Friday, February 28, 2014

T. Urling Walker: One Example of the Value of Cape Vincent's Seasonal Residents

After a little time reflecting about the events of yesterday I am wondering if BP's flight out of the Cape may have been pushed along at the governor's office.

If there was some influence brought in at the highest levels of government then maybe we need to reserve a special thank you to a Cape seasonal resident who may have tipped the balance in the end with his personal plea to Governor Cuomo.

Former Watertown Mayor T. Urling Walker sent a letter to Governor Cuomo in early December (Link). Mayor Walker wrote about the potential that the Governor might have to make the final decision.

He indicated that Cape residents were better educated about impacts from wind development than Albany lobbyists. Mayor Walker closed his letter by saying, "The beauty of the area is a mecca to tourists and an important economic asset to the State, please help us preserve our heritage and not destroy it with inappropriate development."

What I found interesting is that Mayor Walker's letter was sent to Governor Cuomo on December 12, 2013, but that Secretary Kathleen Burgess acknowledged receipt of his letter on February 21, 2014. Secretary Burgess no doubt posted Walker's letter as soon as it was forwarded from the Governor's office. This suggest Mayor Walker's letter was held by the Governor for over two months, and it appears to have been given very careful consideration.

Regardless of how BPs ending came about, I like the thought that Mayor Walker's plea to protect our community may have been instrumental in bringing it about. What we should also appreciate is not only the Mayor's letter, but how it was delivered . Look at the letterhead - City of Watertown. Look at the little handwritten note next to mayor - "Former." I like your gutsy style Mayor Walker.

Thank you Mayor Walker for not only stepping forward, but for how you stepped up to the plate. I think you may have hit a home run.

Times Editors Miss the Bus

I am dumbfounded how the Times' editors could have so completely missed the bus on the Cape Vincent wind issue in their editorial Blown Away (Feb. 28). Times' editors opined that full-time residents had to deal with the ups and downs of the local economy, and can you blame them for not wanting to take advantage of the opportunity for making money off their land with industrial wind development. 
 
Unfortunately, the editors also exposed their bias regarding the rights of part-time residents, “But part-time residents objected to the notion of introducing a wind farm into the community.” They didn’t want to spend their leisure time staring at numerous wind turbines.” With this comment Times' editors could not have been more disingenuous to the majority of us Cape residents.

Here are just two important points editors of the Times missed. In a survey of all Cape Vincent residents in 1992 (well before wind) the overwhelming majority of both full-time and part-time residents rejected future industrial development. The conclusion of that study was “They (Cape Vincent residents) would like to see improved job opportunities and services, but not at the expense or sacrifice of the very qualities that make Cape Vincent so appealing – its beauty, history and small town atmosphere.
 
Furthermore, Cape Vincent’s first master plan for future development and growth (2003) specifically discouraged development such as industrial wind, “Location of towers, prisons or utility facilities where their impact would have a negative impact on scenic vistas and tourism assets.” What became obvious to those full-time residents that did not support industrial wind development (there are many of us), a number of town leaders and full-time residents ignored the wishes and plans of the entire community in order to take advantage of their own economic opportunities via leasing their land to industrial wind developers. 
 
Their attitude was to hell with the community planning, we want our money! Apparently the editors of the Times also believe that community planning for future development is just a waste of time.

The other major oversight of the Times was their continuing refusal to ignore the corrupting influence of BP’s payments to local officials. The Times broke the story on conflicts of interest in 2006, but subsequently always chose to view the issue as only wind development and not wind corruption. The Times has yet to report on the language in BP’s wind lease contracts that requires the full cooperation of leaseholders in forwarding their project. This information has been available for years and has important ethical implications for public servants. 
 
For town officials who are expected to serve the public’s interests these leases were disastrous and the payments to officials by BP tainted their service to their constituents. The Jefferson County Board of Ethics understood the importance of this issue; I just wish the editors of the Times could have understood it as well.

Finally, the Times recommends, “Residents must begin the process of healing some of the wounds caused by this experience. They can start by recognizing that perhaps they themselves were responsible for some of the pain inflicted.” Unfortunately, this editorial by the Times does absolutely nothing to help that process. The paper could have helped far more by leaving their editorial page blank. 
 
But, their editorial does prove that it is impossible for editors sitting in an Washington Street office some 30 miles distant to understand a very complex community issue - at best the editors of the Times get all their information about Cape Vincent second-hand. 
 
What is also obvious to us now with this editorial today is that not only have we had to fight BP for the past eight years, but we have had to fight the Watertown Daily Times as well.

Clif Schneider





Thursday, February 27, 2014

BP ‘terminating’ Cape Vincent Wind Project

BP Wind Energy is pulling out of Cape Vincent after unsuccessful attempts to sell its 285-megawatt industrial wind farm project.

 “It’s a sad day for Cape Vincent. The few people who don’t live here are now running the town,” leaseholder Harvey J. White said, referring to how seasonal residents practically took control of the town board by changing their residencies for the sole purpose of voting for anti-wind candidates for Cape Vincent Town Council. Continue...

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

BP - The Beast is Dead!

 Can you believe it?

A small band of over –the-hill misfits beat the fourth largest corporation in the world and saved their town. Congratulations to all my readers and all those people who have supported and commented on issues related to wind development and wind corruption. February 26 will long be remembered as the date in our history where the redcoats were sent packing the third time in 250 years!

Thank you all!

 EXCLUSIVE!!! Breaking news BP is Packing it in

 Feb. 26, 2014  10:14 EST
Exclusive
 

BP cancels 200 MW wind project


BP Wind Energy has cancelled a 200-285 MW wind project it estimated would have cost in excess of $300 million


Victor Kremer, editor for

 Sparkspread, has just

 confirmed that YES indeed the

 200-285 MW 

  project that is being cancelled

 by BP is the Cape Vincent Wind 

Farm Project Proposal!


The Watertown Times has received confirmation  from BP that they are terminating the Cape Vincent Wind Farm project link here to read the story

Aubertine says he won’t run in 21st Congressional District

CAPE VINCENT — Darrel J. Aubertine, a prominent Democrat in the 21st Congressional District, announced today he would not seek the seat being vacated by Rep. William L. Owens, D-Plattsburgh.
Continue...

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Won't you be my good neighbor

 What is a good neighbor agreement?
A device used by wind developers that allows them to take advantage of people that live near industrial wind plants.
Developers buy the rights of people living in close proximity to turbines for a small payment. By signing a good neighbor contract you agree to accept the noise, shadow flicker or any other issue that may degrade the quality of your life.

As part of BP's Cape Vincent Wind Farm they have signed people up to good-neighbor agreements. These agreements put covenants on the land encumbering it for up to 40 years. I have been unable to find even one good neighbor agreement on file with the Jefferson County Clerk. 
Why haven't they been filed? Who's responsibility is it to file these agreements?

If these agreements have not been filed are they legal and binding on the land?

 Link here to read entire BP Good Neighbor agreement







Below is a copy  transcript of a BP Good neighbor recruitment letter
December 11, 2007

  

Regards,
Jim Madden.
Business developer




Friday, February 21, 2014

Cape Vincent to send letter urging judge to kill BP application for wind farm

UPDATED: 2/21/14 7:08 AM
PUBLISHED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2014 

CAPE VINCENT — Paul F. Aubertine, the lone Democrat seated on Town Council, was the only member who opposed a decision Thursday to urge a judge to kill BP Wind Energy’s application for the Cape Vincent Wind Farm project.Continue...

Video clip from last nights Town of Cape Vincent Board meeting.
Councilman Aubertine raises objections to taking a proactive stance with the Article 10 process

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Headline, article gave incorrect perceptions

When I saw the Watetown Daily Times on Feb. 4, and the online version, I couldn’t believe it. Urban Hirschey’s picture was on the front page along with a story about proposed solar panels on his property — in the top half no less, what an honor.
Wow, overnight there must not have been any floods, protests, wars, earthquakes, election recalls, political demonstrations or any other happening to deserve front page coverage. Continue...