HAMMOND — The anti-wind farm group Concerned Residents of Hammond has quickly challenged the legality of the wind law a lame-duck Hammond Town Council passed Monday. The decision to pass the law brought a swift response in a lawsuit filed Tuesday afternoon in the St. Lawrence County clerk’s office, Canton, by the residents group.
“We fully expected this action by the present board,” said Mary D. Hamilton, the group’s president. “We were hoping the outgoing supervisor and councilmen would have better understood the November election results. If this board truly had the best interests of the residents of Hammond in mind, they would have allowed the incoming board members the opportunity for input on this issue and would have ceased this process and cooperated to allow that to happen.”
The state Supreme Court lawsuit challenges the Hammond Town Council’s completion of the state Environmental Quality Review assessment, which was completed in its entirety at a special meeting Monday. It also cites conflicts of interest, saying council members who didn’t vote nevertheless participated in the environmental assessment, and accuses the council of several violations of the state Open Meetings Law, including failing to provide copies of the law, conducting town business before meetings were convened and material alterations to the law after the public hearing was completed.
The suit seeks a temporary restraining order and an order of preliminary injunction for Local Law No. 1. Plaintiffs are Pamela Winchester, James W. Brown, Roseanne E. Whittier, William C. Tanner and Christopher J. McRoberts. The lawsuit cites as defendants the Hammond Town Council, including Supervisor Janie G. Hollister and councilmen Ronald E. Tulley II, James C. Pitcher, Russell Stewart and James E. Langtry, and Code Enforcement Officer James R. Gleason.
The wind law was passed 3-0 Monday at the special meeting, supported by Mrs. Hollister, Mr. Tulley and Mr. Langtry. Local Law No. 2, which exempts wind towers from the town’s site plan and subdivision review, also was passed by an identical vote. Mr. Pitcher and Mr. Stewart, though present, recused themselves from the vote, having already signed land leases with a wind company.
“The decision of the outgoing Town Board to push through this law at the eleventh hour suggests that Iberdrola, Atlantic Wind or some other commercial wind company is likely waiting in the wings to seek a permit as soon as the law is passed,” reads the lawsuit. “Why else would the current Town Board take this action with three weeks remaining in the year and its term of office?” Furthermore, the lawsuit states, “In addition, the Wind Law in its current form does not adequately protect the environment or the health and safety of the Hammond community.”
“The Town itself identified numerous areas of potential environmental concerns which are memorialized in section 4 of the Wind Law, including drainage problems, noise and light pollution, and electromagnetic interference with communication signals. This demonstrates that the Town itself acknowledges that there are significant potential dangers. However, the Wind Law provides no standards to address many of these problems.”
Mrs. Hamilton defended the group’s quick decision to file its action. “They ramrodded this through before the end of the year,” she said. “Who knows what’s next? They still have three more weeks. We had no choice.”
The Town Council will hold its final meeting of 2009 at 7:30 p.m. Monday in the Hammond town offices.
No comments:
Post a Comment