NPR Interview with Mr. Brown of the Cape Vincent Zoning Committee

Recently Mr. Bob Brown of the Cape Vincent zoning committee who has developed the new zoning laws for the town was interviewed by North Country Public Radio.  He had some rather interesting  things to say.  Some things were rather confusing to me.  For example this quote…

“And Brown said the group considered the preservation of property values as it developed setback requirements.   "We said we are going to do a two-mile setback from the waterfront, which would cover the majority of the homes, and the majority of the property value, and use that as a way to address property value and potential loss of property value," he said.”

But wait.  Haven’t some property values on the Tibbetts Pt. Rd. and other shoreline properties been devalued already by the view of the Wolfe Is. turbines?  Those properties are close to or over two miles from those turbines and there still has been an impact.  And what if I have property  on the south shore of Carleton Island. Even industrial  turbines set back two miles into the CV interior will have a dramatic  negative impact on those properties.  Last I looked on a map, Carleton Is. is still a part of CV.  And what about those property owners in the interior beyond the magic 2  mile limit who feel as protective of their properties as the people on the waterfront do?  Don’t they count??? 

Then Mr. Brown said this as well about dealing with the possible preemption of local zoning by the Article X power plant sitting process…

“Our goal was to write an addendum to the zoning law that the Article X board would not find unreasonable. We can justify each one of the requirements that we put in based on health, safety, science and technology," he said.”

Does Mr. Brown know something that the rest of us in CV and across the State including land use lawyers  haven’t been able to figure out?  How does he actually know what criteria any A-10 siting board will accept as reasonable? The fact is he doesn’t know.  Even NY Assemblywoman Addie Russell who is at the heart of the legislative process is only guessing even with her inside knowledge.  Everyone is guessing on this matter including Mr. Brown and the CV zoning committee and their lawyer.  In essence our zoning law on the wind issue is based on only a guess as to what will happen with Article X. To me that seems like one hell of a risky game to be playing with the treasured scenic resources of our community and region. What if that guess is badly in error?  What are we left with then? When reality sets in do we suddenly wake up and prohibit turbines as a last desperate attempt far too late?  Get a grip on the fact that we are guessing and stabbing in the dark instead of taking the stance we should be taking to actually defend our community.

And Mr. Brown talks very confidently that they can defended our new zoning as “reasonable” with science and research to an Article X board.  Yet no one actually knows what reasonable is. He seems to be ignoring one very important consideration that has nothing to do with science and research.  What about the political component and big renewable lobby money behind the Article process and what they or a court are likely to decide as a result?  If that influences the A-10 process (do ya think!!!)  then the development of our zoning based on a guess as to what “science” an A-10 siting board will consider

“ reasonable” could  be nearly irrelevant as the science and our guess at  “reasonableness” gets tossed out the window in favor of the political considerations.  That would mean our appeasement of A-10 with a “reasonable” setback approach could be badly out of touch with the reality of the political environment.

I think we should stop this guessing game as to what will appease the State and Article X, especially when we simply don’t know, and do what we know needs to be done to really protect this community and region, and prohibit this invasive land use.  Then ban together behind solid protections based in the same science if you want, and defiantly stand our ground and do what it takes to politically and defiantly defend this community and region.

You may get there anyhow at some point. If the town and zoning committee are wrong and the  A-10 guessing game and appeasements and setbacks and the science get thrown out in the A-10 process where are you going to go then? What are you left with?  In the end you will be left with the political component some have desperately been trying to avoid with appeasement.  As a last defense you will be left with a nasty political fight and finally getting down to the nitty gritty of saying you actually don’t want the damn turbines here anyhow as the “reasonable” appeasement approach fails.

What do you actually want in reality?  Is it guessing, appeasement, and compromise, in the face of  having our home rule taken away?   If having our home rule power taken away is not what you want, then guessing,   appeasement, and compromise with the force that is trying to take it away and not taking a definitive stance for what you want seems very  badly misguided.