After an “Article 78” was filed against the Town of Cohocton Windmill Local Law and service upon the Cohocton Supervisor – Jack Zigenfus, the board acknowledged the serious nature of the action by passing a motion to re-write a new windmill local law.
Daniel A. Ruzow a Senior Partner of Whiteman Osterman & Hanna was introduced as representation for the Town of Cohocton in order to recommend correct procedures in writing a new addition to the zoning law. Mr. Ruzow’s Albany, NY firm has represented state agencies and authorities in the SEQRA process.
The Town Board of Cohocton’s action opens the door to a complete restart of the Cohocton Wind Power Project. The clear implication is that the current law has no legal standing and that any town board law would need to follow proper procedure for enactment of a new local law.
Citizens are urged to interact and involve themselves at every stage of this process.
It is imperative to voice your concerns and put them in writing to the Town and Planning Boards.
The question now is “WHERE is the entire wind project”? How can you have an EIS when you don’t know what the regulations governing the project are? Or are the Boards still ignoring the health, safety and financial well being of the citizenry?
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
MEDIA RELEASE: Article 78 filed in Canandaigua, NY against Town of Cohocton
The Town Board of Cohocton did not follow correct and prescribed procedure when the Windmill Local Law No 1 was passed in January 2006. An “Article 78” action was submitted to the Seventh Judicial Court District on May 16, 2006 to challenge the passage of this law. James Hall filed the suit against the Town Board of Cohocton. David Miller, attorney from Naples, NY, represents Mr. Hall in this suit.
Cohocton Supervisor – Jack Zigenfus was duly served notice of this Supreme Court action at the regular town board meeting by Cohocton Wind Watch President Steve Trude.
Mr. Zigenfus asked Cohocton Town Attorney, Pat McAllister, if he had to accept the notice. When the town supervisor was asked if he had any comments for the citizens in attendance or the press covering this meeting, he declined to make a statement.
The Town of Cohocton will need to defend their actions in court. Upon a successful ruling, the Town of Cohocton would need to start the process over for any passage of a new Windmill Local Law.
Cohocton Supervisor – Jack Zigenfus was duly served notice of this Supreme Court action at the regular town board meeting by Cohocton Wind Watch President Steve Trude.
Mr. Zigenfus asked Cohocton Town Attorney, Pat McAllister, if he had to accept the notice. When the town supervisor was asked if he had any comments for the citizens in attendance or the press covering this meeting, he declined to make a statement.
The Town of Cohocton will need to defend their actions in court. Upon a successful ruling, the Town of Cohocton would need to start the process over for any passage of a new Windmill Local Law.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
James Hall and Steve Trude on the Jeff Rense Radio Program
Tonight from 12:00 PM to 1:00 AM May 16, listen to Cohocton Wind Watch members on the Jeff Rense national radio program.
Cohocton Wind Watch - domain name
You can now use http://cohoctonwindwatch.org as a url address to reach the Cohocton Wind Watch website.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Send Letters To The Editor, no later than June 5, 2006.
-Keep your comments short – under 250 words.
-Do not send the same letter to all papers.
-No form letters.
-Include your name, address and daytime telephone number.
-If you are interested in writing a “guest essay,” contact the editorial page editor(s).
Hornell- The Evening Tribune (The Town of Cohocton’s “Legal” paper)
Letters
The Evening Tribune
85 Canisteo St.
Hornell, NY 14843
Managing Editor – Andy Thompson, 607-324-1425
news@eveningtribune.com
Corning – The Leader
Letters to the Editor
The Leader
PO Box 1017
Corning, NY 14830
Managing Editor – Joe Dunning, 607-936-4651 ext.362
jdunning@the-leader.com
Canandaigua – Daily Messenger
Letters
Daily Messenger
73 Buffalo St.
Canandaigua, NY 14424
Editorial Page Editor – Dan Hall, 800-724-2099, ext. 324
messengerletters@mpnewspapers.com
Rochester – Democrat and Chronicle
Letters to The Editor
Democrat and Chronicle
55 Exchange Blvd.
Rochester, NY 14614
Speaking Out Editor – M. Kathleen Wagner, 585-258-2414
kwagner@DemocratandChronicle.com
dceditpage@DemocratandChronicle.com
Elmira – Star-Gazette
Opinion Page
Star-Gazette
PO Box 285
Elmira, NY 14902
Associate Editor – David W. Kubissa, 607-271-8217
opinionpage@stargazette.com
-Keep your comments short – under 250 words.
-Do not send the same letter to all papers.
-No form letters.
-Include your name, address and daytime telephone number.
-If you are interested in writing a “guest essay,” contact the editorial page editor(s).
Hornell- The Evening Tribune (The Town of Cohocton’s “Legal” paper)
Letters
The Evening Tribune
85 Canisteo St.
Hornell, NY 14843
Managing Editor – Andy Thompson, 607-324-1425
news@eveningtribune.com
Corning – The Leader
Letters to the Editor
The Leader
PO Box 1017
Corning, NY 14830
Managing Editor – Joe Dunning, 607-936-4651 ext.362
jdunning@the-leader.com
Canandaigua – Daily Messenger
Letters
Daily Messenger
73 Buffalo St.
Canandaigua, NY 14424
Editorial Page Editor – Dan Hall, 800-724-2099, ext. 324
messengerletters@mpnewspapers.com
Rochester – Democrat and Chronicle
Letters to The Editor
Democrat and Chronicle
55 Exchange Blvd.
Rochester, NY 14614
Speaking Out Editor – M. Kathleen Wagner, 585-258-2414
kwagner@DemocratandChronicle.com
dceditpage@DemocratandChronicle.com
Elmira – Star-Gazette
Opinion Page
Star-Gazette
PO Box 285
Elmira, NY 14902
Associate Editor – David W. Kubissa, 607-271-8217
opinionpage@stargazette.com
Couple in Howard Denied Request to Have A Statement on Windfarms Read into Minutes of Meeting
Eric and Kyle Hosmer of Howard address the Howard Town Board meeting Wednesday night and asked that a letter they read to the board be placed in the official minutes. The request was denied for the time being. As a courtesy, we are printing portions of that letter here.
Editor's Note: The complete letter follows.
May 11, 2006 by Eric and Kyle Hosmer, Hornell in WLEA
To the Town of Howard Board, Residents and Community:
About four weeks ago, we were approached by a neighbor in regards to wind turbines being built in Howard, NY. We had noticed the radio towers at the top of our hill and heard something about wind turbines, but did not really understand what could possibly happen in the very near future to the hills where we bought our first home and plan to raise our children. On many occasions we have discussed the fact that we would like to spend the rest of our lives on this hill, but our plans did not include being surrounded by wind turbines. Since that day, we have been very attentive to meetings in the area and interviews done on radio regarding this issue. We began surfing the web and making contacts with people who had a much better understanding of the benefits verses costs of wind farms. Don’t get us wrong, we are not against green energy, but truly believe there is an appropriate place for it, and that it shouldn’t dash the dreams of people by affecting their quality of life, potentially devaluing their property and causing potential health issues, etc.
READ entire letter from the above link.
Editor's Note: The complete letter follows.
May 11, 2006 by Eric and Kyle Hosmer, Hornell in WLEA
To the Town of Howard Board, Residents and Community:
About four weeks ago, we were approached by a neighbor in regards to wind turbines being built in Howard, NY. We had noticed the radio towers at the top of our hill and heard something about wind turbines, but did not really understand what could possibly happen in the very near future to the hills where we bought our first home and plan to raise our children. On many occasions we have discussed the fact that we would like to spend the rest of our lives on this hill, but our plans did not include being surrounded by wind turbines. Since that day, we have been very attentive to meetings in the area and interviews done on radio regarding this issue. We began surfing the web and making contacts with people who had a much better understanding of the benefits verses costs of wind farms. Don’t get us wrong, we are not against green energy, but truly believe there is an appropriate place for it, and that it shouldn’t dash the dreams of people by affecting their quality of life, potentially devaluing their property and causing potential health issues, etc.
READ entire letter from the above link.
Friday, May 12, 2006
INDUSTRIAL WINDFARMS - COMING TO A PLACE NEAR YOU!
THESE ARE NOT LIKE OUT WEST WHERE MILES OF BARREN LAND IS RESERVED FOR THOUSANDS OF TURBINES. UPSTATE NY WILL HAVE THEM SPRINKLED THROUGHOUT OUR AREA - AS LITTLE AS 500 FEET FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. UNLESS YOU GET INVOLVED NOW AND DEMAND :
"NO - WE WANT COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT / OWNERSHIP AND INPUT ON LOCATION, SITING, NOISE ALLOWANCE, SET-BACKS, HEIGHT, NUMBER , FUTURE REMOVAL BINDERS AND PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPERS!"
WE WANT INPUT TO REDUCE RISK TO TOURISM, RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, BIRDS/WILDLIFE AND PROPERTY VALUES IN THE FINGER LAKES REGION.
SAY " NO!! TO WINDFARMS IN HIGH IMPACT AREAS"!
SAY " NO! TO GOV. PATAKI'S DESIRE TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR WINDFARM DEVELOPMENT!"
SAY "NO TO NYSEG ALLOWING PRIVATE WIND DEVELOPERS TO USE OUR PROPERTY EASEMENTS WITHOUT PAYMENT AND PERMISSION". LET YOUR TOWN, COUNTY AND STATE GOVERNMENT KNOW - YOU MEAN NO!
NO SLIPPING THESE INDUSTRIAL BEHEMOTHS IN BEHIND OUR BACKS!
WE ARE NO LONGER PRIMARILY AGRICULTURAL LAND, WE ARE NOW PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL. THE TAX BASE COMES FROM US! DEMAND INPUT ON THE PLANNING , COST AND REWARDS OF THESE INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS. ** RESIDENTS MATTER JUST AS MUCH AS BIRDS AND WILDLIFE. DON'T LET THEM KILL OFF OUR RIGHTS ALONG WITH OUR VIEWS, PROPERTY VALUES, QUALITY OF LIFE AND TAX REVENUES. WHILE YOUR AT IT - REDUCE YOUR USE OF ELECTRICITY AND OTHER ENERGY SOURCES BY BEING MORE CONSCIOUS. IF WE DON'T WANT TO HURT OUR ENVIRONMENT IN ORDER TO SAVE IT - PARTICIPATION IN CONSERVING ENERGY IS EVERYONE'S OBLIGATION. TELL LEGISLATURES TO FORCE THE INDUSTRIAL USE OF PASSIVE SOLAR LIGHTING FOR MALLS AND PARKING LOTS AND OTHER LESS DESTRUCTIVE MEANS TO CONSUME LESS ELECTRICITY RATHER THAN MAKE US LOOSE OUR DIGNITY TO LIGHT UP ANOTHER SHOPPING MALL.
WE NEED TO CONSUME LESS - OR LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
RICHARD AND CYNTHIA COLE
RIDERS' REST GUEST LODGING
6154 RTE 53 - NAPLES PRATTSBURGH RD.
PRATTSBURGH, NY
"NO - WE WANT COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT / OWNERSHIP AND INPUT ON LOCATION, SITING, NOISE ALLOWANCE, SET-BACKS, HEIGHT, NUMBER , FUTURE REMOVAL BINDERS AND PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPERS!"
WE WANT INPUT TO REDUCE RISK TO TOURISM, RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, BIRDS/WILDLIFE AND PROPERTY VALUES IN THE FINGER LAKES REGION.
SAY " NO!! TO WINDFARMS IN HIGH IMPACT AREAS"!
SAY " NO! TO GOV. PATAKI'S DESIRE TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR WINDFARM DEVELOPMENT!"
SAY "NO TO NYSEG ALLOWING PRIVATE WIND DEVELOPERS TO USE OUR PROPERTY EASEMENTS WITHOUT PAYMENT AND PERMISSION". LET YOUR TOWN, COUNTY AND STATE GOVERNMENT KNOW - YOU MEAN NO!
NO SLIPPING THESE INDUSTRIAL BEHEMOTHS IN BEHIND OUR BACKS!
WE ARE NO LONGER PRIMARILY AGRICULTURAL LAND, WE ARE NOW PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL. THE TAX BASE COMES FROM US! DEMAND INPUT ON THE PLANNING , COST AND REWARDS OF THESE INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS. ** RESIDENTS MATTER JUST AS MUCH AS BIRDS AND WILDLIFE. DON'T LET THEM KILL OFF OUR RIGHTS ALONG WITH OUR VIEWS, PROPERTY VALUES, QUALITY OF LIFE AND TAX REVENUES. WHILE YOUR AT IT - REDUCE YOUR USE OF ELECTRICITY AND OTHER ENERGY SOURCES BY BEING MORE CONSCIOUS. IF WE DON'T WANT TO HURT OUR ENVIRONMENT IN ORDER TO SAVE IT - PARTICIPATION IN CONSERVING ENERGY IS EVERYONE'S OBLIGATION. TELL LEGISLATURES TO FORCE THE INDUSTRIAL USE OF PASSIVE SOLAR LIGHTING FOR MALLS AND PARKING LOTS AND OTHER LESS DESTRUCTIVE MEANS TO CONSUME LESS ELECTRICITY RATHER THAN MAKE US LOOSE OUR DIGNITY TO LIGHT UP ANOTHER SHOPPING MALL.
WE NEED TO CONSUME LESS - OR LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
RICHARD AND CYNTHIA COLE
RIDERS' REST GUEST LODGING
6154 RTE 53 - NAPLES PRATTSBURGH RD.
PRATTSBURGH, NY
ATTACHED IS AN AGREEMENT USED FOR THE TUG HILL PROJECT
This agreement called "NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENTS" is for landowners who abut or are living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines, but do not have a wind turbine on their land.
The purpose of this 17-page agreement is to grant the Wind Development Company certain rights and easements in exchange for monetary compensation. Shown here are highlighted notes revealing what the Company asks and what the Abutter receives.
WHAT IS GAINED BY THE ABUTTER OWNER: The abutter who signs this agreement typically gets paid at the rate of $42.00 per month ($500 per year), or perhaps a little more if his land is extremely important to the Company. He will not have a wind turbine on his land and most likely there will be wind turbines around his land and home.
WHAT IS GIVEN UP BY THE ABUTTER OWNER: By signing this Agreement it appears that the Abutting Owner gives up rights that are provided by the U. S. Constitution, as well as rights given to Citizens of New York State under the NYS Nuisance Laws, and rights normally associated with owning land.
A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE ABUTTER OWNER AGREES TO:
1. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Over, Under, Upon, Along, and Across". The Owner agrees to irrevocably grant and convey to the Company the right to go over, under, upon, along and across the Owner's property for the Company's benefit at any time. For example, this could mean that the Company can put electrical transmission lines wherever they want and enlarge roads up to 3 rods, which is nearly 50 feet, and remove trees, etc. All at their discretion and without notice. (P.3, #4, P.4, #9, P.10, #2, etc.)
2. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to a "Wind Non-Obstruction Easement". The Owner agrees to an irrevocable exclusive easement which states that he shall not interfere with the wind above his property in anyway. This is called a "Wind Non-Obstruction Easement" and this prohibits the Owner from planting trees, building a silo, constructing buildings, putting up towers, etc., unless he gets prior written approval, which is at the sole discretion of the Company. (P.2, #1 and P.11, #2.1.)
3. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to an "Effects Easement". The Owner agrees to an irrevocable perpetual easement, called an "Effects Easement". The Owner agrees to accept without recourse effects and impacts of any kind whatsoever resulting directly or indirectly from the Company's Wind Project Operations. The effects and impacted named are: air turbulence, wake, ice, and all other weather created hazards, vibration, noise, light, view, visual and audio. (P.2, #2, P.3, #4, P.11, #2.2)
4. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Other Effect of Any Kind Whatsoever". Not spelled out, but perhaps implicit and implied are impacts on cell phone reception (an inconvenience); emergency vehicles communication equipment including EMT's, Police and Fire Department (a safety issue); effects from the noise and shadow flicker that have been reported to cause serious human health issues for neighbors living within a mile or so from turbines and these include: sleep deprivation, anxiety, headaches, migraine, nausea, dizziness, palpitations, stress, and depression. By signing these Agreements the Owner gives up any rights he has or his family has under the NYS Nuisances Laws for any compensation, reparation or remediation for legal nuisance and health problems. It can also be assumed that the Company is held harmless if the value of the Owners' property decreases in value or it cannot be sold. (P.2, #2,P.11, #2.2.)
5. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to a "Construction Impact" and "Fully Understands". Additionally, the Owner by signing the Agreement confirms that he has been informed of construction impacts such as noise and dust and construction traffic that may cause inconvenience, and he is agreeable to this. The Owner further understands and accepts that construction, operation and maintenance of the wind turbines may have some impacts on the neighbors and their properties, including the Owner's Property and he is agreeable to this. (P.1, #C P.2, #2)
6. The Abutter Owner "Accepts". The Owner, for himself, his heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns, does hereby waive, remise and release any right, claim or cause of action which he may now have or which he may have in the future against the Company as a direct or indirect result of the Wind Turbine Project. (P. 3, #4, #7)
7. The Abutter Owner "Acknowledges". The Owner acknowledges that the Company has informed him of the potential impacts of construction and operation and agrees the compensation provided in this agreement is adequate for any such impacts. (Has the Owner been informed in writing of what the impacts are? Could he ask for it in writing? P.2, #2)
8. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Fully Support and Cooperate" with the Company. The Owner must support the Company by signing documents, etc. as asked for by the Company. (P. 4, #9)
9. The Abutter Owner shall Agree "this Agreement is Confidential". This agreement shall not be disclosed. The owner is not allowed to discuss the terms of his agreement with others, under any circumstances. (P. 5, #10)
10. The Abutter Owner shall Agree that the "Annual Payment Covers all Impact, Effects, and Health Issues, etc." The Owner by signing the Agreement agrees that compensation provided by the Agreement (at the app. rate of $42 per month) is adequate for any and all such impacts and effects. (Apparently, under the broad wording of "all other effects of any kind" the Company is held harmless because the Owner has accepted monetary compensation and signed the Agreement.
11. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to allow the Company "To test his Television Reception". The Company has the irrevocable right to test the television signal strength and reception of the Owner prior to the construction of wind turbines and after the construction at reasonable intervals. At the Company's discretion they can take corrective measures to improve the reception if the wind turbines have affected it. No other testing is set out in this Agreement. P. 2, #3, P. 11, #2.3)
12. The Abutter Owner shall Agree that the "Agreement Run with the Land". Agreements signed by the Owner run with the land and are binding on the Owner's future heirs, administrators, executors, legal representatives, successors and assigns. (P. 3, #7, P. 12, #6, #8)
13. The Law of New York State shall Govern the Agreement. (P. 5, #11, P. 12, #7)
14. The Agreement is to be Signed in front of a notary by the Owner and a representative of the Company.
15. Length of Agreement is 40 years or until the windfarm stops generating electricity, which ever occurs first. (If the Wind Farm stops generating and is abandon, who pays to have the towers removed? Is there a bond provided to each town to cover such contingencies? P. 3, #8, P. 12, #3)
16. Without obtaining the "Owners Consent" or approval the Company can sell the Agreement to anyone and it is binding. (P. 3, #6)
17. If the wind project is not constructed, no payments will be made to the Abutter Owner. (P. 8)
THE AGREEMENT IS ATTACHED Read for yourself the Agreement and see if you could recommend this to a friend or neighbor for any amount of money, or for $42 per month.
The purpose of this 17-page agreement is to grant the Wind Development Company certain rights and easements in exchange for monetary compensation. Shown here are highlighted notes revealing what the Company asks and what the Abutter receives.
WHAT IS GAINED BY THE ABUTTER OWNER: The abutter who signs this agreement typically gets paid at the rate of $42.00 per month ($500 per year), or perhaps a little more if his land is extremely important to the Company. He will not have a wind turbine on his land and most likely there will be wind turbines around his land and home.
WHAT IS GIVEN UP BY THE ABUTTER OWNER: By signing this Agreement it appears that the Abutting Owner gives up rights that are provided by the U. S. Constitution, as well as rights given to Citizens of New York State under the NYS Nuisance Laws, and rights normally associated with owning land.
A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE ABUTTER OWNER AGREES TO:
1. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Over, Under, Upon, Along, and Across". The Owner agrees to irrevocably grant and convey to the Company the right to go over, under, upon, along and across the Owner's property for the Company's benefit at any time. For example, this could mean that the Company can put electrical transmission lines wherever they want and enlarge roads up to 3 rods, which is nearly 50 feet, and remove trees, etc. All at their discretion and without notice. (P.3, #4, P.4, #9, P.10, #2, etc.)
2. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to a "Wind Non-Obstruction Easement". The Owner agrees to an irrevocable exclusive easement which states that he shall not interfere with the wind above his property in anyway. This is called a "Wind Non-Obstruction Easement" and this prohibits the Owner from planting trees, building a silo, constructing buildings, putting up towers, etc., unless he gets prior written approval, which is at the sole discretion of the Company. (P.2, #1 and P.11, #2.1.)
3. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to an "Effects Easement". The Owner agrees to an irrevocable perpetual easement, called an "Effects Easement". The Owner agrees to accept without recourse effects and impacts of any kind whatsoever resulting directly or indirectly from the Company's Wind Project Operations. The effects and impacted named are: air turbulence, wake, ice, and all other weather created hazards, vibration, noise, light, view, visual and audio. (P.2, #2, P.3, #4, P.11, #2.2)
4. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Other Effect of Any Kind Whatsoever". Not spelled out, but perhaps implicit and implied are impacts on cell phone reception (an inconvenience); emergency vehicles communication equipment including EMT's, Police and Fire Department (a safety issue); effects from the noise and shadow flicker that have been reported to cause serious human health issues for neighbors living within a mile or so from turbines and these include: sleep deprivation, anxiety, headaches, migraine, nausea, dizziness, palpitations, stress, and depression. By signing these Agreements the Owner gives up any rights he has or his family has under the NYS Nuisances Laws for any compensation, reparation or remediation for legal nuisance and health problems. It can also be assumed that the Company is held harmless if the value of the Owners' property decreases in value or it cannot be sold. (P.2, #2,P.11, #2.2.)
5. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to a "Construction Impact" and "Fully Understands". Additionally, the Owner by signing the Agreement confirms that he has been informed of construction impacts such as noise and dust and construction traffic that may cause inconvenience, and he is agreeable to this. The Owner further understands and accepts that construction, operation and maintenance of the wind turbines may have some impacts on the neighbors and their properties, including the Owner's Property and he is agreeable to this. (P.1, #C P.2, #2)
6. The Abutter Owner "Accepts". The Owner, for himself, his heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns, does hereby waive, remise and release any right, claim or cause of action which he may now have or which he may have in the future against the Company as a direct or indirect result of the Wind Turbine Project. (P. 3, #4, #7)
7. The Abutter Owner "Acknowledges". The Owner acknowledges that the Company has informed him of the potential impacts of construction and operation and agrees the compensation provided in this agreement is adequate for any such impacts. (Has the Owner been informed in writing of what the impacts are? Could he ask for it in writing? P.2, #2)
8. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to "Fully Support and Cooperate" with the Company. The Owner must support the Company by signing documents, etc. as asked for by the Company. (P. 4, #9)
9. The Abutter Owner shall Agree "this Agreement is Confidential". This agreement shall not be disclosed. The owner is not allowed to discuss the terms of his agreement with others, under any circumstances. (P. 5, #10)
10. The Abutter Owner shall Agree that the "Annual Payment Covers all Impact, Effects, and Health Issues, etc." The Owner by signing the Agreement agrees that compensation provided by the Agreement (at the app. rate of $42 per month) is adequate for any and all such impacts and effects. (Apparently, under the broad wording of "all other effects of any kind" the Company is held harmless because the Owner has accepted monetary compensation and signed the Agreement.
11. The Abutter Owner shall Agree to allow the Company "To test his Television Reception". The Company has the irrevocable right to test the television signal strength and reception of the Owner prior to the construction of wind turbines and after the construction at reasonable intervals. At the Company's discretion they can take corrective measures to improve the reception if the wind turbines have affected it. No other testing is set out in this Agreement. P. 2, #3, P. 11, #2.3)
12. The Abutter Owner shall Agree that the "Agreement Run with the Land". Agreements signed by the Owner run with the land and are binding on the Owner's future heirs, administrators, executors, legal representatives, successors and assigns. (P. 3, #7, P. 12, #6, #8)
13. The Law of New York State shall Govern the Agreement. (P. 5, #11, P. 12, #7)
14. The Agreement is to be Signed in front of a notary by the Owner and a representative of the Company.
15. Length of Agreement is 40 years or until the windfarm stops generating electricity, which ever occurs first. (If the Wind Farm stops generating and is abandon, who pays to have the towers removed? Is there a bond provided to each town to cover such contingencies? P. 3, #8, P. 12, #3)
16. Without obtaining the "Owners Consent" or approval the Company can sell the Agreement to anyone and it is binding. (P. 3, #6)
17. If the wind project is not constructed, no payments will be made to the Abutter Owner. (P. 8)
THE AGREEMENT IS ATTACHED Read for yourself the Agreement and see if you could recommend this to a friend or neighbor for any amount of money, or for $42 per month.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Steuben Industrial Development Association (IDA) and UPC Wind Project by Robert C. Strasburg II
After receiving the letter from UPC suggesting revenues in the “range” of $660,000 for the payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) program offered to the Town of Cohocton, Steuben County and Wayland Cohocton Central School in return for favorable legislation allowing the placement of commercial wind turbines in the Town of Cohocton, I went to the IDA myself to ask some questions.
Since I have not been able to get a strait answer from the Town Board or the Planning Board as to what the formula was for determining potential income to our Town from the installation of these wind turbines, i.e. (how much were they selling our viewscape for) I decided to ferret out the data myself.
I met with James P. Sherron the Executive Director and found his information to be quite enlightening. Following is a summary of what I learned today:
The IDA is not able to get involved in a PILOT program such as the one proposed by the European fostered wind company known as UPC unless a Town formally invites the IDA.
In order to introduce government subsidies into a project in Steuben County, the IDA must be directly involved.
The IDA attaches ownership to properties where these proposed wind mills will go by taking Title or lease of these properties and thus removes these properties from the tax roles. This allows the PILOT program to then commence.
The terms and amounts of revenue from the PILOT program that will govern the wind turbine project in Cohocton are negotiable. Negotiations of these terms are done by the Lead Agency; in this case it is the Cohocton Planning Board.
The PILOT revenue is based on the potential sale of electricity and is not a guaranteed revenue amount.
The $660,000 as the suggested amount by UPC that Cohocton Town, Steuben County and the school may receive from this PILOT program is determined by a formula based on an assumed constant output of 30% of the actual wind turbine rating. (I was not able to verify this number and it does not conform to other studies I am familiar with, other studies suggest a much lower output in the range of 10-20%)
Here are the separate factors that combine to produce the formula used by UPC in their projection:
A 2MW turbine has a supposed potential output of 2 Megawatts per hour
UPC assumes a actual output of 30%* capacity
A Megawatt is 1000 kilowatts
The IDA used .04 to represent what a kilowatt of wind generated electricity can be sold for on the electrical grid
Formula:
2MW wind turbine reduced to assumed actual production of 30% = 600 kilowatts per hour x .04 per kilowatt = $24 per hour x 24 hours in a day = $576 x 365 days per year = $210,240 per year per 2MW wind turbine gross revenue from the sale of electricity.
$210,240 per year per 2MW wind turbine x 58 proposed wind turbines in Phase 1 & Phase 2 of the Cohocton wind turbine project = $12,193,920 gross revenue for UPC per year.
Proposed $660,000 in total PILOT payments by UPC to Cohocton Town, Steuben County and the school ÷ $12,193,920 = 5% of gross revenue expensed by UPC in PILOT funds.
In summary, using the numbers provided to me by UPC and the IDA, 95% of the gross revenue generated from the sale of electricity from these 58 wind turbines included in the first two phases of the Cohocton wind project is in the control of a Privately held Corporation that has refused to disclose to me the identity of their investors. Has our Town sought to discern where this money is going? Does it stay in our Town? Our County? Our State? Our Country?
If the IDA did not remove these properties from the tax roles and UPC was obligated to pay the taxes that would then be levied on all 58 of these 2 Million dollar structures, these unknown investors would then flee our hills and Cohocton could then consider strategically placing 5 of these wind turbines throughout the Town in places chosen for their minimal impact and enjoy the $1,051,200 in revenue from the sale of electricity. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that we can service the debt, improve our Town, reduce our environmental and health impact and keep 100% of the revenue in our control with that kind of revenue. If they insist on having wind turbines, they should at least be smart about it.
I am all for alternative safe energy, but a study of the facts quickly reveals that this wind turbine industry is corrupt with corporate greed bilking tax subsidies, raping viewscapes, funneling American money out of local economies and worst of all, our Town Board has become victim to their seduction.
RE: Results of inquiry to Steuben Industrial Development Association (IDA) on 5/9/06 for confirmation of revenue formula presented by UPC Wind Management, LLC.
*30% IDA assumption may be high
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
Since I have not been able to get a strait answer from the Town Board or the Planning Board as to what the formula was for determining potential income to our Town from the installation of these wind turbines, i.e. (how much were they selling our viewscape for) I decided to ferret out the data myself.
I met with James P. Sherron the Executive Director and found his information to be quite enlightening. Following is a summary of what I learned today:
The IDA is not able to get involved in a PILOT program such as the one proposed by the European fostered wind company known as UPC unless a Town formally invites the IDA.
In order to introduce government subsidies into a project in Steuben County, the IDA must be directly involved.
The IDA attaches ownership to properties where these proposed wind mills will go by taking Title or lease of these properties and thus removes these properties from the tax roles. This allows the PILOT program to then commence.
The terms and amounts of revenue from the PILOT program that will govern the wind turbine project in Cohocton are negotiable. Negotiations of these terms are done by the Lead Agency; in this case it is the Cohocton Planning Board.
The PILOT revenue is based on the potential sale of electricity and is not a guaranteed revenue amount.
The $660,000 as the suggested amount by UPC that Cohocton Town, Steuben County and the school may receive from this PILOT program is determined by a formula based on an assumed constant output of 30% of the actual wind turbine rating. (I was not able to verify this number and it does not conform to other studies I am familiar with, other studies suggest a much lower output in the range of 10-20%)
Here are the separate factors that combine to produce the formula used by UPC in their projection:
A 2MW turbine has a supposed potential output of 2 Megawatts per hour
UPC assumes a actual output of 30%* capacity
A Megawatt is 1000 kilowatts
The IDA used .04 to represent what a kilowatt of wind generated electricity can be sold for on the electrical grid
Formula:
2MW wind turbine reduced to assumed actual production of 30% = 600 kilowatts per hour x .04 per kilowatt = $24 per hour x 24 hours in a day = $576 x 365 days per year = $210,240 per year per 2MW wind turbine gross revenue from the sale of electricity.
$210,240 per year per 2MW wind turbine x 58 proposed wind turbines in Phase 1 & Phase 2 of the Cohocton wind turbine project = $12,193,920 gross revenue for UPC per year.
Proposed $660,000 in total PILOT payments by UPC to Cohocton Town, Steuben County and the school ÷ $12,193,920 = 5% of gross revenue expensed by UPC in PILOT funds.
In summary, using the numbers provided to me by UPC and the IDA, 95% of the gross revenue generated from the sale of electricity from these 58 wind turbines included in the first two phases of the Cohocton wind project is in the control of a Privately held Corporation that has refused to disclose to me the identity of their investors. Has our Town sought to discern where this money is going? Does it stay in our Town? Our County? Our State? Our Country?
If the IDA did not remove these properties from the tax roles and UPC was obligated to pay the taxes that would then be levied on all 58 of these 2 Million dollar structures, these unknown investors would then flee our hills and Cohocton could then consider strategically placing 5 of these wind turbines throughout the Town in places chosen for their minimal impact and enjoy the $1,051,200 in revenue from the sale of electricity. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that we can service the debt, improve our Town, reduce our environmental and health impact and keep 100% of the revenue in our control with that kind of revenue. If they insist on having wind turbines, they should at least be smart about it.
I am all for alternative safe energy, but a study of the facts quickly reveals that this wind turbine industry is corrupt with corporate greed bilking tax subsidies, raping viewscapes, funneling American money out of local economies and worst of all, our Town Board has become victim to their seduction.
RE: Results of inquiry to Steuben Industrial Development Association (IDA) on 5/9/06 for confirmation of revenue formula presented by UPC Wind Management, LLC.
*30% IDA assumption may be high
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
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
An Alternative to Corporate Wind Projects - C-BED Plan
Read the C-BED Community-Based Energy Development model from the permanent links on the right column.
Corporations model keeps 95% of revenues, while payout only 5% to landholders and local government.
C-BED model returns a 20-50% for local community project.
Judge for yourself, who has a better business plan.
Corporations model keeps 95% of revenues, while payout only 5% to landholders and local government.
C-BED model returns a 20-50% for local community project.
Judge for yourself, who has a better business plan.
Monday, May 08, 2006
Cohocton Wind Watch Media Release - May 8, 2006
Cohocton Wind Watch [CWW] is sponsoring an informational meeting at Wayland-Cohocton Elementary School, 30 Park Ave., Cohocton,NY on May 18 at 7 PM.
According to Steve Trude, president of the organization, CWW plans to address issues raised by a Draft Environmental Statement [DEIS] prepared for a proposed wind farm atop the Pine Hill, Lent Hill and Brown Hill areas of Cohocton which is located in north-eastern Steuben County, New York.
Trude says the group also plans to question the efficacy of the project which was originally designed for smaller 1.5 megawatt wind turbines and now will use larger 2.0 megawatt turbines. The group will also discuss the Town of Cohocton's "Wind Mill Local Law #1."
Says Trude, "We want to make sure that the Town Board and Planning Board make the best choices for Cohocton and all of its landowners and residents."
The proposed wind farm, to be developed by UPC Wind Partners, LLC, of Massachusetts, would include 41 - 2.0 megawatt turbines, each 403 feet high. The project would be spread over 5,775 acres of leased land.
The turbines would be 13 times taller than an average utility pole, or roughly the height of Xerox Tower in nearby Rochester, NY. Current zoning laws would allow the turbines to be placed as close as 1,500 feet to nearby homes.
The turbines would be the largest built in New York State to date.
A second proposed project for the Dutch Hill area of the township would also be developed by UPC and would include 17 - 2.0 megawatt turbines.
CWW says they have many concerns about the proposed projects including a decrease in property values; lack of a feasibility study by the town; environmental and health concerns.
According to CWW, Realtors in neighboring communities where wind farms are proposed have seen many property owners selling properties in anticipation of towers being built.
Mike Keenan, a Realtor in nearby Naples, Ontario County, says he has already lost sales in towns where wind farms are proposed when prospective buyers have learned the turbines would be within their "viewscape."
Says Keenan, "Plain and simple, people don't want to look at towers."
According to the DEIS, the Cohocton turbines would be visible from many surrounding townships including Wayland, Avoca, Freemont, Howard, Wheeler, Prattsburgh, Italy and Naples as well as Canandaigua Lake.
According to Keenan, many out-of-state and downstate buyers are drawn to the region because of the low cost of housing and the scenic beauty of the area.
The DEIS states that some of the potential negative effects from construction and operation of the wind turbines include changes in the water table; sedimentation of ponds and streams; loss of wildlife habitat; loss of agricultural lands and woodlands; soil erosion and compaction; interference with communication signals; hazards created by "ice throw" and loss of tourism and recreational dollars.
CWW says it also questions tax incentives, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority cash transfers, Empire Zone deals and accelerated tax write-offs the out-of-state developers may have received.
The group says it is further concerned because several California wind farms developed by UPC's founder are no longer operational.
The group says it recently learned that UPC aided the town in the drafting of its "Wind Mill Local Law," and that some Cohocton lease-holders may have been offered more money per turbine than others.
In addition, says CWW, the DEIS contradicts itself in many places, has factual errors, contains inaccurate or incomplete maps and other mistakes.
"We are not against renewable forms of energy," says Trude. " In fact, we're all for it. We just question the size and scope of the project as well as its practicality. We don't believe the Town Board and Planning Board have thoroughly looked at all the issues involved."
The group says that through the "Freedom of Information Act", they have uncovered what appears to be irregularities in permitting for the project, including a lack of several key permitts required by Steuben County and New York State.
The Town of Cohocton has admitted that it has no clear idea as to how much revenue might be generated by the project, nor does it have a plan as to how it would spend the money.
Trude adds that town landowners have only until June 7, 2006 to respond to the DEIS, after which the town has said it will go ahead with the project. Construction is slated for the spring of 2007. The Town Board and Planning Board will only consider written questions. These should be sent in care of the Town Clerk, 15 South Main St., Cohocton, NY 14826.
The DEIS can be viewed on-line at www.cohoctonwind.com, or at the Cohocton Town Hall, the Cohocton Public Library, the E. J. Cottrell Memorial Library in Atlanta, NY, and the UPC information office at 28 Maple Ave., Cohocton.
The "Wind Mill Local Law" is available at Town Hall. Cohocton Wind Watch can be reached at http://batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch; PO Box 52, Cohocton, NY 14826, or, at 585-534-5581.
According to Steve Trude, president of the organization, CWW plans to address issues raised by a Draft Environmental Statement [DEIS] prepared for a proposed wind farm atop the Pine Hill, Lent Hill and Brown Hill areas of Cohocton which is located in north-eastern Steuben County, New York.
Trude says the group also plans to question the efficacy of the project which was originally designed for smaller 1.5 megawatt wind turbines and now will use larger 2.0 megawatt turbines. The group will also discuss the Town of Cohocton's "Wind Mill Local Law #1."
Says Trude, "We want to make sure that the Town Board and Planning Board make the best choices for Cohocton and all of its landowners and residents."
The proposed wind farm, to be developed by UPC Wind Partners, LLC, of Massachusetts, would include 41 - 2.0 megawatt turbines, each 403 feet high. The project would be spread over 5,775 acres of leased land.
The turbines would be 13 times taller than an average utility pole, or roughly the height of Xerox Tower in nearby Rochester, NY. Current zoning laws would allow the turbines to be placed as close as 1,500 feet to nearby homes.
The turbines would be the largest built in New York State to date.
A second proposed project for the Dutch Hill area of the township would also be developed by UPC and would include 17 - 2.0 megawatt turbines.
CWW says they have many concerns about the proposed projects including a decrease in property values; lack of a feasibility study by the town; environmental and health concerns.
According to CWW, Realtors in neighboring communities where wind farms are proposed have seen many property owners selling properties in anticipation of towers being built.
Mike Keenan, a Realtor in nearby Naples, Ontario County, says he has already lost sales in towns where wind farms are proposed when prospective buyers have learned the turbines would be within their "viewscape."
Says Keenan, "Plain and simple, people don't want to look at towers."
According to the DEIS, the Cohocton turbines would be visible from many surrounding townships including Wayland, Avoca, Freemont, Howard, Wheeler, Prattsburgh, Italy and Naples as well as Canandaigua Lake.
According to Keenan, many out-of-state and downstate buyers are drawn to the region because of the low cost of housing and the scenic beauty of the area.
The DEIS states that some of the potential negative effects from construction and operation of the wind turbines include changes in the water table; sedimentation of ponds and streams; loss of wildlife habitat; loss of agricultural lands and woodlands; soil erosion and compaction; interference with communication signals; hazards created by "ice throw" and loss of tourism and recreational dollars.
CWW says it also questions tax incentives, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority cash transfers, Empire Zone deals and accelerated tax write-offs the out-of-state developers may have received.
The group says it is further concerned because several California wind farms developed by UPC's founder are no longer operational.
The group says it recently learned that UPC aided the town in the drafting of its "Wind Mill Local Law," and that some Cohocton lease-holders may have been offered more money per turbine than others.
In addition, says CWW, the DEIS contradicts itself in many places, has factual errors, contains inaccurate or incomplete maps and other mistakes.
"We are not against renewable forms of energy," says Trude. " In fact, we're all for it. We just question the size and scope of the project as well as its practicality. We don't believe the Town Board and Planning Board have thoroughly looked at all the issues involved."
The group says that through the "Freedom of Information Act", they have uncovered what appears to be irregularities in permitting for the project, including a lack of several key permitts required by Steuben County and New York State.
The Town of Cohocton has admitted that it has no clear idea as to how much revenue might be generated by the project, nor does it have a plan as to how it would spend the money.
Trude adds that town landowners have only until June 7, 2006 to respond to the DEIS, after which the town has said it will go ahead with the project. Construction is slated for the spring of 2007. The Town Board and Planning Board will only consider written questions. These should be sent in care of the Town Clerk, 15 South Main St., Cohocton, NY 14826.
The DEIS can be viewed on-line at www.cohoctonwind.com, or at the Cohocton Town Hall, the Cohocton Public Library, the E. J. Cottrell Memorial Library in Atlanta, NY, and the UPC information office at 28 Maple Ave., Cohocton.
The "Wind Mill Local Law" is available at Town Hall. Cohocton Wind Watch can be reached at http://batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch; PO Box 52, Cohocton, NY 14826, or, at 585-534-5581.
Saturday, May 06, 2006
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL RESIDENTS OF COHOCTON
COHOCTON WIND WATCH
P.O. Box 52, Cohocton, NY 14826
585-534-5581 Emails to: cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com http://batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch/
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL RESIDENTS OF COHOCTON
We are sponsoring an information meeting to be held at the Wayland-Cohocton School in Cohocton on May 18th at 7 P.M. We ask that every taxpayer and resident come to this meeting if at all possible. Please do not take the following matter lightly. It has very serious long term ramifications to all residents.
As citizens of the Town of Cohocton we have concerns about the Wind Turbine Project proposed for Cohocton by UPC Wind Management, Inc. of Newton, MA. These concerns have motivated us to make this formal outreach to you. In our judgment, this proposed plan from UPC is short on information as to what long term negative impacts we are facing.
• Please do not allow the seductive suggestion from UPC of $660,000 per year in revenue asreleased -in their letter dated April 11 to blind you. Come to the meeting for the details on this.
• The Town Board is on a fast-track to the installation of these wind turbines and has not given in toour appeal for sufficient time to study this issue and have so far denied the option of a public vote.
• Our preliminary research has uncovered that if sufficient pre-planning is not done prior to theinstallation of a wind farm project, residents may later discover that they are met by deaf earswhen they discover things are not as they were told they would be.
• The Town Board has not satisfied us that they have a plan to help us combat a severe drop inproperty values as a result of these wind turbines.
• It is our judgment, that extremely important health and environmental issues are being leftinsufficiently addressed.
• In this short letter we are not able to share with you all the details of these negative effects.
We consider it fair to scrutinize the details of this Wind Turbine Project promoted by UPC as they stand to make millions of dollars from these turbines. UPC is only putting forth the most favorable information. After our review of the details of this turbine project (including the possibility of 65 wind turbines protruding 400 feet into the air on top of our surrounding hills) we are alarmed at the numerous negative long term financial and health effects that you may suffer.
This is arguably the largest decision that any Town Board in Cohocton's history has had to make. It is in your best interest to be informed about this issue. Please come to the May 18th meeting to take an active roll in protecting yourself, your family, your assets and the future of Cohocton.
Sincerely,
Cohocton Wind Watch
P.O. Box 52, Cohocton, NY 14826
585-534-5581 Emails to: cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com http://batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch/
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL RESIDENTS OF COHOCTON
We are sponsoring an information meeting to be held at the Wayland-Cohocton School in Cohocton on May 18th at 7 P.M. We ask that every taxpayer and resident come to this meeting if at all possible. Please do not take the following matter lightly. It has very serious long term ramifications to all residents.
As citizens of the Town of Cohocton we have concerns about the Wind Turbine Project proposed for Cohocton by UPC Wind Management, Inc. of Newton, MA. These concerns have motivated us to make this formal outreach to you. In our judgment, this proposed plan from UPC is short on information as to what long term negative impacts we are facing.
• Please do not allow the seductive suggestion from UPC of $660,000 per year in revenue asreleased -in their letter dated April 11 to blind you. Come to the meeting for the details on this.
• The Town Board is on a fast-track to the installation of these wind turbines and has not given in toour appeal for sufficient time to study this issue and have so far denied the option of a public vote.
• Our preliminary research has uncovered that if sufficient pre-planning is not done prior to theinstallation of a wind farm project, residents may later discover that they are met by deaf earswhen they discover things are not as they were told they would be.
• The Town Board has not satisfied us that they have a plan to help us combat a severe drop inproperty values as a result of these wind turbines.
• It is our judgment, that extremely important health and environmental issues are being leftinsufficiently addressed.
• In this short letter we are not able to share with you all the details of these negative effects.
We consider it fair to scrutinize the details of this Wind Turbine Project promoted by UPC as they stand to make millions of dollars from these turbines. UPC is only putting forth the most favorable information. After our review of the details of this turbine project (including the possibility of 65 wind turbines protruding 400 feet into the air on top of our surrounding hills) we are alarmed at the numerous negative long term financial and health effects that you may suffer.
This is arguably the largest decision that any Town Board in Cohocton's history has had to make. It is in your best interest to be informed about this issue. Please come to the May 18th meeting to take an active roll in protecting yourself, your family, your assets and the future of Cohocton.
Sincerely,
Cohocton Wind Watch
Public Health and Safety placed at risk by UPC Cohocton Wind Farm
The more you know the greater your outrage! Government has an intrinsic duty to protect the public heath and safety of citizens. Local jurisdictions, especially on the town and county levels are supposed to have the closest empathy for their neighbors and residents. The theory that planning committees and town boards administer according to their solemn responsibility is not a given. Blatant and conscious disregard to fulfill their public oath is no further away then the caviler and heavy hand on the Town of Cohocton as it pushes a man made disaster.
UPC, the developer of the Cohocton Wind Power project, operates under a shell of corporate shields. Acting under Canandaigua Power Partners 1 and 2, LLC – the two phase project has been introduced to circumvent the impact of a single plan. Just how many more ventures are ready to be unveiled and are being kept from public scrutiny? What is the purpose of conducting business under a stealth shield of disinformation and disingenuous dealings?
Part of the answer rests in the severe adverse health effects to residents that live in proximity to the 2.0 MW wind turbines. Listen to the real life experience of the horror and medical consequences of being located too near to these health hazards. The testimonials on Save Upstate New York speaks volumes and goes directly to the reason why meaningful set backs are so necessary to protect households, families and children.
Examine closely the scientific research of noted scientist Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD.
Industrial wind turbines produce significant amounts of audible and low-frequency noise. Dr. Oguz A. Soysal, Professor and Chairman of the Dept. of Physics and Engineering at Frostburg State University in Maryland, measured sound levels over half a mile away from the Meyersdale, PA, 20-turbine wind farm. Typical audible (A-weighted) dB (decibel) levels were in the 50-60 range, and audible plus low-frequency (C-weighted) dB were in the 65-70 range. 65-70 dB is the loudness of a washing machine, vacuum cleaner, or hair dryer. A difference of 10 dB between A and C weighting represents a significant amount of low-frequency sound by World Health Organization standards.
The noise produced by wind turbines has a thumping, pulsing character, especially at night, when it is more audible. The noise is louder at night because of the contrast between the still, cool air at ground level and the steady stream of wind at the level of the turbine hubs. This nighttime noise travels a long distance. It has been documented to be disturbing to residents 1.2 miles away from wind turbines in regular rolling terrain, and 1.5 miles away in Appalachian valleys.
If these facts don’t trigger your anxiety level, you won’t find any relief from the medical data with a long standing experience of the health problems from wind turbines:
Dr. Amanda Harry, a British physician, found (near a 16-turbine installation in 2003) that 13 out of 14 people surveyed reported an increase in headaches, and 10 reported sleep problems and anxiety. Other symptoms included migraine, nausea, dizziness, palpitations, stress, and depression.
Noise itself can induce dizziness and loss of balance in people with a previous history of noise-induced hearing loss, since, when people damage their hearing through too much exposure to loud (e.g., machine) noise, the balance organs in the inner ear may also be damaged. This is known as the Tullio phenomenon.
Still need more evidence? Consider these peer review conclusions. Balaban, CD, and Thayer, JF. 2001. Neurological bases for balance-anxiety links. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 15:53-79, wrote:
Dizziness (specifically, vertigo) and anxiety are neurologically linked phenomena. Hence the anxiety and depression seen in association with other symptoms near wind installations are not a neurotic response to symptoms, but rather a neurologically linked response to the balance disturbances people experience from shadow flicker or low-frequency noise. Sleep deprivation, by the way, also causes anxiety and depression.
More troublesome concerns of living within the harmful effects of wind turbines are demonstrated by Sataloff, J, et al. 1987. Tinnitus and vertigo in healthy senior citizens without a history of noise exposure. American Journal of Otolaryngology 8:87-89.
Older people, who often sleep less soundly, are more likely to have their sleep disturbed by turbine noise. They may also suffer more disturbances in equilibrium near turbines because of age-related problems with the function of the inner ear (e.g., dizziness and tinnitus: ringing in the ears) or from the nerves or parts of the brain receiving signals from the inner ear. It is noteworthy that among healthy people age 57 to 91, 5% have chronic dizziness, and 24% tinnitus.
Dr. Nina Pierpont presents additional health dangers.
When turning with the sun behind them, turbine blades cast moving shadows across the landscape and houses, described as a strobe effect within houses, which can be difficult to block out. Some people lose their balance or become nauseated from seeing the movement. As with car or sea sickness, this is because the three organs of position perception (the inner ear, eyes, and stretch receptors in muscles and joints) are not agreeing with each other: the eyes say there is movement, while the ears and stretch receptors do not. People with a personal or family history of migraine, or migraine-associated phenomena such as car sickness or vertigo, are more susceptible to these effects. The strobe effect can also provoke seizures in people with epilepsy.
What is the overwhelming public interest that takes precedent over the health and safety of the 150 residents that are being condemned to a life of chronic ill health? The rational solution is to demand proper set backs. Remember that the size of turbines in the Cohocton UPC project are 33% bigger than those slated for the adjacent Town of Prattsburgh. The noise levels in the UPC impact study are based upon 1.5 MW turbines. Reasonable and objective public officials would acknowledge the flaws in the UPC DEIS report. Where is the legitimate oversight when a township refuses to protect the health of resident taxpayers?
The common sense solution is to ensure the fundamental rights and protection for all citizens from government approved complicity in harming the health of residents. Irresponsible conduct and negligence bears substantial liability for the municipality, developer and all lessors under contract because they are knowingly placing this neighbors health at risk.
Setbacks of 1.5 – 2.0 miles from such wind turbines is the prudent and moral requirement. The fall out from such reckless public policy will touch other area townships. The conscience of the Cohocton community seems to have been lost. Some have sold their souls for a few pieces of silver. The real and true price of this UPC project will be paid for decades to come. No one can turn a blind eye to the willful harm to neighbors and accept such injustice in silence. Immediate action to increase the setback limits from 1,500 feet to a distance which will ensure that each surrounding household does not jeopardize their health is imperative and the duty of government on all levels. Show you outrage, write and place your objections into the legal record. Contact the Town of Cohocton and demand meaningful modification to the UPC project. Save our Finger Lakes region, full details on Cohocton Wind Watch.
James Hall – May 7, 2006
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Notice Of Acceptance Of Draft EIS And Public Hearing
Steuben County - The Planning Board of the Town of Cohocton, as lead agency, has accepted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Cohocton Wind Power Project. A public hearing on the Draft EIS will be held on May 25, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. at the Wayland-Cohocton Elementary School, 30 Park Avenue, Cohocton, NY. Public comments will be accepted until June 9, 2006. The action involves Site Plan and Special Use Permit approval and all the permits and approvals necessary to construct and operate a wind-powered generating facility consisting of forty one (41) turbines with a capacity of up to eighty two (82) megawatts, a 115 kV overhead transmission line, electrical substation, collector station, operations and maintenance building, electrical collection system, gravel access roads and necessary public road improvements, and up to four meteorological towers, on approximately 5,755 acres of private lands. The turbines are proposed to be located primarily along Pine Hill and Lent Hill northeast of the Village of Cohocton. The transmission line will be located through the Cohocton River Valley south of the turbine area.
Contact: Sandra Riley, Town of Cohocton, 15 South Main Street, Cohocton, NY 14826, phone: (585) 384-5330 ext. 1.
Contact: Sandra Riley, Town of Cohocton, 15 South Main Street, Cohocton, NY 14826, phone: (585) 384-5330 ext. 1.
Will Sherwood, Mayor - Village of Naples, NY letter
Village of Naples New York
P.O. Box 386, 106 South Main Street Phone: (585) 374-2435
Naples, New York 14512 Fax: (585) 374-2441
April 28, 2006
Mr. Jack Zigenfus, Supervisor
Town of Cohocton
6 West Main Street
Atlanta, New York 14826
Dear Supervisor Zigenfus,
While I wholeheartedly support exploration and research into alternative energy sources, I am also deeply concerned about Cohocton’s plans to install wind turbines within sight of the Village of Naples.
Your selected sites on Pine Hill will be within a few short miles of our village center and due to their proximity, their colossal scale and the actual locations they will be seen from virtually every spot in the village. Their presence will set a precedent for future installations within sight of the village. With this letter I formally ask that the village of Naples be granted “Interested Party” status in the SEQRA process. We ask that this letter be put into the public record as you move forward in your SEQRA review.
Is this a case of NIMBY? You bet. As a community that is dependant on the tourism industry, we are deeply troubled by the looming visual presence of these huge monoliths effecting our view-shed. Their presence will surely impact the environment here in the Village with the word environment being defined in the SEQRA regulations to include “the existing community or neighborhood character”, having “historic and aesthetic significance”.
Naples is famous for its beauty and even the most naïve observer could not fail to register the negative influence that the turbines presence could have on life in our village.
We see another potential impact to the village with the likelihood that trucks carrying component parts might come down Route 21, through the village and could realistically tie up traffic, before during and after their installation. Naples has suffered immeasurably as a result of the 2004 spring storms and the resultant washout damage done to Route 21. For the last two years, our tourism has been at a modern day low and even today, Route 21 is closed off for three months as the DOT works to make those repairs permanent. I can’t imagine how our restaurants and sundry other tourist related businesses will stay open should the routes used by the trucks need augmenting either in preparation for or as a result of the moving process.
I beg you to cease and desist, to cancel this project before it does irreparable harm to the character of our community and the economic viability of our entire region.
Very Truly Yours;
Will Sherwood, Mayor
P.O. Box 386, 106 South Main Street Phone: (585) 374-2435
Naples, New York 14512 Fax: (585) 374-2441
April 28, 2006
Mr. Jack Zigenfus, Supervisor
Town of Cohocton
6 West Main Street
Atlanta, New York 14826
Dear Supervisor Zigenfus,
While I wholeheartedly support exploration and research into alternative energy sources, I am also deeply concerned about Cohocton’s plans to install wind turbines within sight of the Village of Naples.
Your selected sites on Pine Hill will be within a few short miles of our village center and due to their proximity, their colossal scale and the actual locations they will be seen from virtually every spot in the village. Their presence will set a precedent for future installations within sight of the village. With this letter I formally ask that the village of Naples be granted “Interested Party” status in the SEQRA process. We ask that this letter be put into the public record as you move forward in your SEQRA review.
Is this a case of NIMBY? You bet. As a community that is dependant on the tourism industry, we are deeply troubled by the looming visual presence of these huge monoliths effecting our view-shed. Their presence will surely impact the environment here in the Village with the word environment being defined in the SEQRA regulations to include “the existing community or neighborhood character”, having “historic and aesthetic significance”.
Naples is famous for its beauty and even the most naïve observer could not fail to register the negative influence that the turbines presence could have on life in our village.
We see another potential impact to the village with the likelihood that trucks carrying component parts might come down Route 21, through the village and could realistically tie up traffic, before during and after their installation. Naples has suffered immeasurably as a result of the 2004 spring storms and the resultant washout damage done to Route 21. For the last two years, our tourism has been at a modern day low and even today, Route 21 is closed off for three months as the DOT works to make those repairs permanent. I can’t imagine how our restaurants and sundry other tourist related businesses will stay open should the routes used by the trucks need augmenting either in preparation for or as a result of the moving process.
I beg you to cease and desist, to cancel this project before it does irreparable harm to the character of our community and the economic viability of our entire region.
Very Truly Yours;
Will Sherwood, Mayor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)