Watertown Daily Times | Much is at stake in upcoming elections
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2009
The voters of Jefferson County have a great responsibility on Nov. 3. There are many candidates running this year who would like to give your town away. Yes, give your town away to multibillion-dollar foreign wind corporations to add a few dollars to their budgets. The big plan is to place nearly 500 wind turbines that operate at a 20 percent efficiency throughout the county. Think about this for a minute. This will destroy the county, your town and your property, and thanks to the many lies that the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) has spread to the town boards and the landowners, we all are in trouble.
Here is a good example. In the town of Lyme, we have two openings for the town board. Running for these positions are Eric McDermott, a 2009 High School graduate. Is he ready to deal with the likes of Acciona Energy and BP? Julia Gosier, the outspoken member of Voters for Wind, whose agenda is to give the town of Lyme, known as the Golden Crescent, to British Petroleum. What would this do to our quiet nights and beautiful sunsets, and property values? She presently has a lawsuit against Lyme's wind law. Don Bourquin, member of the Planning Board, has a conflict of interest with his family and wind contracts. Ed DeMattia, a common-sense retiree from Verizon with an open mind, wants to work for all the people in Lyme, has no conflicts. Anne Harris, member of the Planning Board, who worked many hours with others to develop a good and fair wind law for the town, has no conflicts. The voters of Lyme have a clear choice. All the voters of Jefferson County should know whom they are voting for, and what they stand for. Call them and ask the hard questions. There is very much at stake here. Just look to Wolfe Island, add another 400, 450-foot wind turbines, and visualize what your town would look like. Would you buy a $30,000 car that gets six MPG? Voters, get out to vote and vote responsibly.
Steve Rutigliano
Three Mile Bay
Monday, September 28, 2009
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Wind farm revenue may take major hit
EMPIRE ZONE: Leaders brace for $6.3m reduction if appeal fails
Wind farm revenue may take major hit
STEVE VIRKLER
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2009
LOWVILLE — While hopeful that the Maple Ridge Wind Farm will retain Empire Zone benefits, local leaders are preparing for the worst-case scenario: a $6.3 million drop in combined wind-farm revenue for area governments.
While Lewis County projected $2.16 million from the wind farm in this year's budget, the proposed 2010 budget likely will include only about $600,000, the amount the county would receive if Empire Zone benefits are revoked, County Manager David H. Pendergast said. That's nearly a $1.6 million reduction.
link here to original story
Wind farm revenue may take major hit
STEVE VIRKLER
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2009
LOWVILLE — While hopeful that the Maple Ridge Wind Farm will retain Empire Zone benefits, local leaders are preparing for the worst-case scenario: a $6.3 million drop in combined wind-farm revenue for area governments.
While Lewis County projected $2.16 million from the wind farm in this year's budget, the proposed 2010 budget likely will include only about $600,000, the amount the county would receive if Empire Zone benefits are revoked, County Manager David H. Pendergast said. That's nearly a $1.6 million reduction.
link here to original story
Friday, September 18, 2009
WDT Editorial Wind power: look beyond money
Watertown Daily Times | Wind power: look beyond money
Wind power: look beyond money
By PERRY WHITE
SPECIAL COMMENTARY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
Whither wind? As the nation staggers toward replacing fossil fuels with alternative energy sources, the north country has become a favored spot for companies looking to develop wind farms. The largest wind farm in the Northeast is up and running in Lewis County, and new projects are proposed in Hounsfield, Cape Vincent, Lyme, Clayton, Orleans and Hammond. Each of those communities is struggling with how to embrace — or not — the 400-foot towers and the transmission lines to carry the power.
The range of reactions is enlightening. The Maple Ridge project was embraced with enthusiasm by the communities on top of the Tug Hill Plateau, where before windmills, the chief enterprises were snowmobile trails, taverns and dying farms. That project has pumped about $8 million a year combined into town, school and county coffers, providing some tax relief and many capital improvements in towns that were far from flush with cash.
Many other municipal leaders now see the Maple Ridge model as potential for an infusion of fresh money into town bank accounts. In Cape Vincent, a significant opposition to wind power has gained no traction with a Town Council and a Planning Board that have unabashedly embraced a project for the town.
In Clayton, where the Town Council appeared to be leaning in the same direction, a citizens committee charged with developing recommended wind farm regulations came back with strong controls on setbacks and noise that town Supervisor Justin Taylor has acknowledged may end any prospect of a wind project in the town. Orleans and Lyme officials seem to be leaning in the same direction, while Hammond's reaction has been much more like Cape Vincent's.
The hallmark of the issue in each town has been the level of discord it has engendered. The Wind Power Ethics Group in Cape Vincent has been the subject of scorn, anger and ridicule by residents who view wind power as saving the town. Needless to say, the anti-wind group sees it as ruining the town's unique site, where Lake Ontario joins the St. Lawrence River, the gateway to the Thousand Islands. The Hammond battle appears to be forming along the same lines.
What is not being addressed in any of these debates is the larger question of what position wind power will take in the national energy production cycle. Because wind power technology has been around for a long time, it is at an advanced stage of development, and it is cheaper than solar power. Thus, it achieved a quick popularity with people seeking a quick alternative to coal and oil.
However, wind power has its own drawbacks. For one, except in off-shore installations, it is intermittent. And it is unpredictably intermittent — the loss of sufficient wind to generate electricity cannot be controlled by system operators. Hence, wind power will always need backup power to step in when the wind dies. And to date, that has been provided primarily by coal-fired plants — our worst choice, given the greenhouse gases it produces.
This flaw creates a false sense of accomplishment for environmentalists — yes, the wind is infinitely renewable and produces no pollution. But at least at this point in its technological development, it is a gallingly unreliable source of electricity that requires standby power to keep a sufficient number of electrons rolling across the thirsty electrical grid.
There is also the issue of cost. Wind power is economically feasible only with significant, multilayered government subsidies. Without the federal tax credit for such facilities, which reduces costs by several cents per kilowatt and allows the power to be competitive, few wind projects would be proposed. And no wind-power projects in New York state are being proposed without significant tax concessions — from Maple Ridge, where Empire Zone status funded by state taxpayers has kept the ball in the air to date, to payment-in-lieu-of-tax agreements being sought by every other wind developer. This spreads the costs of making money to taxpayers everywhere.
Hovering over the deeply divided parties is the Wolfe Island Wind Project, an 86-tower development in Ontario that looms, either wistfully or forebodingly, over the Cape Vincent, Lyme and Clayton combatants. That project is visible on Dry Hill Road in Rodman, 30 miles away, especially at night, when the array of 86 intermittent red lights casts an eerie slash of blinking light on the distant horizon.
Yet the issue here boils down to money. Some people want to make money off the wind farms, and some want to preserve and protect their property values.
And this creates perhaps the most subtle and difficult-to-address question: are those opposed to wind farms because of their fear they will despoil what is unquestionably one of the most beautiful regions in the Northeast carrying the torch for everyone because it is in the state's — and arguably the nation's — interest to protect such an important natural resource? Would the nation be happy if a nuclear power plant was proposed for Crater Lake, for example, or if a hydropower project was proposed for the Grand Canyon? I doubt it.
The north country may be the finest example of the good and the bad of wind power development. On the one hand, Maple Ridge appears to be an exemplary project that meets nearly everyone's needs and harms very few. On the other, the river project proposals may carry too great a cost for the entire region, with very few benefiting and many harmed. And once the towers are up, they are up for a long, long time. This is not a decision that should be rushed. And because the ramifications are so widespread, it is one that should be considered in the broader sense, and not fueled only by money.
Perry White is the city editor of the Watertown Daily Times
Wind power: look beyond money
By PERRY WHITE
SPECIAL COMMENTARY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
Whither wind? As the nation staggers toward replacing fossil fuels with alternative energy sources, the north country has become a favored spot for companies looking to develop wind farms. The largest wind farm in the Northeast is up and running in Lewis County, and new projects are proposed in Hounsfield, Cape Vincent, Lyme, Clayton, Orleans and Hammond. Each of those communities is struggling with how to embrace — or not — the 400-foot towers and the transmission lines to carry the power.
The range of reactions is enlightening. The Maple Ridge project was embraced with enthusiasm by the communities on top of the Tug Hill Plateau, where before windmills, the chief enterprises were snowmobile trails, taverns and dying farms. That project has pumped about $8 million a year combined into town, school and county coffers, providing some tax relief and many capital improvements in towns that were far from flush with cash.
Many other municipal leaders now see the Maple Ridge model as potential for an infusion of fresh money into town bank accounts. In Cape Vincent, a significant opposition to wind power has gained no traction with a Town Council and a Planning Board that have unabashedly embraced a project for the town.
In Clayton, where the Town Council appeared to be leaning in the same direction, a citizens committee charged with developing recommended wind farm regulations came back with strong controls on setbacks and noise that town Supervisor Justin Taylor has acknowledged may end any prospect of a wind project in the town. Orleans and Lyme officials seem to be leaning in the same direction, while Hammond's reaction has been much more like Cape Vincent's.
The hallmark of the issue in each town has been the level of discord it has engendered. The Wind Power Ethics Group in Cape Vincent has been the subject of scorn, anger and ridicule by residents who view wind power as saving the town. Needless to say, the anti-wind group sees it as ruining the town's unique site, where Lake Ontario joins the St. Lawrence River, the gateway to the Thousand Islands. The Hammond battle appears to be forming along the same lines.
What is not being addressed in any of these debates is the larger question of what position wind power will take in the national energy production cycle. Because wind power technology has been around for a long time, it is at an advanced stage of development, and it is cheaper than solar power. Thus, it achieved a quick popularity with people seeking a quick alternative to coal and oil.
However, wind power has its own drawbacks. For one, except in off-shore installations, it is intermittent. And it is unpredictably intermittent — the loss of sufficient wind to generate electricity cannot be controlled by system operators. Hence, wind power will always need backup power to step in when the wind dies. And to date, that has been provided primarily by coal-fired plants — our worst choice, given the greenhouse gases it produces.
This flaw creates a false sense of accomplishment for environmentalists — yes, the wind is infinitely renewable and produces no pollution. But at least at this point in its technological development, it is a gallingly unreliable source of electricity that requires standby power to keep a sufficient number of electrons rolling across the thirsty electrical grid.
There is also the issue of cost. Wind power is economically feasible only with significant, multilayered government subsidies. Without the federal tax credit for such facilities, which reduces costs by several cents per kilowatt and allows the power to be competitive, few wind projects would be proposed. And no wind-power projects in New York state are being proposed without significant tax concessions — from Maple Ridge, where Empire Zone status funded by state taxpayers has kept the ball in the air to date, to payment-in-lieu-of-tax agreements being sought by every other wind developer. This spreads the costs of making money to taxpayers everywhere.
Hovering over the deeply divided parties is the Wolfe Island Wind Project, an 86-tower development in Ontario that looms, either wistfully or forebodingly, over the Cape Vincent, Lyme and Clayton combatants. That project is visible on Dry Hill Road in Rodman, 30 miles away, especially at night, when the array of 86 intermittent red lights casts an eerie slash of blinking light on the distant horizon.
Yet the issue here boils down to money. Some people want to make money off the wind farms, and some want to preserve and protect their property values.
And this creates perhaps the most subtle and difficult-to-address question: are those opposed to wind farms because of their fear they will despoil what is unquestionably one of the most beautiful regions in the Northeast carrying the torch for everyone because it is in the state's — and arguably the nation's — interest to protect such an important natural resource? Would the nation be happy if a nuclear power plant was proposed for Crater Lake, for example, or if a hydropower project was proposed for the Grand Canyon? I doubt it.
The north country may be the finest example of the good and the bad of wind power development. On the one hand, Maple Ridge appears to be an exemplary project that meets nearly everyone's needs and harms very few. On the other, the river project proposals may carry too great a cost for the entire region, with very few benefiting and many harmed. And once the towers are up, they are up for a long, long time. This is not a decision that should be rushed. And because the ramifications are so widespread, it is one that should be considered in the broader sense, and not fueled only by money.
Perry White is the city editor of the Watertown Daily Times
Cape Vincent ~ Editorial~ Mr. Alexander~Watertown Daily Times | Send lawyers, guns and money
Send lawyers, guns and money
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
When the Cape Vincent Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed Monday night its decision to require that Roger D. Alexander tear down the windmill he built on his property, it might as well have sent e-mails out to every lawyer in the county that a lawsuit is a-comin'.
Mr. Alexander, you'll remember, went to the town zoning enforcement officer with his plan, asking for guidance and a permit to erect the 90-foot tower. He got a permit in May, and it was renewed in August. And he built his windmill. And then spit hit the blades.
The howl was made by Mr. Alexander's neighbors, and the Zoning Board of Appeals apparently heard them loud and clear, because it not just once, but twice, rescinded the permits and will tell Mr. Alexander to remove his windmill. His, ahem, $80,000 windmill.
I suppose I understand the neighbors' positions. (I do, however, hope these neighbors have never sported pro-wind-farm signs on their lawns.) But it occurs to me that perhaps complaining after the tower was up might weaken the neighbors' position.
And it would seem almost a given that Mr. Alexander will have to resort to the courts to try to protect his not insignificant investment. He did not, after all, defy the rule of law. He did everything by the book. Now the town is telling him our fault, your loss. Does that seem fair to anyone?
Lots of planning boards and zoning boards of appeal get sued, but many of them prevail. The ones that lose are the ones that made egregious errors in their rulings. At least on the surface, it looks as though Cape Vincent ought to buckle its seat belt — it could be in for a bumpy ride.
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
When the Cape Vincent Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed Monday night its decision to require that Roger D. Alexander tear down the windmill he built on his property, it might as well have sent e-mails out to every lawyer in the county that a lawsuit is a-comin'.
Mr. Alexander, you'll remember, went to the town zoning enforcement officer with his plan, asking for guidance and a permit to erect the 90-foot tower. He got a permit in May, and it was renewed in August. And he built his windmill. And then spit hit the blades.
The howl was made by Mr. Alexander's neighbors, and the Zoning Board of Appeals apparently heard them loud and clear, because it not just once, but twice, rescinded the permits and will tell Mr. Alexander to remove his windmill. His, ahem, $80,000 windmill.
I suppose I understand the neighbors' positions. (I do, however, hope these neighbors have never sported pro-wind-farm signs on their lawns.) But it occurs to me that perhaps complaining after the tower was up might weaken the neighbors' position.
And it would seem almost a given that Mr. Alexander will have to resort to the courts to try to protect his not insignificant investment. He did not, after all, defy the rule of law. He did everything by the book. Now the town is telling him our fault, your loss. Does that seem fair to anyone?
Lots of planning boards and zoning boards of appeal get sued, but many of them prevail. The ones that lose are the ones that made egregious errors in their rulings. At least on the surface, it looks as though Cape Vincent ought to buckle its seat belt — it could be in for a bumpy ride.
Cape Vincent~Send lawyers, guns and money
Watertown Daily Times Send lawyers, guns and moneySend lawyers, guns and money
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
When the Cape Vincent Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed Monday night its decision to require that Roger D. Alexander tear down the windmill he built on his property, it might as well have sent e-mails out to every lawyer in the county that a lawsuit is a-comin'.
Mr. Alexander, you'll remember, went to the town zoning enforcement officer with his plan, asking for guidance and a permit to erect the 90-foot tower. He got a permit in May, and it was renewed in August. And he built his windmill. And then spit hit the blades.
The howl was made by Mr. Alexander's neighbors, and the Zoning Board of Appeals apparently heard them loud and clear, because it not just once, but twice, rescinded the permits and will tell Mr. Alexander to remove his windmill. His, ahem, $80,000 windmill.
I suppose I understand the neighbors' positions. (I do, however, hope these neighbors have never sported pro-wind-farm signs on their lawns.) But it occurs to me that perhaps complaining after the tower was up might weaken the neighbors' position.
And it would seem almost a given that Mr. Alexander will have to resort to the courts to try to protect his not insignificant investment. He did not, after all, defy the rule of law. He did everything by the book. Now the town is telling him our fault, your loss. Does that seem fair to anyone?
Lots of planning boards and zoning boards of appeal get sued, but many of them prevail. The ones that lose are the ones that made egregious errors in their rulings. At least on the surface, it looks as though Cape Vincent ought to buckle its seat belt — it could be in for a bumpy ride.
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
When the Cape Vincent Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed Monday night its decision to require that Roger D. Alexander tear down the windmill he built on his property, it might as well have sent e-mails out to every lawyer in the county that a lawsuit is a-comin'.
Mr. Alexander, you'll remember, went to the town zoning enforcement officer with his plan, asking for guidance and a permit to erect the 90-foot tower. He got a permit in May, and it was renewed in August. And he built his windmill. And then spit hit the blades.
The howl was made by Mr. Alexander's neighbors, and the Zoning Board of Appeals apparently heard them loud and clear, because it not just once, but twice, rescinded the permits and will tell Mr. Alexander to remove his windmill. His, ahem, $80,000 windmill.
I suppose I understand the neighbors' positions. (I do, however, hope these neighbors have never sported pro-wind-farm signs on their lawns.) But it occurs to me that perhaps complaining after the tower was up might weaken the neighbors' position.
And it would seem almost a given that Mr. Alexander will have to resort to the courts to try to protect his not insignificant investment. He did not, after all, defy the rule of law. He did everything by the book. Now the town is telling him our fault, your loss. Does that seem fair to anyone?
Lots of planning boards and zoning boards of appeal get sued, but many of them prevail. The ones that lose are the ones that made egregious errors in their rulings. At least on the surface, it looks as though Cape Vincent ought to buckle its seat belt — it could be in for a bumpy ride.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Cape ZBA stands by ruling on turbine
Cape ZBA stands by ruling on turbine
By JAEGUN LEE
TIMES STAFF WRITER
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The town's Zoning Board of Appeals is standing by its decision that Roger D. Alexander's 92-foot-tall personal wind turbine is illegal.
At a ZBA meeting Monday, Chairman Edward P. Bender said Mr. Alexander does not have to take his wind turbine down immediately. It's up to the Town Council to make that decision, he said.
If the town board upholds the ZBA's decision at its Oct. 8 meeting, the town's zoning enforcement officer will notify Mr. Alexander of his violation by mail, giving him 14 days to take down the turbine.
After a public hearing on the issue, The ZBA voted unanimously to treat residential wind turbines as an accessory structure. Section 585 of the zoning law, which deals with such structures on individual lots, limits their height to 35 feet.
The turbine was constructed after permits were issued by the town's zoning enforcement officer, Alan N. Wood, in May. The permit was renewed in July. Mr. Alexander, owner of the Lazy Acres Mobile Home Park, said he erected a personal wind turbine next to his residence on County Route 7 to reduce his utility bill.
"The permit was improperly issued," Mr. Bender said Monday.
After the tower went up, a neighbor, Mary C. Grogan, filed a complaint with the ZBA.
"When I come up here next spring, I don't want to see it there," Mrs. Grogan said.
Albert J. Gibbs, who also lives next to Mr. Alexander, said Monday that he was upset Mr. Alexander never notified his neighbors about the turbine. Mr. Gibbs said he has Meniere's disease and argued the noise from the turbine would cause him to lose balance. Meniere's disease is an inner-ear disorder that causes dizziness, tinnitus and hearing loss.
David B. Guertsen, Mr. Alexander's attorney, said Mr. Alexander's neighbors had plenty of time to complain before the turbine was erected as his client completed the foundation for the tower last September. Mr. Guertsen said his client spent $80,000 to erect the turbine and the ZBA should uphold Mr. Wood's decision to issue the permit.
Mr. Wood said he issued the permits because he was told, by both the zoning and planning boards, there were no setback and height rules for residential wind turbines in the zoning ordinance.
By JAEGUN LEE
TIMES STAFF WRITER
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The town's Zoning Board of Appeals is standing by its decision that Roger D. Alexander's 92-foot-tall personal wind turbine is illegal.
At a ZBA meeting Monday, Chairman Edward P. Bender said Mr. Alexander does not have to take his wind turbine down immediately. It's up to the Town Council to make that decision, he said.
If the town board upholds the ZBA's decision at its Oct. 8 meeting, the town's zoning enforcement officer will notify Mr. Alexander of his violation by mail, giving him 14 days to take down the turbine.
After a public hearing on the issue, The ZBA voted unanimously to treat residential wind turbines as an accessory structure. Section 585 of the zoning law, which deals with such structures on individual lots, limits their height to 35 feet.
The turbine was constructed after permits were issued by the town's zoning enforcement officer, Alan N. Wood, in May. The permit was renewed in July. Mr. Alexander, owner of the Lazy Acres Mobile Home Park, said he erected a personal wind turbine next to his residence on County Route 7 to reduce his utility bill.
"The permit was improperly issued," Mr. Bender said Monday.
After the tower went up, a neighbor, Mary C. Grogan, filed a complaint with the ZBA.
"When I come up here next spring, I don't want to see it there," Mrs. Grogan said.
Albert J. Gibbs, who also lives next to Mr. Alexander, said Monday that he was upset Mr. Alexander never notified his neighbors about the turbine. Mr. Gibbs said he has Meniere's disease and argued the noise from the turbine would cause him to lose balance. Meniere's disease is an inner-ear disorder that causes dizziness, tinnitus and hearing loss.
David B. Guertsen, Mr. Alexander's attorney, said Mr. Alexander's neighbors had plenty of time to complain before the turbine was erected as his client completed the foundation for the tower last September. Mr. Guertsen said his client spent $80,000 to erect the turbine and the ZBA should uphold Mr. Wood's decision to issue the permit.
Mr. Wood said he issued the permits because he was told, by both the zoning and planning boards, there were no setback and height rules for residential wind turbines in the zoning ordinance.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Maple Ridge tax loss a warning for Cape ~ Letter to the editor
Watertown Daily Times | Maple Ridge tax loss a warning for Cape
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2009
I am a year-round resident of Cape Vincent and have attended meetings, researched windmills and their placement and health issues. There are so many issues that can and will affect our community and any other community with windmills on their agenda.
I recently read about Lewis County's loss of income from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm because of the loss of their Empire Zone certification. This is something of great importance to any community that is considering wind farms. When monies come into a community, budgets are set up and the spending begins. Projects are started, and the community depends on the yearly income from the wind farms to meet the demand of new expenses and projects.
Now Lewis County has to make up a loss of income,and that can be made up one way, and one way only, taxpayers. Businesses and homes will have to share the burden of the loss.There is no one else to turn to. Can this happen in other towns with wind farms? You bet it can.
We as a community, with our leaders, need to stand back and take a hard look at the fate of Lewis County. We need to protect the future of our community. We need to protect our investments. We need to do what is right for the entire community of Cape Vincent, not the wind farm companies or their investors, but the people throughout our area who will have to live with health issues, noise, declining property values and the horrible sight of these 450-foot spinning windmills throughout the community.
Add to it the loss of promised and expected income like Lewis County and that spells disaster.
Mariana Reinhart
Cape Vincent
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2009
I am a year-round resident of Cape Vincent and have attended meetings, researched windmills and their placement and health issues. There are so many issues that can and will affect our community and any other community with windmills on their agenda.
I recently read about Lewis County's loss of income from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm because of the loss of their Empire Zone certification. This is something of great importance to any community that is considering wind farms. When monies come into a community, budgets are set up and the spending begins. Projects are started, and the community depends on the yearly income from the wind farms to meet the demand of new expenses and projects.
Now Lewis County has to make up a loss of income,and that can be made up one way, and one way only, taxpayers. Businesses and homes will have to share the burden of the loss.There is no one else to turn to. Can this happen in other towns with wind farms? You bet it can.
We as a community, with our leaders, need to stand back and take a hard look at the fate of Lewis County. We need to protect the future of our community. We need to protect our investments. We need to do what is right for the entire community of Cape Vincent, not the wind farm companies or their investors, but the people throughout our area who will have to live with health issues, noise, declining property values and the horrible sight of these 450-foot spinning windmills throughout the community.
Add to it the loss of promised and expected income like Lewis County and that spells disaster.
Mariana Reinhart
Cape Vincent
Town of Cape Vincent sets rules for public at meetings
Watertown Daily Times | Town of Cape Vincent sets rules for public at meetings
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The Town Council will limit public speech to five minutes per person and set rules for public participation at council meetings.
According to the new guidelines, the public will be given 30 minutes to speak at the beginning of each council meeting. Speakers must state their name, address and organization before making a comment.
Town Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the town always has allowed the public to ask questions and make comments at any time during its meetings although the board is not required to do so. He said the town decided to implement the new guidelines to facilitate orderly participation.
Written comments also may be submitted to the Town Council before meetings.
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The Town Council will limit public speech to five minutes per person and set rules for public participation at council meetings.
According to the new guidelines, the public will be given 30 minutes to speak at the beginning of each council meeting. Speakers must state their name, address and organization before making a comment.
Town Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the town always has allowed the public to ask questions and make comments at any time during its meetings although the board is not required to do so. He said the town decided to implement the new guidelines to facilitate orderly participation.
Written comments also may be submitted to the Town Council before meetings.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Henderson eyes total wind farm ban
Henderson eyes total wind farm ban
VOTE IS 4-1: Town Council instructs law firm to draft turbine law
By SARAH HAASE
TIMES STAFF WRITER
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2010
HENDERSON — The Town Council made Henderson the first municipality in the north country that could enact a ban on commercial wind farms.
At its meeting Wednesday, the council voted 4-1 to allow the law firm Hancock & Estabrook LLP, Syracuse, to write a law that would ban all commercial wind development in the town.
Members of the council and the citizens wind committee met with lawyers who said the town already is effectively restricting wind turbine development on more than 90 percent of the land in the town, Supervisor Raymond A. Walker said.
"Based on what the citizens wind committee has already come up with, it's a good idea to not allow wind energy in the town," he said.
Councilman Frank W. Ross voted against the motion. He said he did not have enough time to read the two-page letter from the law firm that was distributed before the meeting.
Councilwoman Torre J. Parker-Lane pushed the issue with help from more than 30 community members, some of whom requested a board member read the letter out loud. She said the board needs to act on allowing the firm to draw up a law before summer residents leave and do not have an opportunity to attend the public hearing.
"If we're going to put off this discussion, then I would like us to set up a date for a special meeting," she said. "I really don't want to put this off any longer. If we did the law according to what we have, it could leave us open. They suggested we do a complete ban on wind towers."
Ms. Parker-Lane made the motion and she, Mr. Walker, Councilwoman Carol A. Hall and Councilman Steven C. Cote voted in favor.
During the meeting with the law firm, Mr. Walker said, the town also was asked whether it wanted to reserve the right to appeal the state Supreme Court's dismissal of the town's Article 78 proceeding.
In February, the town brought legal action against the town of Hounsfield, asking a judge to annul the Hounsfield Planning Board's site plan approval for the proposed Galloo Island Wind Farm. Henderson filed a state Supreme Court Article 78 proceeding against Hounsfield, the state Department of Environmental Conservation and Upstate NY Power.
On Aug. 18, Judge Joseph D. McGuire denied Henderson's request, ruling in part that the town did not have standing to file an action.
The council voted 4-1, with Mr. Walker, Ms. Parker-Lane, Ms. Hall and Mr. Cote voting yes and Mr. Ross opposed, to reserve that right.
"We're not doing anything yet, just keeping the option open," Ms. Parker-Lane said.
The board is not moving forward with the formal appeal, but will have the option to do so several months down the road if it needs to, Mr. Walker said.
VOTE IS 4-1: Town Council instructs law firm to draft turbine law
By SARAH HAASE
TIMES STAFF WRITER
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2010
HENDERSON — The Town Council made Henderson the first municipality in the north country that could enact a ban on commercial wind farms.
At its meeting Wednesday, the council voted 4-1 to allow the law firm Hancock & Estabrook LLP, Syracuse, to write a law that would ban all commercial wind development in the town.
Members of the council and the citizens wind committee met with lawyers who said the town already is effectively restricting wind turbine development on more than 90 percent of the land in the town, Supervisor Raymond A. Walker said.
"Based on what the citizens wind committee has already come up with, it's a good idea to not allow wind energy in the town," he said.
Councilman Frank W. Ross voted against the motion. He said he did not have enough time to read the two-page letter from the law firm that was distributed before the meeting.
Councilwoman Torre J. Parker-Lane pushed the issue with help from more than 30 community members, some of whom requested a board member read the letter out loud. She said the board needs to act on allowing the firm to draw up a law before summer residents leave and do not have an opportunity to attend the public hearing.
"If we're going to put off this discussion, then I would like us to set up a date for a special meeting," she said. "I really don't want to put this off any longer. If we did the law according to what we have, it could leave us open. They suggested we do a complete ban on wind towers."
Ms. Parker-Lane made the motion and she, Mr. Walker, Councilwoman Carol A. Hall and Councilman Steven C. Cote voted in favor.
During the meeting with the law firm, Mr. Walker said, the town also was asked whether it wanted to reserve the right to appeal the state Supreme Court's dismissal of the town's Article 78 proceeding.
In February, the town brought legal action against the town of Hounsfield, asking a judge to annul the Hounsfield Planning Board's site plan approval for the proposed Galloo Island Wind Farm. Henderson filed a state Supreme Court Article 78 proceeding against Hounsfield, the state Department of Environmental Conservation and Upstate NY Power.
On Aug. 18, Judge Joseph D. McGuire denied Henderson's request, ruling in part that the town did not have standing to file an action.
The council voted 4-1, with Mr. Walker, Ms. Parker-Lane, Ms. Hall and Mr. Cote voting yes and Mr. Ross opposed, to reserve that right.
"We're not doing anything yet, just keeping the option open," Ms. Parker-Lane said.
The board is not moving forward with the formal appeal, but will have the option to do so several months down the road if it needs to, Mr. Walker said.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Despite concerns, windmills are beneficial~ Letter to the editor
Watertown Daily Times | Despite concerns, windmills are beneficial
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
I am often amused with what some people in Cape Vincent say or write about windmills. Early on they were described as poorly engineered and accident prone. Pieces of ice were cast off them like high-speed projectiles. Many were reported to catch fire and break up, crushing spectators. Birds, bats and low-flying airplanes were put in danger by the huge rotating blades. Reflection caused blindness, and the sound windmills emitted caused vertigo and ringing ears. The criticism made one feel that a new weapon of mass destruction had been invented, not a means for generating electricity cleanly.
As the debate or battle proceeded and many of the objections proved to be weak indeed, the focus became location. Obviously, this consideration is meritorious as ill-placed windmills could be more than disconcerting. If one were placed on a road, say Route 12E, accidents could happen.
Moving on, we find that the way they are going to be placed profits some of our town board members. Were these deals made to ensure board members' cooperation? Smells like collusion. Is this greed or is this just progress? After all, windmills will also help to lessen our dependence on foreign oil; besides, without some shady deals, not much seems to get done in this country.
What is most important, it seems to me, is that windmills are a step in the right direction, particularly, if one is concerned that clean air will benefit our progeny. Carbon-based fuels are polluting the air we breathe, our oceans and our lands.
There are those who feel that windmills don't belong in Cape Vincent because of the economic reasons. Some people prophesy that our land values will fall. If one preaches that often enough, they will.
Those who claim they are aesthetically displeasing are actually blind to telephone poles and wires, stoplights and ramshackle buildings and homes, and land stripped of trees and covered with blacktop; behold a 40-acre parking lot.
It has been said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." I've noticed people visiting Cape Vincent to view the windmills on Wolfe Island: a new tourist attraction for Cape Vincent. Who'd of thunk it?
Robert Cardarelli
Cape Vincent
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
I am often amused with what some people in Cape Vincent say or write about windmills. Early on they were described as poorly engineered and accident prone. Pieces of ice were cast off them like high-speed projectiles. Many were reported to catch fire and break up, crushing spectators. Birds, bats and low-flying airplanes were put in danger by the huge rotating blades. Reflection caused blindness, and the sound windmills emitted caused vertigo and ringing ears. The criticism made one feel that a new weapon of mass destruction had been invented, not a means for generating electricity cleanly.
As the debate or battle proceeded and many of the objections proved to be weak indeed, the focus became location. Obviously, this consideration is meritorious as ill-placed windmills could be more than disconcerting. If one were placed on a road, say Route 12E, accidents could happen.
Moving on, we find that the way they are going to be placed profits some of our town board members. Were these deals made to ensure board members' cooperation? Smells like collusion. Is this greed or is this just progress? After all, windmills will also help to lessen our dependence on foreign oil; besides, without some shady deals, not much seems to get done in this country.
What is most important, it seems to me, is that windmills are a step in the right direction, particularly, if one is concerned that clean air will benefit our progeny. Carbon-based fuels are polluting the air we breathe, our oceans and our lands.
There are those who feel that windmills don't belong in Cape Vincent because of the economic reasons. Some people prophesy that our land values will fall. If one preaches that often enough, they will.
Those who claim they are aesthetically displeasing are actually blind to telephone poles and wires, stoplights and ramshackle buildings and homes, and land stripped of trees and covered with blacktop; behold a 40-acre parking lot.
It has been said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." I've noticed people visiting Cape Vincent to view the windmills on Wolfe Island: a new tourist attraction for Cape Vincent. Who'd of thunk it?
Robert Cardarelli
Cape Vincent
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)