News Home

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Wind Power Ethics Group asking for residents’ aid in lawsuit  

Credit:  by Timothy W. Scee II, Special to Newzjunky.comm www.newzjunky.com 18 January 2011 ~~

CAPE VINCENT, N.Y.  – The Wind Power Ethics Group began gathering public comments Sunday regarding its Article 78 lawsuit filed against both the town Planning Board and Acciona Wind Energy USA in an effort to gain momentum against its defendants.

Jefferson’s Leaning Left and Pandora’s Box of Rocks, two local blogs apparently against wind development in the town, featured a message from WPEG entitled, “The Pen is Mightier than the Sword.”

Directly naming Acciona Project Manager Tim Q. Conboy, Planning Board Chairman Richard J. Edsall, former supervisor Thomas K. Reinbeck and Planning Board attorney Todd M. Mathes, the message reads, “If anyone has knowledge about any unreasonable, unfair or devious actions of the Cape Vincent Planning Board, the wind developer Acciona or their attorneys, please let us know.

John L. Byrne, the organization’s president, said WPEG has had an “overwhelming response” from town residents. Included with the group’s message are affidavits from various town officials, along with their testimonies regarding the lawsuit.

“We’ve received, I would say 20 to 30 e-mails so far that have come in with solid holes in their response,” he said. “The citizens are actually participating in the lawsuit now, which is a really interesting thing.”

But not all Cape Vincent town residents say they are in favor of the plaintiff, WPEG, or its claim, “The residents are suing the town in Cape Vincent,” as read in the subject line of an e-mail sent to Newzjunky.com from Byrne.

“They would like to believe that, but that’s not true,” Darrell E. Burton, Jr., a member of Voters for Wind said. “You know, there’s been an awful lot of lies and that’s not how you win a case. You win a case by proving what’s been going on.”

Burton, referring to WPEG’s allegations that the Planning Board breached the State Environmental Quality Review Act, which played into the Article 78 lawsuit filed Oct. 27, 2010, believes the anti-wind group’s concern with sound is over-exaggerated.

“These noise, sound tests that they’ve done, they’re so far off,” Burton said. “They don’t really give you the true picture, they choose when they do them. If they do it out in the farmer’s field and the farmer happens to drive his tractor, which makes an extreme amount a noise, they eliminate that.”

He continued, “I live right on the Lake Ontario shore and you should have been here last night to hear the noise from the waves and the ice bouncing on the shore. It doesn’t bother me at all.”

Last week Supervisor Urban C. Hirschey was criticized by town citizens for allegedly sharing confidential documents regarding the sound study with WPEG, labeled as “Soundgate” by wind development critics.

Byrne, however, believes the ambient sound study, conducted by Hessler Associates Inc., Haymarket, Va., is a critical piece of information to town residents and should be publicly available.

“The information very, clearly shows that the sound study by the developer, which was accepted by our planning board, was flawed.”

Document: WPEG Asks Citizen to Review Soundgate

Source:  by Timothy W. Scee II, Special to Newzjunky.comm www.newzjunky.com 18 January 2011

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 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 Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


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