The "Revolution" Problem - Big Talk Little Substance!!!

Being that the comp plan and new zoning are are but a done deal at this point, in the past few days there have been a few interesting comments of a similar theme.  That is that if or when Article X comes to town there will be a "noisy resistance", or a "revolution" as some  commenters put it if our local laws are prempted. 

I will believe it when I see it.

Really?  And I would love to hear exactly what the plans are for this to take place. 

Since being in Cape Vincent for a few days now I have had the time to speak to a few friends and aquaintances about their perceptions about the wind issue.  It's interesting because I  sense a general reaction from some that with the new zoning and comp plan that it is over and our issues are pretty much settled, and that at this point they just want the wind issue to all go away. On the Pandora blog she is trying to promote or is speculating  that BP has failed in CV and will walk away soon.  I would not so quick to make that judgment.  The wind industry in general has a lot riding on CV.

So it makes me wonder where we really are in the wind process since 2006.   Do we really have this so called resisitence and revolution left in us as some commenters are suggesting if Article X comes to town?  Or are we at a point I once saw on a wind company analysis paper of opposition and resistance where ultimately people after a while just caved in and and didn't care and accept the outcome.  It becomes a default acceptance of the wind development because we so despereately want back to our normal lives and relationships, while the developers just sit us out and wait and win.  Does the efforts to develop a new wind law and comp plan, as good as they are,  give us an excuse now to drift away as if the problem has been solved? Are we in a psychological position from being beaten on for so long that when Article X comes, we will just shrug and accept it as inevitable?

I have serious doubts a serious "resistance" will ever arise over the Article X issue as some suggest since we have spent so much time to this point trying erroneously to appeasing it.

After all we are talking about a community from day one where many many people are not willing to stand up and put their names on their beliefs and comments.  Not exactly the breeding ground for serious resistance. Or will there be a significant resistance as Article X sweeps into town, but it will be anonymous so in reality we won't know when and where it is taking place?  We just won't ut our names on it!!!!

I'll tell you what...if you are serious... how about you start right now and all you "anonymous radicals" out there suggesting revolution and resisitance start right now by demanding our town board pass a definitive resolution in opposition to Article X and declare that Article X will not be accepted or welcome in this community.  That if they come here it will not be for siting of wind turbines, it will be for an ugly political fight.  That we don't recognize Article X in this community!

And finally who is your resistance and revolution going to be against, as your town continues to appease the Article X process and appoint local representative to it's siting board? So who will you have a revolution against then as your local town board becomes part of the problem and enorses and enables the entire Article X process?

This makes the picture rather complicated since nearly no one on the opposition side dares to question our current new board.  You gonna stand against them in their  endorsement of the A-10 process...or once again as the "experts" tell you that is too radical and not the right path you will dutifully follow.

What you supposed revolutionary anonymous radicals commenting on the blogs with your bravado don't get is that if you are going to have a meaningful resistance and revolutionary impact against Artilce X, you absolutely have to have your town board behind you in support for it to be meaningful or effective. And what if they refuse to do that.  You and your revolution will be left twiating in the wind.

Do you honestly think they will support you? That has not been the evidence so far?...I seriously doubt it. I think they will go on right to the end with A-10 appeasement, and accept whatever is dished out to them and the community.  Without the town board support you would ultimately have to take them on too for enabling and endosing the process.

And who or what organization is going to do that?  Is it WPEG. Most of the significant people that ran WPEG at various times are now in the town govt.  Hirschey, Byrne, Schneider, Chase, Bragdon, and others.  WPEG is a ghost of "opposition"  past.  And both blogs are tightly aligned with the new Rep. govt and everything they do.  Do you honestly think they are going to publicly oppose this new govt. as they continue to enable and endorse the A-10 process?  So much for your revolution!!!

So right from the get go you so called Article X revolutionaries have got yourself a nice uncomfortable  little dilema to work your way through.  To have your little A-10 revolution you may to have to end up just like me...having to take on certain aspects of the new town govt, and the old WPEG opposition that is now our town govt. if they continue to endorse the A-10 process and enable it. 

You can't have it both ways.  You can't endorse an enbling of the very process you are trying to have a revolution against.  So where is that revolution going to come from? Is most of the community "opposition" going to suddenlt at the last minute when it's too late going to have an Earth shaking epiphany (including the town board) to resist BP and the State as BP's trucks are rolling into town?

  And that is why I seriously doubt there is going to be any revolution as some blog commenters suggest as A-10 and BP try to  walk away with Cape Vincent.

The new town board and their supporters who are writing letters to the NY PSC and endorsing and passing a setback wind law as attempted appeasement in essence have the entire community on lockdown as to any potential "revolution" against Article X.

We aren't opposing or revolting against anything...we are ALREADY with our new zoning laws and PSC letters far far into the process of endosring and enabling  the A-10 process.  We are giving power to the exact thing you are claiming you want to resist. 

And this is how you are going to start a resistance or revolution???????

Good luck with all that!!!

Water

The other day the humidity here was about 5%.  Wildland fires are burning in AZ and in many of the states all around us. We have been lucky so far in Flagstaff.   This region lives and dies by water. When we leave for CV everything that has meaning or importance in our lives is packed in a place it can be moved on a monents notice to a safe area in case of a forest fire evactuation.  It is an interestig exercise to go through your house and belongings and choose what really matters to you and what doesn't.  What can't you live without?  Most of it comes down to the emotional stuff like pictures momentos  Maybe we should all take that approach in CV.  What can we live without...what can't we live without.  Maybe that is what our Comp Plan attempts to do.  But CV is far to big to pack up and move on a moments notice from the path of BP's destructive  wind proposals. There is no getting out of the way.   We will all be stuck with it for a long long time.  I have evacuated people in the path of a devistating forest fires several times. I have seen the look on their faces and in their eyes. The fear and the terror.

I hope I never have to see that look in the eyes of the people in CV as BP's destructive path controls our futures!!!

 Living in the arid desert SW I have developed a much deeper appreciation for water...large expanses of water. Fresh water where you can't see the other side.

In AZ there is a saying...If you see a dry wash...we call that a creek.  If there is water in it then we call it a flood!  We are now about 60 days with out rainfall.  The record is 90 days. 

I love water...it is endlessly fascinating to me.  Living here even makes that lust for water worse.

Soon!

JLL Trying to Cover His Tracks????

Mr. Wiley at the blog JLL in his comment section is already trying to back away from his comments I posted below in my previous post about the zoning committee making dangerous and unneccessary concessions for Voters For Wind and  BP on wind turbine noise. I noted his early morning comment today crammed in among the others on his blog.   He must have gotten a flury of emails and calls this AM suggesting that he tone it down and get back in line, and that he was sounding too much like that damn Pundt guy!!!!

But he keeps digging himnself a deeper hole.  Now he has stated in his comment section a sort  of convoluted apology:

"That morning the atmospheric conditions were just right so that when I was out in my back yard feeding the birds the Wolfe Island turbines were emitting the jet roar type of noise that never goes away. The kind of noise you can feel that seems to bring the bulk of complaints from around the world.

My reaction was, "Why the hell should we be allowing any development in this town which adds the the complete change of sound levels already given to us by the Wolfe Island project."


The underlining is mine ( Pundt)

I am guessing in his snit as he calls it the real truth spilled out!!!

But now he is saying that why should we allow any development in town that creates or adds to such noise.

Well I will be damned...he and I are in complete agreement.  Keeping in mind that even one large turbine shoved way back by Lyme will increase the noise level over Wolfe Is. for somebody.  Well,,,maybe not for Mr. Wiley since he will live a long way from any CV turbine development under our new zoning laws. Think about the poor sucker in the CV interior who will have his bird feeding disrupted by turbine noise if we allow even a few!

Jeees Rick what you are suggesting sounds a lot like a BAN on wind development.  Hey keep having those snits buddy...I like the way it makes you think!

You keep this up and they will be calling you a radical nut case lunatic like me!  You know... a marginal fringe voice like you have refered to me several times for wanting to allow NO turbines in CV just like you have suggested in your comment above.

Careful...you will lose your secret decoder ring!!!!

The New Cape Vincent Zoning Committee Made a Dangerous Concession In Their New Zoning Law!!!!

So I am sitting here absolutely stunned!!!!    I just got around to reading Rick Wiley’s JLL blog and I am STUNNED!!!

Here is what Mr. Wiley said about the noise restrictions in the  new 2012 Cape Vincent draft zoning law.

“In my opinion, the Cape Vincent draft zoning law is still overly generous with NOISE allowances for industrial wind turbines that will expose us to NOISE 24 hours of the day. Night time NOISE limits of 35 Decibels is an unnecessary and dangerous concession to British Petroleum and their local Voters for Wind financial partners who have thus far refused to concede to anything lower that 50 Decibels.

I was so stunned in fact that I had to re-read this a couple times to make sure I had it right, then pulled up my copy of the new zoning to look at the noise restrictions again.  

WOW!!!!!  Dangerous and unnecessary concession.  As Wiley himself would say HOLY CRAP!!!!

Now actually good for you Rick in standing this ground on noise particularly with industrial wind turbines, but I have a better suggestion.  How about you take one step further and we eliminate that source of noise once and for all…period!!!!  Then we won’t have to argue and worry or be dangerously impacted by 50 or 35 or whatever the most recent magic dba number is that almost nobody understands anyhow.

Is Mr. Wiley suggesting that the “experts” that I have been told repeatedly we must follow could possibly be WRONG!!!!  Maybe even did something dangerous.

Is Mr. Wiley actually being critical of the new town board  appointed zoning committee and their work and suggesting that they conceded something dangerous and unnecessary to BP that could harm the public welfare of CV????.

Dangerous and unnecessary isn’t exactly lightweight criticism. That is getting pretty damn edgy.

Then there is this comment under the JLL post.

“Perhaps it is designed to appear generous to an article 10 board but not too generous to BP Any town that restricts noise to 25 dBA may get a designation as too burdensome and their law could be rejected. Any town using 50 dBA, as suggested by BP, is inviting a wind farm into their community. Recommending 35 dBA to me looks like a balancing act that the zoning committee is trying to accomplish that is not so restrictive to be called burdensome, but too restrictive for BP to put 140 turbines in the Cape.
The committee members aren't a bunch of dummies. I wish them luck.”

Is this person and Wiley for that matter actually suggesting  that they are at the point in their thinking that the zoning committee was acting dangerously and unnecessarily to compromise with and appease Article X?

That is really interesting… and that would be a damn slippery slope to be on for many reasons including politically. Want to write letters to the PSC about Article X?  Well how about somebody  (maybe Mr. Wiley) now write the PSC and tell them they don’t agree with the experts noise restrictions in the new CV zoning law and they are an unnecessary and dangerous concession that will harm the community !!!!   I won’t hold my breath on that one!

Now what I expect to see here is a wholesale attack on Mr. Wiley from the avid supporters of the new town govt and its zoning committee. 

Can you imagine for a split second if I had said this zoning committee did something dangerous and unnecessary.  Or for that matter said anything negative about them AT ALL.   The new board defenders would be off their leashes and on the rabid  attack.

Now watch out Rick…if you keep this up you could end up just like me where the zoning committee would outright reject any more of your input.

Now if we  are not willing to prohibit wind development for the blatant and painfully obvious reasons, both scientific and rational to really protect this community…then this is the slippery slope appeasement and compromise game you end up playing and BP and the State are going to be better at it.   My suggestion would be stop complaining at this late date. You chose and supported this path and gave it to the “experts” to play this game for you.  If you don’t suddenly like the way they are playing, then I guess you live with it.  After all Wiley told us repeatedly they were the “experts”.  They could not possibly be wrong!

Conflicts of Interest - Who Has Them And Who Doesn't???

If you go to the blog Pandora’s Box of Rocks you will see a paper on wind turbine noise in stable atmosphere conditions.  Since I can not comment on Pandora’s I will comment here on this discussion.

The comments attached to that post morphed into a discussion for some claiming Cape Vincent Councilman  Clif Schneider has a conflict of interest because he ran against wind turbines in CV, or may have a concerned stance about them.  This is sheer idiocy.  Well first, I don't ever remember Mr. Schneider running on an election platform “against” wind turbines.  No Republican candidate took that position and I defy anybody to show me concrete evidence where they did run on comments opposing or wanting to ban wind development. .

Then some have tried to imply  that since Mr. Schneider is a CV councilman and  is also trying to protect CV  property values (including his) that will be negatively impacted by industrial wind development that this constitutes a financial conflict of interest.  This too is absurd. 

Where this fails as a rational is that IF Mr. Schneider is opposed to wind development and his concerns or actions on wind energy are to protect property values, (including his own by default along with all others) that would be a  town wide impact protecting ALL property values and thus impact everyone’s financial interest. not just his, vs. somebody like Edsall or the Masons who have a direct legal contract with the developers where their decisions as town officers would give them a  direct financial gain and incentive to favor the wind developers proposals.  They would gain personally (through an actual legal/financial contract) and others would not on a level playing field. A contract which BTW states that the lease holder has to assist the wind developer in getting their project approved and sited.  Mr. Schneider has no such contract or involvement with wind development.  As a result Mr. Schneider could decide either way in wind and he has no conflict. 

How about you pro windies consider this.  By your definition of conflicts Tom Rienbeck and Micky Orvis on the old board had a conflict… right?  Why?  Because you have been claiming all along that wind development will actually benefit the town dramatically and property values would go UP…including Rienbeck and Orvis’s property. So they would have a financial interest and conflict.  You also claim taxes would go down, once again where Orvis and Rienbeck would also gain financially. So by your argument they would also have a wind conflict of interest.  That would mean the entire old board was conflicted by your idiotic definitions.  You can’t have it both ways…and THAT is how your argument is so completely absurd!!!!

For example, let’s say Mr. Schneider votes yes for a new recreational water edge park and boat launch with nice facilities somewhere in the town.  This public access to the water could make the town more attractive and desirable for locals, tourists, and potential new residents overall and might also increase everybody’s property values as a result.  So does Mr. Schneider who has no involvement in the park directly nor owns the property where the park would be developed have a conflict even though he voted on something he thinks is good for the town and that would increase his property values AND everybody else’s?

The answer is a clear NO since everyone in town was impacted the same on a broad citizen wide property wide scale, not just Mr. Schneider or any other select town officer. He would have made a policy decision based on the overall good of the community, and since he lived here as a community member, then by default he would gain like everyone else would.  His interests could not be claimed to be a priority over the community at large.  He would have no conflict as a result.

This is such a no brainer I am surprised that the pro wind people keep dragging it out as rational.  Each time they do it just looks more ridiculous and drags their credibility down another notch. If that is possible at this point!!!!

Now if Schneider owned the property on which the park was to be located and the town was going to purchase it, or if he had a business that would provide services in the park  that would be different matter and considered a direct conflict. That does not mean he could not be a town officer, but he would legally have to recuse from all matters or votes concerning the park.  Actually just conflicts alone by public officials are not illegal.  But not declaring them or acting on them for your own financial interest is illegal.

So what does NYS Law say about conflicts.  General Municipal Law, Article 18 sec. 809. This is what actually matters, not some pro wind puppet’s opinion.

IV. DISCLOSURE IN LAND USE MATTERS

Article 18 requires that requests, applications, and petitions

relating to land use disclose the interest of any state officers or

municipal officers or employees in the applicant.  On its face,

Article 18 does not, however, require recusal by the affected

municipal officer or employee The request, application, or

petition must set forth the name and residence of the official and the

nature and extent of the official's interest in the applicant, "to the

extent known to the applicant." Article 18 appears, thus, to

impose no duty upon the applicant to inquire as to the possible

interests of officials in the applicant.

"Interest" is broadly defined. The officer or employee is

deemed to have an interest in the applicant: if the applicant is the

officer or employee or is a family member of the officer or

employee; o r if either the official or his or her family member

holds a position with the applicant;l60 or if the official or his or her

family member owns or controls stock in the applicant;161 if the

official or his or her family member would receive a benefit from the

applicant if the application was approved.

A knowing and intentional violation of these disclosure provisions is a misdemeanor.

Failure to comply with section 809 may result in the invalidation

of the municipal action on the matter, at least if the interested

municipal official takes any official action on it.  Mere nondisclosure

alone, however, may be insufficient to invalidate the

municipal action, at least if disclosure is thereafter made prior to the

municipality taking the action on the application, petition, or

request.

Although section 809 requires only disclosure, not recusal, courts

have extended the section to mandate recusal as well, even by

classes of individuals not encompassed within the section.


And what does the Cape Vincent Ethics Code say? It’s pretty clear.

But since we are talking about conflicts of interest this all becomes a more interesting discussion.  Not because of Mr. Schneider, who has no conflict even by definition of the laws or codes, but as to other town officers, Planning Board alternate officer Karen Bourcy and Planning Board member Rochne Burns.  Bourcy has disclosed her conflicts and started recusing herself, although too late in the wind game to matter. She must continue to do so if faced with wind decisions as an alternate.  The decision to retain her by a board so intent on ethics in the last election still baffles me.   Mr. Burns, however, still remains a big question mark since he at least at one time had a lease with Acciona.  Is that lease in existence and if so has it been bought up by BP?  This is not an attack on Mr. Burns, these are just facts as they exist.

Is Mr. Burns in violation of our CV ethics code and state ethics laws?  I looked up the NY AG wind ethics BP disclosures of CV town officers they are involved with.  It was dated March 2012 and Mr. Burns is not listed. But the question remains, does he have a active wind contract?  I have seen no public official disclosure at the town level on this matter either.  This matter needs to be publicly and officially resolved ASAP.  Despite the high level of ethics mantra and repeated questions on the matter by me…no one at the town level, or blogs or others have addressed it in any way.

Why would it matter?  Because Mr. Burns sat on the Comp Plan committee as a town official from the Planning Board.  Note what the portion of NYS law I underlined says above. Does his potential conflict by sitting on the CP committee have an effect on the integrity of the  new Comp Plan?

To intentionally not disclose is a misdemeanor, and he was appointed several months ago…and if the town wants to protect the integrity of its new Comp Plan and the good work of the committee it would be in the best interest for them to have Mr. Burns publicly disclose or at least publicly clear up his financial wind interests if he doesn’t have any currently. 

It would also be in their best interest simply because the ethics matters were such a big big issue in the last election that put them in office.

And in the end the Jefferson County Ethics Board and the NYS AG Office in various general ethics opinions have agreed that it does not need to be an actual conflict to raise concerns.  They state that even  the “appearance” of a potential conflict is not good for the public’s confidence in govt.

It’s long past time to clear this matter up.  It is absurd to argue and defend Mr. Schneider’s innocence (which on this point I would defend) on conflicts on one hand, if we are not going to address the entire conflict issue that still has implications for the town as we speak.  So let’s be consistent.  It was after all Mr. Schneider among other Town Board members who voted to appoint a potentially wind conflicted Mr. Burns and a known wind conflicted Mrs. Bourcy to the Planning Board.

Comment and Show Support For The New 2012 CV Comp Plan

Use the follwoing link to Go Petition to comment on and show your support for the new 2012 Cape Vincent Comp Plan.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/we-support-the-2012-cape-vincent-comprehensive-plan-as.html

A Revolution!!!! REALLY??????

I saw this comment on the JLL blog this AM in  relation to if Article X comes to CV and preempts our local zoning laws of wind development.  I was really  amused by this "silent type" comment bluster, and ther others talking big talk about what they will do.

"Recently, A well respected-silent majority type Cape Vincent resident and business person commented to me, "If they try to overrule our local laws, I promise a revolution."

REALLY?????   Well if you have been silent this long (6 years +) while industrial wind has been raping our community, I doubt seriously you will stand up now and create any kind of revolution or anything else.  It doesn't appear you are wired to do anything of the sort. 

My question is, where have you been?  What exactly does it take in this community for some people to understand what is happening to us at the hands of giant corporations and nit wit politicians that support them.

Is this what it takes?  We have to wait till BP a giant energy corp is on our doorstep with the  state, and their giant expanded indisutrial wind disaster loaded on the trucks coming down the CV roads...then we will get upset.  Unbelievable!

I know...how about we wait till the turbines are actually up...then start raissing a fuss and a revolution.

This kind of thinking absolutely boggles my mind!  It's the same thing that spurs on all the anonymous comments on the blogs.  And all this being afraid to speak up with your name is EXACTLY what makes the wind developers successful.  They spread fear in every community they touch as the real controlling mechanism.  They realize that the mantra will be that we all have to be "reasonable" and that they can steam roll these communities like ours because if there dare be a revolution ...it will be far to late to have any impact. Nice respectable, responsible, people don't start revolutions.  They know we are wired from elementary schoolto sit quietly and don't make a fuss or stand out.

To every person who does not want BP in this community, every time you sign something anonymous or won't speak up...you give one more small victory to the wind developers.  YOU make it all possible!!!!

Revolution...no I don't think so. I can't even utter the words "wind turbine ban" in this community without a lot of people getting their underware all in a bunch over it.   Revolution is one hell of alot more radical that that!

You don't start a damn revolution with letters, and zoning laws, and comment periods and letters and hearings.  When the Article X board comes to town all you are likely to do is work within the confines of the system and go to meetings, and public hearings, and speak nicely and politlely to the commissioners, and talk about your studies and research, and compromise, as your community gets suckedright down into BP's industrial wind hell hole!!!

NY Article X Could Preempt Our Local Wind Zoning Laws - But Which Way???

If an Article X siting board comes to Cape Vincent, what will they do?  Would they prempt our local industrial wind setback zoning laws so BP could put up most or all of their turbines.  Would they only allow 20, 50, 100 ???

That is the mode of thinking we have gotten tunnel vision on. That A-10 will override our laws FOR development.

But what if they preemept our new industrial wind setback zoning in the other direction?  What if they say that BP is "prohibited" from putting ANY turbins in CV or the area?  That would be prempting our local laws too, saying that they weren't tough enough.

Wouldn't that be interesting.  That is what NY Assemblywoman Addie Russel seemed to be indicating.

Who Says You Can't Ban Things????- Take a Political Lesson My Friends!!!

Somebody sent this article from the NY Times in an email this AM.  

Read it here at this link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/nyregion/hydrofracking-under-cuomo-plan-would-be-restricted-to-a-few-counties.html?hp

Now this is real interesting.  Looks like Cuomo is caving to pressure to severely  limit hydrofracking in NY.  Sounds like there have been some protests and others pushing their home rules rights.  Note that part about hydrofracking would only take place if the towns agree to it.  Well can you imagine that!!!!  Geee I don’t know is there any lesson that could be learned here about wind development and Article X????? Anybody been saying we should stand up against wind development with a ban, and stand up and fight Article X????

This article clearly points up what I have been talking about and the importance of communities taking a real strong political stand against wind …ya know like “prohibiting it” in our community instead of even slightly opening the door to it. or  appeasing the process that could force it on our community.  Or writing letters begging the NY PSC to see it our way, and that we have been reasonable.  What is it people just don’t get about this.  Stand up and make this wind and Article X issue such a political hot potato that the politicians that endorsed it won’t dare actually enforce it.

I think the real point here and it appears to be working with fracking and Cuomo,  is to be real damn unreasonable about invasive industrial uses like fracking or wind energy invading our community. Cuomo is going to run for President and he doesn’t really want the blood on his hands of forcing communities through legislation, that will stick to him like glue, that is more BIG Brother Govt  preempting peoples basic home rule rights.  But first he has to run for Gov. one more time, and this time he may have some real Republican opposition other than the buffoon Carl Palidino.  This time with what we know about Cuomo's bogus CV investigation, and his Aubertine appointment and the rights robbing Article X, some powerful Rep. Gov. candidate could make real political hay and trouble.

I have said all along that passing Article X was one thing…it will be quite another thing politically to actually force it on communities.  That could get around, and be real politically nasty… and that means VOTES!!!  There are already a number of towns in NY that have banned industrial wind, and we should to, then let Cuomo run a round and preempt all those laws.  That will go over real well politically!!!!

I will say it again, and this above article reinforces this idea.  We should be sending a message as follows:

1. We should be prohibiting wind turbines outright based on the science and research and impacts we now know.

2. We should be prohibiting industrial wind based on our comp plan and zoning protections as well.

3. We should be passing a resolutions (along with other towns and the County if possible)

outright opposing Article X.

4. We should be opposing wind turbines in the Lake.

5.   We should let it be known that if BP brings an Article X board to town we will use highly visible protests and PR here and in Albany, and things are going to get real real politically uncomfortable.  I know for fact that Gov. Cuomo doesn’t like protests…remember when he came to Watertown in 2010????

So let’s get our town board crackin, and have them pass a resolution opposing Article X!!!  Why won’t they do that.

 

Do Ya Like Big Toys - BP Does!

Can't wait for this to be dragged through and over the roads and fields of Cape Vincent to put up BP's giant wind turbines!!

                                 Cranes at Maple Ridge Wind Farm - Tug Hill, NY

                           Hey.... here is a good parking spot for one of those BP cranes!!!!

It's A Simulation Right Now - But Maybe Not For Long. It Might Soon Be A Real Nightmare!!!

2008 visual simulation of part of the early Acciona project done for me with engineering software.  Looking inward from the River at the Cape Vincent town shoreline.

I am visually oriented with degrees in the visual arts. So several years ago soon after industrial wind invaded our community I started exploring what the visual impact would be of 400 ft. wind turbines as seen over water and across flat glacial terrain.  I used existing towers and structures to make estimates.  It quickly became real clear the impact would be devastating to the regional beauty, especially when viewed from the water or the islands including Wolfe Is.  It was also clear that many people did not have a real handle on what that impact would be. I didn't think it could be called "majestic".  In those days between BP and Acciona over 200 turbines were proposed for our Cape Vincent / Lyme area, and that didn’t include Wolfe Island, Clayton, Hammond, Orleans, Galloo, Henderson (which got smart and banned turbiners) or the Lake turbine proposals.

Early 2006 crude personal attempt to estimate the visual impacts compared to known object heights

like the CV prison water tower.

Acciona was avoiding taking pictures from the water and islands because they KNEW how the impact would affect people.  Of course once the Wolfe turbines went up then it became real clear and a lot of people on the wind fence dropped off when they could see and live with the impact day and night first hand.

Before the Wolfe turbines went up, I made a contact with somebody attached to the national wind opposition.  This person was an engineer and told me he could accurately reproduce the impact of the Acciona turbines near the River with engineering software if I sent him certain information.

So I took several pictures of the shore line from out on the River  and recorded the exact location by GPS  on a USGS topo map along with the coordinates.  Next I estimated the width of the camera view angle from those locations.  Along with this I sent topo maps from Acciona that showed the precise locations of their proposed 96 (at that time) turbines.  From this information simulations were developed, and he sent me the results as you see above.  It even included an animation. 

Later Acciona reduced their project from 96 to 53 then to 51 turbines, so the simulations were less accurate.  But I thought I would drag them back out now and post them since BP has BIG plans for their wind complex at 285 megawatts.  That could mean 190 -1.5 MW turbines, or 143 - 2MW turbines or 123 - 2.3 MW turbines like Wolfe Is.  or 95 3MW turbines.  Any way you cut it we could be going backwards toward a lot of turbines like in the beginning of these 2006 proposals.  If BP went with 190 turbines now , add that to the 86 on Wolfe Is and you have a major industrial wind factory of  276 giant turbines.  That is raw unadulterated environmental insanity, especially since we get minuscule amounts or unpredictable unreliable power for all that environmental damage…especially the visual damage to our beautiful region.  And wham!!!! The beautiful 1000’s and Golden Crescent could go almost overnight from being one of NYS’s most beautiful treasured regions, to being an instant sprawling industrial wind plant.  Instant environmental transformation.  Instant corporate political bullshit insanity!!!!

With the generous financial help of some friends I put this  1/2 page ad in the 1000 Islands Sun in the summer of 2008. The Website stlawrencewind..org was the old WPEG Website

 which apparently no longer exists.

But remember that the new Save the River director Lee Willbanks doesn’t think he or STR has a “dog in the hunt” when it comes to wind development  That is the most absurd things I have ever heard in trying to dodge the responsibility they “claim” for the River if you think of what might occur along the River and the tremendous impact it could have.  I wonder exactly when he would put his environmental “dog in the hunt?????   What exactly would it take.  I keep forgetting that STR thinks the River actually starts at the head of Grindstone Island. 

At any rate here are the simulations that have suddenly become relevant again, for people to consider as to what our town and region might soon look like.

I took a fair amount of heat from the pro wind side about these simulations as inaccurate blah, blah blah.
Judge for yourself against an identical real life condition on Wolfe Is.  Seems they were pretty damn close, maybe even an underestimate. 

Take a good look...this could be CV's future staring right back at you!!!!  Still want to play footsie with Article X by writing letters to the PSC???? They won't have to live in our BP nightmare!!!

Just imagine 190 - 400 ft industrial wind turbines in CV.  If that happens CV is no longer a town, it's a giant industrial factory site owned by BP. The name on the map will now read "Cape Vincent - BP Industrial Site!!!!                              

Who Is Really Anonymous???? - The Anonymous Paranoia

This post refers to a comment left by 4:16 AM on the post below about Planning Board member Cadarelli's comments.

Idle threats 4:16 AM????

OK you can believe whatever you want, but I am not the one slinking around paranoid and anonymous that somebody will find out my identity.  But let me clear something up for you about blog tracking. All the CV blogs can track or even block computer by  IP addresses, and I know at least one person that has tracked me and my comments very closely at times on the other blogs and mine of which they don’t administer.   Of course I am an easy target to find if I go anonymous since I have used my name before.  How do you think Wiley at JLL or Pandora’s knows that the NY AG's office has been watching his blog or the FBI or the other agencies etc who keep up on his posts regularly. But don't be fooled and get stuck on the IP address thing as the only source of information. Nasty or reckless commenters on blogs have very definitely been tracked down. And I know that for fact from a local incident!   Right?   Another example, if I choose to be on either CV blog and they put up their map and a push pin icon will show up in Flagstaff.  If I am not on their blog or use a proxy server, there will be no push pin.  That is pretty damn easy to figure out.  Now Wiley likes to claim to confuse this information that I am not the only one from Flagstaff, that some students at the university log on too. Maybe, but the funny thing is, if I don’t look at his blog those map location push pins disappear.  And they don’t appear when I am in CV either.  So that would be a no brainer. Just like certain other push pins from AZ disappear in the summer months.

First of all, there really is no such thing as truly anonymous on the Internet or a blog.  You of all people should know that by now. It mainly depends on how much law enforcement and the court gets involved in comments get out of control. 

But consider that there are other legal ways of narrowing down a commenter if the need arises. I know one regular commenter on the other blogs that lives in real fear that their identity will be exposed because they KNOW how easy it could be if not careful. No matter which way they chose to comment I can nearly always identify their comments. Same for other people I  know who try to hide their identity. The Lone Ranger is a classic.  I hope the Ranger doesn’t think he or she  is fooling anybody.

 For example everything you have ever said here, on other blogs, in a town meeting, in your other writings, or on a video, or in a phone or email conversation  leaves a unique linguistic "footprint"  We all have a style, uniqueness  and a personality we can't disguise no matter how hard we try, especially if we get upset. mad  or emotional as some of my commenters frequently do. We all have logic patterns, and expression patterns, word patterns and idiosyncrasies. For example the other day somebody in an emotional  rant that was familiar left a real big clue by referencing a subject I have not talked to hardly anybody about…big mistake if you are desperately trying to stay anonymous.   In SAR I am a certified man tracker, even with training from the US Border Patrol that works the illegal immigration issues on the AZ//Mex . border.  Man tracking is the same.  People leave distinct foot prints and clues in and around those prints and all over the place even when they are trying to hide them. We find a lot of people this way and other ways too, even when they are hiding from us. Get good enough at it and you can tell what they are thinking and where they are like to go next, and a lot of other things you can decipher about them. Some illegals try to hide their prints by attaching cow hooves to there boots, but people do not walk like cows, so it gives them away. Some try to walk backwards, but the foot hits the ground completely differently and leaves different tell tales signs as a result. We aren’t designed to move backwards very far or effectively.  Exactly the same with words and patterns on the blogs, or anywhere else.  Now the question is,  have you ever heard of forensic linguistics, or is there even software that can look at patterns in words and expressions, and writings?  I’ll leave that to your imagination. Being that you are already so paranoid that you hide your identity, that should keep you busy for a while looking over your shoulder.  Like the person who calls themselves or used to call themselves Cape Fear on the blog and in the WDT and is a staunch Hirschey supporter.  That one was easy to track down, even thought I don’t care, but that persons extreme emotions in repeated comments attacking me and how they did it after a number of comments it was a dead give away.  Note that that person has not been commenting lately.  That is easy to figure out too.  Sometimes what isn’t said and the timing says more that what is!!!  For example the precise time stamp on some of the comments that attack me are a definite pattern. Hell all you would have to do is graph that and it would reveal a lot.  Somebody likes to be up early and get to work on the day.  That would indicate somebody that is a probably very busy and involved in something…maybe an important person. Maybe a big coffee drinker to get the day started.  Maybe they like to go out early and exercise, or walk.  They probably go to bed early as a result.  Or maybe it means nothing and they just like to get up early to for no particular reason.  But people aren’t random…they have patterns.  See this puzzle can be fun.  So who else on the blogs has early time stamps on posts and comments? 

I am not trying to scare off commenters, it’s just an interesting conversation and subject this anonymous thing.  I fact I am a bit fascinated by why people do it or think that way or what drives them to hide an identity.  I can actually understand why some do. 

Actually I don't find your above comment particularly offensive, or really care,  but like in your comment where you use the words "loose cannon"...ever use those word before?  Yup you sure have…and what about that Wizard of Oz reference of the “man behind the curtain;’ is there anywhere on the blogs or writings where Wizard of Oz references come up?  Any pictures of the Wizard behind the curtain…YUP!!!…ever use similar references before?  Somebody uses TV and movie character references.  Which makes me wonder where the Lone Ranger is these days…haven’t heard from him lately. Why would that be???? Did he finally leave town figuring he had chased down those conflicted people on the old  boards.  Wonder what is taking up his time now?  Justice has been done in CV I guess.   I miss those funny posts.  He s probably Hi Ho Silver Away and off to other wind conflicted communities with Tonto to track down bad guys.  Good luck Ranger.  Using thr Ranger as an identity would probably mean the person is about my age.  I doubt that is a younger person. They probably don’t even remember the Ranger TV program.

 Like me, how many times do I use the word absurd, or insane?  Lots and that would be a dead give away if I suddenly went anonymous.

Now like I said before, I don’t have time to spend my days tracking people on the blogs, and most times I could care less, who comments or where they come from, and I don’t even care about anonymous commenters that much, especially if they have something interesting or positive to impart from either side of the issue. And I don’t need to hide. I guess I have an aversion to that since I spend so much time looking for lost, missing or people who are hiding for one reason or another.   I guess being in SEARCH and rescue it just intrigues me because we often deal with writings.  Suicide notes, trip plans, notes on the edges of lost maps, last computer entries, emails, voice mails etc.  It’s just real intriguing to try to solve those puzzles… thats all!  

Unless somebody crosses the line on the blogs with nasty lies, or tries to drag my friends into the mix with nasty lies about them viciously and unjustly hurting their reputations in a string of comments, or gets real foul and offensive. 

So to those people… just keep putting your foot prints on the blogs!!!!

More Slimy BP Wind Salesmen in Town?

Apparently the wind hucksters are at it again trying to take another bite out of CV.  Both Cape Vincent blogs are reporting that BP has salesmen in town fishing for more suckers to sign up with more leases.  On the Pandora blog this comment was in regards to BP's new local activity.

"Anonymous said...

Maybe the town should contact the AG on what is going on with BP completely ignoring the morotorium and conducting business. Surely the AG would want to look into the blatent disregard for any type of authority."

We might not like it (I certainly don't)  but I think in reality the Town wind development moratorium would have no legal bearing on BP signing up more private leases.  That is private business between BP and the new lease holder which the moratorium would not control. Could be wrong but I think that is the case.  need to keep a sharp eye on County records to see who ends up with a lease attached to their deeds.

BP buys up the Acciona leases right in the face of a zoning law that would be very restrictive to their project proposals, and then is running around signing up more leases, and they are proposing to expand their project from 200MW to 285MW which would mean 190 turbines if the 1.5 MW capacity turbines were used. So are they bluffing or what do they know that we don't know? 

Anybody have an inside track as to where the new leases are being signed up in CV?

I Love The Page Banner on Pandora's Box of Rocks Blog - I Couldn't Agree More!!!

I noted something very interesting on the Cape Vincent blog Pandora’s Box of Rocks.

Right up front bold as life IN VIVID COLOR is a big banner that says

 “BRITISH PETROLEUM

  LEAVE CAPE VINCENT”

As I remember this is the exact same bumper sticker one of our new town councilmen used to have on his car bumper, except it was referring to Acciona. 

Well I certainly agree with that sentiment and have since 2006 for any wind developer trying to invade our community!!!!

 But hey wait just a damn minute here! 

That is pretty rabid anti wind rhetoric!  Isn’t that what I have been saying for a long time?  Well I’ll be damned it sure is!!!    Ban wind developers from CV and get them the hell out of town…you know like LEAVE CAPE VINCENT BP!!!!

But I thought that this type of vehement anti wind sentiment was frowned upon as:

Lunatic

Nut case

Radical

Irrational

Irresponsible

Idiotic

Politically out of touch

Fringe marginal voices

Imbalanced

Insane

ETC!!!

I love Pandora’s blog banner.  Guess people are finally starting to see it my way!!!!

BP Says - "We Should Be Able To Kill Birds Too" The Don't Want To Miss Out On That Action!!!!

From the best information I can find the BP Gulf oil spill killed about 6000 birds in the initial phases.  That is not considering the long term impacts.  Not long ago here in AZ I sat through a presentation to our county by wind developer Nextera.  They presented information on bird mortalities from industrial wind turbines.  It was the same carbon copy crap we have seen in Cape Vincent.

Their claim was that in the US turbines would kill about 30,000 birds annually, and then of course  that gives the usually BS justification that our cars, cats, windows etc kill birds too.  Now the bird groups around the world disagree with this wind industry number for bird kills and put it a t a much much higher number.

But what the heck, let’s go with the Nextera numbers of 30,000. Keeping in mind that Cape Vincent sits smack dab in a very important bird migratory fly way, let’s put some perspective on those numbers.

BTW I thought I heard from the NYDEC that the distance from the shore to protect that critical flyway was at least 6 miles.  I didn't note that in our new zoning law.

BP and the wind industry are asking you to accept is the equivalent of the impact on birds that is FIVE TIMES the impact of their Gulf oil spill EACH YEAR.  6000 birds in the Gulf oil spill divided by 30,000 = 5 times the bird impact ANNUALLY!!!!.

The absurdity is they are asking us to accept the impact of 5 of their Gulf oil spills IN ONE YEAR, EVERY YEAR on birds in the US.  Of course as more wind turbines go up more birds get killed…keep that in mind.

The justification is that because other sources kill birds and bats they should be able without question get in line with the killing machine too.

Now wait a minute.  If someone else can kill birds, and they can kill birds, and then

somebody else comes along and says that since all these people kill birds we should able to too, where does this goofy BS logic end?  Isn’t that what produces endangered species, and why we have laws to protect them???  Ddduuuuhhhhh!!!!!!!

Of course if you go to the NYDEC or the USFW and get a “taking permit” then hack away at as many endangered species as you want…you have a PERMIT!!!!!

Only government could come up with a scheme that has a permit to kill the very species you are trying not to kill and protect!!!!

Excellent Post On JLL!

Despite what disagreements I have had with Wiley at the Cape Vincent blog JLL, I have read his blog for a long time, and there is often some good or interesting information.  Today's JLL post on his trip to Communist Cuba and the comparison to NY's Article X local rights robbing legislation is excellent and everyone should read it. Big govt control is big govt control, no matter how democratic you try to make it look or what fancy BS name you give it. 

I would add that does this mean that NY Gov. Cuomo is using Communist tactics to strip away local rights when it comes to his "green" agenda for the State.

 Cuomo made another interesting move that is a eerily like Communism as well. When former NY Sen. Darrel Aubertine was removed from office mostly over his big industrial wind connections and the voters  of NNY clearly expressed a decision to remove him using their democratic right to vote, Cuomo overrode the people' rights and democratic expressions and put Aubertine right back in NY govt. and apparently NY Sen. Patty Richie must have received a Communist style threat from Cuomo to get in line with  his "State" agenda since not long after defeating Aubertine in the elections she voted for Cuomo's appointment of Aubertine to his new Ag Commissioners job.

I wonder if that Cuban flag JLL has posted is flying over the State capitol building in Albany?

BTW...if when Cuomo runs for President will he appoint Aubertine as the Sec. of Agriculture?  I live surrounded by a national forest controlled by the US Dept. of Agriculture.  Good God that is a scary thought!!!!!

Is Cape Vincent Planning Board Alternate Member Bob Cardarelli On To Something????

At the last Cape Vincent Planning Board meeting,PB alternate PB member Bob Cardarelli presented a letter with a number of suggestions for the Town. In addition to combining the Village and Town was the following suggestion about wind development.

6. “Meet with the windmill company to establish a district which is beneficial to the whole community. Without a direct meeting, other authorities will make determinations which may leave much to be desired.”

Mr. Cardarelli might want to sit down and review the purpose of zoning.  It’s not to negotiate with every goofy developer scheme that comes to town.  This suggestion should not surprise anyone.  Mr. Cardarelli has been pro wind for sometime based on personal conversations I have had with him.  One was very heated phone conversation back in 2006 that included a discussion on the wind conflicts of interest among the old CV govt officials. He voiced an opinion back then that “corruption” was just a fact of life and sometimes the way things got done.  I mentioned when Mr. Cardarelli was appointed that he was among several pro wind people the new govt had appointed to the PB , like Karen Bourcy, and we all know about her conflicts, and Rochne Burns who at one time at least had a wind lease.  So like I said , Mr. Cardarelli’s willingness to meet and “negotiate” with the wind developers before Article X arrives should be of no surprise.

But this # 6 suggestion brings up some interesting discussion points that I am surprised no one is talking about.  We all tend to see Article X as a black and white question only.  They will either respect our zoning, or they preempt our local laws and give the town away to BP.  But not so fast!  Is that the end of the game?  Do we as a community hold any power to prevent this BP disaster?  Well maybe we do.

Let’s say A-10 lets BP develop as proposed and preempt our laws.  Is it really game over? Or is that just the impression that is fostered by not looking beyond the A-10 process?

Is negotiation in the cards after that?  First, there isn’t anything that I can see that would prevent BP after they win with A-10 from getting warm and fuzzy for good company PR purposes and at least entering into discussions with the town as to just how much they are willing to destroy the town with their project.  But the bigger question is, what about the Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT)  wind developers claim they need to make their projects viable?   Once again there is that pesky little PILOT question that is still under the carpet.  I have asked this question before and either no one knows or they aren’t telling what they know.  What if push comes to shove and BP is given the town by an A-10 board?  What if the town or the county say NO to a PILOT.  Bigger question is… WOULD one or the other say NO to a BP PILOT.  Remember the JCIDA gave  each taxing entity the power to vote yes or no on a PILOT, and if one says NO then the PILOT doesn’t fly, at least the way I understand it.  Now that raises some real interesting questions doesn’t it?

Could our town board with their Republican WPEG super majority voting power hold BP hostage over the PILOT?  Could they just say NO and then force BP to walk away because the project wouldn’t be financially viable with no PILOT?

OR…now pay attention here…could this be the leverage point of negotiation with BP???

Our brand spanking new zoning law’s wind section could be preempted at this point by an A-10 siting board.  But that doesn’t mean as far as I can tell that BP has to develop a full project.   Don’t forget, no zoning law is written in stone never to be amended again. 

So if an A-10 board gives BP the go ahead in our town, what will our Town Board do?????  I am not suggesting negotiation with BP. I say send them packing ASAP with NO PILOT and do it NOW.  Nor am I suggesting that our Town Board should or would negotiate.  But it sure raises some very interesting alternatives.  If they did negotiate with BP that would be holding the winning A-10 ace in the hole,  what would they negotiate for? Would they send BP packing out of town, or would they negotiate with BP for a smaller project?  Hhhmmm…this PILOT question that nobody is talking about could be a real ticking time bomb!!! A real sleeper.  You don’t see this discussion on the other blogs, as important as it could be in controlling the A-10 assault.

Maybe Mr. Cardarelli is on to something in a backhanded way, although I don’t think this is where he intended to go.  I’m not sure what leverage Mr. Cardarelli thinks he would bring to the table that would want to make BP also come to the table at this point if they think they will win in an A-10 siting.  Is Cardarelli planning on bringing a stick to a gun fight, or is he just going to beg BP to be reasonable?  There has been a lot of talk about compromise and negotiation with the wind developers since 2006, setbacks etc.  But one thing that seems to have eluded the opposition is that until recently we have had NO power to force compromise or negotiation. NONE!

Why wait for Article X.  Why don’t we call up BP right now and say we don’t give a damn what A-10 does…you are not getting a PILOT, so pack your bags boys and don’t waste our time and yours in court!!!

Of course if A-10 sticks it to us and our new zoning laws, the town  could also negotiate for a smaller project too?  This is going to get real interesting if the A-10 game has additional options.  Actually it’s already real interesting if you explore the details and possibilities of this discussion for a while.  

I will ask the same question I have asked several times and everybody goes silent on.

Can an A-10 siting board force a town or county to agree to a PILOT, even if local wind laws clauses are preempted? 

This PILOT question might be and interesting privilege of the floor question at a town board meeting!