This comment letter Re: Article 10 was written by Jack Palminteri,
resident of Cherry Valley, NY
May ,20 2012
Hon. Jaclyn Brilling
Secretary
New York State Public Service Commission
Three Empire State Plaza
Albany, New York 12223
Dear Secretary Brilling:
I would like to inform you of the many concerns that I and many others have regarding the Article X regulations as they apply to local governments and the people they have sworn to protect.
The town that I live in, Cherry Valley NY, has been targeted by two wind developers three times in the last ten years. On both of these occasions the projects were opposed by a majority of the people and the projects were turned down.
Over the last six years the town has passed a wind law in order to protect the health and safety of it's residents and a comprehensive plan that ensures that the rural life- style that we now enjoy will not be compromised .A land use law and a road use law were also passed during the last two years reflecting the will of the people. The wind law was crafted by our planning board with the advice of an environmental engineering firm and contains reasonable guidelines regarding setbacks and noise levels.
Article X states that local laws will be respected as long as they are not "Unduly burdensome." What does that mean,?
unduly burdensome for the developer who stand to make tens of millions of taxpayer dollars from these projects?
If the siting board will be charged with making these decisions then they ought to be free of political pressure from ambitious politicians and the corrosive influence of the wind lobby. If they are not then the whole process will reek with the stench of corruption and be nothing more than a kangaroo court.
This will leave adversely impacted homeowners no place to turn except the legal system.
Local laws must be respected , they represent the will of the people and are consistent with the NY State constitution. Article IX of that document ,”requires deference to the level of government closest to the people.” Article X seems to be in direct conflict with state law and you can be sure that if push comes to shove it will be challenged.
It is imperative that the siting board members be vetted and to have them disclose any potential conflicts of interest. They also should make public all meetings between themselves and any lobbyists representing a proposed project .
In addition to the “intervenor fund” all developers must be required to issue buy out agreements to all homeowners within a three mile radius of any industrial wind facility.If there are no health or safety risks the wind company has nothing to worry about . This gives the non- participating homeowners a layer of much needed protection and is important because there are no moral, legal or ethical precepts that I know of that requires anyone to assume these risks so that corporations and their
lease holders can make a profit.
Page 2
Another concern that I have is that the times and locations of the comment periods have not been defined. Given the fact that most people work, it is imperative that all hearings be held in the evenings or on weekends in the targeted communities so that everyone has a chance to be heard.
To do otherwise is to effectively exclude the people who have the most at stake and will be perceived as part of a strategy to push these projects through as quickly and easily as possible regardless of the consequences . As far as the developers and the board members go, this may be an inconvenience to them but it is part of their jobs and must be done to maximize public involvement.
With great power comes great responsibility and also entails great liability.
The people in this state have a right to be safe in their homes and to enjoy a quality of life that they have right now. To assume that Albany bureaucrats and energy company salesmen that know and care nothing about local towns will have our best interest at heart is both naive and dangerous and will rightly be perceived as a way to push forward questionable projects without having to bother with all of the safety and health issues that these corporations deny exist.
Setback and noise levels standards must be established based on independent scientific criteria and not on the biased opinions of those who stand to gain the most.
To do otherwise is an inexcusable of act of negligence.
Jack Palminteri
Cherry Valley
NY
2 comments:
Siting board members vetted? Good idea, but not from personal, contractual entanglements. Rather, have there been directives to agency heads from higher-up political bosses to "facilitate" the process? This is the sticky point.
This whole damnable Article X process could be made a lot simpler if it allowed wind development to take place in communities that are now actively structuring their local laws to attract wind development and at the same time stayed away from those communities that want nothing to do with wind.
Easiest way to do this? Accept local law regardless if it is unduly burdensome to the developer. How about being concerned if the applicant's proposal is unduly burdensome to a community?
Excellent suggestion 5:19 AM.
Anything that interferes with the wind developer's plans will obviously be considered unduly burdensome by BP.
It's far more important to consider what the community wants first rather than let those crooks decide what they want to do to our town.
Post a Comment