BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Monday, April 8, 2013

What I have worked for my entire life is suddenly devalued by 50% to the benefit of a handful of neighboring citizens


The Honorable Jeffrey C. Cohen, Acting Secretary
Three Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12223-1350

 Dear Secretary Cohen:
I am writing to you in reaction to the Preliminary Scoping Statement filed
by BP Wind Energy relating to its proposed 124 turbine wind farm in Cape
Vincent, NY. I am a resident of Cape Vincent, and I am strongly opposed to
this development for several reasons:
1) Although my physical property itself is not being taken by what amounts
to the imposition of Eminent Domain, its prior market value is being taken.
This amounts to an "illegal taking" under the law;
2) I realize that there have been many emotional and visceral reactions to this proposal -but this one is black and white and undeniable. I urge you to simply order an impartial comparative study of real estate sales in the Village of Cape Vincent and the Town of Cape Vincent prior to and then since 2008. Devaluations of50% of prior relative market values are not uncommon. While properties in surrounding communities have recovered
from the "Great Recession" our properties have not because of the
wind mill issue. BP Wind Energy can provide all the academic studies about
real estate devaluation they want. All real estate markets are local -and the
values in this one are ruined for all but the lands upon which turbines may
be placed;

3) The argument has been made by those who favor this development that
they have the Constitutional RIGHT to do what they wish on/with their property, provided it is legal. No argument there. But it becomes a much
more complicated legal question when the exercising of those rights
actually abrogates the rights of so many others. What does this do to my
right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" when what I have
worked for my entire life is suddenly devalued by 50% to the benefit of a
handful of neighboring citizens? I will need to know who is responsible for my just compensation;
4) BP Wind Energy admits in its scoping statement that the realistic outside useful life of this project is 20 years at most. We will then be faced with 124 useless, rusting hulks hovering over our properties. Then what? Whose responsibility is it to return the landscape to the way it was prior to this invasion?
Mr. Cohen, Cape Vincent has only ever had its location on the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario to host its tourist economy. That has been true for decade upon decade. And that's all it will have for the coming decades. To put that -and the majority of its citizens' economic futures -at risk for perhaps 20 years of inefficient, heavily subsidized energy production hardly seems I like a prudent move.
I am in total opposition to this planned project for these and many more reasons. Wind power has its place. Cape Vincent is not one of them.


Anonymous said...

When a homeowner loses 50% of the value of their home and can't even sell or live in it because of what the leaseholders have done they have a right to become whole. The leaseholders are speaking on behalf of Bee Pee and the information they have been providing is turning out to be wrong. Many believe that Bee Pee, the community organizer and the voters for wind should be held accountable. That is why the citizens of the Thousand Islands and Golden Crescent region should support the bloggers defense fund.

Anonymous said...

The greedy handful of neighboring citizens benefiting from a wind factory project should be on the receiving end of a lawsuit brought by property owners that have seen their property values drop as the result of a wind development debacle. Property value guarantees and decommissioning rules and suggestions were brought up to the PSC last year by myself and other COAX members and ignored by the PSC along with other good suggestions made by COAX.