Cape Vincent sends a letter to the Public Service Commission Re: Oct. Public work session

 Below is a rendering of the letter and below that is the letter as it was downloaded from the Public Service Commission website.

Ms. Katrina Landis                                                        October 30, 2012

Chief Executive Officer

BP Alternative Energy

501 Westlake Park Blvd.

Houston, TX 77079

Reference: BP Cape Vincent Wind Power project

 Dear Ms. Landis,

On Tuesday evening, October 23, a public work session of the Town Council and the Planning Board of the Town of Cape Vincent, NY was held for the purpose of considering the proposed British Petroleum wind power project in our town.

Present before us to inform us about the project and to respond to our questions was BP Wind Power Development Director, Richard Chandler.

It has become the norm in Cape Vincent for meetings of our Town Council and Planning Board to be recorded. Enclosed for your reference is a video disc recording of the full length of Tuesday's meeting.

We provide you with this recording in the hope that you will view it and thereby better inform yourself about the receptivity of our people and their town government to the proposed BP project. More than once Mr. Chandler asserted his confidence that the BP project enjoys our community support and that BP is not prepared to move forward in communities where such support is lacking. We found it hard to believe our ears. The great majority of our residents do not want your project in our town and they want any future development to be compatible with our zoning laws.

To be frank, Ms. Landis, we were astonished and taken aback by Mr. Chandler's persistent unwillingness to respond to very straightforward and pertinent questions respectfully asked of him by each of the undersigned town officials. What happened Tuesday evening was anything but a candid and open discussion with us regarding the

aspects, implications and history of your wind project here. Mr. Chandler simply refused to have that conversation, answering our questions only in the narrowest fashion possible often to the point of being completely unresponsive and patently evasive. To say this was a frustrating evening for the government of the Town of Cape Vincent would be an understatement.

Again, we ask you to view the enclosed recording and make every other effort to understand what has obviously escaped Mr. Chandler, Cape Vincent values its small- town roots and does not want what we consider the industrial blight that will accompany your project. We also ask that you re-evaluate your company's plans, because what you propose for Cape Vincent is not only incompatible with our community's vision, but is also incompatible with BP's wind projects elsewhere, since there are many more people here and we are committed to protecting their health, safety and general welfare.

Thank you for your close attention to this and we would very much welcome your response.

Sincerely yours,

Urban Hirschey - Supervisor

Brooks of Bragdon – Deputy Supervisor

John Byrne – Town Board

Clif Schneider – Town Board

Richard Macsherry – Planning Board Chair

Robert Brown – Planning Board

Cyril Cullen – Planning Board

Paul Docteur – Planning Board

Cc:

Mr. John Graham                                                 Mr. Omar Aboudaher

President                                                              Vice President, Business Development           

BP Wind Energy                                                   BP Wind Energy

501 W. Lake Park Blvd.                                       700 Louisiana St., 33rd floor

Houston Texas 7709                                             Houston Texas 7709

Hon. Jaclyn A. Brilling

Sec., N Y S Public Service Commission

Three Empire State Plaza

Albany, NY    12223 – 1350 

 ~~~~ 

Letter below

Link here to the Public Service Commission Website to download letter

Turbines & Radar ~ A letter to the Public Service Commission

Honorable Jaclyn A Brilling, Secretary
 NYS Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment
Three Empire Plaza
Albany NY 12223

RE: Case 12-F - 0410: Application of Cape Vincent Wind Power, LLC for
          Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need to
                Construct an approximately 200-285MW Wind Electric
 Generating Facility in the Town of Cape Vincent, NY


Honorable Secretary Brilling:

September 28, 2012, I submitted a comment letter for the above file. I have a
 supplemental comment to add to the file for the Cape Vincent Wind Power Application.

I was reviewing the BP Public Involvement Program and I noted that the list of
stakeholders did not include the Fort Drum Military instillation.

 As the crow flies this military base is approximately 30 miles from BP†proposed Cape
Vincent wind project.  Fort Drum is being considered for a possible missile
interceptor site, additionally Fort Drum may also become home to a predator
 drone program.  Issues with wind turbines and radar are a well-documented
phenomenon.  Large wind turbine blades reflect radar signals creating unwanted
echoes in radar systems (clutter).This clutter poses the challenge of
distinguishing wind farm signatures from airplanes.  Additionally Cape Vincent
 shares a border with Canada; radar interference caused by wind turbines has the
 potential to critically influence our border security.

Respectfully,

Kathryn A. Hludzenski

Town officials asserted home rule at meeting

Hester Chase 

 Sunday October 28,2012

On Oct. 23 the towns of Lyme and Cape Vincent met BP Project Manager Richard Chandler for the very first time.

I write to thank the town and planning boards from both towns.

As a citizen who has been concerned about the unethical development of wind, this was a night to remember.

Seventeen town officials from two towns made it very clear to Mr. Chandler, Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the world that they were elected to serve the people and to be guided in their decision-making process by the health, safety and welfare of the community as proscribed by our local zoning laws.

They demonstrated the intellect, courage and conviction necessary to defend our laws and indirectly our capability to govern ourselves with home rule.

For those who missed this historic meeting, it was recorded by Steve Weed Productions at this link — 

 http://www.steveweedproductions.com/counter/TOCV.aspx.

I am incredibly proud of each and every one of these men and women.

Hester Chase

Cape Vincent

Cape Vincent Town Board Member Clif Schneider addresses Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

At the Special meeting at Recreation Park, Tuesday evening Town Board Member  Clif Schneider addressed Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

Clif Schneider: I'm not going to take very long. I just, I want to get an idea, of ah ---how BP decided to come here. And ---they mentioned the comprehensive plan; my question really has to do with the comprehensive plan.

 I think it's important to know ah, back in 2003.  You've heard about the plan--it’s a master plan.  I'm sure you're familiar with that whether you're in Texas or, no matter where you live; it’s kind of a common thing. The intent of that is --- sort of describe the community, what the community interests are, and that kind of thing. Back in 2003, the town and village adopted a comprehensive plan; a master plan for the community-- had to do with the economic growth at that time. It-- actually got started in process in 2000, took a number of years, and by 2003 --- they formally adopted it, they just didn't accept it, but they formally adopted it, it gave it more traction. The interesting thing is in 2003, when they started to do that that was long before ah, wind came around town, long before we had --- even before leases were signed and that type of thing. 

I just want -- I just want to point out, to give you a feel for the kind of community this is.  It’s, ah-- I'm thinking in terms of if BP were going to come here they would be wanting to say, okay, the first thing I wanted to do is see their master plan, and of course I want to talk to some officials. The vision statement for-- in that 2003 plan, was to protect the integrity of Cape Vincent’s small town atmosphere, while allowing for compatible residential growth, econ- commercial growth. So, you can see it was geared toward a small community, a rural community, that type of thing. It went through various parts of ah, the town, and describing the breaking out into different zones. There is an internal section called the agricultural residential section where actually most of your project is scheduled to be developed. And what that plan said back in 2003, before you both came to town, was what they wanted to enhance and, ah -- support was agriculture in that section and it said to develop-- development that has minimum impact on ah, the important resources such as scenic view, vistas, working landscapes and tourism assets, now this is before you guys came to town. It also said what to discourage and it said location of towers, prisons and utility facilities where the facility--- where the impact would have a negative   impact on scenic vistas and tourism assets.  So, I mean you-- it's a quite clear statement.

 The thing I'm interested in, I think a lot of people are, is what, what prompted wind companies to come here when you know this is a small town --- small town atmosphere, you have very  Clear stuff which is saying hey what we really want to do with our agricultural area is leave it alone ,we don't want towers. How could you possibly come in here and ---at that time when you first came in you  had a project of hundred turbines, it was 95 at the time but it’s similar to what you have right now, the equivalent of 140 story buildings in our --in the town that wants to maintain a small atmosphere. How did you come to do that? I mean do you even think that, that really is compatible with the kind of community was described back there in 2003?

Chandler:  That’s--I mean, the question you're asking is of me personally, I-- I was not involved with the original siting of this project and this area.

Clif Schneider: okay, well, let's move ahead to now.

Chandler: Sure.

Clif Schneider: Now come in, you’ve got 100 and ah, 124, which is even more

(Unintelligible), turbines which is even more of an impact. And so, you still, we still have that same vision. That same vision of a small-town, small commercial industry, we also have the same sense about what we want to do with the interior so-- the project you are proposing really is, do you think that's compatible, to the   kind of description we had in that master plan?

Chandler: Ah.

Clif Schneider: Would you say the development you have right here is compatible with a community that wants to maintain a small-town atmosphere?

Chandler: Ah, I do, I do believe the project offers ah, the opportunity to be both compatible with ah, allowing for wind power generation as well as maintaining the ability to continue agricultural activities and a small town feel.
 Again, this is not the first project that we've pursued,  um, there are other small towns across the US  and in New York that have hosted wind turbines sites, ah, have not had ah,detrimental effects, that ah, some may have thought that might  be the case. Ah, we absolutely continue to believe that. Ah, there is great wind resource here in Cape Vincent as you know all too well, you live here; you know the power of wind.  Um, ah, we believe that we offer the opportunity to bring significant environmental and economic benefits to the town, both in the form of leasehold payments as well as ah, any kind ah, of payments we might make   in lieu of taxes.

Clif Schneider:  you know, you indicated – – – – – your discussion about you said you   looked at your own internal controls, you know we ah, took a look at the ----you’re ah, posted website, you’ve got 13 wind farms.

 We to took a look at that-- in terms of internal when I look at those, those wind farms that you have in other words, I found where they were in Colorado, and Texas and what have you.  I did the little Google Earth thing, I was flying over your, your ah, wind farms out there, and internally it looks as though you have the same notion about your plans, I mean internally ah, this, town and this set up and this plan, really is, is in contrast and incompatible with the kinds of things you’ve done everywhere else.

Chandler: UM,

Clif Schneider: I mean, this, this, and you don't have any other place. I've looked at all those things and, and you know you've got miles between turbines and, and ah, homes and residences, you don't have any wind farm where you have it right next to a tourism-based economy to a major area of the, a region in the state that draws tourism. You haven't got anything, so why did you come here?

Chandler: You, we can talk about setbacks that we've used in developing the layout here, from  looking at roadways, looking at ah, residences looking at a, ah, property lines, of parties who are or are not participating in the project. We can talk about all those kinds of details, all of which I again, I reiterate are either at or above our own internal standards and   certainly at or above industry standards for building wind turbine projects. This is both for proposed and operational projects.

Clif Schneider: Okay and I understand that.  You say in a sense that really is compatible but you've also said here, that you're trying to be responsive to what we are putting forward. From my personal point of view it's not compatible, what you propose is not compatible with what this community stands for.

 And I've got one last comment. The advertising, you mentioned the advertising you   know, we have seen these ads, I thought they weren’t very helpful. One thing in particular how can you be pushing the economic deal with the money that’s going to come back to the community?  In all essence that's all based on an assumption that you are going to get a ah, pilot agreement, that really was when we initially set it up--we have a legislator here right here that said in effect that this wasn't to be used in anything else other than Galloo. So you can't really  be talking about any kind of financial stuff particularly--- putting an ad in the paper, talking about financial stuff, when you really haven't even set-- begun the discussion of ah, the arrangements and agreements that are required from all the taxing jurisdictions to do that. So, my suggestion there would be you know lay low on the advertising don't stress anything on economics until you get to the point.  

The other thing is take home the message that this is a small community --- what you got up there is incompatible with what we stand for.

Both BP $ ACCIONA had been working in unison for years to bring Cape Vincent into submission .

At the Special meeting at Recreation Park, Tuesday evening Planning Board Member  Butch Cullen mentioned that BP had put pressure on the Jefferson County Industrial Development Agency(JICDA) to cut a  tax deal with the town, and that they wanted to take away the towns taxing jurisdiction authority, completely away.

 In 2010, the Jefferson County Industrial development Agency had been working on the development of a Uniform Tax Exemption Policy , a policy that governs payments in lieu of taxes or PILOT payments. Both BP and Acciona wanted the JCIDA to take away a towns right to veto a PILOT agreement .

The scheme to cut out taxing jurisdictions was put forward by BP attorney Justin S. Miller, Harris Beach PLLC, Albany.

"The IDA is not required to make changes forwarded by the taxing jurisdictions," he said. "There is no required consent or veto power of the taxing jurisdiction — you're just required to have a public process." [1]

If a pilot is negotiated for BP’s project, they will be paying a fraction of what they should be paying.

The wind developer gets a reduction in the taxes that they are required to pay. The AVERAGE decrease in property values for homeowners in a community that hosts turbines is 30% to 40%

When the property assessments are accordingly reduced this means a reduction in tax revenue for the community. The result of this will be an increase in tax rates to cover this loss in tax revenue.

  Recently it was reported that BP’s Chandler had been seen visiting Don Alexander CEO of the Jefferson County Industrial Development Agency.

 Both BP $ ACCIONA  had been working in unison for years to bring Cape Vincent into submission .

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[1] Link here to a Watertown Times editorial Re: the IDA, PILOTS $ BP

Below is a letter sent to the JICDA from Acciona’s project developer Tim Conboy. 

Regarding the development of a uniform tax exempt policy in Jefferson County.

BP's Chandler states that BP's Cape Vincent Wind project violates local zoning".

At the Special meeting at Recreation Park, Tuesday evening Dave Henderson  Lyme Town Councilman addressed Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

 The following is an excerpt not the full exchange

 Dave Henderson : I guess I’m asking , have you taken  into consideration  the latest information,  world  standards on siting turbines?

 Chandler: Again, I don’t know how you are defining world standards. I've indicated what it is that we have looked at .  

Dave Henderson: Have you looked at the world health organization’s recommendations?

Chandler: if you have additional standards that you'd like for us to factor in that are outside of the town zoning law, we will be happy to take a look at them. What I've described is what we've factored in.

Dave Henderson:   you are not addressing the town zoning law at all, like I said you are going to ignore the town zoning law.

 Chandler: We have read the town zoning law.

 Dave Henderson: But you're not going to abide by it.

Chandler: we have read it we read it, we have factored it in, and we are proposing for discussion what we have behind you.

Dave Henderson:  What’s behind me does not represent the town zoning law, is that correct?

Chandler: I believe it's correct to say that if we were to take this layout and overlay it the town zoning law it would be in violation of that.

Dave Henderson: Thank you.

Cape Vincent Planning Board Member Butch Cullen addresses Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

  At the Special meeting at Recreation Park, Tuesday evening Planning Board Member  Butch Cullen addressed Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

Butch Cullen: Can you hear me?  

Chandler: absolutely.

Butch Cullen: just a little bit of background. I'm looking at this whole thing in a little different light than some of the people especially the planning board members and town board members. I've been involved in zoning in this town for, I don't know since 1989, on and off. A member the planning board for 13 years, I have experienced a lot of situations with small-scale site plan reviews.  I have gone through a lot of training at state level and county level relative to how to deal with projects, site reviews especially. So, I concentrate on the procedures that the planning board members need to follow.

 I was brought back onto the planning board about a year and a half ago, because of the meltdown of our previous planning board and the fact that this community needed help in regard to planning. My experience, past training drove me to start doing some research on this project, and what really baffles me is we have very small projects in this town, very small projects that have been handled well than this one. BP, the size of your Corporation, I'm sure you guys go through this all the time, all the time. You must have capabilities to deal with almost any land use regulation, or zoning law or anything else globally that you can imagine. For some strange reason you chose not to be upfront with the planning board and the town board. It was a backdoor approach, and I'll just give you some examples of that.

There were secret communications, utterly secret communications, with leaseholders, potential leaseholders, town officials, planning board officials, who knows, who else, years before you applied for this project, probably some of them were under contract with you before you applied for this project. When you did apply which was in 2006, your SEQRA application information was vague and incomplete. The noise impact study was questionable and probably biased. There was no plan to mitigate several of the positive environmental impacts and there still isn’t and there probably never will be.

You put pressure on the Jefferson County industrial development agency to cut you a deal, a tax deal with the town, and to take this town’s taxing jurisdiction authority, completely away.

 It was in 2006 when you applied for this this project and to my knowledge this planning board has not seen one additional bit of official information from BP, relative to modifications of the application. I've kept an eye on this project since day one and that map, the first definitive map I've seen for the project. So, your comments about involving the community, it hasn't happened. I was on the economic impact committee.  Are you aware of the economic impact study that has been done? Are you familiar with that?

Chandler: I'm familiar with the fact that the St. Lawrence wind farm project completed the SEQR process; including the Draft Supplemental final EIS as well as the Cape Vincent wind farm draft EIS.

 Butch Cullen: The town board formed a committee to do an economic impact study of wind development in this town. Are you familiar with that? Are you aware of that?

Chandler: I'm not familiar with the study.

Butch Cullen: It’s important; you should read it, because the state of New York certainly will want to see it, in their evaluation. Anyway, as part of that process I went to the BP office to obtain some information, so we could put our study together, BP refuse to provide information that I asked for. They flat refused to provide it, we were handed that yellow map that’s been in circulation for six years.

I guess it was Jim Madden, there’s a map in there, it's got some dots on it, you guys can figure out who, where those towers, sites are, and he said, by the way it's not complete, or its not accurate its close but it's about all your get out of me. So, anyway that's how cooperative BP has been relative to the impact study.

There's really been no meaningful involvement with BP in this planning board, which should be as opposed to everybody except us since 2006. There was a point in time when I felt (when I came back on the planning board) that it would be worthwhile to just sit down around one table with their advisors, our consultants , BP planning board members and try and put a fence around this thing to figure out where we really are. So,  Mr. Macsherry asked Peter Gross to consider attending a meeting, planning board meeting, a timeline and scheduling meeting. He felt that that wasn't in his best interest to do that. Then to top matters off, submitting the PIP plan to the state of New York that is no better than what I just described.  A whole bunch of big empty information and they let you know in what, six pages of comments as to what they thought about your PIP plan.

 I guess my point is, if you're going to go to the state of New York for review what happens if you fail there? Is it possible you'll come back to us?  If you fail at the state level, will you come back to this planning board for review?

Chandler:  Again, we think the Article 10 process provides the best opportunity for the project to move along and we intend on it adhering to the process, provide the information that we need to make it a robust and complete an application as possible.

Butch Cullen: So, you're saying you probably won't come back to us.

Chandler: I think we have a very valuable project here for this community. The Article 10 process provides an appropriate avenue for pursuing the project and moving forward, and we are going to pursue that.

Butch Cullen: So, you will or will not answer the question. Will you be coming back to this planning board with an application for wind development project if the state turns you down?

Chandler: We can hold the hypothetical situations here, the fact is, and we have an application that we are working on for a project that we believe provides true benefit both economically and environmentally for both the community and the state. We are focused on moving forward in the process.

Butch Cullen: Needless to say, I'm not sure you really understand you probably got an idea by looking around this room how enormous this project is to this town.  It’s a tsunami as far as Cape Vincent is concerned. But I'm not sure you really understand the character and the history and the other key aspects of this community. I really don't think you understand that.  Certainly BP…  Just let me tell you some of the impacts, the pressures on this community in the last 13 years. Families have been torn apart, totally torn apart, friendships destroyed. Health of individuals impacted. I could go into detail on that but there are people in this room that I'd rather not have hear that. The voters were in turmoil, they did their job they elected the people they wanted because of wind in this community. Our town budget is difficult for this town board to plan, due to the expenses its put this town through and getting legal services and pay other costs associated with what we are going through.

 The town board has been in and upheaval it settled down, now we have a fabulous town board.  Planning board went through a meltdown; we have a fabulous planning board now.  There are some here that don't like it but there's a reason why they don't like it, it's because it's a good planning board. We volunteered we have literally thousands of volunteer hours in this community, these  people sitting right here at these tables put this thing back together ,picked up the pieces to get  this town back on track and we did that.

 Been tremendously difficult for local businesses.  If you are pro-wind you go one place, if you are anti-wind you go another and that's the way it is. Poor businessmen don't know what to say.  Our organizations have even been impacted.  Some people think if wind comes to the town were gonna get a new clock on the village green, or something’s gonna be repaired or have some work done at the lighthouse. These people don't know what to think. Just a few examples of what's going on here, in case you didn't know. The end result of all this in my opinion, if you took a vote in this room, in this town right now there's a total lack of trust in BP, based on past experience.

We see a new BP here tonight, only because state of New York demands it, that’s why we see a new BP here, none of this stuff ever happened until tonight. We removed the conflicted or unethical board members. It's all been the result of wind. We had a meltdown on our planning board, all a result of wind. We updated our comprehensive plan (something else you should become familiar with) all because of wind. We amended our zoning law, all because of wind.

 The threat of you going to Article X is another disconnect with Cape Vincent.  Basically what you're telling us is we just don't intend to abide by what the local community wants.  It's just another disconnect. So, as I mentioned we updated our comp plan and our zoning law. We updated our comp plan because it's what the people in this town want, and it's also what they don't want. It clearly states what they want and what they don't want. You should become familiar with that even though you won’t abide by it. We have a zoning law based on our comprehensive plan, the way it should be based on scientific fact and expert advice. Any fair and unbiased siting board would expect nothing less from BP than what is contained in our comprehensive plan.

 No matter what route you take, that is if you decide to go with Article X and never come back here, I think you should be prepared to know, Cape Vincent is going to defendants local laws, and its land-use regulations entirely as they are written.

Cape Vincent Meeting Message BP Wind:"GO HOME"

by Joanna Richards

Cape Vincent,NY,October 25, 2012 ~ Town officials and community members from the Jefferson County towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme gave BP a clear signal at a meeting Tuesday night in Cape Vincent: a wind farm isn't 

welcome there.

Hundreds turned out for the meeting. Signs reading,"BP GO Home! filled the town recreation hall parking lot.

Link here to continue reading, this story  and the anti community comments  made by wind supporters  

FACTS ABOUT BP'S CAPE VINCENT WIND "FARM"

Proposed turbine location map

Richard F. Chandler, director of business development for British Petroleum's proposed Cape Vincent Wind Farm,  revealed the turbine array plan at last nights meeting at rec park .This is the very first time the public has been given a map indicating where any of the turbines for their project will be.

Richard Chandler BP wind energy 

Map o turbine locations Cape Vincent NY

YNN reports on Cape Vincent Meeting with BP's Richard Chandler

JEFFERSON COUNTY, N.Y. -- A meeting was held in Jefferson County over a wind energy project that has divided the community. BP Wind Energy was recently reprimanded by the state public service commission for not reaching out to Cape Vincent residents with their plans for a wind farm.

So Tuesday night, the corporation was at a community meeting with a revised plan for a 124-turbine project in the town. BP presented a plan it's submitting to the state, which allows a sitting board to override local zoning laws in approving large power projects.

Continue reading YNN report via this link

Brooks Bragdon Town of Cape Vincent addresses BP's Richard Chandler

 Town of Cape Vincent ,Town board member and

Deputy Supervisor , Brooks Bragdon Addresses BP Project Developer Richard Chandler



Brooks Bragdon : are you familiar with the town's comprehensive plan,   and what that is?

Chandler: I've read the town's comprehensive plan.

Brooks Bragdon: Okay, are you familiar are you familiar with the fact the Cape Vincent is predominantly an aesthetic community with many views on the St. Lawrence River and Lake?

Chandler: Ah, sure.

Brooks Bragdon: And are you aware that has many historic preservation properties?

Chandler: I am aware there are historic preservation properties in the town of Cape Vincent.

Brooks Bragdon: Are you aware that the current comprehensive plan, updating the comprehensive plan, is very similar to the prior comprehensive plan?

Chandler: I have not compared the current comprehensive plan to the previous one.

Brooks Bragdon: I just want to assure you, that it is, a great deal of time and effort went into it, but it's based on the prior comprehensive plan. It's based on studies, surveys ,that go back for decades, here in the town. It's not something that was invented recently and it's not something that was in any way altered for current circumstances. The current zoning law was created over a period of months. We estimated the man hours that went into it at about 3500 man-hours. It's very important, that the zoning law does not rest on its own, it is tied into that comprehensive plan. This community is certainly a very aesthetic, world-class community. And also a community that's blessed by tremendous historic preservation resources, and that zoning law, was intended to protect that. Recently ,you spoke with attorney Curtin he said, do you intend to take into account the recent zoning law that we created? Your answer such as I remember it, we read the law, we evaluated it internally within BP and came up with a solution that we consider reasonable.

 Now, I want you to look me in the face  and I want you to tell me, are you going to come into our community on the basis of our zoning law or not? If ,you're not going to come into our community on the basis of our zoning law, we are going to have a complete commitment to an adversarial relation. If you're going to come into this community on the basis of our zoning law, I am personally prepared to work with you but I want you to answer it and not in gobbledygook. I want a clear understandable answer.

Chandler: Again, we have factored in ,we have read through the zoning law, we have factored that in, we want to continue to have a dialogue with the town of Cape Vincent and the Town of Lyme, to talk how we can further optimize what we have proposed here ,this is by no stretch the final version by any stretch this is for discussion purposes, we like to have your feedback for what it is we're proposing, we have looked at the options that are available to us ,looking at the article 10 process.

·         Brooks Bragdon: I'm asking you, please cut the bullshit and tell us  if you are  to work within our zoning law or not.

·         Chandler: We are committed to working with the town of Cape Vincent and the Town of Lyme, to optimize the project that we have here.

·         Brooks Bragdon: that project is in extreme violation of our zoning law,it has nothing to do in our zoning law. I'm not going to try to beat it to death ,I'm just saying ,that has nothing to do with our comprehensive plan, nothing to do with the zoning law…

·         Hello!!

·        Chandler:  I'm waiting for questions sir.

·         Brooks Bragdon: well do you have a comment?

·         Chandler: I'm here to talk about the project and answer questions that are available for you to ask, for me to answer.

·         Brooks Bragdon: Okay , I assume that when you say you have read the law and you got an internal evaluation, you came up with what you consider to be reasonable, from your view point, that's enough ,you don't care about this law and you're just going to try to drive right over the top of it.

·         Chandler: we absolutely have cared about the interest of the Town of Cape Vincent and Lyme and Jefferson County New York State and we will continue to do so.

Planning Board Chair Richard Macsherry addresses Mr. Chandler.

 Richard Macsherry: With all due respect, most of us in our adult lives have been in a situation where you think am I on a different planet? And that's, to be very honest with you sir, either you haven't kept up with what has gone on for six years, or it is a business model to ignore it but this is a town that is as impacted as any other where there is not uniformity in perception.

 I do have something that I worked on for the last week and a half and which are due consideration. Ladies and gentlemen it is keenly instructive to remind ourselves how industrial wind came to the town of Cape Vincent.  I will note up front that only those directly involved from landowners to developer representatives know exactly when the first contacts were made. You see secrecy has always been a hallmark of the energy prospector’s business model. For 10, 15 years and perhaps more this Township has been a target for wind development.

What we have come to know with certainty, is through the leases  such as this and I do have an original here, as this example dated July 26, 2010 the developers took license, aided by the lax in nature of New York State real – a state law to legally bind a land – owner to do the wind companies bidding. And I quote from section 8.4 entitled requirements of governmental agencies, “owner(owner is the land owner) owner shall assist and fully cooperate with grantee, at no out-of-pocket expense to owner, and complying with or obtaining any land-use permits and approvals, building permits, environmental impact reviews, or any other approvals required for the financing, construction, installation, relocation, replacement, maintenance, operation or removal of wind power facilities in the project, this is interesting it's in parentheses (whether located on the property, on the adjacent property, or elsewhere) (goodness elsewhere) including execution of applications for such approvals, if required." Further," in connection with any applications for such approvals, owner agrees a grantee's request to support such applications (again at no out-of-pocket expense to owner) at any administrative, judicial or legislative level."

 Finally, and I'm almost done with this recitation"

 in the event that any laws, rules, regulations or ordinances of any governmental agency provide for setbacks or otherwise restrict the location of any wind power facilities to be installed on the property were adjacent properties, owner shall cooperate with grantee in obtaining waivers such as setbacks and shall execute any documents reasonably requested by grantee to evidence owners waiver of such setbacks."

Ladies and gentlemen, you will hear from others the issue of setbacks that is when tower distances from residents, property lines, roads and so forth. No wonder given what I have read above that BP and other developers claim (prior to Cape Vincent) such uniformity in siting criteria in currently operating wind farms in the state of New York. This lockstep tightness in force through contract stipulations generates the basis for what BP interprets as an industry standard. And as what Mr. Chandler said the company standards. What is clear is the goal of targeting community through biased efforts of compensated and compromised local citizens.

 By the way I did miss the point here that there is   no scientific justification embodied in the BP lease requirements.

The Cape Vincent community at large gradually began to grasp the implications of industrial wind and the hold their leases held over the landowners. In 2007 two town board members held wind leases and another’s family held leases. The planning board chair held leases in the board secretary was conflicted with lease holding family ties. To wind developers were courting business here and conflicted town officials played loose attention to the town's code of ethics. Recusal from official involvement was considered appropriate but only in the context of which company you are signed with. It didn't matter what the promotion of corporate wins agenda was a conflict no matter which developers application your actions furthered one was meant to complement the other.

The ethical due diligence expected of elected and appointed officials was secondary to the explicit expectations of leaseholders and the potential for personal profit. At this point you might ask didn't anyone step forward to question this masking of ethical governance? Certainly. Privilege of the floor was allowed town board meetings, but answers, let alone justifications for actions were rare but definitely tinged with the motion. Planning board protocol under the lease holding chair was to deny most residents their right of speech. Beginning in 2008 the videotape records of these meetings the suppression of citizens’ speech. The act of suppression were characterized by such vehemence that many residents withdrew from public interaction. One clearly remembers the visceral shock of this.

Compromised behavior on the part of political leadership usually does not persist without support. Such support was given, in writing by a sitting State Sen. and local land/lease holder in 2006, this was bolstered in 2008, by a staff attorney with the firm Whiteman Osterman and Hannah who coincidentally had been hired by the town at the request of the lease- holding planning board chair. That law firm has had a long history of pro- wind advocacy. I ask, what does the average listener   conclude was happening? BP's wind energy's business model has the effectively separates the few with self-interests from the majority whose only expectation was and is for transparent and inclusive and truly representative governance.

Did anyone in the town of Cape Vincent, New York complaining? Yes, early and often to the state attorney general's office. The record of this activity is robust and for all to see. After six years the case against conflicting governance due to wind related influence presumably remains  open, yet there is been no remedial action taken by the New York State Atty. Gen.'s office.

It was interesting to note however, on August 19, 2009 a Mr.Sakurada, VP for BP wind energy did sign the governors newly framed code of conduct agreement. Local project manager Jim Madden signed the same pledge on July, 30, 2009, again window dressing. There was no behavioral change on the part of either BP or local leaseholders in positions of power.

 I am almost done.

In 2011, the ballot box, the majorities last resort land, and even sell without a single illegality, to the changes that state government was not willing to address. There are no longer conflicted/lease holding residence on the elected town board. Conflicted planning board members recuse themselves from wind -related issues. And now, the ex-attorney general and current Gov.'s action seemed directed at sacrificing Cape Vincent, New York to fulfill a goal, a goal for expanded energy availability. The evidence here lies in his resurrection of article 10 legislation and rules. W Link this appears to be his tacit acceptance of the BP tactical business model. Our home rule rights have been denied; by and attorney general and governor whom we once trusted. Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cuomo let the discussion begin. You both know very well, that alternatives to taking Cape Vincent do exist.

Crowd cheering.

   Richard Macsherry: you know, there's no celebration for any of us. There's no celebration for the people who trusted what they were told individually in their homes and there's no celebration for me ,at one time I was willing to do some negotiating.  I can't now. This is just gone too far and public outreach, I just, you have to sincerely sir, address what is really the division of this town.  And if you're interested in just ignoring that, you have a heck of a time these next several months because the past is with us.

The issue with what went before with the prior planning board with SEQRA. I would defy anybody to tell me that due diligence was served. It was not, it was self-interest that was served. So, as far as I'm concerned, you're starting all over, and what you claim in your PIP, you really need to rethink, whether you're addressing this town all sides honestly, or this is more of just the slickness, because there are some of us that have really been out in the world before.  This is not the end of Appalachia which one of BPs proponents called us.

Wind energy forum brings hundreds

CAPE VINCENT — It was standing room only in the Recreation Park on Tuesday night — with “BP Go Home” protesters occupying one side and green-shirted Voters for Wind filling the other.

Sandwiched between an audience of 300 people and local lawmakers from Cape Vincent and Lyme was Richard F. Chandler, representing BP Wind Energy, who was grilled by town officials for nearly two hours in a comment-heavy question-and-answer session following a brief presentation on the project.

Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Times

Cape Vincent Planning board member Bob Brown addresses Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

 At the Special meeting at Recreation Park, Tuesday evening Planning Board Member Bob Brown addressed Richard Chandler, BP project developer.

Bob Brown: Mr. Chandler, thank you for coming tonight and giving us the little bit of information that you did .I assume you're here to answer some questions should we pose them.  

I would like to explain a little bit about what we have done in the past year with our zoning laws. Your advertisement, you say you've published. I've seen one of them that advertisement says Cape Vincent wind farm to achieve a win-win for the community and local economy .The only way we see a win-win is if you pay some significant attention to our new zoning law.

In January, the town board appointed a group of citizens from all over the town and charged us with looking at the existing zoning law. Obviously part of that was to address wind energy conversion systems.  Four attempts have been made in the past six years to write a wind addendum to the zoning law, each of these attempts ended in dismal failure because   of the attitude of conflicted interests. These attempts were carried out in a very controlled fashion; public input was not sought let alone encouraged, by the zoning law committee.  Under the guidance of Mr. Curtin established two irrevocable principles. 
Number one, the health the safety and welfare of the entire community, everybody, was Paramount. 
The second one, was all technical requirements, all technical requirements were established in concert with recognized experts in their field. These were not established based on emotion or anything else. They were based on expert technical, sound scientific knowledge and we do have the experts to back it up and we will bring them with us.

The zoning rewrite committee set up an operating method that encouraged public input, the well-publicized meetings wherein the paper, initially, they were then talked about at the town board meetings. The town knew we were having the meetings and everybody was invited to come.

 From January 17, to June 4, we met twice a week, two and half hours each time. The public was invited, the public was encouraged. During this entire time neither BP nor any of the identified leaseholders attended these meetings and contributed in any way toward the coverage of wind energy conversion systems.

 We set up a formalized method where people could write a comment or suggestion and we had them in a notebook, we still have them. 

There were no comments from anybody, on setbacks, anything related to turbines, setbacks noise vibration anything. Apparently, BP had gotten together leaseholders and said stay away from the process. To further encourage public participation the committee insisted on having a public comment session, before we submitted the draft to the town board and the public hearing. Again, we received no wind related comments from BP, or their leaseholders.

 Yes, we did receive a letter from you Mr. Chandler, dated June 27, and I'm going to try to quote the end of that letter. For parties interested in submitting applications to site wind energy projects in the town of Cape Vincent, the provisions contained in the proposed zoning law are unreasonably burdensome, in view of existing wind generating technologies and/ or the need of costs to ratepayers. We respectfully request the town reconsider the proposed zoning law, taking into account the above comments. 

Mr. Chandler, we appreciate your effort but you told us nothing. You did not make one suggestion on how you thought we could improve the law and make it more amenable to your needs. Again, we had the formal public hearing when the town was looking to pass a law on WECS wind energy conversion systems. Some of the leaseholders made comments on other sections but nothing having to do with wind. The result of these months of effort was a zoning law that contains many sections with requirements for industrial concerns that were similar to the types of requirements that were there for WECS.

 The law treats all of those concerns equally, independent of specific commercial business. So, if there is a sound requirement for turbines it's the same sound requirement as it is for a Quarry. We did not separate out wind turbines. Mr. Chandler, I was the chair of the zoning law a rewrite committee, we spent a good deal of effort revising our law. Our law very much reflects what our comprehensive plan says. The work resulted in a comprehensive zoning law that protects the health safety and welfare of the community. It is a just law, it does not discriminate against anyone entity, and this law is not up for grabs. 

Unless it can be demonstrated that a request fully complies with the health safety and welfare of our community, the request will not be considered. We believe this law is defensible under any review .

A couple of quick questions if I may please.

BP apparently decided they were not going to participate or their leaseholders participate in the law. And yet, in your PIP, in the last section you say that you want to talk to the towns and then decide what local laws and ordinances the siting board should not apply.

 It's illogical to expect the siting board to vacate a law that you and/or your leaseholders were offered the opportunity to participate in but declined to do so .Can you explain the logic of that Please?  How can you ask the siting board to vacate the Cape Vincent zoning law when you were given numerous opportunities to participate in the development of it?

Chandler: we are proposing a project that we believe the community supports, that can't happen, unless we have a community that supports it. We can't build a project on land that we don't control. We have an incredible amount of support from the community that is why we are  here, that is why we are  moving forward with this project.

 We have continued to engage with the community and the board over the past several years including this year, including over the summer months, time that we were spending on trying to optimize the layout that you see before you here. There was certainly uncertainty.

Planning board Chair Richard Macsherry: who did you talk to? Just out of curiosity, from either board.

Chandler: the response that we provided in the June, time frame was the best information that we had at the time to contribute to the  discussion that the town was having  regarding its draft zoning law. At the same time the Article 10 process was also in the draft format. Given the regulatory uncertainty regarding how to move forward with permitting, we were trying to give feedback in both of those processes, while trying to work on a revised layout of optimizing the two projects. So, only after getting a bit more clarity and certainty on where the town was going to end up with its zoning law in August time frame when that was passed and when the Article 10, process was passed in the August time frame as well, that we have enough certainty on what the options were, that we can use to take the project forward.

Bob Brown: Sir, you haven't answered my question .My question was,  you elected not to participate and  your leaseholders through you, elected not to participate in the development and writing of  this law.  How can you go to the state and say the law was no good ? You were given many opportunities to participate and we did it directly through the entire town.

 I think your proper response to Mr. Macsherry was that you worked with 4 or 5% of the town and assumed that they were going officially notify our board. Nobody did.

Chandler:  We, again we submitted a response in the June time frame.

Bob Brown: I read that last paragraph in that response sir, and it said nothing as far as being helpful to the writing of the law.

Chandler: we submitted a response in the time frame, to notify the board that we had seen the draft zoning law and we asked the town to reconsider because as drafted at that time, as currently drafted, we do believe that the requirements are unduly unreasonable, with respect to wind turbines

Bob Brown: what requirements?

Chandler: I'm not prepared to comment the specifics of that.  This forum is the opportunity to...

Attorney Curtin: I think Mr. Chandler has answered the questions to the best of his current ability, given the facts that he may have been provided by other parties. This is not, certainly not, an inquest or deposition, but that having been said and you’ve got additional questions please ask them.

Bob Brown: I won't take up any more time. Thank you Mr. Chandler.