BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Thursday, January 13, 2011

HOW WIND TURBINES BECAME UTILITIES in CAPE VINCENT



A friend sent me this it is an accurate account of the events that unfolded in Cape Vincent.
These events ultimately led to the wind turbines being designated as utilities.

This is the Truth and there is documentation to support it.
Additionally Certain Planning Board $ Town Board members in Cape Vincent are self serving liars, the planning board of Cape Vincent is not even following their own comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan is a means to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the people in the community and give due consideration to the needs of the people in the region of which the community is a part.
K.M.

THE STORY OF HOW WIND TURBINES BECAME UTILITIES


THE BEGINNING

Nov. 8, 2006 Planning Board meeting:

Planning Board Chairman, Mr.Edsall and the planning board (PB) are asked the critical question that sparks the controversy.

“Is a wind farm an acceptable site plan review use in the agricultural district?”

Is this question asked by Acciona? The minutes are not clear.
The Planning board chairman, Mr. Edsall asks his board for a vote on the question. They vote 5-0 . (With 3 conflicted votes) Note that the question is NOT are wind turbines a utility.
That is where the confusion starts. The question is about a wind farm being a proper site plan review use. This is a very important point.

The Problem:

There is no discussion on why a wind farm is acceptable as a site plan use in the Agricultural district by the PB. They give NO explanation as to why it is allowed or under what category it might fall. There are 12 site plan review uses allowed in the AG district. A wind farm is not listed as a use. Utilities, light industrial, and commercial ARE listed uses, but the planning board never says which use a wind farm is. They just say it is acceptable and move on.

So they must have had some reason in their heads. They never clearly define why wind turbines are allowed and why.Did they think that they are a utility because that is what the wind company told them? And that was what SLW listed on their permit application?

There is also the problem that it is out of the jurisdiction of the PB to make this determination or answer this question.
NY Town Law does not give the PB the power to interpret zoning law.
That is for the Zoning Enforcement Officer Alan Wood, and if there is a question it goes to the Zoning Board of Appeals. So even though everyone blames WPEG, it is the planning board that screwed up 1st.


Dec 2006: VERY IMPORTANT

WPEG challenges the planning board’s decision before the CV Zoning Board of Appeal.

It is critical to understand that… WPEG did not challenge whether turbines are utilities. They only asked for a determination, that if a wind farm is an acceptable site plan review use, which use is it, because wind farms are not listed?

The problem starts here because

SLW AND THEIR LAWYERS SWEEP IN AND SAY…”OH OUR PROJECT IS OK IN THE AG DISTRICT BECAUSE IT IS A UTILITY UNDER YOUR CURRENT ZONING AND UTILITIES DEFINITION”.

WPEG never said a word about utilities…it was SLW who defined turbines as utilities. Then WPEG challenged that as well, saying a wind farm is not a utility as defined by Cape Vincent’s zoning law. This is important…how did WPEG get blamed for turbines being utilities if they were fighting that turbines are not utilities…this makes no sense at all.

It is also very important to note that SLW’s application for a permit, and site plan review that was turned in to the town, also says their wind farm should be considered a utility.

WPEG didn’t write that on their application for them. The important thing is that even if WPEG didn’t challenge the PB decision these projects would have moved forward as utilities ANYHOW because that is what SLW put on their application. If nobody challenged it, it would have moved forward as a utility anyhow.

Now the other thing that is being lied about is they are saying WPEG is at fault for killing the 2006 wind law.

At the end of this post, I have included the minutes of an Aug 2006 meeting where [ Supervisor Reinbeck stated that on behalf of the board, he will request the planning board to adopt our proposed wind tower regulations as a guideline during their site plan review process]. So that is a lie too.
Also at the bottom of this post, is a letter from Richard Edsall: June 14, 2006. We propose that the town board abandon its efforts to amend the current zoning law.

Why does Reinbeck start a wind law committee, spend $20,000 on the law, and spend 5 months on it, when he knows he can’t pass it anyhow because of the conflicts of interest on his board? The answer is because he never wanted a wind law to begin with unless it was very weak and favored the wind company.

The wind law was finished in Jan…it is now almost May.
He is not going to pass a wind law because he and Edsall and the board and the lease holders do not want one.

No matter what they say, they want turbines as utilities so they can put as many of them in as possible and as close to the river and lake as possible!!!! THEY ARE LIARS!!!!
But to do this and create a public diversion they will blame WPEG for all the points above.

You have to have something for cover when you recklessly waste $20,000 of tax payer money.
Unsigned



Wednesday, January 12, 2011

CAPE VINCENT~ HOW WIND TURBINES BECAME UTILITIES




HOW TURBINES BECAME UTILITIES IN CAPE VINCENT
Preface

A reader sent me this; it is a good chronological progression of the events that unfolded in Cape Vincent.
These events ultimately led to the wind turbines being designated as utilities. This is the Truth and there is documentation to support it. Additionally the planning board and Town board in Cape Vincent are self serving liars, the planning board of Cape Vincent isn’t even following its own comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan is a means to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the people in the community and give due consideration to the needs of the people in the region of which the community is a part.


K.M.

THE STORY OF HOW WIND TURBINES BECAME UTILITIES


THE BEGINNING
Nov. 8, 2006 Planning Board meeting:

Planning Board Chairman, Mr.Edsall and the planning board (PB) are asked the critical question that sparks the controversy.

“Is a wind farm an acceptable site plan review use in the agricultural district?”

Is this question asked by Acciona? The minutes aren’t clear.
The Planning board chairman, Mr. Edsall asks his board for a vote on the question. They vote 5-0 yes. (With 3 conflicted votes) Note that the question is NOT are wind turbines a utility.
That is where the confusion starts. The question is about a wind farm being a proper site plan review use. This is a very important point.

The Problem:

There is no discussion on why a wind farm is acceptable as a site plan use in the AG district by the PB. They give NO rational as to why it is allowed or under what category it might fall. There are 12 site plan review uses allowed in the AG district. A wind farm is not listed as a use. Utilities, light industrial, and commercial ARE listed uses, but the planning board never says which use a wind farm is. They just say it is acceptable and move on.

So they must have had some reason in their heads. They never clearly define why wind turbines are allowed and why.
Did they think that they are a utility because that is what the wind company told them? And that was what SLW listed on their permit application?

There is also the problem that it is out of the jurisdiction of the PB to make this determination or answer this question.
NY Town Law does not give the PB the power to interpret zoning law.
That is for the Zoning Enforcement Officer Alan Wood, and if there is a question it goes to the Zoning Board of Appeals. So even though everyone blames WPEG, it is the planning board that screwed up 1st.


Dec 2006: VERY IMPORTANT

WPEG challenges the planning board’s decision before the CV Zoning Board of Appeal.

It is critical to understand that… WPEG did not challenge whether turbines are utilities. They only asked for a determination, that if a wind farm is an acceptable site plan review use, which use is it, because wind farms are not listed?

The problem starts here because

SLW AND THEIR LAWYERS SWEEP IN AND SAY…”OH OUR PROJECT IS OK IN THE AG DISTRICT BECAUSE IT IS A UTILITY UNDER YOUR CURRENT ZONING AND UTILITIES DEFINITION”.

WPEG never said a word about utilities…it was SLW who defined turbines as utilities. Then WPEG challenged that as well, saying a wind farm is not a utility as defined by Cape Vincent’s zoning law. This is important…how did WPEG get blamed for turbines being utilities if they were fighting that turbines are not utilities…this makes no sense at all.

It is also very important to note that SLW’s application for a permit, and site plan review that was turned in to the town, also says their wind farm should be considered a utility.

WPEG didn’t write that on their application for them. The important thing is that even if WPEG didn’t challenge the PB decision these projects would have moved forward as utilities ANYHOW because that is what SLW put on their application. If nobody challenged it, it would have moved forward as a utility anyhow.

Now the other thing that is being lied about is they are saying WPEG is at fault for killing the 2006 wind law.

At the end of this post, I have included the minutes of an Aug 2006 meeting where [ Supervisor Reinbeck stated that on behalf of the board, he will request the planning board to adopt our proposed wind tower regulations as a guideline during their site plan review process]. So that is a lie too.
Also at the bottom of this post, is a letter from Richard Edsall: dated June 14, 2006informing the Town Board, We propose that the town board abandon its efforts to amend the current zoning law.Why does Reinbeck start a wind law committee, spend $20,000 on the law, and spend 5 months on it, when he knows he can’t pass it anyhow because of the conflicts of interest on his board? The answer is because he never wanted a wind law to begin with unless it was very weak and favored the wind company.

The wind law was finished in Jan…it is now almost May.
He is not going to pass a wind law because he and Edsall and the board and the lease holders do not want one.

No matter what they say, they want turbines as utilities so they can put as many of them in as possible and as close to the river and lake as possible!!!! THEY ARE LIARS!!!!
But to do this and create a public diversion they will blame WPEG for all the points above.

You have to have something for cover when you recklessly waste $20,000 of tax payer money.

Unsigned


Monday, January 10, 2011

Thousand Islands District Halts Turbine Plan

Watertown Daily Times District halts plan to install wind turbine


District halts plan to install wind turbine

As reported by the Watertown Daily Times
NOT MADE IN USA: Purchase of Canadian system did not meet requirements of federal stimulus grant
By JAEGUN LEE
TIMES STAFF WRITER
MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2011

CLAYTON — The Thousand Islands Central School District's plan to install a wind turbine on school grounds is a no-go.

Instead, the district will spend the federal grant money it received last year to install a photovoltaic system.

The district was set to buy a 20-kilowatt turbine from a Canadian firm, but the project came to a halt because the structure did not meet one of the stimulus grant's requirements: the product must be made in the United States.

"Because of issues with the government over where we could purchase it, that plan has fallen through," district Board of Education member John P. Warneck said. "So we're changing it to a 35 kw photovoltaic system that converts sunlight into electricity."
Read full WDT article and comments -->here<-- Below are the financial details of the Alice in Wonderland Economics ~ for the Wind turbine that the Thousand islands School District had been set to participate in .



AWARDEES FOR ARRA STATE ENERGY PROGRAM - ROUND 2 AWARDS FEBRUARY 2010
Amount awarded, $163,760 to the Thousand Island central School district, for the installation of a 20 KW wind turbine ~ estimated yearly savings = $7,474. At this rate it will take approximately 21 years for it to pay for itself. A 20 KW wind turbine has an approximate life cycle of twenty years so it will be a close call. It is worth a look at the NYSERDA website to see what our fiscally bankrupt State sees as necessary to spend tax dollars on, money that we do not have. People keep applying for grants using the rational if we don’t apply it will go somewhere else. This needs to stop! We do not have this money to waste on these rationalizations. This unnecessary spending has to stop. Total awards for ARRA STATE ENERGY PROGRAM - ROUND 1 AWARDS October 2009 were $ 24,030,700 WITH AN ESTIMATED SAVINGS OF 6,507,683
The ARRA STATE ENERGY PROGRAM - ROUND 2 AWARDS for FEBRUARY 2010 were $39,375,845 with an estimated savings of $6,980,700. Granted perhaps some of these upgrades may have been necessary, however in these times of financial upheaval in New York most of these projects probably could have been at least delayed until our state was in better fiscal shape.

What will the fiscally responsible idiots have on the horizon for 2011 that they think is absolutely necessary to spend our tax dollars on?

the answer is......

A 35 kw photovoltaic system that converts sunlight into electricity."


Let’s hope that the math works out better on this scheme than the snake oil turbine deal.


Talk about pulling a rabbit out of your hat ...

Acciona is heavily involved in photolatic systems maybe they could be of assistance in the project, oops aren't they foreign too - I forgot they have been in town so long I thought they were “one of us”!!!

Friday, January 7, 2011

Aubertine said he planned on calling Hooker on Friday


As reported By The Syracuse Post Standard ~
Aubertine lands state ag and markets job
Published: Thursday, January 06, 2011, 11:09 PM
By Charles McChesney

Albany, NY -- Gov. Andrew Cuomo nominated former North Country state Sen. Darrel Aubertine to head the state’s Department of Agriculture and Markets, the agency that oversees, among other things, the state fair.

Aubertine, 57, said he was pleased to be offered the position and was looking forward to carrying out the mission the governor laid out in his state of the state message Tuesday, including looking at possible cuts.

“There really is no department in state government that is perfect, no department or agency that doesn’t deserve a hard look,” Aubertine said. “We have limited resources to work with.”

A sixth-generation farmer and past member of the Assembly and state Senate agriculture committees, Aubertine is familiar with the state fair. He has attended several times.


“I won the milking contest last year,” he said.

However, Aubertine said he had not read the indictment against former state fair Director Peter Cappuccilli who was arrested last month on grand larceny and fraud charges. Cappuccilli is accused of using his position to benefit himself and his family.

Aubertine said he hadn’t read the inspector general’s report that criticized top Department of Agriculture & Markets officials and current fair Director Dan O’Hara for failing to seek bids on a $700,000 contract to produce the fair’s 2008 concerts and a $127,500 contract for a boxing event at the 2009 fair.

“I’m not that familiar with it,” Aubertine said. He said he expected to get up to speed on the matter in a month or so, after first dealing with the department’s budget.


The commissioner position, which requires confirmation by the state Senate, pays $120,800 a year.

The current commissioner, Patrick Hooker, was appointed in 2007 by then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer. Hooker appeared at a news conference Thursday in Salina with Lt. Gov. Robert Duffy, where they announced an energy efficiency program for farmers.

Aubertine said he he planned on calling Hooker Friday to discuss the transition.More...

DEC Notice of ST. Lawrence Wind Complete Application


Please be advised that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has determined that the applications listed in the attached notice are complete for purposes of initiating DEC review of the proposed action
State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination
A final environmental impact statement has been prepared on this project and is on file.
SEQR Lead Agency Cape Vincent Town Planning Board
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination
A cultural resources survey has been completed. Based on information provided in the
survey report, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
(OPRHP) has determined that the proposed activity will have an impact on registered or
eligible archaeological sites or historic structures. The department must consult further
with OPRHP before making a final decision regarding the issuance of the permit.
DEC Commissioner Policy 29, Environmental Justice and Permitting (CP-29)
It has been determined that the proposed action is not subject to CP-29.
Availability For Public Comment Contact Person
Comments on this project must be STEPHEN M TOMASIK
submitted in writing to the Contact NYSDEC
Person no later than 01/20/2011 625 BROADWAY
or 15 days after the publication date ALBANY, NY 12233
of this notice, whichever is later. (518) 402-9167
__________________________________________________

ST LAWRENCE WINDPOWER LLC~ NYS DEC Notice of Complete Application

Saturday, January 1, 2011

What made Cape Vincent great will be gone


Watertown Daily Times What made Cape Vincent great will be gone

THURSDAY, AUGUST 6, 2009


Cape Vincent is where I grew up, and has always been my favorite place. I don't think I am alone in this sentiment. However, the proposed wind farm will certainly ruin the reason that Cape Vincent is so sacred and unique to people. More importantly, our future generations will never experience the natural beauty that this area is known for. It will be changed to an industrial nightmare. Many will not want to live or retire here as a result, and hence the legacy of families that settled and built this town will be lost forever. I have tried to remain neutral regarding the turbines, but there comes a time when you have to stand up for your rights.

Why do our town officials value the wind companies more than the citizens they represent? Furthermore, it's hard to understand why so many people are indifferent about the issue. Many people say, "I don't care one way or another because I won't see them from my house or from the village. They won't affect me." To me this translated to I don't care what happens to my neighbors or my community.[Watertown Daily Times What made Cape Vincent great will be gone]


 



Great Minds Think Alike But Fools Seldom Differ

This is an update of Quotes & Comments from our Board Members with links added to the sources~ from the archives of the Watertown Daily Times and the Thousand Islands Sun and the Syracuse Post Standard ~
Our auspicious town leaders ~ what have they had to say about Wind Development over the years?

Some of these quotes may be confusing out of context , just click the date of the source to link to the complete article ...



ANDREW BINSLEY
X~Planning Board Member
AGENDA~$$$
2 brothers-in-Law
& nephew have
wind
contract~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April 13, 2006Andy Binsley
Mr. Binsley said after disclosing that six of his relatives have signed contracts with the company, he added, "If some people here would like to say I have no right to speak on this, I will say, 'Thank you. This is America. I will speak.'"
But as Mr. Binsley left, he had a different opinion.
"I believe as many relatives as I have and as many family and friends in this community, I no longer have a say in this," he said. "Have a nice day."
And Mr. Binsley said the wind projects could reduce the potential for residents defaulting on their taxes, which would negatively impact all taxpayers, by providing a financial boost to farmers in transition.
"I have one brother-in-law that walks with a limp," he said. "He can't afford health insurance, but if he can put one windmill on his property maybe he can. Maybe he can stay here. Maybe he can live here."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RICHARD EDSALLCape Vincent
Planning Board Chairman
AGENDA~ $$$$
has wind contract
Wife’s parents have wind contract
Brother-in-law has wind contract

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
August 5, 2005Richard Edsall
“It would allow these farmers to stay in business.” Said Richard J. Edsall a town resident. “If they get two or three windmills on the land, they can pay the taxes on the land. I didn’t say it’s the best idea. But it makes sense.”

Mr. Edsall said a company, not New York State Wind and Power, has approached him about leasing his land off of Burnt Rock Road, at least two miles from Lake Ontario.
He and many others who attended the hearing said they have visited wind farms and the noise produced by the spinning blades that power turbines is negligible and the towers are not unsightly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
March 26, 2006"We need some real help with this law," town Planning Board Chairman Richard J. Edsall said. "If we don't pass a law one way or another, they're still coming. People have already signed contracts."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Watertown Daily Times

April 6, 2006

Richard J. Edsall said Wednesday he'll recommend no distance requirement for developments near rivers or lakes.
Instead, he advocated that turbines not be permitted in the riverfront district, which extends 1,000 feet south of Route 12E, or the lakefront district, which uses County Route 6 as its eastern boundary. Any property outside those two districts would be permitted use areas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MR. Edsall said the restriction , which would limit development to south of St. Lawrence corners, comes without explanation . He added, "Two miles would wipe out both projects "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"This is a slow process going through the Planning Board", he said . "The first wind project could take six months".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Edsall said any member was encouraged to provide input during each site plan review.
"You're welcome to bring a contingent , stay on top of things and make recommendations", "And those recommendations at that point would be considered by the Planning Board on each specific turbine . If were looking at the project and the project has 60 turbines we look at the placement of each one in regards to roads , houses cemeteries, archaeological finds anything else that you can think of that's a significant impact, Your welcome to come and participate in that process."


Watertown Daily Times
April 12, 2006

Mr. Edsall said he sees no conflict of interest in his participation at the monthly stakeholder meetings, because the sessions are not planning board meetings. The chairman said he will make recommendations about siting wind farms at a planning board meeting at 7 p.m. today at the town offices, but plans to recuse himself from votes that relate to his property.
The planning board will make a formal recommendation to the town board, which will use that advice to decide which areas will be eligible for development. The town board meets at 6 p.m. Thursday
"If you're telling me that you think I influence the town board, you're giving me a lot more credit than I deserve," said Mr. Edsall,
"I own 125 acres in the Lake District that is perfect windmill territory and I agreed and pushed for eliminating the Lake District," he said.


Watertown daily times
April 13,2006
Town Planning Board Chairman Richard Edsall sold some of his property
for the construction of the wind farm.

He said the town stands to earn $2 million in revenue right off the bat.
~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April 13, 2006

Mr. Edsall wants to permit turbine development in the town's agricultural/residential zone, with no setback stipulation, and to ban development in the riverfront and lakefront district. The lakefront district uses County Route 6 as its eastern boundary.

Mr. Edsall made his suggestion again Wednesday, but not, he said, as the planning board chairman. He petitioned to be included on the board's agenda as a private citizen and representative of a community group that has met monthly to discuss wind turbine issues.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
May 12, 2006

"We want in the law a separate thing that says there will be a fee per tower," Planning Board Chairman Richard J. Edsall said. "You're not specifying the fee. We'll come up with that later. And the second one is that we say that it is 1,000 feet from a property line that's not participating."

Property owners who allow the erection of a tower on their property must ensure it is at least 1,000 feet from any neighbor who is not participating in the development.

"I want that 1,000 feet on the property line, because that keeps good neighbors," Mr. Edsall said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Watertown Daily Times
November 10,2006
Board Chairman Richard J.Edsall said the board unanimously voted to allow turbine development in the agricultural residential zone at Mr. Hoppers request.

"All he's done now is ask if this is a legal use in the town, and the answer is yes, it could be, "Mr. Edsall said.
Mr. Hopper did not ask to put turbines in the riverfront or lakefront zoning districts, Mr. Edsall said.

Mr. Edsall said Mr. Hopper's application will not be complete until an environmental quality review for the area of his proposed turbines has been completed.

He said the Planning Board has sent out letters to several agencies that would be affected by the project.including the village and town of Cape Vincent. Stating that it would like to be lead agency for the purpose of the review responses at its December meeting and vote as to whether it will be lead agency

"We have reserved the right to have outside professional expertise as we want it and we intend to use it," Mr. Edsall said.

Mr. Hopper will have to submit the exact locations of his proposed wind turbines before the environmental review is done Mr. Edsall said.

Watertown daily Times
Feb 23, 2007

Richard J. Edsall - said he , sent a letter to the Lyme Town Council asking it to approve the Cape Vincent board as lead agency. When Lyme did not respond within 30 days, Mr. Edsall said, it approved Cape Vincent to move forward under state Environmental Quality Review Law.

Mr. Edsall said Lyme could become lead agency for the portion of the project in its town. BP would simply have to split its project into two separate entities. He said the Cape Vincent Planning Board wanted to incorporate Lyme into hearings concerning the company’s environmental review.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MARTY MASON~
Cape Vincent
Town Board Member
AGENDA~$$$
Wind contract holder
Watertown Daily Times

March 24,2006
"Right now, the way we had it up is 1,500 feet from the center line of Route 12E, plus one and a half times the tower height, which is going to put a little over 600 feet on top of that," said Town Council member Marty T. Mason.
~~~
"I think they're in favor of them," Mr. Mason said. "I think what they want is a proper setback from the water."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April 12, 2006
Marty .Mason ~ quotes & comments
Mr. Mason, who is engaged in a continuing discussion with Wind Power New York for other property he owns, said he will recuse himself from voting on wind turbine issues. However, he plans to take part in discussions before any vote.
"I've been involved in it from day one, and not as a benefit to myself, but as a benefit to the town," he said. "I want to see that every town taxpayer will benefit from it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April 14, 2006Marty M. Mason
On Thursday, Mr. Mason said: ‘I do have a conflict of interest. But I’ve also been put on this board for almost 12 years by the people. The people have chosen me to speak for them. I feel what I’m doing up here by speaking, not voting, is what the people put me on this board to do.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thousand Islands Sun
January 26 ,2008The Cape Vincent Planning Board held a public hearing on BP Alternative Energy’s Cape Vincent Wind Farm DEIS report on Jan. 26.
Councilman Marty Mason said that overall a microphone system should be set up in the recreation center to avoid future issues. The forced air system in the center was loud and conveniently used as an example for noise levels. “Its 14 decibels, by the way, “he joked.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
October 15, 2009

Marty T. Mason and Robert H. Chapman, co-chairmen of the town Republican Committee, both said the committee is neither supporting the Republican candidates for town office nor openly supporting Mr. Rienbeck.

"We're not openly supporting Mr. Rienbeck. But individually, our allegiance has always been with Mr. Rienbeck," Mr. Chapman said. "I really feel that he has done a fantastic job and, personally, I think he's the right person for the job."

Mr. Chapman said he also believed that the Democratic candidates for town council had "better ideals."

Mr. Mason, who is also a town councilman, said the committee members agreed to "sit back and see how things unfold."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GEORGE MINGLE
Cape Vincent

X~Planning Board Member
AGENDA???~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April 13, 2006Planner George A. Mingle, who said the wind energy farms would provide an economic benefit to the town taxpayers and reduce the state's dependence on fossil fuels.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


THOMAS K. RIENBECK
~X Supervisor of
Cape Vincent
& current
Planning Board
Member~
AGENDA ???

Tom Reinbeck~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
8/04/2005Thomas K. Reinbeck said he has heard that an unidentified firm wants to build the turbines off of Favret Road, near the town transfer site.
"People might stand up and say 'we all want them' or they may say 'no, we don't want them,'" the supervisor said. "I don't know,I think there are more downsides than upsides." Mr. Reinbeck said he is concerned that the large turbines will detract from the town's bucolic splendor, will make too much noise and could throw large chunks of ice during the winter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WaterTown daily Times
April 12, 2006

Thomas K. Rienbeck, who does not own land in the planned areas, said he has no problems with Mr. Edsall taking part in discussions, unless it concerned the chairman's property.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily Times
April 14 , 2006Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said that in the opinion of the town’s attorney, Mark G. Gebo , officials do not have a conflict of interest until the projects come before the Planning Board for site plan review.

“As far as putting together a generic zoning law, he feels that there’s really no conflict there,” he said. “But we’ve been advised not to use that opinion.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
June 16,2006"There's been overwhelming support for total use of the ag district, to begin with," said Rienbeck, in explaining his change of course. "And furthermore, I see no reason other than visual impacts for anything other than that."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily Times
November 10, 2006

Town Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said that while the planning board will be handling the review, the Town Council will be responsible for dealing with any proposed payment - in - lieu-of taxes- agreements.

"When it comes time for negotiations, we will be heading up that , I guarantee you that,"Mr. Rienbeck said.

Mr. Rienbeck also said he has just begun the process of setting up an escrow account.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
April/07/2007
Town Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck defended town officials, including the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals.

“Everything they’ve done and the Planning Board has done, they’ve done with legal advice.” he said.

Mr. Rienbeck said town Attorney Mark G. Gebo advised the Zoning Board of Appeals that turbines could be considered utilities. Mr. Gebo declined to comment on conversations with the town, citing attorney-client privilege. He said he will argue the Zoning Board of Appeals decision is correct unless the town directs him not to.

“They made a decision they expect me to support, and I will support it,” he said.


The Town Council never passed an amendment to its zoning law for turbines, Mr. Rienbeck said, because of pressure from the ethics group. He said the council is not willing to move backward at this point.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thousand Islands Sun
January 26 ,2008The Cape Vincent Planning Board held a public hearing on BP Alternative Energy’s Cape Vincent Wind Farm DEIS report on Jan. 26.
Town Supervisor Tom Rienbeck said it was a dog and pony show.
Supervisor Rienbeck said that the chair of the planning board, Richard Edsall, would likely have intervened in the process if he had not felt threatened by the people who felt he had a conflict of interest when it came to wind farm development. “He felt that he should abstain and he just accepted the process, but I think other members of the planning board should have said lets tighten up here, “he said. The board felt that town attorney Mark Gebo did the best he could to monitor the event, but felt that the boards, town and planning, should have given him some guidance to assist in the hearing’s proceedings.
Supervisor Rienbeck stated that while he didn’t have anything legal to back up his assumption, he thought that once someone accused of having a conflict of interest was re-elected to the same position, the conflict of interest was void. “Mind you I’m not one- hundred percent about that, but I speak for the board when I say that if we had not folded under the threats of lawsuits, we’d have zoning laws right now,” he said. The county board is looking to become involved in community PILOT agreements so the county can receive some of the money that the host communities are being offered. Supervisor Rienbeck said that it was wrong and until the town board was satisfied with the offered PILOT agreements no wind farm would make through the planning board’s site plan review.
“The Jefferson County board is in it for the money. We’re in it for Cape Vincent,” he concluded.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily times
FRIDAY, AUGUST 15, 2008
RE: wind Committee
"Hopefully, this will make a much better relationship with everybody," Mr. Rienbeck said. He declined to discuss details of the draft law Thursday.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily times
September 5, 2008"No one was ever interested in it being in anywhere but the agricultural-residential district," he said.

Mr. Rienbeck also reiterated that he alone was responsible for the makeup of the committee.

"I wanted to get a mix of the community," he said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily times
December 21, 2008Rienbeck *
Context wind law committee
CAPE VINCENT — Both developers of wind farms in the town have asked for a quick conclusion to the wind law committee's work.

"I think we're over regulating on these setbacks," Mr. Rienbeck said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily times
CAPE CONTROVERSY:
Alexander to be given chance to appeal ruling to town's ZBA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
RE; Turbine Host Agreements
, Febuary 11, 2008
Cape Vincent Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck echoed that statement. "We've put all the time and effort into the project," he said. "We intend to reap the rewards."

Mr. Rienbeck agreed with Mr. McAuliffe's statements on the possible longevity of the projects. While any financial agreements would last 15 or 20 years, improvements in technology could allow turbine heads to be replaced.


"There wouldn't be a problem with upgrading or selling them," Mr. Rienbeck said.

Watertown Times
September 27, 2008
Wind Committee Re: Setbacks

Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said, "We're just trying to get this ready for a public hearing. Things can still change."

"It's six instead of five," Mr. Rienbeck said, recalling the previous wind zoning law draft the town had done. "No one complained two or three years ago with that noise level."


Watertown daily times
FEBRUARY 17, 2009Rienbeck response to ethics ad about conflicted board members~

I'm only one person on the board, but I certainly am not interested in the town spending any more money on getting this law through," he said.

"It was pretty upsetting to see something like that," Mr. Rienbeck said. "It felt like a slap in the face ... it's an attempt to degrade the town government."


"I heard comments by opponents of wind power and they were somewhat happy with what we put together," he said. "As much as they've said they're in favor of wind power, this makes it look more like they're not in favor."
"They need to keep in mind that if a law is not passed," he said, "wind power development is allowed to occur anywhere in the town under the current law."

Watertown daily Times
July 10,2009
"Currently, we have two projects under review in the ag district and we're not going to suspend those," Mr. Rienbeck said. "One is almost complete."

"We're trying to get it so that if we do enact it, that it will be able to stand up for any legal challenges, from either side," Mr. Rienbeck said. "And we've been criticized that we didn't have enough voting members on the board to enact a law, so I'm not sure about that now."


"We would like to have an ambient noise level established," he said. "The wind farms have done their own sound studies and they paid the piper, and WPEG has done a sound study and they paid the piper, and the question is whose tune is right."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily times
August 14,2009RE: a petiti on for a one year moratorium with 650 signatures~

"The wind companies are at least a year away from getting any kind of approval," Mr. Rienbeck said. "I can't personally see how it will benefit any of us."

The proposed six-month waterfront moratorium, on the other hand, would prevent town residents from erecting personal wind turbines along Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River while the town drafts a law to regulate wind development, he said.

"We've already had four request for personal wind turbines," Mr. Rienbeck said.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Rienbeck said the town's attorneys at Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna, Albany, are fine-tuning a new wind law, and he hopes to see the law adopted before the end of this year.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily times
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2009
Re: controversy over personal wind turbine

Town Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the issue had nothing to do with the council.

"That was their decision to make," he said.

Mr. Rienbeck said both he and Mr. Wood consulted the town's attorney, Mark G. Gebo, before mailing the notification to Mr. Alexander.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown daily times
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2009
“It sucks, doesn't it?” Mr. Rienbeck said. “These people, they have registered to vote here but they don't even live here. They obviously took advantage of the gray area of the law.”
Mr. Rienbeck who has been in office for 10 years, said most of the people who changed their registration to vote for Mr. Hirschey were rich seasonal residents who oppose wind farms.
“All they care about is their cottages on the river,” he said. “They are nothing but selfish people. It's a sad day for the people of Cape Vincent.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watertown Daily Times
June 27 2010Context escrow accounts
But former Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the move would endanger the two accounts' existence by taking some control away from the developers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~


DONNY MASON
Cape Vincent
Town Board Member ~
AGENDA~$$$
Wind contract holder
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thousands Islands Sun
January 26 ,2008The Cape Vincent Planning Board held a public hearing on BP Alternative Energy’s Cape Vincent Wind Farm DEIS report on Jan. 26.

Councilman Donald Mason said that he had many complaints from people over the way it was organized.
“People were giving their three minutes to friends or other speakers. The gentlemen from Lowville didn’t say anything about the DEIS. He only talked about his problems. A lot of people didn’t talk about the DEIS and I think that should be addressed if they do this again, “he said. The board felt
that the public hearing was supposed to be specifically about the DEIS and not personal feelings about the wind project itself.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Syracuse Post standard
February 14 2010Donny Mason
Cape Vincent Councilman Donald Mason, a former dairy farmer who has a wind company lease, said he’s not influenced by it.

“At far as I’m concerned, I’m just doing what I think is best for the town,” Mason said. “It’s tough to have anything in this little town. There’s one way in — one way out. This is the best thing that’s come along that I can see in my lifetime.”

Opponents see the windfall from wind as short-term and shortsighted.
“There’s a lot of money to be made from it for the town, county, school, landowners,” said Mason, the town councilman. “We have no industry here at all. We have summer people, thank God we have them, but our town has dropped right down. There’s one grocery store, one gas station, one bank, a couple of restaurants and that’s it.

Watertown Daily Times
July 10, 2009Councilman Donald J. Mason agreed. "Those projects are too far along and it's not fair to the wind companies, to begin with, to suspend them now."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~


MICKEY W. ORVIS
Cape Vincent
Town Board Member
AGENDA ~???Mickey W. ORVIS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Watertown Daily Times
June 16,2006Mr. Orvis added, “I can’t justify taking another 1,000 feet, whether it’s a farmer or just a regular land owner, of their property .”
~~~~~~
“ 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 we’re going to wait for a supply of wind towers. And that’s longer we have to wait for any tax relief.