TOWN OF CAPE VINCENT LOCAL LAW of 2006

A LOCAL LAW to AMMEND CAPE VINCENTS ZONING LAW

WDT / ILL Wind Blowing/ Potential Wind Developments In CV

A new citizens organization, Wind Power Ethics Group

Byline: Kelly Vadney

Jun. 24--CAPE VINCENT -- A new citizens organization, Wind Power Ethics Group, is investigating possible effects of proposed wind turbines in the town.

"There's been a lot of indecision on the board," said Dr. Charles J. Moehs, vice president and spokesman for the group. "I don't think they've covered all of the issues."

WPEG sent a letter to the town board urging it to consider a moratorium on turbines through Dexter attorney Judy Drabicki last week.

Dr. Moehs said 50 to 60 people are members of WPEG, both seasonal and year-round residents. He said the group has met two or three times in the past month to two

WIND TOWER SETBACK NIXED

Wind power setback nixed
Cape zoning plan: amendment changed to resolve deadlock
By Jude Seymour
Times staff writer
June 16,2006

Cape Vincent – two members of the town Council have reversed their positions on setback requirements of commercial wind towers, causing a deadlock that was resolved Thursday only by stripping any such regulations from up close zoning law amendment.
Two Councilman recusing themselves over apparent conflicts of interest, the three members remaining agreed May 11 two set a project boundary that would begin 1000 feet from the already established River district boundary. Proposed law therefore, restricted the first turbine from being placed any closer than 2600 feet from the center line over 12 the.
But supervisor Thomas K Rhinebeck and Councilman Mickey W Orvis offered a revised boundary Thursday that showed turbines as close as 1600 feet from the center line over 12 E. Councilman Clifford P. Schneider who had already compromised for the May 11 proposition did not alter his proposal.
“There’s been overwhelming support for total use of the Ag district, to begin with." Mr. Rhinebeck in explaining his change of course" and furthermore, I see no reason other than visual impacts for anything other than that"
Mr. Orvis added," I can't justify taking another thousand feet, whether it's a farmer or just a regular landowner of their property."
But Mr. Schneider said town residents have been misled by statements made at the June 3 public hearing, where many town farmers claimed they would have problems with the proposed setbacks.
“I found out these were basically three farmers affected by what the town was proposing," the councilman said." And two of these farmers still had 100 acres that could be developed. One farmer is seriously affected, but he still going to have 40 acres left to have a tower on."
The three Councilmen could agree to address setbacks only through forbidding wind power development in the lake and river districts. Their proposal also allows tower construction starting at 1600 feet from the high water mark of both Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River leaving the town planning board responsible for actual siting during each procedural review.
This revised zoning law amendment will be subject to a public hearing which has not been scheduled all three Councilman agreed not to pursue a six-month moratorium on wind power development.
“We have to take advantage of the tax relief that's going to be available to us." Said Mr. Orvis." We could wait and the wind company, the developer, could go to another spot and come back to us, but supply and demand.
We’re not the only ones in the country that are going to have wind towers built. The longer we wait the longer were going to wait for a supply of wind towers. And that's longer we have to wait for any tax relief."

Assemblyman Aubertine’s letter to Cape Vincent’s Town Board written in June of 2006:

Assemblyman Aubertine’s letter to Cape Vincent’s Town Board written in June of 2006:
Re: Abstaining from Voting on the location of Wind Turbines in Cape Vincent
Ladies and gentlemen:
I regret that I was unable to attend the public hearing held on June 3rd at which time the above referenced subject was discussed and I appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts with you now.
Specifically, I would like to comment about the issue of whether a board member should abstain from voting on an issue. As elected representatives, we are responsible to make decisions for the benefit of our constituents and community. This project, which affects thousands of acres and dozens of property owners, has the potential to positively affect every resident. Whether through a reduced property tax rate or new economic opportunities, Messrs.’ Wood and Mason will certainly not be the sole beneficiaries should this project move forward.
While some may feel that these elected officials should abstain from voting on this matter – my belief is that they should not. If they are restrained from voting in this instance, then shouldn’t the community decide now what the guiding principals will be for future abstention in different matters and with what representative? I.e. voting on a tax rate that affects their personal property.
Healthy and positive discourse is mandatory in a democracy; however, governing by referendum is unwise. After careful reflection, I feel it is ethically proper that in this case all board members should vote on the issue at hand. In fact, I believe it is their responsibility to do so.

Sincerely,

Darrel J. Aubertine

Edsall Letter 6/14/2006 & Minutes

.

June 14, 2006:

Desperate to cut the public out of the zoning process, PB Chairman Edsall wrote a letter June 14, 2006, to the town board informing them that the PB passed a resolution by a 5-0 favor vote, that the current zoning law is sufficient to properly site any private or commercial wind turbines in the Town of Cape Vincent. No change to the current zoning laws are necessary at this time. We propose that the Town Board abandon its efforts to amend the current zoning law.” [This resolution effectively allowed developer’s unrestricted rights for development and give the planning board as much or as little control as they deem appropriate.
Edsall wrote that the resolution passed by a 5 to 0 vote indicating that neither PBC Edsall or two other members of the PB with ties to wind developers recused themselves from this vote.]
Was there even a vote? In the minutes from the Planning Board meeting of June 14, 2006, there is no record of any such vote.

Edsall Letter

Planning Board Minutes June 14, 2006 (1)

Planning Board Minutes June 14, 2006 (2)

Cape Vincent Group Seeks Moratorium On Wind Farms

Cape Vincent Group Seeks Moratorium On Wind Farms

June 14, 2006 in WWNY-TV Watertown

A group of residents has hired an attorney in connection with proposals to build a wind farm in the town of Cape Vincent. Wind Power Ethics Group, made up of approximately 30 people, wants a moratorium on development of commercial wind power facilities.

The group hired Dexter attorney Judy Drabicki, who drafted a letter asking the town board to make no decisions on wind farm projects for six months.

Drabicki said the town needs to carefully examine the potential harm posed by wind facilities.

"You need to look at the view shed. You need to create computer generated images. You need to study the birds, study the traffic, not just click off boxes on a form," said Drabicki.

The attorney said a State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) is necessary before the town allows wind farm development.

Meanwhile, the town council is working on drafting zoning ordinances. It has been accepting letters from residents about the proposed wind farm projects.

The council will meet Thursday to discuss the issue.

"The SEQR is part of our process of changing any zoning law, which the town board will address all those issues. Link unavailable

Edsall Letter ~ proposing efforts to abandon efforts to amend current zoning

Planning Board Chairman Richard Edsall Proposes Town Board abandons efforts to amend current zoning

Cape Vincent ~ Wind History ~ WPEG’s attorney suggests moratorium on wind development

June 13, 2006:

In a letter to Town Supervisor Rienbeck and the TB, WPEG’s attorney suggests that any wind zoning law should be preceded by a moratorium on wind development to give all parties time to research the issue of industrial wind development. The town adopts no such moratorium as other surrounding towns do. This has the appearance that the town with 6 conflicts of interest is in a rush to expedite the wind development process.
All other towns around Cape Vincent have done moratoriums on this issue to develop a wind law.

J. Drabicki ~ Letter to Supervisor Reinbeck Re: Comments on Proposed Local law to Amend CVZoning Law

Wind farm topic causes turmoil

Wind farm topic causes turmoil
When a town board schedules a meeting on a Saturday and so many people show up, you know it's a big issue: wind farms.
June 4, 2006 by Brian Dwyer in News10now
Link not available

They have them in Lowville, and they'll soon be in Cape Vincent.

Depending on who you ask, you'll get a different answer as to where they should go.


The town board is considering a law requiring them to be 1,600 feet away from the riverfront district.


Those living on the water don't like it, and they say it's way too close and would ruin their property.


"What are you creating? Not a few isolated windmills, towers, or turbines, but 150 of them. It'll desecrate the landscape for generations to come. I don't want to look at them," one discouraged community member said.


But for some, they see what is happening in Lowville.


The alternative energy, combined with the tax money coming in, sounds like a good way to keep their taxes down.


Farmers are even asking that the towers be built closer than 1,600 feet away