BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Sometimes the water in Cape Vincent stinks real bad

Cape Vincent's Water district #2 has been a hot topic recently but... According to the comment below there may be big issues with other districts as well.

Comment on ~ Darrel Aubertine needs to clarify what he meant when he said Town of Cape Vincent Attorney Mark Gebo "helped develop the line"

4/22/2014 At 2:46 PM ~


I think Water District #3 users have been given the shaft, quietly.

They were told by Town of Cape Vincent officials they had to switch to the town's District #4 because of low DANC waterline pressure. No town official, however, contacted DANC and tried to resolve the issue. Instead, they horns-waggled District #3 users into joining District #4, paying part of the Town's District #4 water district debt while still paying DANC debt. 

Oh, and for years District #3 also paid most of water district #2's debt service and maintenance fee, while District #2 used most of the water.

District #2 users may be screaming they've been treated unfairly, but it is District #3 users who have gotten screwed by their own friends in high places.

District #3 never had to give up the DANC line. All they needed to do is tell DANC they needed more pressure. I think they were sucked into #4 so that the town could justify #4 and keep costs down by sacrificing District #3 users.

Sometimes the water in the Cape stinks real bad. 

Monday, April 21, 2014

Darrel Aubertine needs to clarify what he meant when he said that Town of Cape Vincent Attorney Mark Gebo "helped develop the line"

Today a story was published  in the Watertown Times concerning Cape Vincents infamous Water district #2 in this story Darrel Aubertine is quoted as saying  

"Mark Gebo helped develop the line and did the legal work, and the DOH signed off on it and had no issues.”

 Darrel Aubertine needs to clarify what he meant when he said that Attorney Gebo "helped develop the line. "

 At a special board meeting held Thursday April 12,2012 Town of Cape Vincent attorney Mark Gebo made the following statement concerning water district #2

“There are geographic boundaries to this district. The problem is that we have users who are drawing water through this district that are not within the geographic boundaries,” town attorney Mark G. Gebo said. “Generally speaking, the regulatory agencies, when I’ve had to deal with them on these issues, don’t like the concept of outside users. If you are going to add somebody to the district, that’s fine. But expand the geographic boundary and bring them in.”
This is for a variety of reasons, Mr. Gebo said.
“That way you have shutoffs in place for each of the users. So, if there’s a problem just for one user, you haven’t got to shut off three,” he said. “And it gives the town a better handle on what to expect in terms of use; a better handle on handling something like a large break that might be affecting the usage in the system. It also makes it a little easier perhaps even to just monitor where leaks are taking place.”

Cape Vincent suspects illegal water hookups in Water District 2; health,sanitation concerns raised

Link to original WDT story



water district #2


The following post has been pieced together from information obtained through a FOIL request and the Jefferson County Tax database.

According to the water district agreement for Water District #2, there are three official users
Donny Mason Parcel Tax ID # 40.00-1-43
Wesley Bourcy Tax ID # 49.00-1-11.3
Darrel Aubertine Tax ID # 50.00-1-16

The DANC Regional water line runs through and/ or parallel to these parcels allowing them to directly hook into the DANC line. (See map below)

These users or owners are billed for their water on a monthly basis accordingly, Donny Mason gets a water bill, Wesley Bourcy gets a water bill, however, Darrel Aubertine does not get a water bill.
The water bill for Darrel’s land is addressed to Terry Aubertine’s Hell Street address.

Additionally, the bill is not for parcel # 50.00-1-16, the vacant lot in water district #2, owned by Darrel Aubertine .
The actual service location is listed as 3244 Hell Street ; this is the farm that once belonged to Paul Aubertine, Darrel Aubertine’s father. The Tax maps show that it now belongs to Darrel Aubertine. The parcel number(40.00-1-17) listed in the water service contract was not a Typo; this water service location is completely outside of the Boundaries of District #2.


Jefferson County tax information

SWIS: 222889 Tax ID: 40.00-1-17
Darrel J Aubertine 32554 Hell St
Cape Vincent NY 13618
Margaret S Aubertine 32554 Hell St
Cape Vincent NY 13618
Water Supply: None ***
~~~~
The dark Black line on the map below is the DANC Regional water line & the green star is the property out side the district that is billed as a service location in the district.

Department of Health to Cape Vincent: Seize control of privately run water district to prevent contamination

March 26,2012
Letter from Fourth Coast to Supervisor Hirschey outlining proposed audit of water district #2



Letter from Fourth Coast to Supervisor Hirschey concerning water districts #2&3





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Water bill from water district 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Water bill from water district 2

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Water bill from water district 2







Below are documents
pertaining to Water District #2

Cape Vincent,Water District 2 ~ Original Rules ~ and Regulations

Cape Vincent,Water District 2 Rules ~ and Regulations as amended 3 -11-1999

Cape Vincent Water District 2 Rules and Regs. as Amended 12 -9-1999



Department of Health to Cape Vincent: Seize control of privately run water district to prevent contamination


  TED BOOKER
TIMES STAFF WRITER
PUBLISHED: MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2014 AT 12:30 AM

Describing the water district’s genesis, Mr. Aubertine said, “The reason the Development Authority was never part of the district is because they couldn’t afford to run 9,000 feet of waterline, so we had to run those ourselves." Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Daily Times



Tuesday, April 1, 2014

The Town of Cape Vincent concludes its portion of the public record concerning the Article 10 process with a simple thank you

Hon. Kathleen H. Burgess - Secretary 
New York State Department of Public Service 
3 Empire State Plaza 
Albany, NY 12223 

Re: Case No. 12-F-0410: 

Dear Secretary Burgess:


Now that BP has officially withdrawn its application for the Cape Vincent Wind Farm project proposal the Town of Cape Vincent would like to conclude its portion of the public record on this matter with a simple thank you.

For over a decade the cloud of industrial wind development hung over Cape Vincent with seemingly less regard for our community than our wind resource.  We did not believe Article 10 was as big a threat to  municipal sovereignty as many others saw the law.  Rather, it was welcome relief that a process was finally in place that proved to be fair as applied to us in Cape Vincent.  The process that unfolded under Article 10 was not tainted by local conflicts of interest, as happened under pre-Article 10 local siting with SEQRA.

We conclude our long ordeal with our observation that may serve to guide the decisions of any other municipality that may be faced with a similar set of circumstances that we have experienced.  The staff of the Public Service Commission are not the foe of a municipality, as some in our community feared.  The Article 10 law provides a number of protections for local plans and zoning laws, and in our experience, PSC staff were courteous, professional and conscientious 

It is in the interest of every community that may be involved in the Article 10 process in the future to enlist  local human resources necessary to understand the rules and to participate in a way that preserves their community's vision, values and outline for its future growth.  

It would appear to us that Article 10 can be a success if both the community and developer cooperate, but that cooperation must be based on a general local receptivity to the developer’s plans.  Local governments also need to be a forceful advocate for their community, they do have a role to play in the Article 10 process, contrary to what some believe.  If they choose not to fully participate, then they effectively relinquish home rule.

Finally, we urge that Article 10 never be allowed to be used as a device to force a project on a community when a developer reaches too widely and too deeply into that community, demanding too much. 

Again, please thank Public Service Commission staff for their professionalism and fairness, in particular we would like to thank ALJ Paul Agresta and Mr. Andrew Davis.


Respectfully yours,

Urban Hirschey, Supervisor
Dick Macsherry, Deputy Supervisor 
Brooks Bragdon, Councilman
Clif Schneider, Councilman
John Byrne III, Councilman
Paul Aubertine, Councilman