Now many people are all hyped up about the fact that the DEC and the NYPSC agreed with the town on many of BP's PSS issues. BUT, BP can at this point just make a summary and response and then ignore the rest and not include any of this input in their application.
Ahhhhh yes...I guess this must be the "fair and impartial" rules our town officials were talking about recently!
Yup...the rules say BP can just ignore the town and the State agencies and other stakeholders...yup that is certainly fair!!! Well at least to BP!!!
Note however, this statement in the PSC letter.
"Thereafter, it is contemplated that the developer will work with interested parties to resolve any disagreements they may have about the sufficiency of the planned scope and studies to be included in the application"
So if BP can ignore the town right now, and then BP comes back and says, hey let's talk about the PSS, the town would walk away??? Seems they wouldn't have a choice but to talk if they actually want some input now! Right now BP holds all the cards via the Art. X fair and impartil rules!!!
But I mean hey... the rules are the rules and are fair... right????
Below is the NYPSC response and you can see the town's question embedded in the letter in italics.
Of course then there is this letter from the NYPSC about Acciona's and the old planning board's handling of the SEQR review back in 2007.
Sounded real good. However, the EIS process went forward anyhow, and the EIS was accepted, and what did the DEC and the PSC do about that. NOTHING. In fact the EIS was so bad WPEG sued the planning board over it. So much for tough talk from State agencies!
Of course WPEG's law suit was thrown out because the SEQR "expert" lawyer Byrne and Schneider chose made a law school 101 screw up on a simple procedural matter!
No doubt you won't agree, but you are reading this all wrong. If BP doesn't revise their PSS, it is not incumbent on the Town of Cape Vincent to speak to them again until the application hearing. The included statement that" it is contemplated that the developer will work with interested parties to resolve differences" does not imply the town is obliged even though the developer has not accepted any of their recommendations. It doesn't say that. Note that it refers to the hearing examiners role as including "mediating stipulations among the parties where possible"- Not just what BP insists on.
ReplyDeleteYou are interpreting this as if negotiating some deal is a given. Its just not true, no matter how much you want to trash the town officials.
To get back to the orginal point...here. Pandora's blog seemed to indicate that BP had only 3 choices in her post.
ReplyDeleteWhether BP decides to commence a stipulation phase or not, or whether the town decides to enter into it or not...the point is this is a potential phase in the Art. X process and it will be interestintg to see what happens.
Note also that the town is not the only entity that can be negotiated with. BP can negotiate with the other state agencies, or Lyme, or any stakeholder.
CV might not negotiate but will the others?
And it appears this stipulation time frame is nearly upon us.