-turbine farms in heavy construction in Klickitat and Sherman counties, it was only a matter of time before a large project surfaced in Wasco County.
That was the case Thursday at the Discovery Center, when a small contingent of local people turned out to hear a presentation by UPC Wind, a Newton, Maine-based company.
UPC’s project, Cascade Wind, would place 40 General Electric 1.5 megawatt wind turbines in a seven-mile footprint on (appropriately enough) Sevenmile Hill.
Power generated along the ridge would be brought to a new substation and connected to an existing 115 kilovolt line that runs from The Dalles to Hood River. The total capacity of the project would be 60 megawatts.
“You have a world-class resource in the gorge,” UPC’s Krista Kisch told the audience. She characterized the winds in the proposed Cascade Wind project area as “good to excellent, at 8.5 to 9 meters a second.”
She called the terrain in the project area “complex,” requiring calculations of wind shear so that placement doesn’t cause turbulence for the next tower downwind.
Most of the land in the project area is zoned A-2 Agriculture and F-2 Forest Zone. Kisch said 85 percent of the towers would be located in open fields.
UPC’s American headquarters are in Maine, but the company originally began in Europe 10 years ago, and has been in the U.S. for the past seven years. Kisch said the company currently has 3,600 megawatts planned in 35 projects under development.
(Click to read entire article)
That was the case Thursday at the Discovery Center, when a small contingent of local people turned out to hear a presentation by UPC Wind, a Newton, Maine-based company.
UPC’s project, Cascade Wind, would place 40 General Electric 1.5 megawatt wind turbines in a seven-mile footprint on (appropriately enough) Sevenmile Hill.
Power generated along the ridge would be brought to a new substation and connected to an existing 115 kilovolt line that runs from The Dalles to Hood River. The total capacity of the project would be 60 megawatts.
“You have a world-class resource in the gorge,” UPC’s Krista Kisch told the audience. She characterized the winds in the proposed Cascade Wind project area as “good to excellent, at 8.5 to 9 meters a second.”
She called the terrain in the project area “complex,” requiring calculations of wind shear so that placement doesn’t cause turbulence for the next tower downwind.
Most of the land in the project area is zoned A-2 Agriculture and F-2 Forest Zone. Kisch said 85 percent of the towers would be located in open fields.
UPC’s American headquarters are in Maine, but the company originally began in Europe 10 years ago, and has been in the U.S. for the past seven years. Kisch said the company currently has 3,600 megawatts planned in 35 projects under development.
(Click to read entire article)
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
The Texas Wind Powers A Big Energy Gamble by Jeffrey Ball
Only possible with heavy tax breaks and other public investments and will never be more than 5% of our needs.
(Click to read part of the WSJ article)
"SILVERTON, Texas -- Deep in the heart of Texas, multinational giants are gambling on a new supply of energy. The prize isn't oil. It's wind.
In this pancake-flat country, where the wind blows so relentlessly that the sagebrush and mesquite are permanently bent, Royal Dutch Shell Group, BP PLC and a wind-development company owned by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. are racing to lease vast expanses of ranchland. In a bet on wind power's long-term viability, they're planning to erect what would be some of the biggest wind farms in the world, with thousands of wind turbines costing some $2 million apiece."
"It's "a land rush," says Mark Wilby, a petroleum engineer who once developed natural-gas power plants for Enron Corp., and now develops wind projects for Shell. In Shell's storefront office in the largely abandoned courthouse square of Silverton, the county seat, Mr. Wilby pulls out a color map showing how the Texas wind blows. The windiest areas are in red, and Briscoe County is bloody. Shell hopes to build an approximately 120-square-mile wind farm here, which would be several times larger than any in the world today."
(Click to read part of the WSJ article)
"SILVERTON, Texas -- Deep in the heart of Texas, multinational giants are gambling on a new supply of energy. The prize isn't oil. It's wind.
In this pancake-flat country, where the wind blows so relentlessly that the sagebrush and mesquite are permanently bent, Royal Dutch Shell Group, BP PLC and a wind-development company owned by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. are racing to lease vast expanses of ranchland. In a bet on wind power's long-term viability, they're planning to erect what would be some of the biggest wind farms in the world, with thousands of wind turbines costing some $2 million apiece."
"It's "a land rush," says Mark Wilby, a petroleum engineer who once developed natural-gas power plants for Enron Corp., and now develops wind projects for Shell. In Shell's storefront office in the largely abandoned courthouse square of Silverton, the county seat, Mr. Wilby pulls out a color map showing how the Texas wind blows. The windiest areas are in red, and Briscoe County is bloody. Shell hopes to build an approximately 120-square-mile wind farm here, which would be several times larger than any in the world today."
Monday, March 12, 2007
Developers are in earliest stages in Hamlin
(March 12, 2007) — HAMLIN — When Kathy Habgood looks through her front window toward the rolling farmland just beyond Cook Road, she sees uncertainty.
An avid birdwatcher, Habgood enjoys the Canada geese, hummingbirds, turkey vultures, orioles and other songbirds that flock to her yard.
She's afraid the birds might stop coming if developers move forward with plans for a 50-turbine wind farm across from her home.
"This is such a rich area for birds, so near the shore," she said. "Anything that would deter them would be terrible."
(click to read entire article)
An avid birdwatcher, Habgood enjoys the Canada geese, hummingbirds, turkey vultures, orioles and other songbirds that flock to her yard.
She's afraid the birds might stop coming if developers move forward with plans for a 50-turbine wind farm across from her home.
"This is such a rich area for birds, so near the shore," she said. "Anything that would deter them would be terrible."
(click to read entire article)
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Wind energy and the banality of evil - Calvin Luther Martin
... meet Julian and Jane Davis (see "Gone with the wind," attached*). Jane, a former nurse, and Julian's a farmer. They live in Lincolnshire, England. "Gone with the wind" appeared in the Daily Mail (United Kingdom) yesterday (as far as I can tell).
Now, meet Noble Environmental (attached). Read "Gone with the wind," then read Noble's ads in the Malone Telegram from a year or so ago. And don't miss Charles Hinckley's e-mail, attached, about my wife and me. (Hinckley, CEO of Noble, sent this email around to people on my email list, including my wife's sister at Cornell.)
Noble believes it's on the verge of erecting hundreds of wind turbines in Clinton and Franklin counties, New York State. (As well as elsewhere in New York and Michigan, but I will leave those projects alone for the time being.) Noble was given approval to build these hundreds of turbines by the town boards of Clinton, Ellenburg, and Altona, and it is very likely going to get similar approval from the towns of Chateaugay and Bellmont. (Noble is not alone in this venture, of course; Horizon/Marble River is likewise planning on hundreds in Clinton County, as well as, perhaps, Franklin County.)
Compare Noble's ads in the Telegram to the story on the Davises. Interesting, huh? Kinda makes your blood boil, doesn't it?
This is why some of us -- many of us, in fact -- are fighting Noble. Because of stories like the Davises. Neighbors for the Preservation of the North Country hired attorney Robert Cohen last year to stop Noble in court, and so far it's succeeded. NPNC's lawsuit, filed last September, is holding, and Noble has not built a single turbine, despite promises it would have some up in 2006 (which ended 3 months ago). None, so far.
Besides the lawsuit, NPNC is fighting Noble before the Army Corps of Engineers, since Noble needs permits from the Corps. Once again, Bob Cohen is doing the heavy lifting on the Army Corps process.
When you go to bed tonight, think about Jane & Julian Davis. Chances are good they won't be sleeping much tonight. Or tomorrow night. Or last night, for that matter. Well, come to think of it, any night -- unless they vacate their home and stay in town. Like the d'Entremonts in Nova Scotia, who finally gave up, locked their front door, and abandoned their home. That was 13 months ago. Same reason. (But, again, don't forget Noble's ads in the Telegram.)
The wind salesmen: Who are these people? Are they real people?
I am a retired professional historian. One of the things I studied and taught as a historian was Nazi Germany. How people in Hitler's Germany did horrible things to other human beings -- all because they were told to do so by some (deranged) superior. Hannah Arendt, the philosopher, attended the Nuremberg war crimes trials after WWII. She was especially interested in Adolph Eichmann, the SS officer who orchestrated the Death Camp process. The so-called Final Solution. Arendt took notes during the Eichmann trial, which happened some years after the Nuremberg trials, listening intently to this man's answers to cross-examination. She came away shocked by his coldness -- his chilly, matter-of-fact inhumaneness. She sat there looking at the face of evil, day after day, and found evil to be banal. Matter-of-fact. Just getting the job done.
"The banality of evil." Arendt didn't put it quite this way, but it's a now-famous summary of her analysis of Eichmann.
I would suggest applying this phrase to the wind energy salesmen: the banality of evil. Remember the Davises and imagine that the wind energy company behind this atrocity is ... yawning. They have a job to do -- for themselves, for their stockholders. The Davises are expendable. They don't matter.
Take a look at the wind energy ads in your local newspaper and think of the banality of evil. Not just banal, but even cheerful. Where truth just doesn't matter. Nor the pursuit of truth. My wife and I have pursued truth, and Mr. Hinckley responds with the attached "executive summary," he calls it.
Sitting here on this early spring morning, I think of Hannah Arendt and I think, of course, of George Orwell. His 1984. Where language, truth, decency, gravitas, grace -- they've all vanished.
Nineteen eight-four ended 23 years ago. We are now in the era of Noble Environmental. Re-read Mr. Hinckley's broadside against my wife and me, and ask yourself if you detect anything "noble" or "environmental" about it.
And remember Orwell. For that matter, remember Arendt.
Blessings on you,
Calvin
Calvin Luther Martin, PhD
Now, meet Noble Environmental (attached). Read "Gone with the wind," then read Noble's ads in the Malone Telegram from a year or so ago. And don't miss Charles Hinckley's e-mail, attached, about my wife and me. (Hinckley, CEO of Noble, sent this email around to people on my email list, including my wife's sister at Cornell.)
Noble believes it's on the verge of erecting hundreds of wind turbines in Clinton and Franklin counties, New York State. (As well as elsewhere in New York and Michigan, but I will leave those projects alone for the time being.) Noble was given approval to build these hundreds of turbines by the town boards of Clinton, Ellenburg, and Altona, and it is very likely going to get similar approval from the towns of Chateaugay and Bellmont. (Noble is not alone in this venture, of course; Horizon/Marble River is likewise planning on hundreds in Clinton County, as well as, perhaps, Franklin County.)
Compare Noble's ads in the Telegram to the story on the Davises. Interesting, huh? Kinda makes your blood boil, doesn't it?
This is why some of us -- many of us, in fact -- are fighting Noble. Because of stories like the Davises. Neighbors for the Preservation of the North Country hired attorney Robert Cohen last year to stop Noble in court, and so far it's succeeded. NPNC's lawsuit, filed last September, is holding, and Noble has not built a single turbine, despite promises it would have some up in 2006 (which ended 3 months ago). None, so far.
Besides the lawsuit, NPNC is fighting Noble before the Army Corps of Engineers, since Noble needs permits from the Corps. Once again, Bob Cohen is doing the heavy lifting on the Army Corps process.
When you go to bed tonight, think about Jane & Julian Davis. Chances are good they won't be sleeping much tonight. Or tomorrow night. Or last night, for that matter. Well, come to think of it, any night -- unless they vacate their home and stay in town. Like the d'Entremonts in Nova Scotia, who finally gave up, locked their front door, and abandoned their home. That was 13 months ago. Same reason. (But, again, don't forget Noble's ads in the Telegram.)
The wind salesmen: Who are these people? Are they real people?
I am a retired professional historian. One of the things I studied and taught as a historian was Nazi Germany. How people in Hitler's Germany did horrible things to other human beings -- all because they were told to do so by some (deranged) superior. Hannah Arendt, the philosopher, attended the Nuremberg war crimes trials after WWII. She was especially interested in Adolph Eichmann, the SS officer who orchestrated the Death Camp process. The so-called Final Solution. Arendt took notes during the Eichmann trial, which happened some years after the Nuremberg trials, listening intently to this man's answers to cross-examination. She came away shocked by his coldness -- his chilly, matter-of-fact inhumaneness. She sat there looking at the face of evil, day after day, and found evil to be banal. Matter-of-fact. Just getting the job done.
"The banality of evil." Arendt didn't put it quite this way, but it's a now-famous summary of her analysis of Eichmann.
I would suggest applying this phrase to the wind energy salesmen: the banality of evil. Remember the Davises and imagine that the wind energy company behind this atrocity is ... yawning. They have a job to do -- for themselves, for their stockholders. The Davises are expendable. They don't matter.
Take a look at the wind energy ads in your local newspaper and think of the banality of evil. Not just banal, but even cheerful. Where truth just doesn't matter. Nor the pursuit of truth. My wife and I have pursued truth, and Mr. Hinckley responds with the attached "executive summary," he calls it.
Sitting here on this early spring morning, I think of Hannah Arendt and I think, of course, of George Orwell. His 1984. Where language, truth, decency, gravitas, grace -- they've all vanished.
Nineteen eight-four ended 23 years ago. We are now in the era of Noble Environmental. Re-read Mr. Hinckley's broadside against my wife and me, and ask yourself if you detect anything "noble" or "environmental" about it.
And remember Orwell. For that matter, remember Arendt.
Blessings on you,
Calvin
Calvin Luther Martin, PhD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)