Consider Every Option???

Below is part of a comment on the JLL blog talking about how we handle wind and or solar in our town with Article X hanging over our heads.

"With the loss of local control as the principal tool to protect our town, community leaders need to be adaptable and consider every option that becomes available to them even if some are onerous."

I agree with this commenter, however, this is not what is happening in reality on the ground. The "prohibit" option based on the SAME science and research as the setback approach has been given very little if any thought other than to marginalize it an attack it and try to make its proponents out to look like crazies. How does that ad to a rational discussion of ALL options. Especially when numerous communities around the nation are rationally making that choice.  The two papers I submitted  about 25 pages long each written rationally and carefully on this  very subject for an alternative were outright rejected by the zoning committee. That is not an attack on anybody...that is just a fact of what happened.

Unfortunately the current CV town govt (committees included with a few rare exceptions) seems to have been locked into the setback approach even before the new draft zoning law ever reached the committee, as if there was to be no discussion on the matter. And I know for FACT that many in town positions now have been proponents only of the setback approach long before they became town officers.

The point is from what I know from first hand experience with these  individuals, and that is NOT being discussed, is that even if Article X never existed and we didn't have it over our heads...the setback zoning approach would STILL be the ONLY approach and the idea to prohibit would still be marginalize off to the edges as from a bunch of radical crazies.

Go on the Internet and Google wind farm bans or prohibit wind turbines etc and see what you come up with.  Are you telling me that ALL these people and counties and municipalities are crazy wackos?  Not likely. There is a big case in Kansas about this very issue and based on mainly aesthetic considerations.  Even the other CV blogs have made a point of reporting when a agency like a town bans industrial wind at the very same time they attack people who want to prohibit wind turbines.  That is not an attack either that is fact, and I am baffled as to what the point is of those blog posts??????

And we have a LOT of counties and towns right here in NYS along that lake that "oppose" pretty much the same as "prohibit" turbines in the lake...are they all nut cases????  This opposition for the lake turbines would in large part be a viewshed consideration  and is exactly what the new CV zoning attorney is saying you can't do.    I wonder if he has discussed this with all these towns and counties???  If you don't want them in the lake, which would be mainly an aesthetic decision why would you want any on land near more people where the would create much greater problems???  


If we just roll over to the State politicians, Article X,, and the big corps. (and foreign corps)  who want to go anywhere they damn well please any time they damn well please...then once again we are just giving away more of our rights.

 I suggest some of you go back and see the movie  by Robert Redford, The Milagro Bean Field War.
Great movie. I hope you will look at it.

In a way it could be the Article X fight in CV...and ironically like CV the controversy is partly about WATER!