Friday, June 30, 2006

CWW UNDER ATTACK BY YES WIND & HUNT NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND by Karl Palmiter

In response to Hunt’s letter in the Valley News. He is correct, the town is under attack, but it’s under attack from UPC and some board members along with Yes Wind, who are trying to destroy this country side and the lives of the people who live out here where these turbines are going to be. We are simply trying to defend ourselves from those bullying and attacking us.

You refuse to answer questions that desperately influence our lives and residence. You said yourself you don’t have answers to a lot of questions, yet you are committed to going forward with this project that is foolhardy. Without answers how can you possibly feel that the community can trust your judgment like you telling us to?

You like to use False information such as cutting down on air pollution from fossil fuels, or cutting down on dependence of foreign oil and so on. We are for helping our environment, but it is not wind turbines. It is a proven fact that wind turbines won’t solve the problem. If you would be honest and actually do research other than what UPC and other town supervisors from towns that also wanted these turbines in like yourselves, you would see that no conventional power plants anywhere in the world have been shut down because of wind turbines. They provide a Glut of electricity at times, and nothing at other times. This scenario that you are promoting reminds me of a want to be general in history. He wouldn’t’ believe his subordinates, he had all the knowledge he needed and he was determined to stay the course. YES he did become famous his name was GEORGE ARMSTRONG CUSTER.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

June 28 letter to Cohocton Planning Board by Don Sandford

Dear Chairman Fox & members of T/ Cohocton Planning Board:

This past Monday on radio station 1480 AM, Hornell, NY commentator Keven Dorin had as his guest Mr. Larry Mitchell, a Texan, based now in Washington D.C. Mr. Mitchell is C.E.O. of The American Corn Growers Association, phone #202-835-0330, who was referred to Mr. Dorin by a Mr. Carroll Wade of Jasper, NY, 607-792-3662, a member of The National Farm Organization. The theme of the discussion had to do with needed investigation by town board members in formulating a more lucrative return for towns using grants & tax incentives from private enterprise. In years past, Mr. Wade and Mitchell were part of a national committee to come up with a plan for energy in the future. Ethenol from corn is one source which is know by most people and wind power another, but with a twist. Both are convinced that making deals with companies like UPC is not in the best interest of the town and that with more investigative work by boards such as yours you could find out the same information and do so much better. There are numerous grants and tax write-offs by international companies just waiting to be asked. An example is “John Deere Wind Power”, a contact being a Mr.Carl Hing Mertinins 515-267-4250, which Mr.Wade suggest the planning board contact. Mr. Wade, a farmer in Jasper, has been involved with this form of energy nationally from its inception in the United States, knows people involved from Minnesota to Illinois and beyond and during out 1-1/2 hour phone conversation was a sincere and sensible advocate with facts and figures to back up his positions and said if he could assist your board he would be glad to do so and feel free to contact him. It’s very important to him to see this done right everywhere!

My contention has been from the beginning, a much better business plan needs to be in place along with all the safe guards protecting the financial value of homes, property and quality of life issues of the people living near and effect by the turbines.

Perhaps this information will be useful to you. You have to understand that myself and others like me are trying to get a point across that there are many visions and ideas out there just waiting to be discovered by people such as the planning board and you took the job to do justice for everybody. Please give Mr.Wade a call and find out for yourself what this “wind pioneer” has to say. As the lead agency, take all time the time you need to do a difficult job, but in the end, done with an open mind reaching a decision you can all be justly proud of!

(As a side note ,Mr Wade is also invoved with the “Farm-Aid” program started by Willie Nelson and others,which will have their fund raising concert in Philadelphia, Penn. Area this fall.)
Sincerely,

Done E. Sandford

June 28, 2006 letter to Senator Hillary Clinton by James Hall

June 28, 2006

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
United States Senate
476 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

James Hall
PO Box 657
Naples, NY 14512

RE: Follow-up to question asked at the “Alternative Energy in New York Conference” held at the Hyatt Regency Rochester, NY June 26, 2006

Senator Clinton,

During the Alternative Energy in New York Conference and in your speech you promoted the “so called” benefits of industrial wind turbine projects. The objective in asking the following question, during the Q & A session, was to bring to your attention the grave circumstances of the organized criminal wind project scheme that is being fostered upon the public, residents and property owners, especially in rural areas of New York State.

I asked for your assistance. “Senator Clinton we need your help. When will the federal government conduct an anti-trust and RICO investigation regarding the wind turbine developers, their predatory business practices and their collusion with Town, County, State governments and IDA agencies?”

The theft in value and uncompensated use of our properties by industrial wind developers in coordination with Town, Country, State and IDA agencies is of unprecedented scope and scale. The economic model for such wind developments cannot exist without substantial government subsidies. Electric generation from these wind turbines has a much higher cost, has no storage ability and is lost when the grid is supplied by long- term contract methods. Also the wind velocity in most of our state does not support consistent electric generation. Peer reviewed studies of public safety hazards have not been conducted in Upstate where icing will be a huge factor. There is no essential public benefit, while the destruction of agricultural and residential areas will be permanently affected.

Inadequate liability and property insurance coverage, as well as, indemnity protections for townships, leaseholders and residents, who will be obliged to live next to an industrial facility subject the entire community to unnecessary risk. Effective mandates for decommissioning, removal and restoration are noticeably absent from all these projects.

The public safety and the pristine environmental treasure of our land is being sacrificed upon the altar of greed as public officials eagerly enable their dishonest partnership that will only produce the systemic destruction of the landscape and our quality of our lives.

These unaccountable and LLC corporate developers, many with foreign financed and owned interests, and local leaseholders with wind contracts function under a wall of silence. Their projects conspire to steal the use and destroy any resale property values of residents who live in proximity to their industrial turbines. Placing such giant machines as high as 500’ with the same setback as their height next to a home is unconscionable.

Where is the duty and obligation of government at all levels to protect the public safety and safeguard the constitutional, equal protection and property rights of all taxpayers? How can our children be protected when the authorities betray their oaths of office for the price of a wind turbine site?

The pattern of turbine leases given to town officials and administrative cronies has been repeated throughout NYS. Town councilmen, relatives or family members routinely sit on boards that act as lead agencies. Their conflict of interests and suspect ethical conduct demand an official and wide scale federal investigation into this multi billion dollar racket. Anti-trust and RICO statures are being violated. NYS politicians will not intervene, claiming that it is a “local matter”. (see enclosed letter from NYS Assemblyman Bacalles)

The nature of the wind turbine fraud is historic and extends to the very foundation of our rule of law. The “Comprehensive Plans” of townships are being circumvented with the abuses of spot zoning, segmentation and avoidance of SEQR regulations. Court challenges and Article 78 actions abound, but no district attorney will step forward or honor their duty and investigate the trail of bribes and criminal conduct that is systemic in this industry of graft. Our NYS attorney general will not start a probe. Ordinary citizens need federal involvement to stop the corruption that is so rampant in the industrial wind projects.

The real and frightening prospect of private development eminent domain and condemnation looms over all NYS rural communities. With wind turbine site locations scattered among and adjacent to residential properties, our homes will become unlivable. Many taxpayers will not be able to sell and certainly will never receive replacement value costs. This injustice is a direct result from the complicity and illegal actions of an unholy alliance among corrupt proponents of a business plan designed to steal agricultural land for industrial use. PILOT tax programs are a scam and exist to bilk the remaining taxpayers. Commensurate and equitable taxes will not be accessed on such wind projects. Follow the money, who makes the public decisions, who benefits and who is responsible for condemning so many NYS citizens to a life sentence in an industrial hazard zone.

Senator Clinton will you intervene and use the enormous influence your office has in making a recommendation to the Department of Justice that a dedicated and trustworthy U.S. Attorney be assigned to undertake a full scale criminal investigation into the NY statewide business practices of the industrial wind developers and the respective town governments that have demonstrated malfeasance in their office?

I will end with your answer to me at the Alternative Energy in New York Conference: Thank You.

Cordially,



James Hall
PO Box 657
Naples, NY 14512
(585) 534-5581

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Another UPC Project - WindFarm Prattsburgh DEIS report

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)

Below please find links to our Draft Environmental Impact Statement that was accepted by SCIDA on June 22, 2006. The Draft EIS will also be available for public review at our office in Prattsburgh:

Windfarm Prattsburgh, LLC
3 Naples Road
PO Box 301
Prattsburgh, NY 14873
Tel: 607.522.4598
Fax: 518.399.7342

A copy of the DEIS may be requested from:

Dan Albano
197 North Street Rd
Argyle, NY 12809
1 (518) 248-4016


DOCUMENTS (PDFs)
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (report text)

June 26, 2006 - James Hall's question to Senator Hillary Rodman Clinton

At the “Alternative Energy in New York Conference” held at the Hyatt Regency Rochester, NY the following public question was asked of Senator Clinton in front of the assembled audience:

James Hall question: Senator Clinton we need your help. When will the federal government conduct an anti-trust and RICO investigation regarding the wind turbine developers and their collusion with Town, Country, State governments and IDA agencies?

Senator Hillary Rodam Clinton response: Thank You.

The Senator wrote down notes after her answer. I introduced myself as the publisher of BATR and a member of Cohocton Wind Watch.

Saturday, June 24, 2006

June 23, 2006 letter to Cohocton Zoning Board of Appeals by Jim Lince

Cohocton Zoning Board,
Cohocton Zoning Board of Appeals
15 Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826

June 23, 2006 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL

Dear Zoning Boards:

This serves as a formal complaint.

We are writing concerning the tower on Joseph Meyers land which was erected sometime in 2003. We first documented this tower in December 2003. It is plainly visible from our residence.

We have asked the town clerk to provide a copy of the application and approval for this tower.

Our understanding is this land is zoned AG-R, and there is no provision in the zoning for a tower of this size. It is an industrial tower. When we noticed the tower was erected, we called the town and complained --- we were told it was permitted.

We do not understand the rational for the permit in that there is no provision in the zoning for towers like this. You may be, however we are not aware of a tower like this required for farming, agriculture, farm operations, or residential use (AG-R). If it is for communications purposes on the farm, then due to the sheer height (estimated 150’), we would be concerned about the power output/FCC regulations and appropriate use in a residential area. If it’s a weather station for the farm, those are less than 30’ high, even at scientific stations. Farmers use GPS now, but that’s all driven from satellite and does not require such a tower. So, we would not know what the farming/agricultural purpose is for this tower?

Based on the ruling June 22 against the Dyckman tower, we appeal to you to apply the same standards to the Meyers tower. The presence of the tower remains a nuisance to us as an adjacent neighbor/owners and not within the legal zoning for the area. Thank you for your attention to this matter and upholding the legal zoning of our land.

Sincerely,
James G. and Shannon P. Lince

Friday, June 23, 2006

Prattsburgh's Article 78 Going Forward - Will be heard on September 14, 2006

Supreme Court Judge Galloway has turned down the motion to dismiss and has scheduled that the action will be heard on the merits of the case.

SCIDA has 30 days to respond.

We have 30 days to respond back.

Then oral arguments will be on September 14.

The judge said that Ecogen may submit a defense of the DEIS, but they*
may not submit anything new. *What they can do is get new experts to
defend what they have already submitted.

A Stunning Victory for the Rule of Law in Cohocton

Last night the Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to uphold the law and turn down a variance request for a meteorological test tower on Councilman Joseph Dyckman’s property.

The test tower had already been erected by the wind company UPC before permits were submitted. UPC has a history of erecting these towers without getting the proper permits in Cohocton, as well as, in Vermont and New Hampshire.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

June 22, 2006 DEIS response cover letter

June 22, 2006

Cohocton Planning Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, New York 14826

Lead Agency for the UPC Cohocton Windmill Power Project

Mr. Chairman and Board Members:

The submission of the enclosed opposition documents in response to the DEIS prepared by Environmental Design & Research for Canandaigua Power Partners LLC (CPP) aka UPC is an unnecessary exercise. While the hope that the Cohocton Planning Board will find the information useful in the ongoing process of community education, the fact exists that UPC does not have a valid project. No application has been filed and no action has been made. Also, it has been represented that the Town of Cohocton, in its freedom of information law response that no agreement, written or oral exists, between UPC and the Town Supervisor and the Board. If this is true, without a clear and specific plan and proposal based upon legitimate zoning authorization, the entire DEIS process is premature. Since Cohocton Windmill Local Law #1 is under the cloud of an Article 78 challenge and the “so called” replacement ordinance Windmill Local Law #2 is under review, the basis for proceeding ahead with a DEIS is superfluous.

The DEIS is incomplete in all areas. It is nothing more than a generic proposal for a wind project with specifics to be determined later. The purpose of a DEIS is review and analysis of actual impacts and the mitigation measures that will be taken by concerned citizens and involved agencies. There are no alternative plans presented or evaluated in the document. There are no significant site specific studies merely generalities and comments. “For purposes of this report”, “wherever possible”, “for the purpose of this DEIS it is assumed” statements abound. The DEIS reads like a high school term paper. Much of the material has been used in several other environmental impact statements in the State.

However, the wealth of scientific data and peer review research that is included in this response should well serve the deliberative investigation that the Cohocton Planning Board has been charged to undertake. It is with sincere intent that the solemn duty of the lead agency will be assisted in that enormous task.

Included is a detailed outline with a point-by point format from the DEIS proposal, consisting of 34 pages and the supplementary documents of 1-461 pages, and this cover letter. Additional supporting documents are included which provide proof and evidence regarding specific aspects in the DEIS. A copy of the Advocates of Prattsburgh response to the Ecogen Prattsburgh/Italy Wind Farm is included since the ownership interests in both projects is the same and the attempt to avoid segmentation issues is so obvious. Also a DVD on the “Voices of Tug Hill” is presented as an illustration of area resident evaluation of life under the canopy of industrial wind turbine zoning. This experience and lessons learned apply to Cohocton and all the UPC “so called” mitigation measures are inadequate to resolve the fundamental deficiencies in the size, scope and scale of the UPC project.

Special thanks in compiling this response to all members and supporters of the community citizen organization Cohocton Wind Watch and Cohocton Free, Rick Bolton, John Bose, Katherine Bush, James and Judith Hall, Jim and Shannon Lince, Terry and Ruthe Matilsky, Dr. William Morehouse, Karl and Bonnie Palmiter, Alice and Saul Sokolow, Gary and Pat Struck, Robert and Michelle Strasburg II, Steve and Hollis Trude, Nancy Wahlstrom, Amy Wolfe. The list is endless and we thank everyone for their input.

Since the time given to respond to this DEIS proposal was so limited, the full range of information wherewith provided could have been expanded. Trust that future DEIS responses will be more extensive.

June 21 letter to Cohocton Town Board by Rebecca Conard

Town Of Cohocton

Town Planning Board, Town Board of Cohocton, Sandy Riley,

My husband and I, within the past five months, have become residents of the town of Cohocton, NY. We had a dream retirement home built in the country, and we are presently working on the interior. We moved to the Town of Cohocton, from a small village,, in hopes of listening to the birds sing, have no neighbors, enjoy the serene countryside that abounds us,, but with attending several town board meetings, planning board meetings, and meeting new friends in this community, we find out, after building our home,, that there is plans of bringing in huge wind turbines. I find this quite disturbing, because when we applied for all the permits needed to build our home, that I designed, NOT ONE thing was mentioned to us about these monstrous turbines coming to our road, and others. I suppose we will never finish our home, nor the porch that was originally designed and planned for the front of our home, as we won’t want to sit on the porch and listen to or see these turbines. If we had known, previously to the fact, that these huge turbines were coming to our road, we NEVER, NEVER would have built here!

We are not against wind power, by all means, after all, we were denied electricity, by a farmer, (he didn’t want electric poles running across his fields, but its ok to have these monstrous turbines in his fields,,grrr) and now we have solar power and soon to be, our own personal windmill, which will ONLY be 100 feet in the air! (that is our ONLY power!)

We never expected to be so short lived in these beautiful hills! Once these monsters come in,, the hills won’t be beautiful anymore! We can sit outside, now, on any given day or night, and watch the deer, and fox and listen to the birds sing, the owls hoot, the turkeys calling, the coyotes howling, and just wildlife in general! It is so peaceful here, why are these turbines coming, just to please the farmers pockets???? Whether they know it or not, their milk production will greatly diminish! Awww, too bad,, It is my understanding, that it is going to cost more to take these monsters down, than what the farmers will profit from in the leasing of the land! Another thing that really boggles our minds, is the fact that if lightning strikes or if they malfunction, and catch fire, there is no equipment in our town or any surrounding towns big or tall enough to put these fires out! With the amount of oil that is stored in these generators, they could smoke for days, and wouldn’t that smoke be toxic?

With all the reading that we have done, there is nothing good to say about these turbines, as they will decrease our property values, raise our taxes, they cause accidents, the birding population will be affected immensely,,oh my God, I could go on forever,,,this is so wrong! Won't you please reconsider the beauty of our hillsides, that could be ruined for the rest of some peoples lives? This is our paradise! It is our home!!!!!!!!!! I think the setbacks of these turbines should be at least a mile from ANY property line!

Another thing,, I believe UPC is a scam! and that they are salesmen, and the town of Cohocton fell for it! what suckers! Why don't other town have these huge turbines? because they didn't fall for the scam!

Please reconsider our hillsides,,our homes,,our views, our feelings, and others! These don't belong in Cohocton,, they belong in NYC where they don't care what their hillsides look like! or in the ocean, the desert, ANYWHERE but here!

Sincerely,
Rebecca Conard

Could you please send me a receipt for this letter?

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Moratorium Declared by Cherry Valley Planning Board

The Cherry Valley Planning Board has unanimously recommended an 18 month moratorium on all major development in the town of Cherry Valley.

There will be a few exceptions to the moratorium such as minor subdivisions and sub-divisions within families.

The time is to be used to complete a comprehensive plan, and to prepare necessary ordinances to properly control large-scale development. If all necessary legislation is in place before the 18 month period expires, the moratorium could be shortened.

The proposal must now be submitted to the Town Board for formal approval. It is expected that the Town Board will concur with the Planning Board's recommendation.

The Planning Board has made a bold decision on a controversial topic - land use regulation. It has made a responsible committment to the welfare of our community by transforming itself into a pro-active institution, truly a planning board.

The members of the Planning Board do not all agree with us. Nor does everyone in the community. And this does not mean that turbines are no longer a possibility in Cherry Valley. But, by taking action, the Planning Board has lifted the argument to the plane of reasoned discourse. They have earned our praise.

The Advocates for Cherry Valley welcome the opportunity to participate in a dialogue that will find a way to reconcile the inevitability of development with the unique history and beauty of our town.

The conflict over the proposed turbine farm on East Hill stems from a failure to understand that there must be a proper balance between individual rights, and the rights of a community as a whole. The people of East Hill have understood this from the beginning. That is why they have fought so hard. Tonight they have won a victory.

Remember, there are no "bad guys" in our town. There are just carpetbaggers like Reunion Power whose satchels are filled with greenbacks and the seeds of dissension. (Am I over the top or what?)

Congratulations to everyone for all their hard work. Don't forget,our struggle continues. But now this summer seems more sunshine than rain.

Jon Boone's speech at Perry, NY meeting

silverlakespeech.pdf

Cohocton Town Board postponed voting on Windmill Local law #2 until the August regular meeting

Last night, Tuesday June 20, 2006, the Cohocton Town Board delayed a vote on the proposed Windmill Local Law #2 until the Cohocton Planning Board submits their recommendations in the early part of August. Therefore, it was stated that no vote would be held before the regular Town Board meeting on the third Tuesday on August, 15, 2006.

June 20, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Councilman Joe Dyckman by Robert C. Strasburg II

June 20, 2006

Councilman Joe Dyckman
Cohocton Town Board
Cohocton, NY 14826

Mr. Dyckman:

My recent letter dated June 19th included the question "Are any of you successful business men?" Joe, I apologize to you for this question. When I think of this wind turbine issue and the Town Board, you do not come to mind to me because you abstain from voting on points surrounding it.

This was an ignorant oversight on my part. I was in no way questioning you as to your caliber as a businessman, you simply did not come to mind when I was making this point. Please accept my apology, no insult intended.

When I saw you tonight the blunder came to my mind. I do watch your farming operation and admire what you do. We may not agree on the issues surrounding these turbines, but there is nothing personal in my heart against you or any of the Town Board members. I am adamant in my opinion that this project as proposed is wrong for Cohocton, but it is not the personalities involved, it is the issues.

I am sure you have family that have been wounded or killed in wars wherein they served to defend our way of life. It offends me greatly when I see government sponsored programs tramping on the rights that my family went to war and died to defend. I have no problem with a landowner making money from a program inside the confines of his or her property lines, but we all have property rights and each landowners' rights stop where his or her neighbors' start.

This program as proposed includes a blatant disrespect of what we are as Americans. We in America are private landowners with deeds that say we have the right to quietly enjoy our property. This program as proposed is a violation of those rights. Local Law #2 is nothing short of a dictatorial document which is the gateway for the gathering and redistribution of wealth from poor communities and taxpayers to a chosen few. (I am not talking about the amount offered to the leaseholders; I am talking strictly about corporate enrichment)

All this propaganda about it being our patriotic duty to support this "green energy" for the good of the Country does not fly with me, the facts do not support that this should be a united effort amongst Americans to help our Country. This is a corporate (some of them foreign) fostered scam to bilk Americans of our money and our rights, supported by our local, State and Federal governments, all on the back of an energy need that this effort does not even offer a significant contribution to.

This is not a N.I.M.B.Y. issue. This is about heartfelt conviction to resist a deception of the worst kind. This is a deception against simple uneducated Americans who do not have a clue what is being done to them. When I drive through Town and see all these "we support clean safe power" signs in the yards of people that I thought were free independent educated people who were somewhat privy to the level of corruption in our governments, a cringe goes through my body. Not to get sidetracked, but this is how America was defeated in Vietnam. Communists are masters at spin, so are greedy Corporations and politicians. Fine upstanding people have bought into this hoax. Those green signs for supposed clean power are a testament to how people can be easily misled.

The saddest truth about this whole affair is the fact that some have willfully joined in this deception. I may get chided by the "yes wind" people for being rude or impolite and I have even been accused of being a liar, but no matter … this issue is to important to let go by without a fight. I have only suffered a little chiding; others have given their lives to defend these principles that have made America strong. What concerns me the most is when I present these violations of what used to be cherished rights and my government calls my efforts noisemaking and baloney. God be merciful to the ignorant. We are talking about much more than ice throw and noise. We are talking about the continued deterioration of the American principles that have made us strong in the past.

The Bible is often misquoted as saying that "money is the root of all evil" This is a misquote. The Bible says it is the "love" of money that is the root of all evil. Joe, don't let the money blind you. You have been offered only enough to help these Corporations bilk your neighbors. Separate yourself from this scam. Joe, from what I can tell, they are only offering Cohocton 6/10ths of 1% of their revenue. You are a businessman; can you justify support of this?

Scrap this plan as it is, resolve to work to get a better one in which the impact of these turbines is contained within the leaseholders property, choose a company to deal with that offers you as a leaseholder and our Town, a sufficient fair compensation plan that is worthy of the trust you have been given. Rewrite the zoning law so it protects us better than the one that simply calls for a letter of credit as surety. Based on the letter that the "yes wind" people put into today's Valley News, they do not understand what this means. A letter of credit is a worthless document for a program with the liability this offers.

Stop the money grab that UPC has started Joe, get a handle on this and defend our Town. No one on the Town Board wants to sit down with me in open public debate about this. I am not interested in a shouting match, I want to sit down with our government and dialog on a point by point basis, respectfully, rationally and democratically.

Sincerely,

Robert C. Strasburg II

June 20, 2006 letter to Cohocton Town and Planning Boards by F. Jeffrey Goldthwait, J.D.

Date: June 20, 2006

To: Town Board and Planning Board of Cohocton

From: F. Jeffrey Goldthwait, J.D.

I am a resident, property owner, taxpayer and registered voter in the Town of Cohocton.

I hereby claim the right on behalf of myself and of all residents and property owners in the Town of Cohocton to honest, impartial, knowledgeable, lawful and equal representation of all the people, by each and every elected and appointed official of the Town of Cohocton. You all took and signed an oath of office. I suggest you review that document. We the people intend to hold each and every one of you to the letter and spirit of that oath.

All public officials of this town have an obligation and duty to fulfill and execute the duties and responsibilities of his/her office in a responsible, honest and non negligent way. Each official must, with respect to any matter over which they have decision making power, at all times avoid any actual or potential conflict of interest involving them and/or their respective families and/or business associates. We the people intend to hold each and every one of you to the letter and spirit of that obligation and duty.

We the people of the Town of Cohocton did not elect you or support your respective appointments for the purpose of leading a UPC financed parade of giant wind turbines through we the people's town, with Wayne Hunt as the self-anointed torch bearing, drum major and the Town Board as grand marshals. Perhaps all of us should pause and reflect upon the meaning behind the upcoming Fourth of July holiday which celebrates a declaration of all of us to be independent and free from the same type of foreign, outside interference and potential harm to our community such as that proposed by UPC.

I respectfully request a written response by the Town Board and Planning Board to each of the following questions set forth in this document and attachments thereto which has been personally served by me on Town Supervisor Jack Zigenfus.

1. What justification does the Town Board and Planning Board have for not reviewing and updating the town's negligently out of date "Comprehensive Master Plan" before making a decision to adopt any new Town Law or Town Zoning Law amendment when such a significant new land issue such as the proposed UPC Wind Turbine Project is being considered?
2. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent Legal, Real Estate Appraisal, Financial, Environmental and Small Town Business Development experts whose services the Town Board and/or Planning Board have retained in order to professionally evaluate the proposed UPC project in order to assure all the people of the Town of Cohocton that you are being professional, impartial and thorough in your sworn duty to represent all of the people of Cohocton in a fair, judicious an non negligent manner?
3. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent financial experts retained By the Town to analyze the financial worth, stability and performance of UPC (with its former ENRON executive(s) and its parent companies?
4. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent financial experts retained By the Town that concluded that a PILOT by UPC was financially more beneficial to the Town than other tax options?
5. Just what is UPC's track record of successful, completed, fully operating and economically viable wind turbine projects?
6. Would put your own money in a (L)imited (L)iability (C)orporation without insurance? Do you fully understand the severe limitations of legal liability to the Town of Cohocton that UPC will enjoy at our expense and risk?
7. Why has the Town Board taken an apparent "oath of silence" and not responded to any public questions about the negotiations between the Town and UPC?
8. Why is it that the only expert legal counsel drafting documents and proposed Town laws in this matter retained and paid for by UPC?
9. When will the Town Board and Planning Board address the issues raised as to the legality of some of the meetings held to date?
10. Is not this proposed wind farm project in clear violation of the stated purpose of our newly enacted Zoning Law? Article 1;Sec. 120;2,4,7 which states in part that the "PURPOSE of said law is:
"2. To encourage the most appropriate use of land, to conserve and enhance the value of property:…
4. To provide for open spaces and recreation areas, protect natural resources, agricultural land, scenic areas…
7. To assure privacy for residents and freedom from nuisances and noxious conditions disturbing to the senses or harmful to the health, prevent unsightly, obtrusive and noisome activities, and generally enhance the community."
11. The proposed UPC project also violates Local Law No. 2 of the year 1987; Section 4. which reads:
4. DUTY OF MAINTAINING PRIVATE PROPERTY
No person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge of or control of any premises within the Town of Cohocton shall maintain or keep any nuisance thereon, nor shall any person keep or maintain such premises in a manner causing substantial diminution in the value of other property in the neighborhood in which such premises are located.

We the people of the Town of Cohocton respectfully request answers to all of the above questions. We believe we have a right to the answers and that the Town Board and Planning Board have a legal, ethical and moral duty to provide us with written answers.