Cape Vincent Wind History ~ 2006 ~ Leader Of The Pack ~

December 13, 2006:
With representatives of AES-Acciona and BP Alternative Energy present, the PB voted unanimously 5-0 to be lead agency in the state SEQR environmental review process for Acciona’s project site review.
Despite protests from some citizens, the site plan review process for wind farm development moved forward Wednesday night when two companies, AES Acciona Wind Power NY and BP Alternative Energy, came before Edsalls Planning Board. With representatives of AES-Acciona and BP Alternative Energy present .
Edsalls Planning Board voted unanimously 5-0 to be lead agency in the state SEQR environmental review process for Acciona’s project site review. Then the PB votes to make itself lead agency with sweeping power over the BP project as well in a 4-0 yes vote with one unidentified abstention. According to the Watertown Times article included in this post, Chairman Richard W. Edsall abstained from the vote concerning BP, because he has land in its proposed project area and had an agreement with Greenlight Energy, the company Mr. Hiza worked for before it was bought by BP.
Edsall and his Planning Board now have absolute critical control over the environmental review process, but never consider his conflicts of interest and prior recusals or the conflicts of two other PB members.
Later in the meeting the PB approves a met tower placement on the property of a brother of TB councilman Joe Wood and ZEO Alan Wood. This is a wind related issue yet the vote is 5-0 in favor with no abstentions this time which includes a yes vote by Karen Bourcy who is the sister to the individual getting the approval for the met tower. They recuse when they choose, there is no consistency to recusals or abstentions.


Dec. 20, 2006:
The NYDEC submits a letter to the PB and Edsall concerning the pending DEIS and the town as lead agency. They do not object to the town PB as lead agency. However, they may not been aware of the conflicts of interest since there is no mention of it in their letter, However if they were aware of the conflicts what would this say about the leadership of the DEC and their ethical standards? At this point no conflicted town officers had made any official disclosures as required by the town’s ethics code, written in 1970. As the public was not informed of the conflicts the DEC may have been in the dark about the ethical lapses of Edsalls Planning Board as well. They recommend that a public scoping be done so important studies get included, and the public and other involved agencies have input. The scoping was skipped over despite the request of the DEC who expresses concerns over wind farm impacts particularly in this area. In addition the letter outlines numerous areas of study the DEC thinks are important.
~~~~~~
Published on January 9, 2007,
Watertown Daily Times
CAPE ZBA SETS HEARING ON WIND POWER APPEAL
Town officials decided an appeal from a citizens ‘group concerning the legality of wind farm development could no longer be ignored Monday when the Zoning Board of Appeals set a public hearing to address the issue.
Previously at a Planning Board meeting, Edsall stated “These people have a right to go through the site plan process," he said. "In the end, if you feel the process has gone unfairly, you can do an Article 78 in State Supreme Court."
~~~~~~
January 11,2007
No resolution Rienbeck asks for permission to authorize BP escrow account

Meeting minutes---->

January 16, 2007:
The Watertown Daily Times (WDT) reports, “St. Lawrence Wind Power has skipped an optional phase in the state Environmental Quality Review process. AES Acciona Wind Power NY, the development company that is pursuing the potential St. Lawrence Wind Power farm, presented the Planning Board with a draft Environmental Review Statement, a 300 to 400 page document that outlines the studies the company will do to pursue development in the town's agricultural district. [In one of the first decisions as lead agency, PBC Edsall and the PB permit AES-Acciona to opt out of one of the optional requirements of SEQR. Again, a decision that Edsall makes without consideration or regard to his conflicts]. Perhaps Edsall was thinking only of his wind contracts, they are the driving force behind every decision that he makes.
~~~~~~WIND PLAN ARGUMENTS KEPT BRIEF
Published on January 19, 2007,
Watertown Daily Times
Attorneys from the Wind Power Ethics Group and AES Acciona Wind Power NY spent less than an hour presenting cases to the Zoning Board of Appeals concerning the St. Lawrence Wind Power project Monday.
The ethics group submitted an appeal in December of the Planning Board's decision to allow turbines in the agricultural district under site plan review. About 100 people attended the hearing, but few commented.
Judy Drabicki, a Dexter attorney is representing the ethics group .
~~~~~~January 26, 2007:
WDT reports, “The town Planning Board received a draft environmental impact statement from AES Acciona Wind Power New York for the St. Lawrence Wind Power project Jan. 10, but it will not be made available to the public until Feb. 1,
This is in violation of state Freedom of Information Law, according to the state Committee on Open Government.” This is a blatant move on Edsalls part to hinder the public’s ability to have any input on these wind projects. AES-Acciona also states in their DEIS they will comply with PB guidelines. In addition Edsall is quoted in the paper as allowing the DEIS to be taken home by the PB members to study, 2 others of which have family conflicts. This opens the door to the possibility of select members of their families or other lease holders viewing a document that has not been released to the public