** CAPE VINCENT WIND HISTORY III

This is part III of a series of Wind education posts.

British Petroleum's new project manager Peter Gross said that he wanted to educate the community about wind development .
~~~~~~

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 declaring that current zoning is sufficient to regulate wind development in Cape Vincent and that the TB should abandon its efforts to amend current zoning law.[1] However, there is no record of any vote in the Planning Board minutes [2]
Additionally, current law did not include anything to regulate wind projects, other than site plan review process, which gave a great deal of discretionary control to the PB, particularly Chairman Edsall.

The very next day, June 15, 2006, Aubertine also wrote a letter to the TB urging the lease holding conflicted board members to vote on wind issues by telling them that it is their duty to vote even though they are conflicted and he also stated that governing by referendum (popular vote) is unwise.[3]
The same day of the Aubertine letter, at the TB meeting of June 15, 2006,Reinbeck and Orvis changed their minds about the restrictive setbacks, setbacks that would eliminate 12 turbines from Aubertine’s neighborhood. The revised boundary allowed turbines as close as 1,600 feet from the center line of Route 12 E.Reinbeck gave the following quote to the Watertown Daily Times as to his reasoning behind his change of course. “There’s been overwhelming support for total use of the AG district, to begin with,” “And furthermore, I see no reason other than visual impacts for anything other than that.” Orvis followed with “I can’t justify taking another 1,000 feet, whether it’s a farmer or just a regular land owner, of their property.”[4]

Aubertine has been criticized over this controversial letter and in his own defense said that his letter “was in a line with separate council that the Town had at the time.”[sic] In a WDT’s article concerning Aubertine’s letter it was said that Cape Vincent received its own advisory opinion from the Albany law from Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna (WHO) in July. However, the legal opinion that WHO constructed in regard to Cape Vincent’s conflicted officials is dated July8 2008 two years afterAubertine’s letter.[5]

Aug. 10, 2006, the TB moved forward with the adoption of zoning regulations for wind power development and issued a positive declaration that required an environmental impact study to determine the impacts from the new law.[6]
It was discovered that the environmental reviews required would cost $40,000+. This cost became an issue at the TB meeting of Aug.28,2006, where Councilman Orvis told the board that he was not comfortable spending $40,000 + of the taxpayer’s money to have a SEQR done and end up not having turbines.
Supervisor Reinbeck said he felt the same way. Supervisor Reinbeck resolved to, “Discontinue the process of amending the Town of Cape Vincent Zoning Law to regulate wind towers.” This resolution is what Edsall hoped to accomplish with his letter of July 14, 2006. Marty Mason and Joe Wood abstained from this vote and the resolution did not pass.[7], [7a]

Sept. 13, 2006, Chairman Edsall’s Planning Board overstepped their authority by approving a motion to adopt the Town’s guidelines to regulate wind development.
[8]
This quote in the Watertown Times by Reinbeck demonstrates that he was supportive of Edsalls maneuver. "They certainly can't sue us if we don't go through with the zoning amendments," "No one says we have to change our zoning." Mr. Reinbeck said.[9]

This left them with the option of declaring that turbines were utilities under the choice of approved uses in the town’s guidelines. This opened the door for Edsall to have complete control over the process through site plan review. Acciona submitted an application for a wind power project in Cape Vincent at the PB meeting of Nov. 8, 2006. Edsall’s board voted unanimously to be lead agency in the State Environmental Quality Review process.[10],[11]
This gave Chairman Edsall and his PB complete control over the environmental review process.

Nov. 2006 Donny Mason was elected to TB without disclosing that his wind lease with Acciona made him conflicted, which was at odds with the Town of Cape Vincent’s code of ethics.[12] Furthermore, Donny Mason did not petition the Jefferson County board of ethics for an opinion about conflicts, as suggested by the Town’s attorney, in an April of 2006, letter to Supervisor Reinbeck.

On Dec.13, 2006, Reinbeck set up a designated checking account, e.g. escrow account, with Acciona to cover any additional expenses incurred by the T B. All board members voted in favor including conflicted Marty Mason and Joe Wood. Voting on a financial agreement between the town and a corporation, in which both Mason and Wood had financial ties.    [13] ,[14]

Link here to read CVWind HX~ I

Link here to read CV Wind HX ~ II


[1] Edsall letter to TB recommending they abandon efforts to amend current zoning law.

[2] Planning Board minutes 6/14/2006

[3] Darrel Aubertine letter advising the conflicted TB to vote on wind setbacks.

[4] WDT article ~ Wind Tower Setback Nixed.

[5] WDT article ~ Aubertine misrepresents conflict opinion concerning his letter advising the conflicted CVTB to vote on wind setbacks.

[6] WDT article CAPE VINCENT COUNCIL DECIDES ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NEEDED

[7] Town Board minutes 8/28/2006

[7a] Expanded positive declaration story

[8] Town Board minutes 9/13/2006

[9] WDT article ~ WIND POWER FOES REFUSE TO GIVE UP RIGHT TO SUE.

[10] WDT article ~ Acciona submits application

[11] PB votes to be lead agency in SEQR process for Acciona's & Bp's projects

[12]The Cape Vincent Town Board Code of Ethics 1970

[13] WDT article Town, Wind Farm Firm Establish Account.

[14] Escrow account details