More Blog Censorship????

It must be like moths mindlessly flying around  a light the way the commenters on the Cape Vincent blogs  respond.   This comment was left on JLL by another anonymous reader.

“Anonymous said...

Rick
Lamora is nothing but an Art Pundt tool. He is pulling the same crap Artie did before you shut him down when he was taking over and ruining your blog before.
Shut him down.”

I have known Dave Lamora for something like 40 years. I can tell you for fact that he is nobody’s mouth piece or tool. It just so happens that he and I agree on a number of things in the CV wind battle and we also disagree on some things as well.

I wonder if this person as any freakin clue as to what they are saying and what they have opened themselves up too in terms of defective logic and thinking.   Are you sure you really want to go there????

Now I am going to venture a guess that the commenter is friendly to the wind “opposition” based on the nature of their comments .  If not I will explain the other side too.  If that is the case let’s examine who is actually a tool of who?   I wonder if the idiot who made this comment can educate all of us on exactly how Dave and I agreeing on some things would be any  different from the entire town board (except for Orvis) and their supporters and blogs and voters, agreeing with and being in lock step with the Republican mantra of the Hirschey board?  This would mean they are all tools as well by this simpleton line of thinking. That would also include most of the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals  they  appointed, and many on the various committees they have  appointed.  You all think virtually the SAME on just about everything.  So who would be whose tool in those cases if YOU agree with the Republicans and Hirschey and his town board etc?  I guess they are all mouth pieces for the Hirschey mantra by this commenter’s  standards since they too agree and never seem to question the Republicans or our new town board.  I guess by this commenter’s idiotic comparison of Lamora and I the other CV  Republicans would simply be tools of Mr. Hirschey and his board as well since they agree with him on the wind issue.  There has been virtually no disagreements or dissention or a variety of ideas on the Town Board if you discount Orvis.  Geees…talk about group think.  And  If you are going to talk about who is whose tools and idea clones, this would absolutely pale by comparison to the fact that Lamora and I happen to agree on some ideas and approaches in the CV wind issue. Now by this idiotic marginalization presented by this commenter, this could be extended to mean that anyone who agreed enough with the Hirschey govt to vote for them would be nothing more that a tool for that Republican Town Board agenda.  The  absurd logic black hole you crawled into that anyone who has similar ideas like Dave and myself are tools of one another just marginalized Hirschey and his supporters, his appointments and all the people in CV that voted and supported them.  You are brilliant!!!! They must all be tools of each other by the very definition of your one  dimensional thinking that you are  attempting to peddle.

Now let’s assume you are pro wind and that was the thrust of your comments.   Well sit down because this gets even more absurd! 

If you are pro wind and want to talk about who is whose tool, keep in mind you got sheered like sheep right down to the skin as a direct mindless tool  for the wind developers because they shut down your thinking by waving a wad of cash in your faces, and you have been used so badly you haven’t yet woken up to that fact.  Wanna talk about who is whose tool?  Ok…you had to hire a PR firm run by the PR disaster Marion Trieste  that went so far as to tell you all how to dress in public with  your idiotic green cheer leader uniform shirts,  you had to sign a loyalty oath to be part of  VFW, and taught where to sit together in meetings like lemmings, and be scripted as to what to say and when to say it.  Then you all had to put up signs in your yards in lock step promoting wind. 

Yeah …either way pro or anti wind you guys are real brilliant examples of free thinkers.  Geees give me a break!!! This too pales by the fact that Dave Lamora and I agree on some things in the wind issue in CV.

But here is the real kicker in this idiot’s who is a tool of who debate.  In order for this person in his little limited one dimensional  domain to make sure that nothing threatens his group’s script, he is actually asking Wiley to censor  any dissention or further discussion or alternative ideas.  Wanna talk about tools…Ok…This person who claims Dave and I are tools of each other because we happen to agree  on some things is so desperate and scared of alternative ideas that he is actually asking JLL to make sure no other ideas reach his brain or the brains of the group he aligns with or get consideration by the public at large, by asking Wiley to use the insidious tool of censorship. All thoughts must be in lock step so everyone can remain a tool of the Republican party or pro wind mantra without threat. In the end both side pro and anti have resorted to the exact same tactics of blind allegiance to dogma.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t this exactly how totalitarian regimes structure the flow of information and ideas?  Don’t like someone’s idea so make sure it gets no audience or consideration.  Didn’t Wiley in fact make a point of this in his post about his trip to Communist Cuba and how things work there just like that. 

And isn’t restricting, blocking, and censoring information the very technique the wind developers use with non-disclosure clauses in their leases so they can conquer unsuspecting communities just like CV?

As I said when you consider this with some clarity, the fact that Dave and I agree on some things pales by comparison to insidious request to actually censor and  eliminate discussion and alternative ideas in one of the most critical issues in CV’s history.

Dave and I may agree on some things  maybe many things  in the CV wind battle by virtue of our independent research and thoughts  and then discuss those ideas in an open debate, where many times  we severely test each other’s hypothesis and test it against other people and the public  to see if  they hold  up. And all these blog commenter s are an example and their reponses don’t hold up well when all they can come up with is censorship to protect themselves and stay anonymous . But in this process  neither of us have succumbed to being dragged down in the insidious undemocratic dangerous rat hole of censorship that this commenter requires to protect his apparently weak ideas that could not stand up to a similar test. And in the end Dave an I give our ideas the severest test by stepping up to the plate right in front of  the public and stamping our names on our ideas.  Then our ideas have to also endure the anonymous hit and run tactics of the other CV  blogs, and even then when that is not enough you have to go whimpering to the blog administrators to please block Lamora and Pundt.   It is actually quite a compliment to consider that some people are so threatened by our ideas that they think we must be censored. It is a measure of the power of the ideas and the delivery.

I am proud to be Dave Lamora’s friend and have the opportunity to listen to his well measured and intelligent  thoughts and analysis. And I am proud  of the often difficult and very challenging process we require of each other to test our individual ideas and thoughts and writings  and bring them to a solid conclusion.  This is so contrary to the simpleton idea of “ I don’t like your ideas so make sure someone blocks them so I don’t have to be scared and think about them or actually be accountable for what I say”

In the end because we put our names behind our thinking, we have to be accountable, and the bloggers and hit and run commenters are actually a process that makes us just that much stronger by attempting to make us accountable.  This idea that we are willing to stand up and say what we believe and put our names behind it despite the attacks is what in the end just fries the cookies of people who don’t have the backbone to do that.  It just drives them nuts, as you can see by the attacks because it makes them analyze their own lack of integrity and why they must slink around under the protection of  anonymous and try to have comments that make them accountable blocked.  I am glad I don’t have to live with that weight around my neck.

Wiley and Pandora’s  has already blocked me and others thus I have opened my own blog to make sure there is at least one alternative voice not mired in anyone’s group think.   If Wiley blocks Lamora on behalf of this commenter’s idiot suggestion, then I would suggest that Mr. Wiley and the bulk of his commenters  go back to Cuba and take his blog to where the ideas of censorship are comfortably accepted as the norm.

I would hope Mr. Wiley would have much more integrity and backbone than that since he is a direct reflection of the Republican party and the new town govt. and Mr. Lamora was a direct representative of that very govt on the CV Comp Plan committee.  Or since Mr. Lamora worked within the system and had valuable direct influence and input to the Comp Plan committee… should we completely censor that too???  That is a measure of just  how really STUPID this commenter’s ideas are!

It's Mostly Theatre!

I have to admit it.  I love reading the Cape Vincent blog JLL.  That place is a gold mine for inconsistency and hypocrisy at times, not just by Wiley but by his commenters as well .  To be fair sometimes he has good stuff too. 

But this morning he cracked me up with his opinion about who should be appointed to the town board position left open by Mickey Orvis.  Just a side note here. I think whomever they appoint, that new board member should have  to demonstrate that they know how to “CALL THE COPS”!!!

JLL is stating this on his blog about a new TB appointment:

“Certainly, it would be a wise political gesture for the four Cape Vincent Town Board Republicans to replace a Democrat with a Democrat. However, any Cape Vincent Democrat with family or business ties to big industrial wind should be disqualified from appointment by the duly elected town board.  

The conflict of interest issue is still alive, must be avoided. Any appointed town board member who brings an industrial wind conflict into the position would be suspect and not taken seriously by the majority of Cape Vincent voters who booted out wind lease holders and put the Republicans on the town board.”

REALLY!!!  JLL  is kidding right?  Please tell me he is kidding!!!

First, it is not a disqualifier by actual  law to have a conflict of interest.  However, it must be disclosed and recusal should take place when the conflict comes into play.  Apparently Wiley has his own set of laws and does not have a grip on the actual laws on this matter.

Second he states the conflict issue is still alive.  I guess he would know, since it is still alive in part because his favorite town board re-appointed Karen Bourcy with a blatant conflict, a conflict  that has nearly destroyed our town and Rochne Burns who we still don’t know if he has a lease as he once had with Acciona.

So by Wiley’s own standards, hypocritical as they are, neither of these town board appointments to the planning board mentioned above should be in the positions his favorite “duly elected” Republican town board appointed them to, and neither can be taken seriously. Ok sounds good to me Rick, why don’t you march right over to our town board and explain that to them!

How about we get away from this partisan crap and appoint somebody to the TB that has a brain capable of working on its own without being intravenously  fed the typical partisan Republican Kool Aid!

And by the way, despite all the blog hoopla, at least on the wind issue it doesn’t matter who is appointed Rep. or Dem. or monkey.  The position is essentially powerless with a four vote Hirschey super majority in place already.

This appointment is  more a matter of being good theatre than anything else when it comes to the wind related matters at this point.  Wiley is good at theatre.  The comp plan is a lock, and the zoning is a lock as well and just as I predicted not much was going to change despite comment periods and public hearings.  The essence of that zoning law at least on wind was a lock long long before this new board ever took office. The setback, compromise, push em back idea has been tattooed on the WPEG brain since the day it was formed in 2006. Not much is going to change that.

Then there is this comment from a  JLL anonymous blog sheep. It’s absolutely precious!!!

“I go to Art's blog once a week. The guy is a train wreck. A JLL and Pandora stalker. Real creepy.”

Yet you keep coming here to read it just the same!!!  Thanks!

But this is an interesting distorted asinine twist on the democratic process.  This person is implying that because I read the other blogs and then comment or disagree on my own that somehow this equates to “stalking” the other blogs.

Well first of all dingbat what do you think the other CV  blogs do?  Often they take material they read in other places, like a newspaper or magazine, or even another blog, or a meeting and then they comment on it on their own blog, which is absolutely no different than what I do on my blog.  In case you  haven’t noticed blogs are an open public forum of information that is not sacred or protected from somebody else’s opinion.

And here is the very precious part of this person’s comment about me.  They sit on Wiley’s blog, take drive by anonymous shots at me and other people, and don’t have the balls to put their name on it.  They have to use the cover of anonymous to “stalk” around anonymously, yet call me a stalker when I am openly using my name and the open forum of blogging and information to express my opinion

People like this are dangerous.  The only train wreck here pal is your very own logic!!!  I will give you advice I once saw on a bumper sticker!

Use clutch before engaging the brain!!!

 

Another Good Article by Energy Analyst Robert Bryce - N2N!!!

An aquaintance sent me this article by energy analyst Robert Bryce in an email. 

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/11171/Renewable-Energys-Incurable-Scale-Problem  

Bryce suggests that people who want to go green and get completely off fossil fuels need to get a simple calculator to demonstrate to themselves how improbable that really is based on the fact that renewables like wind and solar lack energy density and thus require huge tracks of land.They have a significant problem of SCALE!!!    He believes in...N2N!  Natural gas to nuclear.  Although I don't always agree with Bryce like his writing becuase he is a realist about the issue.

 

Since our new "green "zoning provides for wind and solar this article should be a must read for the zoning committee and our town and planning board now sudddenly with no science endorsing solar in one of the least sunniest places in the country. 

 

Tell you what... I will provide them the calculators!!!

 

But I am enjoying the recent  long run of AZ like sunny weather so far  this summer in Cape Vincent.

By Default NYS Will Help Us Defend Against Their Own Article X Legislation. They Shot Themselves In The Foot!!!

Since before the 2011 Cape Vincent elections and with the new CV comp plan and zoning efforts there has been considerable talk and debate about the CV comp plan and the comp plan process and what it means to our community.  More importantly now,  how does this all relate to our zoning defense and fight against NY’s Article X power plant sighting legislation which could preempt our zoning on industrial wind siting?  I am guessing that still more than 90% of the CV voting public really doesn’t have a good grasp on how this all applies, other than the comp plan sets the overall land use goals for our community. We can all rant against Article X and loss of home rule, but we better clearly understand what it means in the context of comp planning and zoning and how it critically applies to the  approaches we are using right here in Cape Vincent to protect ourselves.

Ask yourself, do you really know the power the comp plan process has and where those powers come from and what are the implications of all that interaction against Article X  in particular?  That is the critical question now before it is too late!  The State is going to actually help us defend against their own Article X.  Please read on.

Let’s look first at what NY State says about the comp plan process.  This comes from Article 16, Sec. 272-a of the NY Town Laws about zoning. The underlining emphasis is mine.

You can read more on the comp plan in NY Town Law at this link below:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/TWN/16/272-a

1.  “Legislative findings and intent.

  The legislature hereby finds and determines that:

    (a) Significant decisions and  actions  affecting  the  immediate  and

  long-range  protection, enhancement, growth and development of the state

  and its communities are made by local governments.

    (b) Among  the  most  important  powers  and  duties  granted  by  the

  legislature  to a town government is the authority and responsibility to

  undertake town comprehensive planning and to regulate land use  for  the

  purpose  of  protecting the public health, safety and general welfare of

  its citizens.

    (c) The development and enactment by the town  government  of  a  town

  comprehensive plan which can be readily identified, and is available for

  use by the public, is in the best interest of the people of each town.”

The immediate question that should come to mind on reading just this part of the NY Town Law on comp planning is, why would NY want to preempt with its Article X legislation an already existing significant power granted to the towns where  they clearly recognize and  have decisively supported the LOCAL home rule power  to comp plan?  They clearly recognize that LOCAL comp planning  is in the best interest of the people of the town...AND the entire State?  It is a significant and critically important contradiction. The State through Article X has taken away a significant power that in essence they recognize by law is good for the State’s own well being and interests. Does that legal term arbitrary and capricious come to mind!!!  

Especially when this contradictory endorsement of Article X is based on nothing more that political pandering to corporate wind lobbyists, and has no  relevance to the health safety and welfare of any community, as dictated in the comp planning language.  In addition this would be hard to related to the legislative preemption powers of Article 9 of the NY Constitution where the State can dominate the field of legislation if they determine there is an overriding area of State interest.  They have yet to concretely or scientifically define why renewables such as wind energy with all its negative impacts and unreliable power output has suddenly become  an interest or concern that would justify the preemption of the most important legislative powers granted to the towns in the comp planning process.   Now are you starting to get the picture how important the comp plan process is in a defense against Article X.  The comp plan in this context is far more than just saying we want scenic views for Cape Vincent!  It is a powerful tool on many levels…especially now that it is under direct threat. 

Here is where it gets real interesting in my mind in the comp planning,  local zoning, home rule, debate.  This is where we get beyond the surface of comp planning that most people are vaguely familiar with.   It appears NYS in its  political zeal to endorse the corporate green agenda with an  Article X clause of zoning preemption has shot themselves right square in the foot with a major major unexplainable, unjustifiable, blatant  inconsistency in their very own laws. One law is in clear defiance of the other! 

So think on this one carefully  for a minute. This comp planning language in  NY Town Law did not go away with the advent of Article X regulations.  They exist in an extremely  inconsistent legal tandem. Out of one side of their mouths the State is saying they grant the towns significant powers to determine their own land use issues and highly endorses that process and which is supported by reams of actual case law, while at the very same time they have formulated legislation where unelected representatives of the State could take it all away and make the first law irrelevant.   It would be like telling the NYS State Troopers to strictly enforce one state law,  the  65 mph speed limit on the NYS Thruway, then telling them their arrest will not be valid by another state law that allows an 80 mph speed limit to be decided later.  So which way is it NY????  This is the insane political atmosphere under which we are formulating our comp plan and zoning laws, and we should not be endorsing it or buying into this badly inconsistent  legislative absurdity, and giving it any validity whatsoever.

And herein lies one of the critical defenses against Article X if you begin to understand the comp planning issue at this deeper level as it also applies to home rule preemption. We are walking right into a legislative trap.

The State has become lost and absurd and completely contradictory  in its very own legislation.  The State has left us in a legal no man’s land where it is now actually up to us to exert responsible control over a process run amuck.  It really leaves us only one responsible choice as citizens defending a reasonable democratic  process of home rule. We can’t have it both ways. So which law do we follow and endorse in this state legislative circus where the legislative process has become unglued at the hand of large corporate interests where  laws directly contradict themselves?  It seems very rational to follow the only long standing and precedent setting one backed  by case law, and vehemently defend this one that grants us the significant power to regulate our own future and aligns most with home rule control.  If you are speaking the home rule mantra then essentially you  have no other choice.  Why in God’s name would we or should we endorse or appease the one law that pits itself fully  against the very thing we are trying to defend? Why validate it and give it any power whatsoever? If you want home rule why are we caving in with appeasement to the very law that takes it away.  Every letter written to the NYPSC about Article X regulations essentially says we agree with your preemption of home rule and the negation of the significant powers of the comp planning process. Each letter essentially validates the absurd legislative inconsistencies between Article X and the comp planning laws in NY Town Law.  That is why I won’t write them and validate the process that is attempting to take away the very essence of home rule power granted to us by the State…the comp plan! 

If you truly endorse home rule rights we have no other choice than to solidly establish what WE see as our Cape Vincent land use future in our comp plan and zoning and validate it and give it strength, with no apologies and appeasement to a State that is run amuck irrationally contradicting itself legally and trying to convince us we have to follow along and be enablers of their dangerous run amuck scheme. Why give them that validation. We voted for “good govt in the last CV elections. So why are we enabling and following an example of absolutely terrible and destructive govt policy.  That in essence would make our own elections and what they stood for  nearly irrelevant.   That is where our current zoning approach to appease an irrational and irresponsible State legislative Article X scheme has come off the rails and may invalidate what we have worked so hard for locally.  This is actually a severe test of whether the 2009 and 2011 CV elections and democratic process touted so heavily by many as a solution will in the end have any lasting meaning at all.  A lot is riding on what we are willing to do to really defend home rule and against the corporate wind invasion.

I have heard over and over again in the zoning / Article X debate  we. must absolutely be “reasonable” and not overly burdensome.  But what the hell are we being reasonable with?  Are we being reasonable with the Article X devil himself?   What have we bought into with this A-10 forced reasonable zoning approach? Why should we buy into being reasonable with a State that has set a completely unreasonable example  in its significant contradiction of its very own laws. 

By not fully using the powerful comp planning process and  structuring our comp plan and zoning for what we want as a community completely outside of the insidious Article X influence, it is unimaginable what we are actually doing and giving away.

This makes absolutely no sense and sets a extremely dangerous precedent! These are the immediate changes that need to be made to our new comp plan and zoning to rid it completely of the Article X contradictory influence, and  to fully protect our community and home rule rights.

Matt Doheny Is Endorsed By WHO???

Rick Wiley at the Cape Vincent “anti wind” blog JLL must think you and I are really stupid as he hands out his Republican hoopla!  Wiley must think you are so gullible that you won’t look beyond what he says is the “truth.”  His support of Republican Matt Doheny running for Congress  is no secret and a prime example.

 Today Wiley has a post on his blog that the US Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Matt Doheny for Congress. This has to be a good thing for the Republicans right? Well if you want to see another example how this partisan nonsense clouds the truth…then read on.  Here is what the Chamber said about Doheny in their endorsement.

"It is the Chamber's goal to help elect a pro-business majority in Congress and work diligently in support of the interests of businesses large and small to advance legislation that encourages economic growth, job creation and a less intrusive federal government," said Chamber President and Chief Executive Office Thomas Donohue in a letter to Doheny. "We believe that your election to the U.S. House of Representatives will help produce sustained economic growth, help create more jobs and get our country back on track." 

So I am sitting here with this uncomfortable feeling thinking, why does this Chamber endorsement have a really familiar odor to it???   

Let’s see….

 “"It is the Chamber's goal to help elect a pro-business majority in Congress and work diligently in support of the interests of businesses large and small to advance legislation that encourages economic growth, job creation…

Wait a minute…What the hell… isn’t that exactly the mantra of the supporters of Article X and BIG WIND that could ram LARGE BUSINESS  BP  wind right down our throats!!!!! It’s the same damn mantra crap!!!

 It also dawns on me that the Chamber’s statement is in large part why we are suffering under the totalitarian control of BIG BUSINESS, and BIG political legislative  intrusion favoring BIG BUSINESS  right here in Cape Vincent and trying to take our home rule rights away.  Wake up…what the hell do you think the Chamber is really saying?  They might as well be talking about insidious legislation and the people who support it like Article X.  That support of BUSINESS LARGE and SMALL sounds good for Republicans to swallow whole but it  has some real dark  sides to it as we in CV  now all know.

So I get a hunch, and with no more than a single Google search I find it.  What else do you think the US Chamber who endorses Doheny also endorses.  You Republicans will need to sit down.  The US Chamber supports the Production Tax Credit subsidies that supports BIG WIND like BP!!! They believe the PTC should be extended.  You can read about this at the link below.

http://www.windpowermonthly.com/news/1115180/US-Chamber-Commerce-backs-PTC-extension/

Now this would be the exact same PTC that Republican Wiley at JLL has been ranting against. He has also been ranting against Congressman Bill Owens, Doheny’s opponent, for supporting the PTC.  Yet here is Doheny soaking up the endorsement of the US Chamber who also supports the PTC for big wind .  So let me see…what do they call this?  Oh that’s right…HYPOCRITCAL!!!

Then there is this from the article about the US Chamber supporting the PTC extension.

“The chamber's endorsement follows that of President Barack Obama's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. The council said the PTC will help the US "diversify its generation portfolio and prepare for rising levels of energy demand."

So the  US Chamber who supports Doheny, supports the same PTC subsidies Bill Owens supports, ands apparently also supports Obama’s big green agenda!

 And oh yeah what about Republican big boy Karl Rove also supporting the PTC at a American Wind Energy Assoc. conference.  Oh I feel sorry for you CV Republicans who might get a headache having to think outside Wiley’s limited Republican box to untangle this little inconvenient web.  Good luck with that!!!

Like I have said before, if you approach the wind issue with this partisan nonsense that industrial  wind is all the fault of one political party, then you really don’t get it and will be ineffective at fighting  against industrial wind.  You will end up like Wiley shooting at all the wrong targets and endorsing the very things you are fighting against. Remember that according to Wiley NY Sen. Patty Richie was supposed to be our Republican savior on the wind issue. Yet she was one of the votes to put wind corrupted former NY Sen. Aubertine in Cuomo’s job appointment at Ag & Markets.  That would be after a democratic vote for her was supposed to remove Aubertine and his wind conflicts from NY govt. Endorsing her was a brilliant call on Wiley’s and other CV Republican’s part.  It is exactly how you can get suckered. And the local CV Republicans say I am politically out of touch…go figure.

It is exactly how our new zoning law was formulated as well,  with only one tunnel vision line of political thinking to appease Article X as the driving force,  rather than to stand up to completely protect the entire community.  It is why our Republican dominated board threw some of the people and properties  in the CV interior right under the bus in terms of protection from industrial wind.  They didn’t even give those people in the interior the very property protection guarantee they were so all ga ga about at one time and has suddenly completely evaporated in our new zoning.

I would be real careful about drinking the Republican Kool- Aid as we move ahead in the CV wind issue. Doesn’t appear to have a real good record so far!

SIX YEARS!!!!!!

I noted K at Pandora’s blog recently celebrated a four year anniversary (2008) of her research and blogging on industrial wind in Cape Vincent. Congratulations to her and her efforts.  I have just had a small  six year (2006) anniversary of my own recently concerning the CV wind battle.  My quiet little anniversary celebrates a critical event for me that occurred a full  two years before the Pandora blog and research even came to online.

Six summers ago the president of the WPEG  group handed me a computer disc and told me maybe I should look it over. She wasn’t sure what was on it or what specifically it was about, but it seemed to be about wind energy.  It turned out to be the NY State Energy Research Development Authority’s “ Wind Energy Tool Kit.”   You can read it at the link below.  It is a slightly different version than the one I read in 2006 but the basics are the same.

http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/Page-Sections/Renewables/Large-Wind/~/media/Files/EERP/Renewables/wind-energy-toolkit.ashx

We will talk about NYSERDA and our zoning in the next post and why they are important all of a sudden in our zoning process. Stay tuned.

The “Tool Kit” is a very pro wind document to assist  municipalities with a wind energy overview who were facing or considering industrial wind development. It turned out to be one of the most important documents I would read and for me set into action understanding the importance of the community comprehensive plan in the zoning process.  My first important and critical research from an anti wind stand point came early on (2006) and directly from a very pro wind document.  All you had to do was carefully research what was being said  between the lines and be a little perceptive and you could see all the industrial wind energy problems being rationalized, and thus what critical as a strategy to fight against it.  So it is a real hoot when Bryan Stumpf wrote the editorial in the WDT in 2006 saying my Internet research was all from anti wind sites.  He didn’t have a freakin clue!!!

The most important part was the idea of a comprehensive plan and how zoning must follow the direction of a community’s comp plan once adopted.  Of course they then and still do promote the idea of comp planning, BUT,  as a tool to plan for and promote wind energy in a community.  More importantly they did talk directly about the legality of a comp plan and how any zoning must follow the com plan ideals, and that there is case law that supports this comp plan and zoning relationship….BINGO!!!!!!  The light went on above my head!!!!  In 2006 we were about to adopt a wind law amendment, and any wind law amendment would be in direct violation of our existing comp plan.  But I didn’t know that till the next day.

The very next day I marched down to the town offices and asked the town clerk, Arlene Ingerson back then, if Cape Vincent had a comp plan.  Indeed we did and she gave me a copy along with a copy of our zoning laws which I also asked for. There is another interesting side story here as to what I also found on a table in Rienbeck’s office that day in 2006 and how important it would become.  I will save that for later.

At 2AM the next morning in June or July of 2006 while speed reading the CV comp plan cover to cover I struck the gold mine we all know about now and still remains in our new 2012 comp plan.  It was the clause on page 32 of the old plan that discourages towers and utilities in the agricultural district area and discourages any development that would change the scenic rural agricultural landscape of the interior….not only the water front but the rural agricultural interior!!!  That is an important concept now that the new zoning focuses the scenic protections on the waterfront and sacrifices the interior protections for the possibility of wind development.

But I also noted that the bulk of the 2003  Comp Pan theme was protective of the scenic rural character of the entire town and village, and the zoning fit very nicely into carrying out those goals.  At 2AM on an early summer morning in 2006 it dawned on me what we had to do, where we had to go with this document, and how critically important it was. It was a legal gold mine.  I knew then a lot of things were going to hinge on this little gold mine of a document!  I sat there stunned as to what I was reading and re-read it several times. It dawned on me what a scam the old town and planning board was pulling on all of us by ignoring one of THE most critical phases and documents of the zoning process.  It also dawned on me like a slap upside the head that if they were willing to hide and distort this zoning process so clearly outlined in NY law, what would they be capable of when all of this was reinforced by blatant conflicts of interest? That is when I knew in 2006  we were in real trouble, and we should not compromise as some suggested but attack the problem head on.  We also needed as much focus or more on this issue as the direction of bats, birds and turtles, as a solid defense.  As a result I began to formulate a strategy,  through the courts if necessary, as to how this comp plan and our zoning could be used to prohibit wind turbines in the CV community. Interestingly enough the two papers I gave to the 2012 zoning committee that were outright rejected were the six years of research details since 2006 as to how our existing zoning and comp plan could legally justify prohibiting industrial wind in CV, or where new zoning and comp planning should go for the same  result.  This 2006 research also pointed up a need to formulate a strategy aimed at the NYAG and local DA’s office to battle the conflicts of interest. As Pandora’s blog came online in 2008 I had a year before with other contacted the NYAG’s office with research and already put that process in motion and a month before meeting with the Jefferson County DA, with a petition of concerned people about the blatant conflicts of interest.  And guess what?  The fact the old town officers with conflicts were willing to ignore the comp plan, the most important part of the zoning process,  on behalf of the wind developers and their own financial interests has always been a key piece of the evidence. K at Pandora does some good research at times, but I don’t recall her ever having to actually compile it or pitch it to a DA or the NYAG’s office, and investigators, especially when there was no blog support, against conflicts of interest that came much later, and everybody was afraid to be something other than anonymous, just like today.

 In 2006 at the first public hearing on the 2006 draft wind law I spoke directly to the comp plan and zoning relationship and the importance, and how ignoring it would get that old board in potentially big trouble.  Which essentially it did?  And six years later that is what it has all come down to as I was sure it would. Can the comp plan and our zoning hold up to the legal test.  But now there is a new and bigger component thrown into this arena…Article X.  We will examine that is the next post below and how convoluted the zoning debate still is in some respects!  I will show you in the post below how I think our  wind zoning train has run off the rails!

Just Who Exactly Are We Taking Zoning Advice From????

Part 2 to follow up the post above about comp planning and zoning and NYSERDA's Wind Energy Tool Kit for communities facing wind development.  Here is some explanations from NYSERDA's Website.

About NYSERDA

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is a public benefit corporation created in 1975 under Article 8, Title 9 of the State Public Authorities Law [PDF] through the reconstitution of the New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority. NYSERDA’s earliest efforts focused solely on research and development with the goal of reducing the State’s petroleum consumption. Today, NYSERDA’s aim is to help New York meet its energy goals: reducing energy consumption, promoting the use of renewable energy sources, and protecting the environment.

Funding

Currently, NYSERDA is primarily funded by state rate payers through the System Benefits Charge (SBC)

Mission

NYSERDA strives to facilitate change through the widespread development and use of innovative technologies to improve the State’s energy, economic, and environmental wellbeing.

Through these collaborations, NYSERDA seeks to develop a diversified energy supply portfolio, improve market mechanisms, and facilitate the introduction and adoption of advanced technologies that will help New Yorkers plan for and respond to uncertainties in the energy markets.

Governance

NYSERDA is governed by a board consisting of 13 members, including the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation, the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation, the Chair of the Public Service Commission, and the Chair of the Power Authority of the State of New York, who serve ex officio. The remaining nine members are appointed by the Governor of the State of New York with the advice and consent of the Senate and include, as required by statute, an engineer or research scientist, an economist, an environmentalist, a consumer advocate, an officer of a gas utility, an officer of an electric utility, and three at-large members.

http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/en/About.aspx

Note several things.  Much of this is double talk for being the state authority to rabidly support wind energy along with other renewable.  Note that you are already charged on your electric bill to support NYSERDA and wind energy.  And note that the NY governor ( that would be Cuomo who already has screwed over our community on many levels) appoints some of the board members. Note also that some of the same people on  NYSERDA will apparently end up on or close to the Article X siting process, DEC, PSC etc.

Now if you are trying to protect your community from the ravages of industrial wind energy, and having your home  rule rights taken away, do you think this is a pro wind  group we as a town or our town govt should be taking advice from or getting in bed with?  That doesn’t seem like a wise choice to me…does it appear wise to you????  Well it maybe already be too late because  it appears they have taken the advice of NYSERDA on the wind issue.

Note what NYSERDA says about the zoning process in their Wind Energy Tool Kit for towns.   

Zoning for Wind

“A town that uses zoning and has an up-to-date comprehensive plan that addresses the wind energy resource is in an excellent position to proactively identify key wind energy areas that could be developed. The existing zoning for these areas could then be amended to allow wind energy facilities, subject to the town’s chosen  review process.” 

But wait a minute…isn’t that exactly what the new zoning committee just DID!!!!    Oh yeah and the town govt just threw in their support of solar for kicks which I am sure NYSERDA would be all warm and fuzzy about and would be willing to step right up and help fund with our money collected off our electric bills under the RPS /SBC charges we already pay.

If we are serious about protecting ourselves from the onslaught of the corporate industrial

wind invasion backed by a State endorsed political scheme that is a big govt power grab and  removes any local land use laws that get in the way of that scheme… 

…then why the in  hell are we mimicking zoning advice from NYSERDA, the very pro wind State authority backed by some of the same big power players, some appointed by the very Gov. that has screwed over this community?  They stand  ready  to fund the very wind energy  Article X might ram right down this community’s throat by taking our local rights away!!!! 

  Somebody has got to explain to me how we are going to protect our community from the insidious preemption of home rule, and corporate industrial wind invasion by appeasing, and endorsing, and following the zoning advice of the very entities we are fighting against?  

Somebody want to explain how the hell this  is supposed to work effectively!!!????