Cohocton Wind Watch: June 2006
Cohocton Wind Watch is a community citizen organization dedicated to preserve the public safety, property values, economic viability, environmental integrity and quality of life in Cohocton, NY and in surrounding townships. Neighbors committed to public service in order to achieve a reasonable vision for a Finger Lakes region worthy of future generations.


READ about the FIRST WIND Connection to the Obama Administration

Industrial Wind and the Wall Street Cap and Trade Fraud




********************************************************************

Friday, June 30, 2006

CWW UNDER ATTACK BY YES WIND & HUNT NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND by Karl Palmiter

In response to Hunt’s letter in the Valley News. He is correct, the town is under attack, but it’s under attack from UPC and some board members along with Yes Wind, who are trying to destroy this country side and the lives of the people who live out here where these turbines are going to be. We are simply trying to defend ourselves from those bullying and attacking us.

You refuse to answer questions that desperately influence our lives and residence. You said yourself you don’t have answers to a lot of questions, yet you are committed to going forward with this project that is foolhardy. Without answers how can you possibly feel that the community can trust your judgment like you telling us to?

You like to use False information such as cutting down on air pollution from fossil fuels, or cutting down on dependence of foreign oil and so on. We are for helping our environment, but it is not wind turbines. It is a proven fact that wind turbines won’t solve the problem. If you would be honest and actually do research other than what UPC and other town supervisors from towns that also wanted these turbines in like yourselves, you would see that no conventional power plants anywhere in the world have been shut down because of wind turbines. They provide a Glut of electricity at times, and nothing at other times. This scenario that you are promoting reminds me of a want to be general in history. He wouldn’t’ believe his subordinates, he had all the knowledge he needed and he was determined to stay the course. YES he did become famous his name was GEORGE ARMSTRONG CUSTER.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

June 28 letter to Cohocton Planning Board by Don Sandford

Dear Chairman Fox & members of T/ Cohocton Planning Board:

This past Monday on radio station 1480 AM, Hornell, NY commentator Keven Dorin had as his guest Mr. Larry Mitchell, a Texan, based now in Washington D.C. Mr. Mitchell is C.E.O. of The American Corn Growers Association, phone #202-835-0330, who was referred to Mr. Dorin by a Mr. Carroll Wade of Jasper, NY, 607-792-3662, a member of The National Farm Organization. The theme of the discussion had to do with needed investigation by town board members in formulating a more lucrative return for towns using grants & tax incentives from private enterprise. In years past, Mr. Wade and Mitchell were part of a national committee to come up with a plan for energy in the future. Ethenol from corn is one source which is know by most people and wind power another, but with a twist. Both are convinced that making deals with companies like UPC is not in the best interest of the town and that with more investigative work by boards such as yours you could find out the same information and do so much better. There are numerous grants and tax write-offs by international companies just waiting to be asked. An example is “John Deere Wind Power”, a contact being a Mr.Carl Hing Mertinins 515-267-4250, which Mr.Wade suggest the planning board contact. Mr. Wade, a farmer in Jasper, has been involved with this form of energy nationally from its inception in the United States, knows people involved from Minnesota to Illinois and beyond and during out 1-1/2 hour phone conversation was a sincere and sensible advocate with facts and figures to back up his positions and said if he could assist your board he would be glad to do so and feel free to contact him. It’s very important to him to see this done right everywhere!

My contention has been from the beginning, a much better business plan needs to be in place along with all the safe guards protecting the financial value of homes, property and quality of life issues of the people living near and effect by the turbines.

Perhaps this information will be useful to you. You have to understand that myself and others like me are trying to get a point across that there are many visions and ideas out there just waiting to be discovered by people such as the planning board and you took the job to do justice for everybody. Please give Mr.Wade a call and find out for yourself what this “wind pioneer” has to say. As the lead agency, take all time the time you need to do a difficult job, but in the end, done with an open mind reaching a decision you can all be justly proud of!

(As a side note ,Mr Wade is also invoved with the “Farm-Aid” program started by Willie Nelson and others,which will have their fund raising concert in Philadelphia, Penn. Area this fall.)
Sincerely,

Done E. Sandford

June 28, 2006 letter to Senator Hillary Clinton by James Hall

June 28, 2006

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
United States Senate
476 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

James Hall
PO Box 657
Naples, NY 14512

RE: Follow-up to question asked at the “Alternative Energy in New York Conference” held at the Hyatt Regency Rochester, NY June 26, 2006

Senator Clinton,

During the Alternative Energy in New York Conference and in your speech you promoted the “so called” benefits of industrial wind turbine projects. The objective in asking the following question, during the Q & A session, was to bring to your attention the grave circumstances of the organized criminal wind project scheme that is being fostered upon the public, residents and property owners, especially in rural areas of New York State.

I asked for your assistance. “Senator Clinton we need your help. When will the federal government conduct an anti-trust and RICO investigation regarding the wind turbine developers, their predatory business practices and their collusion with Town, County, State governments and IDA agencies?”

The theft in value and uncompensated use of our properties by industrial wind developers in coordination with Town, Country, State and IDA agencies is of unprecedented scope and scale. The economic model for such wind developments cannot exist without substantial government subsidies. Electric generation from these wind turbines has a much higher cost, has no storage ability and is lost when the grid is supplied by long- term contract methods. Also the wind velocity in most of our state does not support consistent electric generation. Peer reviewed studies of public safety hazards have not been conducted in Upstate where icing will be a huge factor. There is no essential public benefit, while the destruction of agricultural and residential areas will be permanently affected.

Inadequate liability and property insurance coverage, as well as, indemnity protections for townships, leaseholders and residents, who will be obliged to live next to an industrial facility subject the entire community to unnecessary risk. Effective mandates for decommissioning, removal and restoration are noticeably absent from all these projects.

The public safety and the pristine environmental treasure of our land is being sacrificed upon the altar of greed as public officials eagerly enable their dishonest partnership that will only produce the systemic destruction of the landscape and our quality of our lives.

These unaccountable and LLC corporate developers, many with foreign financed and owned interests, and local leaseholders with wind contracts function under a wall of silence. Their projects conspire to steal the use and destroy any resale property values of residents who live in proximity to their industrial turbines. Placing such giant machines as high as 500’ with the same setback as their height next to a home is unconscionable.

Where is the duty and obligation of government at all levels to protect the public safety and safeguard the constitutional, equal protection and property rights of all taxpayers? How can our children be protected when the authorities betray their oaths of office for the price of a wind turbine site?

The pattern of turbine leases given to town officials and administrative cronies has been repeated throughout NYS. Town councilmen, relatives or family members routinely sit on boards that act as lead agencies. Their conflict of interests and suspect ethical conduct demand an official and wide scale federal investigation into this multi billion dollar racket. Anti-trust and RICO statures are being violated. NYS politicians will not intervene, claiming that it is a “local matter”. (see enclosed letter from NYS Assemblyman Bacalles)

The nature of the wind turbine fraud is historic and extends to the very foundation of our rule of law. The “Comprehensive Plans” of townships are being circumvented with the abuses of spot zoning, segmentation and avoidance of SEQR regulations. Court challenges and Article 78 actions abound, but no district attorney will step forward or honor their duty and investigate the trail of bribes and criminal conduct that is systemic in this industry of graft. Our NYS attorney general will not start a probe. Ordinary citizens need federal involvement to stop the corruption that is so rampant in the industrial wind projects.

The real and frightening prospect of private development eminent domain and condemnation looms over all NYS rural communities. With wind turbine site locations scattered among and adjacent to residential properties, our homes will become unlivable. Many taxpayers will not be able to sell and certainly will never receive replacement value costs. This injustice is a direct result from the complicity and illegal actions of an unholy alliance among corrupt proponents of a business plan designed to steal agricultural land for industrial use. PILOT tax programs are a scam and exist to bilk the remaining taxpayers. Commensurate and equitable taxes will not be accessed on such wind projects. Follow the money, who makes the public decisions, who benefits and who is responsible for condemning so many NYS citizens to a life sentence in an industrial hazard zone.

Senator Clinton will you intervene and use the enormous influence your office has in making a recommendation to the Department of Justice that a dedicated and trustworthy U.S. Attorney be assigned to undertake a full scale criminal investigation into the NY statewide business practices of the industrial wind developers and the respective town governments that have demonstrated malfeasance in their office?

I will end with your answer to me at the Alternative Energy in New York Conference: Thank You.

Cordially,



James Hall
PO Box 657
Naples, NY 14512
(585) 534-5581

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Another UPC Project - WindFarm Prattsburgh DEIS report

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)

Below please find links to our Draft Environmental Impact Statement that was accepted by SCIDA on June 22, 2006. The Draft EIS will also be available for public review at our office in Prattsburgh:

Windfarm Prattsburgh, LLC
3 Naples Road
PO Box 301
Prattsburgh, NY 14873
Tel: 607.522.4598
Fax: 518.399.7342

A copy of the DEIS may be requested from:

Dan Albano
197 North Street Rd
Argyle, NY 12809
1 (518) 248-4016


DOCUMENTS (PDFs)
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (report text)

June 26, 2006 - James Hall's question to Senator Hillary Rodman Clinton

At the “Alternative Energy in New York Conference” held at the Hyatt Regency Rochester, NY the following public question was asked of Senator Clinton in front of the assembled audience:

James Hall question: Senator Clinton we need your help. When will the federal government conduct an anti-trust and RICO investigation regarding the wind turbine developers and their collusion with Town, Country, State governments and IDA agencies?

Senator Hillary Rodam Clinton response: Thank You.

The Senator wrote down notes after her answer. I introduced myself as the publisher of BATR and a member of Cohocton Wind Watch.

Saturday, June 24, 2006

June 23, 2006 letter to Cohocton Zoning Board of Appeals by Jim Lince

Cohocton Zoning Board,
Cohocton Zoning Board of Appeals
15 Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826

June 23, 2006 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL

Dear Zoning Boards:

This serves as a formal complaint.

We are writing concerning the tower on Joseph Meyers land which was erected sometime in 2003. We first documented this tower in December 2003. It is plainly visible from our residence.

We have asked the town clerk to provide a copy of the application and approval for this tower.

Our understanding is this land is zoned AG-R, and there is no provision in the zoning for a tower of this size. It is an industrial tower. When we noticed the tower was erected, we called the town and complained --- we were told it was permitted.

We do not understand the rational for the permit in that there is no provision in the zoning for towers like this. You may be, however we are not aware of a tower like this required for farming, agriculture, farm operations, or residential use (AG-R). If it is for communications purposes on the farm, then due to the sheer height (estimated 150’), we would be concerned about the power output/FCC regulations and appropriate use in a residential area. If it’s a weather station for the farm, those are less than 30’ high, even at scientific stations. Farmers use GPS now, but that’s all driven from satellite and does not require such a tower. So, we would not know what the farming/agricultural purpose is for this tower?

Based on the ruling June 22 against the Dyckman tower, we appeal to you to apply the same standards to the Meyers tower. The presence of the tower remains a nuisance to us as an adjacent neighbor/owners and not within the legal zoning for the area. Thank you for your attention to this matter and upholding the legal zoning of our land.

Sincerely,
James G. and Shannon P. Lince

Friday, June 23, 2006

Prattsburgh's Article 78 Going Forward - Will be heard on September 14, 2006

Supreme Court Judge Galloway has turned down the motion to dismiss and has scheduled that the action will be heard on the merits of the case.

SCIDA has 30 days to respond.

We have 30 days to respond back.

Then oral arguments will be on September 14.

The judge said that Ecogen may submit a defense of the DEIS, but they*
may not submit anything new. *What they can do is get new experts to
defend what they have already submitted.

A Stunning Victory for the Rule of Law in Cohocton

Last night the Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to uphold the law and turn down a variance request for a meteorological test tower on Councilman Joseph Dyckman’s property.

The test tower had already been erected by the wind company UPC before permits were submitted. UPC has a history of erecting these towers without getting the proper permits in Cohocton, as well as, in Vermont and New Hampshire.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

June 22, 2006 DEIS response cover letter

June 22, 2006

Cohocton Planning Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, New York 14826

Lead Agency for the UPC Cohocton Windmill Power Project

Mr. Chairman and Board Members:

The submission of the enclosed opposition documents in response to the DEIS prepared by Environmental Design & Research for Canandaigua Power Partners LLC (CPP) aka UPC is an unnecessary exercise. While the hope that the Cohocton Planning Board will find the information useful in the ongoing process of community education, the fact exists that UPC does not have a valid project. No application has been filed and no action has been made. Also, it has been represented that the Town of Cohocton, in its freedom of information law response that no agreement, written or oral exists, between UPC and the Town Supervisor and the Board. If this is true, without a clear and specific plan and proposal based upon legitimate zoning authorization, the entire DEIS process is premature. Since Cohocton Windmill Local Law #1 is under the cloud of an Article 78 challenge and the “so called” replacement ordinance Windmill Local Law #2 is under review, the basis for proceeding ahead with a DEIS is superfluous.

The DEIS is incomplete in all areas. It is nothing more than a generic proposal for a wind project with specifics to be determined later. The purpose of a DEIS is review and analysis of actual impacts and the mitigation measures that will be taken by concerned citizens and involved agencies. There are no alternative plans presented or evaluated in the document. There are no significant site specific studies merely generalities and comments. “For purposes of this report”, “wherever possible”, “for the purpose of this DEIS it is assumed” statements abound. The DEIS reads like a high school term paper. Much of the material has been used in several other environmental impact statements in the State.

However, the wealth of scientific data and peer review research that is included in this response should well serve the deliberative investigation that the Cohocton Planning Board has been charged to undertake. It is with sincere intent that the solemn duty of the lead agency will be assisted in that enormous task.

Included is a detailed outline with a point-by point format from the DEIS proposal, consisting of 34 pages and the supplementary documents of 1-461 pages, and this cover letter. Additional supporting documents are included which provide proof and evidence regarding specific aspects in the DEIS. A copy of the Advocates of Prattsburgh response to the Ecogen Prattsburgh/Italy Wind Farm is included since the ownership interests in both projects is the same and the attempt to avoid segmentation issues is so obvious. Also a DVD on the “Voices of Tug Hill” is presented as an illustration of area resident evaluation of life under the canopy of industrial wind turbine zoning. This experience and lessons learned apply to Cohocton and all the UPC “so called” mitigation measures are inadequate to resolve the fundamental deficiencies in the size, scope and scale of the UPC project.

Special thanks in compiling this response to all members and supporters of the community citizen organization Cohocton Wind Watch and Cohocton Free, Rick Bolton, John Bose, Katherine Bush, James and Judith Hall, Jim and Shannon Lince, Terry and Ruthe Matilsky, Dr. William Morehouse, Karl and Bonnie Palmiter, Alice and Saul Sokolow, Gary and Pat Struck, Robert and Michelle Strasburg II, Steve and Hollis Trude, Nancy Wahlstrom, Amy Wolfe. The list is endless and we thank everyone for their input.

Since the time given to respond to this DEIS proposal was so limited, the full range of information wherewith provided could have been expanded. Trust that future DEIS responses will be more extensive.

June 21 letter to Cohocton Town Board by Rebecca Conard

Town Of Cohocton

Town Planning Board, Town Board of Cohocton, Sandy Riley,

My husband and I, within the past five months, have become residents of the town of Cohocton, NY. We had a dream retirement home built in the country, and we are presently working on the interior. We moved to the Town of Cohocton, from a small village,, in hopes of listening to the birds sing, have no neighbors, enjoy the serene countryside that abounds us,, but with attending several town board meetings, planning board meetings, and meeting new friends in this community, we find out, after building our home,, that there is plans of bringing in huge wind turbines. I find this quite disturbing, because when we applied for all the permits needed to build our home, that I designed, NOT ONE thing was mentioned to us about these monstrous turbines coming to our road, and others. I suppose we will never finish our home, nor the porch that was originally designed and planned for the front of our home, as we won’t want to sit on the porch and listen to or see these turbines. If we had known, previously to the fact, that these huge turbines were coming to our road, we NEVER, NEVER would have built here!

We are not against wind power, by all means, after all, we were denied electricity, by a farmer, (he didn’t want electric poles running across his fields, but its ok to have these monstrous turbines in his fields,,grrr) and now we have solar power and soon to be, our own personal windmill, which will ONLY be 100 feet in the air! (that is our ONLY power!)

We never expected to be so short lived in these beautiful hills! Once these monsters come in,, the hills won’t be beautiful anymore! We can sit outside, now, on any given day or night, and watch the deer, and fox and listen to the birds sing, the owls hoot, the turkeys calling, the coyotes howling, and just wildlife in general! It is so peaceful here, why are these turbines coming, just to please the farmers pockets???? Whether they know it or not, their milk production will greatly diminish! Awww, too bad,, It is my understanding, that it is going to cost more to take these monsters down, than what the farmers will profit from in the leasing of the land! Another thing that really boggles our minds, is the fact that if lightning strikes or if they malfunction, and catch fire, there is no equipment in our town or any surrounding towns big or tall enough to put these fires out! With the amount of oil that is stored in these generators, they could smoke for days, and wouldn’t that smoke be toxic?

With all the reading that we have done, there is nothing good to say about these turbines, as they will decrease our property values, raise our taxes, they cause accidents, the birding population will be affected immensely,,oh my God, I could go on forever,,,this is so wrong! Won't you please reconsider the beauty of our hillsides, that could be ruined for the rest of some peoples lives? This is our paradise! It is our home!!!!!!!!!! I think the setbacks of these turbines should be at least a mile from ANY property line!

Another thing,, I believe UPC is a scam! and that they are salesmen, and the town of Cohocton fell for it! what suckers! Why don't other town have these huge turbines? because they didn't fall for the scam!

Please reconsider our hillsides,,our homes,,our views, our feelings, and others! These don't belong in Cohocton,, they belong in NYC where they don't care what their hillsides look like! or in the ocean, the desert, ANYWHERE but here!

Sincerely,
Rebecca Conard

Could you please send me a receipt for this letter?

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Moratorium Declared by Cherry Valley Planning Board

The Cherry Valley Planning Board has unanimously recommended an 18 month moratorium on all major development in the town of Cherry Valley.

There will be a few exceptions to the moratorium such as minor subdivisions and sub-divisions within families.

The time is to be used to complete a comprehensive plan, and to prepare necessary ordinances to properly control large-scale development. If all necessary legislation is in place before the 18 month period expires, the moratorium could be shortened.

The proposal must now be submitted to the Town Board for formal approval. It is expected that the Town Board will concur with the Planning Board's recommendation.

The Planning Board has made a bold decision on a controversial topic - land use regulation. It has made a responsible committment to the welfare of our community by transforming itself into a pro-active institution, truly a planning board.

The members of the Planning Board do not all agree with us. Nor does everyone in the community. And this does not mean that turbines are no longer a possibility in Cherry Valley. But, by taking action, the Planning Board has lifted the argument to the plane of reasoned discourse. They have earned our praise.

The Advocates for Cherry Valley welcome the opportunity to participate in a dialogue that will find a way to reconcile the inevitability of development with the unique history and beauty of our town.

The conflict over the proposed turbine farm on East Hill stems from a failure to understand that there must be a proper balance between individual rights, and the rights of a community as a whole. The people of East Hill have understood this from the beginning. That is why they have fought so hard. Tonight they have won a victory.

Remember, there are no "bad guys" in our town. There are just carpetbaggers like Reunion Power whose satchels are filled with greenbacks and the seeds of dissension. (Am I over the top or what?)

Congratulations to everyone for all their hard work. Don't forget,our struggle continues. But now this summer seems more sunshine than rain.

Jon Boone's speech at Perry, NY meeting

Cohocton Town Board postponed voting on Windmill Local law #2 until the August regular meeting

Last night, Tuesday June 20, 2006, the Cohocton Town Board delayed a vote on the proposed Windmill Local Law #2 until the Cohocton Planning Board submits their recommendations in the early part of August. Therefore, it was stated that no vote would be held before the regular Town Board meeting on the third Tuesday on August, 15, 2006.

June 20, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Councilman Joe Dyckman by Robert C. Strasburg II

June 20, 2006

Councilman Joe Dyckman
Cohocton Town Board
Cohocton, NY 14826

Mr. Dyckman:

My recent letter dated June 19th included the question "Are any of you successful business men?" Joe, I apologize to you for this question. When I think of this wind turbine issue and the Town Board, you do not come to mind to me because you abstain from voting on points surrounding it.

This was an ignorant oversight on my part. I was in no way questioning you as to your caliber as a businessman, you simply did not come to mind when I was making this point. Please accept my apology, no insult intended.

When I saw you tonight the blunder came to my mind. I do watch your farming operation and admire what you do. We may not agree on the issues surrounding these turbines, but there is nothing personal in my heart against you or any of the Town Board members. I am adamant in my opinion that this project as proposed is wrong for Cohocton, but it is not the personalities involved, it is the issues.

I am sure you have family that have been wounded or killed in wars wherein they served to defend our way of life. It offends me greatly when I see government sponsored programs tramping on the rights that my family went to war and died to defend. I have no problem with a landowner making money from a program inside the confines of his or her property lines, but we all have property rights and each landowners' rights stop where his or her neighbors' start.

This program as proposed includes a blatant disrespect of what we are as Americans. We in America are private landowners with deeds that say we have the right to quietly enjoy our property. This program as proposed is a violation of those rights. Local Law #2 is nothing short of a dictatorial document which is the gateway for the gathering and redistribution of wealth from poor communities and taxpayers to a chosen few. (I am not talking about the amount offered to the leaseholders; I am talking strictly about corporate enrichment)

All this propaganda about it being our patriotic duty to support this "green energy" for the good of the Country does not fly with me, the facts do not support that this should be a united effort amongst Americans to help our Country. This is a corporate (some of them foreign) fostered scam to bilk Americans of our money and our rights, supported by our local, State and Federal governments, all on the back of an energy need that this effort does not even offer a significant contribution to.

This is not a N.I.M.B.Y. issue. This is about heartfelt conviction to resist a deception of the worst kind. This is a deception against simple uneducated Americans who do not have a clue what is being done to them. When I drive through Town and see all these "we support clean safe power" signs in the yards of people that I thought were free independent educated people who were somewhat privy to the level of corruption in our governments, a cringe goes through my body. Not to get sidetracked, but this is how America was defeated in Vietnam. Communists are masters at spin, so are greedy Corporations and politicians. Fine upstanding people have bought into this hoax. Those green signs for supposed clean power are a testament to how people can be easily misled.

The saddest truth about this whole affair is the fact that some have willfully joined in this deception. I may get chided by the "yes wind" people for being rude or impolite and I have even been accused of being a liar, but no matter … this issue is to important to let go by without a fight. I have only suffered a little chiding; others have given their lives to defend these principles that have made America strong. What concerns me the most is when I present these violations of what used to be cherished rights and my government calls my efforts noisemaking and baloney. God be merciful to the ignorant. We are talking about much more than ice throw and noise. We are talking about the continued deterioration of the American principles that have made us strong in the past.

The Bible is often misquoted as saying that "money is the root of all evil" This is a misquote. The Bible says it is the "love" of money that is the root of all evil. Joe, don't let the money blind you. You have been offered only enough to help these Corporations bilk your neighbors. Separate yourself from this scam. Joe, from what I can tell, they are only offering Cohocton 6/10ths of 1% of their revenue. You are a businessman; can you justify support of this?

Scrap this plan as it is, resolve to work to get a better one in which the impact of these turbines is contained within the leaseholders property, choose a company to deal with that offers you as a leaseholder and our Town, a sufficient fair compensation plan that is worthy of the trust you have been given. Rewrite the zoning law so it protects us better than the one that simply calls for a letter of credit as surety. Based on the letter that the "yes wind" people put into today's Valley News, they do not understand what this means. A letter of credit is a worthless document for a program with the liability this offers.

Stop the money grab that UPC has started Joe, get a handle on this and defend our Town. No one on the Town Board wants to sit down with me in open public debate about this. I am not interested in a shouting match, I want to sit down with our government and dialog on a point by point basis, respectfully, rationally and democratically.

Sincerely,

Robert C. Strasburg II

June 20, 2006 letter to Cohocton Town and Planning Boards by F. Jeffrey Goldthwait, J.D.

Date: June 20, 2006

To: Town Board and Planning Board of Cohocton

From: F. Jeffrey Goldthwait, J.D.

I am a resident, property owner, taxpayer and registered voter in the Town of Cohocton.

I hereby claim the right on behalf of myself and of all residents and property owners in the Town of Cohocton to honest, impartial, knowledgeable, lawful and equal representation of all the people, by each and every elected and appointed official of the Town of Cohocton. You all took and signed an oath of office. I suggest you review that document. We the people intend to hold each and every one of you to the letter and spirit of that oath.

All public officials of this town have an obligation and duty to fulfill and execute the duties and responsibilities of his/her office in a responsible, honest and non negligent way. Each official must, with respect to any matter over which they have decision making power, at all times avoid any actual or potential conflict of interest involving them and/or their respective families and/or business associates. We the people intend to hold each and every one of you to the letter and spirit of that obligation and duty.

We the people of the Town of Cohocton did not elect you or support your respective appointments for the purpose of leading a UPC financed parade of giant wind turbines through we the people's town, with Wayne Hunt as the self-anointed torch bearing, drum major and the Town Board as grand marshals. Perhaps all of us should pause and reflect upon the meaning behind the upcoming Fourth of July holiday which celebrates a declaration of all of us to be independent and free from the same type of foreign, outside interference and potential harm to our community such as that proposed by UPC.

I respectfully request a written response by the Town Board and Planning Board to each of the following questions set forth in this document and attachments thereto which has been personally served by me on Town Supervisor Jack Zigenfus.

1. What justification does the Town Board and Planning Board have for not reviewing and updating the town's negligently out of date "Comprehensive Master Plan" before making a decision to adopt any new Town Law or Town Zoning Law amendment when such a significant new land issue such as the proposed UPC Wind Turbine Project is being considered?
2. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent Legal, Real Estate Appraisal, Financial, Environmental and Small Town Business Development experts whose services the Town Board and/or Planning Board have retained in order to professionally evaluate the proposed UPC project in order to assure all the people of the Town of Cohocton that you are being professional, impartial and thorough in your sworn duty to represent all of the people of Cohocton in a fair, judicious an non negligent manner?
3. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent financial experts retained By the Town to analyze the financial worth, stability and performance of UPC (with its former ENRON executive(s) and its parent companies?
4. What are the names of the qualified, neutral and independent financial experts retained By the Town that concluded that a PILOT by UPC was financially more beneficial to the Town than other tax options?
5. Just what is UPC's track record of successful, completed, fully operating and economically viable wind turbine projects?
6. Would put your own money in a (L)imited (L)iability (C)orporation without insurance? Do you fully understand the severe limitations of legal liability to the Town of Cohocton that UPC will enjoy at our expense and risk?
7. Why has the Town Board taken an apparent "oath of silence" and not responded to any public questions about the negotiations between the Town and UPC?
8. Why is it that the only expert legal counsel drafting documents and proposed Town laws in this matter retained and paid for by UPC?
9. When will the Town Board and Planning Board address the issues raised as to the legality of some of the meetings held to date?
10. Is not this proposed wind farm project in clear violation of the stated purpose of our newly enacted Zoning Law? Article 1;Sec. 120;2,4,7 which states in part that the "PURPOSE of said law is:
"2. To encourage the most appropriate use of land, to conserve and enhance the value of property:…
4. To provide for open spaces and recreation areas, protect natural resources, agricultural land, scenic areas…
7. To assure privacy for residents and freedom from nuisances and noxious conditions disturbing to the senses or harmful to the health, prevent unsightly, obtrusive and noisome activities, and generally enhance the community."
11. The proposed UPC project also violates Local Law No. 2 of the year 1987; Section 4. which reads:
4. DUTY OF MAINTAINING PRIVATE PROPERTY
No person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge of or control of any premises within the Town of Cohocton shall maintain or keep any nuisance thereon, nor shall any person keep or maintain such premises in a manner causing substantial diminution in the value of other property in the neighborhood in which such premises are located.

We the people of the Town of Cohocton respectfully request answers to all of the above questions. We believe we have a right to the answers and that the Town Board and Planning Board have a legal, ethical and moral duty to provide us with written answers.

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Wind developers can be intimidating by Sue Sliwinski

It's time to speak plainly and without fear of the obviousness of this unprecedented situation, as each and every day another portion of a concerned and well-meaning public is carefully exposed to the ‘green’ idea of commercial wind power.

September 1, 2005 by Sue Sliwinski, Sardinia (NY) in NWW

Mischa Gaus's recent piece on wind power and the presumption made that the industry is getting an unfair rap, possibly brought on by itself, makes some good points. But it fails to connect the dots so as to present the whole picture...probably because that picture isn't very pretty.

The impacts of commercial wind power development across the country have not even begun to be realized, because the ever-increasing number of developers are still quietly proceeding through the preliminaries that will enable them to cash in quickly when the real gold rush begins. It's going to be the fleecing of America on a scale like we've never seen before. In NY State alone, 1300 turbines are planned for just two counties! And there are three times that amount planned for the rest of the state! (It might be interesting to ask the average guy on the street if he knows anything at all about it, since he'll be affected each time he receives his electric bill.)

It never ceases to amaze me how authors like Gaus are so quick to point to other countries to prove the merits of the commercial wind industry. Just a slightly closer look would reveal that the very reason we're about to be invaded here in the US is because of the failures in other places around the world. Denmark, for instance, is reported by their own energy analysts to have consumed just 4 % of the huge amount of wind power generated in that country in 2003… mainly due to the fact that wind so often generates electricity when it's not needed or wanted. It's the countries around Denmark that are benefiting because they get to buy this expensive juice at a huge discount while Denmark consumers pay the highest costs in Europe. Not only that, but opposition groups have appeared there as well as in most other places where the unpleasant impacts of industrial wind power must be endured, AND their co2 levels are still rising…up 7.5% in 2003 from the year before!

I'm also not surprised at the attack Gaus made on the energy experts who don't happen to be in anyone's pocket and who are willing to call it like they see it. Not surprisingly, our most experienced people are the ones with many years behind them, and that means they may indeed have had some connection with coal at some point, given that it's the most abundant fuel source in the world. But if one were to actually read Glenn Schleede's papers, for instance, they would know that his work is comprised mostly of verifiable data….and very difficult to dispute. I guess that's why so many just point to his 'coal days'…It's much easier than trying to somehow disprove the numbers that are routinely the bulk of his reports.

Many of the newly organized wind development companies are backed by some of the most powerful investment firms in the world. JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs have each officially blown onto the scene as the list of opportunists seeking to exploit the rural countryside continues to grow. Grid operators across the nation have been flooded with applications to build and connect thousands of mind boggling, gigantic machines, whether it be in highly-valued scenic view-sheds, sensitive wildlife habitats, or directly within the borders of residential communities, and every indication is that more requests are on the way.

Government mandates creating a false market have spurred the huge corporations to front the smaller companies like 'Noble Environmental' and 'Zilkha Energy' (now calling themselves Horizon Wind) and together they've joined forces with other state agencies like Washington's Wind Working Group, NY's NYSERDA, and Kansas's Kansas Energy Council. All are working in concert throughout the country, combining resources and leaving little doubt as to the level of success they'll likely achieve in their campaign to glorify commercial wind power and to (more importantly) conceal and trivialize it's many flaws.

Recently Noble Environmental hosted an 'informational' meeting in the small community of Bliss, NY. I decided to attend, and when I entered the old school auditorium, I was shocked. Talk about intimidating!

The stage was brimming with what appeared to be VIP wannabe's donned in 'Noble' shirts, while the walls were literally lined with still more shirts, not unlike a bunch of bouncers. I found an empty seat, and as I watched the miniature 'windmill' to the side of the stage rotate slowly in front of about three hundred or so country folk, I couldn't help but think of a disturbing article I had just recently read that seemed to be playing out right before my eyes. It was about fascism...and the points made were these:

American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. American fascism is not dangerous until there's a coalition that purposely undertakes a campaign to propel their platform. An American fascist puts money ahead of human beings, and is often ruthless and deceitful in doing so. They don't use violence, instead they poison the channels of public information, and because they're often in bed with the nation's largest corporations - they can gain control of newspapers and broadcast media - and promote their lies with ease.

These observations were made by Vice President Henry Wallace in 1944, when the NY Times asked him to write a piece answering the question: What is a fascist?

Wallace also notes: The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by the environment and adapted to the immediate circumstances. Their propaganda carefully cultivates disunity, and they capitalize on all opportunities to impugn democracy. Their agenda is economic as they merge corporate interests with those of the state. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to deceive the public....

They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.
Speaking indirectly of the fascists that Wallace would directly name almost a decade later, President Roosevelt brought the issue to its core: "These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power."

What's happening now is eerily similar to that description from over 50 years ago. Commercial wind developers are creating conditions reminiscent of times most would rather not relive. They're riding roughshod over the system and over people's rights, and are disregarding the habitat and basic needs of wildlife AND of human beings.

Communities, families, and lifelong friendships in rural America are being systematically torn apart by a well-orchestrated and securely financed scheme employing divide and conquer tactics, purposefully misleading information, and the promise of prosperity for all who'll support and believe in the 'dream'.

It's time to speak plainly and without fear of the obviousness of this unprecedented situation, as each and every day another portion of a concerned and well-meaning public is carefully exposed to the ‘green’ idea of commercial wind power. It may well be that indeed fascism is rising again in America...this time using as it's catalyst today's very critical dilemmas and the urgent need to resolve them.

Sue Sliwinski
Sardinia, NY

June 19, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Town Board by Robert C. Strasburg II

June 19, 2006

Cohocton Town Board
Cohocton, NY 14826

Dear Town Board Members:

After communication with Wayne Hunt and his declaration to me by letter that “This parade is not to be denied; not to be stopped. It is just not going to go away!”, referring to this current proposed wind farm program, I must ask the question, is this the consensus of the entire Town Board?

Wayne has charged me with “throwing baloney”. This false accusation has done nothing to persuade me that this program, as proposed, is good for Cohocton. I want to inform the Town Board that although I may not have enough money to totally fund a lawsuit to stop you from continuing on this path of allowing the financial enrichment of UPC at the expense of us residents, there are those that do and I have made my personal commitment to them to spearhead a campaign to raise funds to contribute to this action to stop this wind farm in the Courts.

My personal belief is that this wind farm program as proposed is a liability to the Town and is not going to be a positive contribution. I, and others, have spent countless hours working to raise public awareness (quite effectively I might add J) of the negatives of this program as proposed. I will now include in that continued effort, my personal effort to raising funds to support the legal battle facing us. You have my word that I will not stop until I have done all in my power to defeat this program as proposed.

The entire program is irresponsible because of the following:
1. Disrespect of neighboring property owner’s rights
2. You have the cart before the horse given the fact that you have already exposed the Town to costs associated with this high jacking of our Town and its recourses and have not previously prepared your laws concerning application fees to cover these costs.
3. You have led the Town into employee and volunteer overload by allowing this issue to stress our Town Clerk, Planning Board volunteers to a point where vital Town and Village business is being ignored.
4. Insufficient setbacks from adjacent property owner’s boundaries.
5. Corporate enrichment at the expense of residents.
6. Lack of sufficient Bonding, what are you going to do in the event of bankruptcy of the wind company? A letter of credit is too abrasive to be used for good toilet paper.
7. Insufficient height restriction.
8. Lack of scrutinized financial solvency of UPC.
9. Secrecy and lack of transparency on the part of the Town Board.
10. Lack of sufficient efforts on the part of the Town Board to seek independent review of the program by qualified experts measuring all facets of impact including, but not limited to, impact on roads, property value, health, liability to the Town, etc. A lack of cause and effective research is obvious.
11. Zoning Law # 2 does not deal with low frequency noise and define the proper scale in which it should be measured, nor does it establish the proper noise measurement intervals and time periods.
12. The DEIS study says concerning the lighting on the turbines “However, it was felt that night lighting could be distracting and have an adverse impact on rural residents that currently experience dark nighttime skies.”
13. There has been no professional evaluation measuring the Town’s expenses associated with implementing and maintaining this industrialization of our Town against the P.I.L.O.T. income. If you start with the supposed $160,000.00, what will be the debits directly charged against that income for expenses to the Town relative to the installation and presence of these turbines?

Cohocton is currently in the financial shape that it is in directly due to the lack of credible planning of past administrations governing Cohocton. Our Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 1970. If you want to know why Cohocton is not ready for 2006 financially, I propose you look at that reason.

You, the current governing administration are pressed for answers to our current financial stress and UPC has invited you into their money store and has seduced you with their “canned money”. Success comes from hard work and planning, what can you show me as an example where you or the past three administrations have focused on working to find a solution to our financial stress by revisiting our Comprehensive Plan first.

Your comprehensive plan should be the guide you use to point you to your goal. You do not have a current plan, therefore it is no wonder you have wandered into the foolish trap so deceitfully set for you. How can the industrialization of Cohocton, which is in direct conflict with our Comprehensive Plan, be the answer? You are in a crisis simply because of poor management which can be said this way … You, and previous administrations have mismanaged this Town.

Are any of you successful business men? Have you consulted with any? There is a big difference between going to a job and collecting a paycheck from people who have done all the thinking for you on how to keep a business afloat and keeping a business afloat yourselves. A Town does not stay financially solvent without those responsible for its solvency doing the proper analysis and planning in the proper way. Shortcuts to success always have pitfalls. This Town needs to sit down and do what has been neglected for over 30 years … go to the drawing board and draft a plan for Cohocton’s financial solvency that is based on facts and proven principles of success rather than this irresponsible gamble you are proposing.

If you as members of the Town Board were to run your personal family finances with the same negligent principles you are employing to run this Town, your family would suffer the consequences. It is the same with our Town, you are gambling with our future … irresponsibly. We need our leadership to properly lead. This shortcut that UPC is offering you is an insult to intelligent thinking people.

Wayne Hunt is calling our facts baloney while he offers no facts, just contrived data from altered “models” from school children and other unqualified representatives in which the majority of relevance has been removed. I challenged Wayne to a public debate and to date have gotten no response from him, I extend the same to you. If you can prove in public debate that this program as it is proposed is good for Cohocton, I will quit my resistance to you and join your effort to see these turbines on our hills. If you really believe that this is a good idea, come out and defend your position in public in front of your constituents. Are you afraid you will lose?

I know where Jack and Wayne are positioned on this issue. How about the rest of you? What is your position? Wayne has claimed he is leading this parade. Are you going to follow a man who will not come out into public and give sound defended reasons why he feels this is good for Cohocton?

Sincerely,
Robert C. Strasburg II

Monday, June 19, 2006

Cohocton Town Board Meeting - June 20th on Windmill Local Law #2

All citizens are urged to attend this regular Town Board meeting. If they vote to approve Windmill Local Law #2, you will be a witness to the intentional disregard of the Town Board to observe their own laws. Residents get the officials they deserve. Will you hold your Councilmen to abide by the law? The rule of law is too important to let conflict of interests to run Cohocton.

Tug Hill A Cautionary Tale - Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

Sue Brander is an older woman. In her sixties, I would hazard to guess. She’s a gardener, raises Morgan horses and, in years past, was a “major event” organizer. Sue’s also a professional writer.

Sue lives in a little town in the Mohawk Valley, New York. Right about the center of the state (close to Herkimer, NY, if you know the geography). Hilly, lovely area. Lots of Amish around.

This past winter Sue showed up on my radar screen: I spotted an article she wrote in the Richfield Springs, NY, newspaper, on wind turbines coming to town. It was obvious this woman named Sue Brander was much concerned.

Last week Sue staged a modest “major event” in Stark, a village near her home. She put together a 3-hour conference on wind energy, featuring Gordon Yancey, owner of the Flatrock Inn, smack in the middle of the Tug Hill Plateau (Lewis County, NY). Gordon is worth inviting to a wind conference because his inn is surrounded by 135 (give or take) industrial turbines. The closest being 1000’ away. The Tug Hill turbines went on-line this past January. Sue also had Nick Pressley, owner of an environmental engineering firm, speak about environmental impacts of wind plants. She had another expert address the finances of wind energy, and Dr. Nina Pierpont speak (by teleconference) about health hazards of living close to turbines.

It was a powerful evening, I am told.

Three days later Sue sent out the e-mail, below, about her (adult) daughter visiting the Tug Hill windplant a day after the conference.

I have highlighted a few passages; in particular, the following, which Dr. Pierpont (my wife) tells me is textbook Wind Turbine Syndrome:

"I kept wanting to turn left, because the whole world was turning left…. I got dizzy, and I was dizzy for ten minutes after we left the area."

If you live anywhere near New York State, do what the wind salesmen are always inviting people to do: “Go see for yourself.” The usual invitation runs like this: “Go to Fenner and see for yourself.”

No, don’t go to Fenner, NY, where there are 20 smallish turbines (which, we have reason to think, have their generators turned off much of the time, to cut the noise for this Poster Child Wind Farm). Go, instead, to Tug Hill, and experience those 135 goliath turbines. Go, experience what Gordon Yancey daily experiences. (I have seen Gordon weep in public over the industrial freak show and neurological nightmare he must now live with.)

Go to Tug Hill to see for yourself if you, too, “keep wanting to turn left, because the whole world is turning left.” Or, maybe you’re one of the lucky 80% of the population that doesn’t suffer from inner ear sensitivity (motion sickness), producing the vertigo and nausea this man, Jeremy, describes. I suppose if you’re one of that 80% you can drive away (in a straight line) from Tug Hill and announce, as wind salesmen routinely do, that it’s fine to have wind turbines littering the residential landscape -- that you don’t find them (literally) nauseating and (literally) vertiginous and, hence, everyone should experience them the way you do.

Yes, I have heard this said many times in public meetings in Clinton, Ellenburg, and Brandon, NY. The people who say this go to church on a Sunday morn’ and they lay claim, in addition, to having a functioning brain and, hence, modicum of intelligence. A modicum of morality and intelligence, so they allege.

But as I leave these meetings, I have my doubts. And I think the Leviathan named Almighty Dollar has swallowed them whole.

When I went to the barn this morning, my daughter started in on me about Tug Hill Plateau. "We went for a drive last night," she said. "We went to Herkimer for dinner and Jeremy wanted to go for a ride. We drove up to Barneveldt and stopped for ice cream. Then we went on to Booneville and Lowville.

"Mom!" she exclaimed. "You have to go there! It's awful! Just awful! We can't let this happen here. I've never seen anything so awful. Fenner and Madison are not offensive. These are intrusive and offensive. Jeremy got dizzy. And he was dizzy for ten minutes after we left the area."

She went on and on. There was some wind, but not much. They arrived there shortly before dusk, and stayed for the turnover to darkness, to see the lights. They were there for not more than an hour, perhaps less. She talked about it all the while we cleaned the barn. "You absolutely cannot compare Fenner and Madison to this," she said. "And this is more like what ours will be. You look at the horizon and you see
tips spinning, and you know there are more, just over the next hill. It never ends. It's like having turbines from here to Herkimer."

After we worked horses, I drove Sarah home. Jeremy insisted that I come inside and see the video on his cell phone. "I almost drove off the road," he said. "I kept wanting to turn left, because the whole world was turning left." Jeremy is a crack driver. "I got dizzy, and I was dizzy for ten minutes after we left the area." He pulled out his calculator and asked, "How long are the blades?"

"One hundred thirty feet," I answered. He began calculating the rotor sweep. "They were spinning at sixteen revolutions per minute," he continued. "I counted them. That's 48 blade sweeps per minute. Then he calculated the blade passes per hour. "That's how many times you're going to get strobe flicker if you're in the shadows of these things," he said. "And they give you blinds to stop it? That won't work."

Jeremy is an auto claims adjuster. "Do you know what Diminished Value is?" he asked me.

"Depreciated value?" I asked.

"Yes," he replied. "That's what's going to happen to our property if we can see these turbines. What's the setback from your property line?" On and on. He couldn't stop. The ideas were coming and tumbling over one another.

Many mornings over the past six months, my daughter and I have quarreled over these turbines, as we work in the barn. Her best friend's property abuts mine, and they are getting three turbines. Two of them are behind my property. She didn't want to believe what her best friend's family was doing to us. She just wouldn't hear it.

But she heard Gordon Yancey on Thursday evening. Jeremy stood beside her. They could barely hear, at the back of the Standing Room Only section. But they heard enough to convince Jeremy that they had to go up there and see for themselves. They couldn't stay to hear Todd Schroeter, because Sarah had to go home and check on Grandma. When one of us has to be away, we try to schedule things in a kind of tag team, so somebody looks in on Grandma every two hours. But Jeremy got Todd
Schroeter's message loud and clear last night.

"We have to get our town board members to go up there," Sarah said. "We have to get every lease holder to go up there." We talked about hiring a tour bus. Well, maybe that wouldn't work, especially if they thought Sue Brander was behind it.

"Well, then I am going to make it my personal mission to get The Marshalls to go up there," Sarah said. That's the family of her best friend. "We'll go out to dinner, and we'll drive up there. It's only two hours one way. We left at 6:00, and we were home by midnight. We stopped for dinner on the way. Everybody has to make it their personal mission to get one landowner to go up there and see this."

Finally! We got two more people to listen! I hope there are two more people who listened in house after house in this town, and in every surrounding town. Nothing I told my daughter penetrated. She simply didn't believe it. She believes it all, now.

This e-mail is going to a short list of people. Some of you will want to forward it. You have my permission to forward it to the world.

Sue Brander

Jordanville, NY

The Blue Highlands Citizens Coalition

We believe that our community can and should embrace the concept of wind-generated electricity. We're also committed to ensuring that we don't end up with a scale and scope of wind power development which is inconsistent with the values of our residents, the lovely character of our community, the sensitive Niagara Escarpment environment with which we interact and the features of our community which make it such a desirable place to live, work and play.

Sunday, June 18, 2006

June 19, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Town Board by James Hall

June 19, 2006

Cohocton Town Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14826

Supervisor Zigenfus, Deputy Supervisor Wise, Councilmen Dyckman, LeVesque and Hunt:

The Town Board of Cohocton has announced that Windmill Local Law #2 will be on the agenda for the June 20, 2006 regular meeting. Your board has already been notified that any action to approve this ordinance would be unlawful. This law was formulated to specifically accommodate know deficiencies in the DEIS impact study for the UPC project. Windmill Local Law #2 has included into the legislation several aspects that are far more regressive from Windmill Local Law #1. Anyone who had doubts about the motivation of the Cohocton Town Board before now has clear and demonstrated proof that what UPC wants UPC gets.

It is obvious that the Town Board has never conducted a serious inquiry into the operations, financial background, solvency position and business practices of UPC. The abdication of any due diligence on the part of the Board is undeniable. Projects listed on the UPC site http://www.upcwind.com/projects.php include: Prattsburgh, Mars Hill, Sutton, Sheffield and Kaheawa. Kaheawa has not yet been commissioned and UPC’s actual role in that project is less than definitive. Proton has no information as to status of development. Extensive details on Mars Hill and Sutton indicate that those projects have gone nowhere. Huge opposition against both ventures illustrates that UPC actually has no real experience in building and operating industrial wind turbines. As for Prattsburgh it seems ironic that the UPC involvement let slips their legal segmentation problem with the Cohocton Power Project.

The Cohocton Town Board is hereby presented the enclosed documents on a sordid record of UPC on the Mars Hill and Sheffield projects. Before you vote for approval on Windmill Local Law #2, you must exercise your fiduciary obligation to confirm and verify that UPC is a legitimate company capable of undertaking such a massive industrial project. The Board is so warned that in the event of UPC financial insolvency, the Town of Cohocton stands to bear the damaging consequences because of your rush to approval of a destructive project by a suspect company.

The following outline of UPC inconsistencies and questionable business practices should be considered:

1 Multitude of shell companies and overlapping corporate structure that seeks to circumvent segmentation.
2 Factual bad faith violation in lessor agreement that voids the contract for wind turbines.
3 Failure to disclosure the full nature of future phases that will alter their own impact study.
4 Failure to include in their plan full indemnity and bonding insurance to cover all risks to the Town of Cohocton and all residents.
5 Failure to guarantee full property protection to each property owner within a 2 mile distance of any turbine at full replacement cost value.
6 Failure to ensure medically safe setback distance in their plan and fencing for each turbine.
7 Failure to fund ongoing road maintenance for fire protection for each turbine.
8 Failure to place high tension power line underground as proposed an stated to residences.
9 Disregard of the negative impact in site location on surrounding communities and the entire region, especially regarding adverse effect on area tourism.
10 Lack of full disclosure of conflict of interests regarding SCIDA and their input into the UPC proposal.
11 Incorporation of outside area data into their DEIS report as a substitute for original studies within Cohocton.
12 Lack of full disclosure as to UPC parent Italian company, Spanish company affiliation with the power grid and relationship of all these foreign firms with NYS utility companies.

The Town of Cohocton Board is urged to vote against Windmill Local Law #2 when all legal conditions are fulfilled in order to lawfully act upon this ordinance. Also the Town Board has a duty to take up a moratorium resolution that has already been presented at the unlawful public hearing on June 14, 2006. Once again the demand for a moratorium on any industrial windmill project in the Town of Cohocton is placed before the Town Board.

The refusal of the Town Board to answer questions, or respond in any manner to written correspondence reveals the extent and depth of your malfeasance regarding all aspects of the UPC project.

The fact that UPC offers the lowest scale of remuneration to Cohocton as compared to their other non functioning projects confirms the lack of financial skills and judgment of the Cohocton Town Supervisor and Board. For this reason alone the public deserves a total and complete renegotiation of any agreement that the Town of Cohocton has with UPC.

Since it has been repeatedly represented (during Freedom of Information Act filings) that no such contract exists between the Town of Cohocton and UPC, it would certainly present a most unfortunate legal exposure for Board members if such an agreement oral or written became know during a deposition. Surely the Town of Cohocton and anyone in their employ would want to avoid any charges of perjury by acting upon full and unaltered compliance of Freedom of Information Act filings.

The entire record of UPC and Town of Cohocton negotiations, arrangements and agreements is a public matter and must be disclosed in full. All direct and indirect interests in the UPC project between and among Town Board and Cohocton officials, employers and their respected families and extended relatives will be the subject of investigative and public scrutiny.

In order to conform to your own code of ethics (copy enclosed) each Town Councilman should reflect upon their own circumstance before casting a vote to approve Windmill Local Law #2. Any manifestation or even a perceived appearance of a conflict of interest or benefit from the UPC project will subject that official to appropriate disciplinary actions.

A written reply to this notice from the Cohocton Town Board is your professional responsibility. When will you confront the duties of your office and response to the public outrage over the profound risks inherent in the UPC project? It is your job to take the time to do the research on UPC and verify that the Town of Cohocton is fully protected from a company that makes promises, but has no track record of performance. The Mars Hill and Sheffield projects are two examples of a quagmire that will also engulf Cohocton.

You have the ability to stop the deception and commit the Town of Cohocton to a rational and balanced rebuilding of public trust. A moratorium resolution, two examples already provided to the Town Board for review, is the prudent course. Cohocton should not be condemned to the mercantile greed of an unstable and dubious company. UPC has anti-trust exposure, why put the Town of Cohocton into the same jury dock when you can avoid and protect our township by rejecting the “Pharisee” Ruzow inspired Windmill Local law #2.

Your actions will establish if Cohocton is really the colony of UPC or will it remain the hometown community for all our citizens. A YES vote on Windmill Local Law #2 will show the world that Cohocton really has a “NO BRAINS” Government. The voice of the people says NO to UPC.

Cordially,


James Hall

cc: David Miller – ESQ
Glenn Pezzulo - ESQ

Mr. Hoen's report on property values - Jim Lince

Bard,

It is not responsible for Mr. Hoen or your organization to promote his term paper on property values without providing full disclosure.

Full disclosure is that he chose a sample data population where only 43 could see the turbines. He did not use data within 4,000 feet of a turbine. He failed to use a VISTA variable (no value for viewshed?). He did not remove transactions by the wind company. He had a distinct problem with Fenner Township that he explained away by changing his model. He discloses all this in his paper, but fails to mention any of this in his media quotes. His study is not a before and after assessment.

This is not a game for college students. People have their life’s savings invented in their property/real estate. For your organization to make these claims that value is not affected by wind turbines is irresponsible and academic fraud.

I am in contact with Real Estate professionals who challenge Mr. Hoen’s statements and will expose it for what it is.

Within 4,000 feet property value drops like a rock. VISTA has value.

A public statement with full disclosure is warranted by your organization and Mr. Hoen. Failing that I will take this to the national media.

The public deserves to know the truth.

Jim Lince
Cohocton, NY

June 17, 2006 Robert C. Strasburg II response to Wayne Hunt

Robert C. Strasburg II
60 Maple Ave.
Cohocton, New York 14826

June 17, 2006

Honorable Councilman Wayne Hunt
Cohocton Town Board
Cohocton, NY 14826

Re: Response to your letter

Dear Wayne:

Thank you for your letter of response. Wayne, you have chided me for being insincere to you when actually I did mean what I said about my respect for you and still hold to that opinion. Anyway... I am grateful for your response. Since your letter was headed “Open Letter”, I have taken the liberty of copying it below for reference.

Wayne, in my letter to you I did inquire as to your willingness to meet me in open debate on the issues surrounding these wind turbines. I have no interest in personal attacks, because you are right, you do deserve better treatment than that. I am interested in debating the issues with you. Are you interested?

I am sure you remember when I first started asking you about your reason for supporting these wind turbines, you said “because of the revenue”. Well, I wonder … do you still hold to that now that the numbers have been released and the $160,000 that the wind company is possibly going to give our Town is lower than any of us even dreamed it would be? I can show you how this supposed credit into our General Fund will end up being a debit when the Town of Cohocton has to respond to the presence of these turbines. Would you be willing to debate this point on the Cohocton Wind Watch’s web site? If you will email your position on how this will benefit our Town to cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com , it will be posted unaltered and I will respond to your posting on the web site.

I am asking you to debate on two points; “the benefit of the revenue to the Town” and I would also like to debate you on what your position is on “property rights of neighbors to the proposed towers”. As represented by my previous letter Wayne, I am not interested in attacking you personally. This is not personal. This is about differences of opinions and issues.

I understand your reference in the letter below to the parade not stopping … you did not even stop to legally wait for our Town Planning Board to offer their recommendations on this project. In your letter, you declared that you are the leader of this parade, carrying the torch. Was it your decision to cause the Town Board to illegally violate our Town Zoning Law, disrespect the Planning Board Chairman and sidestep the Planning Board? I am not patronizing you when I sincerely ask you to reconsider your position Wayne.

Respectful still,
Robert C. Strasburg II

OPEN LETTER TO BOB STRASBURG II by Cohocton Councilman Wayne Hunt

Dear Bob;

The parade of progress is marching right down your street, right in front of your house. 1 have taken up a torch, the light of leadership if you will, at the head of this parade. This parade is not to be denied; not to be stopped. It is just not going to go away!

You, for reasons of your own, have taken up a position beside your street and along with a cadre of your friends are trying to stop the parade. Each of you is armed with a bucket of baloney and you're trying to douse the torch by tossing baloney all over it.

Now this baloney tossing does seem to please a certain crowd in Cohocton and some other towns in the area, so maybe you should keep it up. But beware! The baloney is piling up around your feet. Don't trip yourself up in it.

And by the way, don't patronize old Dad any more. As wise and as kind as he is, he deserves better treatment than that. You will make yourself look a lot better and seem a lot more believable in other people's eyes if you treat them with the same respect that 1 have shown you.
Sincerely yours,

Wayne R. Hunt

WH06-18-2006%2010%3B00%3B36AM.rtf

Saturday, June 17, 2006

June 17, 2006 Letter to the Editor by Jim Lince

Dear Editor,

"Who’s going to live in the new Cohocton industrial park?"

Just who are the residents of the new Cohocton industrial park, also known as the UPC industrial wind project?

It won’t be the old farmers that have become the new industrial developers. Most live elsewhere or outside the impact zone. Others will be there just long enough to retire to Florida. There are a few green “YES to industrial development” signs up in the hills.

Most won’t, but a few have stood up in front of the town and proceeded to lecture those who are going to live in this mixed industrial park: “There’s no problem. We went to Fenner! We got cookies and milk. There’s no hazards, no noise, no shadow flicker. We stood under one, so it’s okay!” This is their expert judgment from a few hours of a pre-arranged “company tour” by UPC. The entire trip scripted to put the best foot forward.

Let’s not forget this is the industry that quotes a student and his flawed college term paper as the #1 proof that property values won’t go down!

Unfortunately, the quotes from unpaid people that actually do live close to these massive industrial power plants tell a much different story: Tug Hill, Myersdale, Lincoln, even Fenner. Page after page of complaints, forced buyouts, arbitrations and even abandonments.

But not to worry --- our neighbor developers/leaseholders won’t be living with them anyways.

They won’t be seeing, hearing or living with industrial wind turbines day and night over the next thirty years.

They will drive up to the new Cohocton industrial park, intermixed with residences, sit for an hour, and then return to their peaceful homes.

They will freely stroll around their own back yards and the only thing that will have changed is the balance of their bank account.

They will comfortably sit and look at the clear night sky, rather than the red strobe lights of the industrial complex.

They will sleep soundly in their beds, rather than being awakened by dozens of 400 foot industrial mechanical spinning giants as tall as the Xerox tower. The 747 wingspan sized blades slicing through the air --- the tips traveling almost 200 mph.

And the sad note is they are getting paid to perform this experiment on their neighbors.

Jim Lince

Cohocton, NY

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Legal Notice to Cohocton Town Board Public Hearing on June 14, 2006

DAVID P. MILLER. ESQ.
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW
111 NORTH MAIN STREET. PO. BOX 356
NAPLES. NEW YORK 14512
(585)3742130

June 14, 2006

The Hon. Jack Zigenfus Supervisor,
Town of Cohocton
15S. Main St.
Cohocton, NY 14826

Re: Proposed Local Law No. 2 of the Year 2006 of the Town of Cohocton (Wind Turbine Law)

Dear Supervisor Zigenfus.

As you are aware, I represent James Hall.

Mr Hall and I have been discussing the Town's proposed Local Law No. 2 of the year 2006 and we are concerned about the improper procedure which the Town is following in attempting to enact this local law.

The proposed law was referred to the Town's Planning Board for review and recommendation in mid-May of this year. It is my understanding that the Planning Board is actively engaged in reviewing the proposed law as well as a wind turbine law adopted by the Town of Malone, New York. It is my further understanding that the Planning Board has not yet made any recommendation to the Town Board with respect to the adoption or modification of Local Law No. 2.

In light of the fact that the Planning Board has not yet made any recommendation to the Town Board, the public hearing which the Town Board is holding tonight is unlawful.

I call your attention to Section 810 of the Town's zoning law, last amended in April 2002. That section provides, in part, "Every proposed amendment unless initiated by the Planning Board, shall be referred to the Planning Board. The Planning Board SHALL report its recommendations thereon to the Town Board accompanied by a full statement of the reasons for such recommendation, prior to the public hearing." (Emphasis added). Section 810 then goes on to provide that the Planning Board has 45 days from the date of referral in which to give its recommendation to the Town Board.

The proposed amendment under consideration tonight was initiated by the Town Board, not the Planning Board. The Planning Board has not yet made any recommendations on the law to the Town Board. The Planning Board's 45 day period in which to make such recommendations has not yet expired. Therefore, the hearing which the Town Board is conducting tonight is in violation of the Town's own zoning law. You must have the recommendation from the Planning Board prior to the public hearing.

It would be improper to simply adjourn this hearing, because it was invalid from its very beginning.

Therefore, this hearing should be terminated immediately and a second, lawful hearing should not be scheduled until after the Town Board has received and reviewed the Planning Board's report on this proposal.

The Planning Board has been given the review and recommendation function by New York State law and by your own zoning law. This I am sure was done for a very good reason., namely that Planning Boards frequently serve as a second set of eyes and ears and opinions and often provide valuable insights to the municipal boards which they advise. They can conduct research and acquire information which the Town boards simply do not have the time to do.

As a matter of sound government, you ought not to bypass your Planning Board, but rather you should seek its sound advice concerning this matter which is of such importance to so many in your community.

David P. Miller

June 15, 2006 Open Letter to Wayne Hunt by Robert C. Strasburg II

June 15, 2006

Honorable Councilman Wayne Hunt
Cohocton Town Board
Cohocton, NY 14826

Re: Friend to Friend

Dear Wayne:

I have watched, with pain in my heart, as this issue of whether a wind turbine farm is a good idea for the Town of Cohocton has emerged and taken on a life. The pain comes from watching you as a man that I respect; suffer public embarrassment when what you thought to be a good thing is being revealed to you as not what you thought it was.

Wayne, you are a very knowledgeable man in your industry. I have come to the local hardware with my questions of how to fix this or that with my home repair issues and you have in your gentle kind fatherly way, always guided me well with your advice. I have grown to admire you as I have watched you serve your community with exuberance and energetic commitment.

After I was enlightened in January of this year to the fact that the wind turbines might be a reality to Cohocton, I set out to look at what was really the story behind this new industry. Because you publicly had given your support to this, when I started researching, it was with the full knowledge you were behind it and therefore I was comfortable in my spirit that there was probably good reason for your positive stance on the issue. It did not take long for me though to reach a point of conflict in my soul. After looking at the data from both sides, I could not understand why you were so adamant that this was a good thing. Although the data offered to support these turbines in a community setting such as ours, was on the surface somewhat appealing, a more careful look quickly revealed that a deception was well under way to accomplish the enrichment of corporations at the expense of poor communities and basic property rights.

I have revealed this deception in public, hoping that the information would be received by all and that our community would come together in defense of our way of life without the intrusion of these turbines. Many have received this information from me and others and opposition is growing daily to these turbines intruding our way of life. What pains me is to watch men like you who have previously given your support to this project, reject the truth of the unbiased data and continue forward even in light of the fact that a large part of what you previously have hung your hat on has been exposed as not true.

Wayne, this boils down to character. Character shows well in a man when he is faced with the truth that he was wrong and is willing to publicly admit his error, change direction and let go of error.

You seem not to be willing to take this path, but have instead chosen to defend your position with denial. When faced with the facts that these turbines do make too much noise for residential settings, upset the natural rhythm of quietness at night when people need to rest, are scheduled to be too close to neighboring landowners homes, infringe on neighboring landowners rights, do devalue real property that is close to these turbines, the entire plan is a well crafted scam for enriching corporations at the expense of small communities, and the fact that the scope of the entire project does not fit into the declared Comprehensive Plan for our Town, your response is unsupported denial.

Wayne this boils down to ego. I am asking you to be the man I think you are. Admit that you have erred and change course. You will be well received for your courage to admit you were wrong if you do. If you insist on pressing forward with this issue, you will be exposed to humiliation and the community will reject you as a foolish man. I am asking you as a friend to take the higher road.

Should you choose not to, I am challenging you to a public debate on the following points:

1. The economics benefits to our Town from this plan
2. Corporate profit ratios
3. The truth as to whether this is really "green" energy
4. Liability exposure and Cohocton's preparedness
5. Emergency response preparedness
6. Health Effects of Wind Turbines
7. Findings of European Countries that have experienced this industry for over 30 years
8. Appropriate setbacks
9. Better alternative plans

There are three choices before you:

1. Accept my request as a friend of yours to have the courage to change direction
2. Accept my challenge to a public debate
3. Do nothing and continue your path of denial

My number is in the phone book; please call me with your answer.

Respectfully,

Robert C. Strasburg II

This wind power project is only about one thing by Jim Lince

It’s not about farming or agriculture. The American farm is an institution that all of us respect and should work to protect. There’s not a single definition of farming that includes an industrial power plant.

It’s not about the farmer. The American farmer is an unsung hero, a provider of our way of life. Not farmers, but Industrial Developers are the ones who pour thousands of yards of concrete and build 400 foot high mechanical industrial structures as tall as the Xerox tower in Rochester, with strobe lights and danger of death signs --- not farmers.

It’s not about clean green energy. Unlike hydro power, not a single coal, gas or nuclear power plant will be decommissioned by these turbines. For the nation just to get 20% of intermittent power from these giants it will take destroying land the size of the state of Virginia to do so. That’s not an environmentally sound approach for our nation.

A group of industrial developers in Cohocton (UPC/YES) would have you believe this is all about farming, agriculture, farmers, clean safe power, pretty windmills, setbacks, noise, ice throws, birds, property values, making a payment instead of paying any taxes, and putting money into the hands of the leaseholders.

But this is really just one question: Are the farms, residences and hills of Cohocton an industrial park or is it agricultural and residential zoned land?

If it is an industrial park, then it needs to be zoned an industrial park. The houses need to be condemned and bulldozed, the citizens and their children put out on the street with their belongings. The farms replanted with substations, power plants, and factories.

Rather this than subject our residents to a thirty year torture test in an improperly zoned area, some fighting to stay for what they have left and some fighting to leave. Rather this than placing an industrial zone on top of homes and leaving it to the home owner to fight for any peace. Rather this than have a bunch of industrial developers keep us believing that this is just farming by farmers. Saying it doesn’t make it so.

One question. Industrial park or not. Cohocton deserves a straight answer.

Jim Lince

Cohocton, NY

June 12, 2006 Cohocton Town Board Public Hearing Statement by Robert C. Strasburg II

I am opposed to the local law #2 because:

In my judgment, it opens the Town to allow the installation of an Industry and its industrial machines that we as a Town are not ready to receive. The rush to try to seize this “supposed opportunity” is causing our leadership to take risky and unnecessary gambles exposing us to otherwise avoidable loss if the pace was slowed and a more careful approach was taken. The false sense of urgency surrounding this issue is just that … false. There are other wind companies and there will be other government subsidies available to us at a later date after we have prepared properly for this change in Cohocton.

Because our Town is currently not mature in its ability to manage such a large scale program, has an industrial company strategised how to take advantage of our immaturity and exploit that weakness to its gain?

You are all aware of the movie clips where a bank robber comes into a town, robs the bank and comes out to find that he has been spotted by the police and a chase ensues. The crafty robber reaches in his bag of stolen money and throws a few dollars out the window sending the locals into a frenzied money grab and it creates such a confusion that the police are hindered and the robber gets away.

Might that scene be paralleled with our current situation? Has a company come into our Town, robbed our resources and thrown some money around to insure their getaway? Can we be considered as foolish as the residents of the aforementioned town?

If a robber has 25 million dollars in his bag and chooses to throw out $160,000 to insure a clean get-a-way, what would you call that? I call it pretty darn clever on the part of the robber.

Now, if a few locals from this aforementioned town see all this unfolding and run to the judge to get an injunction to stop the locals from making such fools of themselves and contributing to the success of this robbery, what do you call that? I call it smart.

There have been complaints that the big bad Cohocton Wind Watch is going to the judge and is suing to try to stop a local frenzied money grab. What do you call that lawsuit? I call it profoundly wise.

There have been calls for patriotism to support what is perpetrated to be green energy. What do you call that? I respond with the following statement; Ignorance is never as offensive as when it is willful. Do your homework folks, this entire wind industry scam as it is being proposed is just that … a scam. A scam from the top to the bottom. See me after the meeting and I will point you too easy to find unbiased reports that reveal the depth of this corporate fostered high jacking of taxpayer dollars and community resources.

Thank you very much.
Robert C. Strasburg II

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Response to Local Law 2 by Judith Hall

1. Is the proposed law providing equal protection for all property owners?

You are giving special tax and use consideration to the lease holders as well as UPC or is it Global Wind or Canandaigua Power Partners they use all 3 names interchangeably on documents submitted to the town. Will UPC provide insurance for affected properties, not only adjacent properties are within the wake, ice throw and flicker boundaries, in case someone on our property is hurt by a turbine accident? Will you indemnify us in case our insurance rates increase because we are close to a turbine?

2. Are you protecting our rights and full use of our land with this law?

500 foot setbacks are not sufficient to protect our wind rights or allow us to enjoy the full use of our property.

3. How does this proposed change to the zoning law tie in to the Comprehensive plan for the town of Cohocton?

There is no provision in the comprehensive plan for industry to be out side of the industrial zone. This is not promoting the public health and safety of the citizens. Is this law "promoting the other amenities of rural and suburban living which will best promote and enhance the value of property in the community." Is it "encouraging the retention of large areas of agricultural land in their natural state as a legacy to future generations?" "The proposed zoning ordinance incorporates strict controls to insure that industrial uses will not become detrimental to adjoining property owners." Read from p32 comp plan.

4. What criteria (besides UPC input, a draft copy of the law was faxed to them on __________, 2004 by the town clerk. Mr, McAllister then provided the marked up copy to the board who proceeded to adopt all of their recommendations) did you use to make your decisions, what research did you do to arrive at you conclusions about the setbacks. How have you considered the public health and safety in those recommendations?

UPC establishes a setback of at least 3200 feet in the letter they sent to residents last week to mitigate the effects of shadow flicker. In their own document they state only 1 in 4000 is photosensitive to the phenomenon. Those seem like good odds that at least one autistic child or sensitive person would live within our community, so if reasonable setbacks can mitigate the problem why wouldn't they be adopted. We need a minimum 3500 foot setback from every property and road way in the town.

Law 2 increases an already too high noise threshold coincidentally to accommodate 7 proposed towers, is this protecting the residents?

Please instead of law #2, pass a law for a 6 month moratorium so that you can take a real look at protecting the citizens you took an oath to represent.

Cohocton Windmill Local Law #2 Opposition Evidence by James Hall

The proposed Cohocton Wind Mill Local Law #2, written to facilitate the corporate interests of UPC fundamentally conflicts with the existing Cohocton Comprehensive Plan and Cohocton zoning regulations. The Town of Cohocton Board is hereby notified that the municipality and all parties involved directly or indirectly in any decision that advances and/or approves the UPC Cohocton Wind Power Plan bears full responsibility and liability for any and all damages that arise from their involvement. All legal recourse is reserved in both State of New York, Federal Court and in any other domestic or foreign jurisdictions to bring any and all civil or petition for criminal actions, against all parties, individually or corporate ownership.

This disclaimer serves as notice that the Town of Cohocton has committed fraud, violated Federal anti-trust and RICO laws and has engaged in a willful and systematic scheme to defraud residents and landholders of their U.S. Constitutional equal protection, civil liberties and property rights. Each Board member is duty bound to protect the public safety by their oath of office. The UPC project endangers residents, property owners and the general public by design, scope and placement. Such concurrent negligence opens the Town of Cohocton, any Lessors that signed contracts with UPC and any and all parties complicit as an accomplice in a plan to deprive citizens of their due process to a class action suit and bears the full damages, individually and collectively that may be awarded from such proceedings.

The willful intention to pass a draconian Windmill Local Law #2, even more repressive than Windmill Local Law #1 which is currently subject to an Article 78 challenge action, clearly demonstrates the true extent and depth of collusion, corruption and pernicious conduct of the Town Board of Cohocton. Conflict of interest violations abound, NYS ethical standards are consistently ignored and malfeasance of office is systemic.

If these charges are false, prove your sincerity and declare a moratorium on any ordinance that allows for industrial wind turbines in the Town of Cohocton. Then take up the task of drafting a rational and protective law for all citizens in the township of Cohocton. By your current behavior, the public constituency has been betrayed, and Windmill Local Law #2 is the latest instrument of that duplicity.

Why is this law up for a vote when the excellent work of a former planning board member Don Cleveland goes unnoticed? With his untimely passing, the path to a corporate take over of public policy was laid open. What next can be expected from the Town Board, a change in name from the Town of Cohocton to the Colony that UPC bought?

Enclosed is the Cleveland draft for a local windmill law, written by a Cohocton resident and an outline and recommendations of the section for industrial wind turbines. The Cohocton Town Board stands accused before our entire community of dereliction of duty. Your oath of office demands that you obey the law. The Cohocton Comprehensive Plan must be followed. Mr. Cleveland’s ordinance sought to ensue that mandate. So should any windmill law, that this, or a future Town Board, would deem protective of our township.

Windmill Local Law #2 seeks to supplant the role of the Cohocton Planning and Zoning Boards with the dictates of despotic commissars. By intentionally raising the noise level to 52dbA in law #2, from the 50dbA level in law #1, to accommodate seven UPC turbines from exclusion from site approval, the Cohocton Town Board proves their willingness to do the bidding of their new found benefactors.

Private property rights are natural rights of individuals. It is a privilege for a corporation to conduct business and the UPC proposal does not constitute an “essential service”. Any windmill stature that the Town of Cohocton passes must protect individual property, community integrity and the natural character of the region.

The Town of Malone Windmill Ordinance, copy enclosed, achieves that objective. A blending of that law with Mr. Cleveland’s regulations would be a good start for undertaking a serious locally originated ordinance of a windmill law for Cohocton.

Size, setbacks, scale and liability indemnification are the four pillars upon which a valid windmill law must rest. Supporting documents submitted address each aspect. All items offer tangible solutions to key defects in the UPC proposal. The only way to induce any developer to design a suitable project is to place protective measures into the operative law and codify penalties of substance into the stature.

The code enforcement officer should have the authority to shut down any turbine that violates noise limits or any aspect of the project that endangers the public safety. A fine of $2,500 per day for each infraction will motivate the developer to observe protective mandates.

The four requirements consist but not limited to the following basic outline:

1) Height limit of 199 feet to the blade tip for any industrial wind turbine machine.
2) All setbacks measured from furthest point of blade diameter to adjacent property line, public roads and township lines. Setback distance of 1.5 – 2.0 miles to ensure the public safety against low frequency noise. European levels of 30dbA per standard used in residential areas.
3) Number of units for any project need to be disclosed and limited to areas that conform to above protective setbacks.
4) Full and total liability insurance, bonding escrow account and hold harmless agreement paid by the developer that capitalizes payment to any landholder and property owner from loss of real estate values due to impact of industrial wind turbines.

Since this public hearing on Windmill Local Law #2 is in violation of Cohocton zoning stature, it behooves the Cohocton Town Board to adjourn this unlawful public hearing or risk the further embarrassment of public ridicule, based upon their collective and demonstrated incompetence. In the event that the Cohocton Town Board deems to vote on and pass Windmill Local Law #2, further litigation will ensue.

Cordially,


James Hall

Cohocton Town Board Public Hearing Windmill Local Law #2 Tonight at 7:00 PM

The Public Hearing on the Cohocton Windmill Local Law #2 will be held at the Cohocton Elementary School tonight, June 14, 2006 at 7:00 PM.

It is important that you attend and present your written opposition to this law. The rewriting of the windmill law from #1 further favors the UPC project.

June 9, 2006 letter to the Cohocton Town Board by Robert C. Strasburg II

June 9, 2006

Cohocton Town Board
15 South Main Street
Cohocton, NY 14828

Re: Local Law # 2

Dear Town Board Members:

I am opposed to the above named law for the following reasons:

1. This law allows for the introduction of Industrial grade wind turbines without making sufficient provision for the impact of this introduction.
2. This law as proposed does not include sufficient provisions for a pre-paid non refundable application fee sufficient in amount to cover any and all costs to the Town for necessary studies and reviews measuring all possible impacts to the Town prior to approval of the special use permit.
3. Each one of these turbines is a H.A.Z.M.A.T. event just waiting to happen. We as a Town do not have the necessary emergency response equipment to respond to the liabilities these industrial towers expose us to from fire, contamination from oils, mechanical structural failure, etc. No study has been commissioned or accomplished to see what we as a Town need to do to equip our emergency response teams to handle the increased load of these undeniable exposures.
4. Because these Industrial turbines will be allowed to be so close to residential homes and people, the Town needs to have the ability to defend these homes and people from damage, injury and loss of life from the installation and possible failure of these industrial machines. Because these industrial turbines will be increasing our risk of fire, structural failure and chemical contamination, a sufficient study needs to be accomplished by contractors for the Town with full recommendations included as to what changes needed to be in place to our current emergency response system.
5. Sufficient bonding is not provided for in this proposed law #2. A letter of credit as protection to the Town from liability is inadequate. A letter of credit in a Bankruptcy situation is worthless. A cash Bond to cover any and all liabilities needs to be stipulated in this law.
6. A defend and hold harmless clause must be included in this law holding the Town harmless from all liability for personal injury and property damage from all fines, costs, penalties, liens, attachments, suits, claims, causes of action, expenses and attorney fees caused by the Applicant and its employees, agents, and representatives or those of its subcontractors, that may be incurred as the result of the proposed installation of said wind turbines.
7. This law in its current proposed form allows for the placement of wind turbines 100 ft. plus the maximum structure height from a neighboring property line while also calling out the requirement that these turbines be 1500’ from a dwelling. This results in the scenario that the Town, through this law, and the leaseholder, exercise restrictive control on other people’s property by not allowing the neighbor to build a dwelling on his own property if it will be closer than 1500’ from the wind turbine. Please see the example below.
8. This Town is not prepared to receive the impact of these industrial machines. We as a Town need to declare a moratorium on these turbines, seek proper counsel on rewriting our laws to properly place the financial burden of analyzing an applicant’s special use permit request for these industrial turbines squarely on the applicant, delegate out the necessary research to qualified engineering firms of our choosing and wait for their unbiased reports.
9. Neither our Town Board nor our Planning Board is qualified to measure the impact of this project by themselves. Outside help is needed from unbiased experts of our choosing.
10. Our Town Board and our Planning Board need to get back to work on the Town and Village Business while delegating this high-tech research surrounding these wind turbines out to qualified firms after collecting sufficient funds from the applicant to do so.

Sincerely,

Robert C. Strasburg II

Click on link to submit your SEC complaint on the
First Wind Holdings Inc. IPO public offering


TEN Reasons
Why the SEC should not allow First Wind to be listed on NASDAQ

First Wind Holdings Inc. 12/22/09 SEC S1/A IPO Filing

First Wind Holdings Inc. 7/31/08 SEC S1 IPO Filing

May 14, 2010 addition to the First Wind Holdings Inc. SEC S1A IPO Filing

August 18, 2010 amendment 7 to the First Wind Holdings Inc. SEC S1A IPO Filing

October 13, 2010 Filing update to the First Wind Holdings Inc. SEC S1A IPO Filing

New October 25, 2010 Filing update to the First Wind Holdings Inc. SEC S1A IPO Filing


FIRST WIND Lays an Egg WITHDRAWS IPO
after Wall Street no confidence in company




Send email request to join - RIWT Facebook Groupsplus
cohoctonwindwatch@gmail.com

RIWT is open to the public

Risks of Industrial Wind Turbines is a group of citizens and organizations dedicated to preserve the public safety, property values, economic viability, environmental integrity and quality of life of residents and future generations.

**************