| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Arkwright officials voice their stance on wind towers
Credit: Andrew Kuczkowski, Observer Staff Writer | Observer Today | Oct 15, 2017 | www.observertoday.com ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
ARKWRIGHT – When it comes to the wind turbines coming to Arkwright, there are people who are in favor, as well as people opposed.
There is a group that is now protesting the construction, saying the project is being kept in the dark. Members of the Arkwright Town Board disagree.
However, the Arkwright Town Board did not see its side stated in the Sunday OBSERVER’s story “Concerned Citizens of Cassadaga Wind Project fights against turbines.”
“The unfortunate part was either they (the protestors) lived under a rock, or they don’t talk to their neighbors at all, or they simply lied because this project has been brought to the public for the last 13 years,” Town Councilman Roger Cardot said.
“Nothing has been hidden.”
In an article entitled “Protesting wind farms” that ran Oct 6, protestor Joni Riggle alleged that the board has personal interests in mind.
She said, “Arkwright has town board members that are land leasers, so we see a real conflict of interest. They’ve signed contracts with the wind company.”
Another protester at the rally added, “… it’s unethical. They’re receiving anywhere from $250,000 to $500,000 and they’re on the zoning boards and planning boards of Arkwright.”
That statement upset members of the Arkwright Town Board, saying that isn’t true for the majority of the board.
“There is only one board member (Councilman Chris Cannon) that receives a penny of any sort on this board,” said Cardot. “That person cannot vote at all even to pay the attorneys in this project. They are not privy to any of the meetings of the project. And he was not on the board when the law passed.”
As far as the protests themselves, Town Supervisor Fred Norton stated that the town has no control anymore.
“Unfortunately, they don’t really understand that the lead agency for that project is in Cherry Creek; we have nothing to do with it other than (that) we have one property owner that with a windmill,” Norton said. “Otherwise, we have no say and we have, as they say, an Article 10 proceeding, which means the state of New York and its agencies determine the propriety of the project.”
The project is already underway, and to what Norton has seen, it is clean and orderly.
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 |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=84976 ]
