[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Letters favor CV's wind ordinance 

It now appears the silent majority Reunion Power has been talking about has remained largely silent.

The Cherry Valley town board spent more than three hours Monday night reviewing a three-inch stack of written comment on a proposed wind ordinance to gauge public sentiment.

The ordinance was written by the town planning board with input form its consultants and sets standards for the installation of wind energy facilities in the town.

Reunion Power wants to put 24 wind turbines on East Hill and has said the stringent standards in the ordinance, particularly those pertaining to noise and setbacks from residences and property lines, would effectively kill its project.

Company representatives have been working to bolster support for the project and have encouraged what they deemed a silent majority in the town to demonstrate its disapproval of the ordinance by testifying at the public hearing and writing to the town board.

But at the public hearing and again Monday night, support leaned heavily in favor of adopting the ordinance as it is currently written.

Following the special meeting, town supervisor Tom Garretson said he and councilmen Fabian Bressett and Jim Johnson reviewed 250 letters that evening.

The trio kept a running tally of those letters for and against the local ordinance, but Garretson declined to discuss the actual count.

“I don’t want to give you any numbers, but we received a lot of letters in favor of the ordinance,” he said.

The supervisor said many of the comments were along the same lines as those the board listened to last month at the public hearing. They primarily focused on the setbacks and noise standards.

One thing Garretson said he did notice was that some people were concerned the ordinance would prevent any wind turbines in Cherry Valley.

“The people who wanted revisions [to the ordinance] feel that by adopting the current ordinance it would not allow any wind turbines in Cherry Valley, but I don’t agree with that,” he said.

The supervisor did not elaborate, but earlier this month mentioned the possibility of the town developing its own wind energy facility

“We could create a project that would generate the amount of energy that this town uses, while generating the amount of revenue that this town needs. It would be our project, with laws developed by our town, with our town’s vision in mind,” he wrote.

The 90-day moratorium enacted in August is set to expire in mid-November and Garretson said extending it remains an option if a decision on the wind ordinance is not made by that time.

“It’s too soon to know. It hinges on whether the ordinance needs revision,” he said.

The board did toss out one petition Monday night that was received along with the individual letters. Board members had agreed prior to the public hearing that they would not accept petitions or form letters. They reiterated that provision when they decided following the hearing to extend the comment period to Oct. 10.

“We have to set it aside. We said no petitions,” Garretson said.

Garretson said the earliest the board would make a decision is during its next regular meeting on Nov 9.

By Jim Austin, Editor


This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky