Senate leader picks Randy Atwater, president of Barker Central School, for board reviewing Lighthouse Wind

YATES – One of the two local residents who will serve on siting board for the wind turbine project in Yates and Somerset has been named.

Randy Atwater, president of the Barker Board of Education, was appointed by John Flanagan, majority leader of the State Senate.

However, the other local resident was to be named by Carl Heastie, speaker of the State Assembly. But Heastie didn’t act on the matter, an “abdication of his duties,” said State Sen. Robert Ortt.

It will now fall on Gov. Andrew Cuomo to pick someone for the New York State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment. That board will review the proposed Lighthouse Wind project, which includes up to 71 wind turbines in Yates and Somerset.

“The speaker of the Assembly chose not to do his job,” Ortt said today following a Legislative Luncheon at Tillman’s Village Inn.

Flanagan was charged with picking one of the members, based on four submitted names from Ortt. The local state senator passed along four names of people nominated by Niagara County officials and Somerset Town Supervisor Dan Englert.

Besides Atwater, Cathie Orr, Thomas Staples and Robert Damon were nominated. Orr has been one of the proposed wind project’s loudest critics.

The Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment includes five state officials and two people from the local project area. State Assemblyman Steve Hawley passed along to Heastie four names of people from Yates who were submitted by Orleans County Legislature Chairman David Callard, and John Belson, the Yates town supervisor until Jan. 1.

The four nominated from Yates include Russell Martino, Cynthia Hellert, Glenn Maid and Jeffrey Oakes.

Hawley said he called Heastie’s office several times to press him to name one of the board’s members, but Heastie didn’t act before the deadline.

Hawley and Ortt have been critical of the loss of “home rule” on the project, with the final decision on land use made by the state instead of a local board. As part of a new Article 10 process, the decision for siting large-scale energy projects in New York rests with the Siting Board.

The five state representatives include the chairman of the Department of Public Service, commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation, commissioner of the Department of Health, chairman of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, and the commissioner of Economic Development.

“I’m against this process,” Ortt said today.

The Siting Board wouldn’t be officially convened until Apex Clean Energy submits a final application for the project in Yates and Somerset. Company officials say they are working to submit that application this summer.

Judges say Lighthouse Wind PSS not deficient

Photos by Tom Rivers – Three administrative law judges met at the Barker Fire Hall today to decide some issues with the proposed Lighthouse Wind project. The judges include, from left: David R. Van Ort and Sean Mullany of the Department of Public Service, and Richard A. Sherman from the Department of Environmental Conservation.

BARKER Three judges decided today that Apex Clean Energy wasn’t deficient in its preliminary scoping statement filed Nov. 23 and subject to hundreds of comments.

Somerset, Yates and Save Ontario Shores leaders have been among the critics of the PSS from Apex, saying the company didn’t provide specifics on the size of wind turbines, the exact locations and the turbine manufacturer.

The judges said the PSS wasn’t intended to have “precise” information, but instead to begin the public engagement process. The sizes, locations and other issues can be addressed if the application moves forward, the judges said.

Dan Spitzer, an attorney for the Town of Yates, said the town and residents are hampered in offering a meaningful critique and assessment of the PSS with so many unanswered questions.

Apex wants to build up to 71 wind turbines in Somerset and Yates that could be up to 620 feet high.

Yates and Somerset are among the parties that asked the PSS start over with Apex being forced to provide more details. But the judges denied that request today during a meeting in the Barker Fire Hall. The judges include David R. Van Ort and Sean Mullany of the Department of Public Service, and Richard A. Sherman from the Department of Environmental Conservation.

James Muscato, attorney for Apex Clean Energy, said the company is working to provide “robust” answers to questions about the project.

The trio of judges also made a decision on how to divvy up $70,350 in intervenor funds. That is money provided by Apex for municipalities and citizens groups to review the PSS. State law requires the company to provide $350 in funds for every proposed megawatt. Apex is proposing a 201-megawatt project.

The judges asked attorneys for Somerset, Yates and Save Ontario Shores to explain their estimates for expenses. The three entities identified about $140,000 in expenses, however there was only $70,350 from Apex for the review.

The judges met behind closed doors for about 20 minutes to determine how to split up the funds.

“There is just not enough money to go around, so obviously we’re going to have to make adjustments,” said David Van Ort, one of the judges.

Somerset will get the most: $40,350, followed by $20,500 for Yates, and $9,500 for Save Ontario Shores.

Van Ort told the three groups to work together to get the “biggest bang for the buck.” He also said attorneys could reduce some of their costs for postage and printing by using electronic mail.

Somerset officials identified up to $95,550 for reviewing the initial Preliminary Scoping Statement. That includes the expense of attorneys, engineers, an ornithologist to study the impact on wildlife, an expert on raptor migration to study the impact on wildlife, a real estate valuation advisor to study the potential impact on real estate values, and an audiologist to study the potential adverse health effects caused by the proposed project.

Attorneys and representatives for Yates, Somerset and Save Ontario Shores meet in the Barker Fire Hall after today’s meeting. Dan Spitzer, an attorney for Yates, is in center facing camera.

Yates identified $26,381.25 in costs for legal and engineering services, and Save Ontario Shores sought $19,430 to focus on acoustics, electrical issues, viable alternatives, water resources, biodiversity, and wildlife impacts. SOS has hired environmental attorney Gary Abraham.

Even though the judges approved the intervenor funding today, Van Ort said the two towns and SOS will need to submit bills with an explanation of the services provided. Each disbursement will be subject to review and approval by the judges.

Apex has until Feb. 11 to respond to “several hundred” comments on the PSS. After those responses, Apex officials said they look forward to more formal conversations about the project with the community and state agencies, said Taylor Quarles, development manager for Lighthouse Wind.

Jim Muscato, an attorney for Apex, told the judges and about 100 people at today’s meeting that the company is working to address the comments on the PSS.

“We want to provide full and robust and meaningful responses,” he said.

Photo by Tom Rivers – Jim Simon, third from right, leads the Yates Town Board meeting last Thursday when the board made numerous appointments and set salaries for town employees.

YATES – The new town supervisor has declined pay for leading the town government in 2016.

Jim Simon was elected in November in a write-in campaign over incumbent John Belson. Simon was backed by the Save Ontario Shores citizens’ group that opposes the large-scale wind energy project in Yates and Somerset.

Belson was paid $8,000 in the role as town supervisor in 2015. Simon, who works as dean of the GCC campus centers in Albion and Medina, chose to work for free for the town. The budget kept the salary at $8,000 for 2016. Simon also declined the $1,500 for budget management.

Simon said the $9,500 combined for the town supervisor will go into the general fund balance.

That salary was part of a series of appointments approved during the Town Board’s organizational meeting last Thursday.

The meeting included two new Town Board members with Simon as town supervisor and John Riggi as councilman. Michelle Harling also is the new town clerk, replacing Brenda Donald, who retired on Dec. 31.

Some of the appointments include:

Webster, Schubel & Meier of Medina for legal services at $7,500 for the year; Dan Wolfe as fire and building code officer, and also as zoning enforcement officer; Patricia Laszewski as assessor; Lynne Johnson as town bookkeeper and water bookkeeper;

Dawn Metty as Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Board clerk; Gary Daum as ZBA chairman; Keith McKinney as ZBA member; Richard Kurz, Ed Urbanik and Ralph Smith as Planning Board members; Don Lamay as Planning Board chairman;

Roger Wolfe as water district superintendent and cemetery superintendent; Wes Bradley as youth agency representative; Michelle Harling as registrar of vital statistics; Dawn Metty as deputy registrar; John Donald as dog control officer;

John Riggi as deputy town supervisor; Dawn Metty as town historian ad deputy town clerk; David Hydock as deputy highway superintendent; Susanne Sanderson as court clerk; Eric Harling as court baliff;

M & T Bank and the Bank of Castile as official depositories for the town;

The Daily News of Batavia as official newspaper to publish the town’s legal notices.

The Town Board also set the following as salaries and wages for 2016:

Highway superintendent at $62,922; Town clerk, $39,900; Supervisor bookkepper at $14,500; Water superintendent at $13,325; Town justice at $8,500 for the year; Cemetery superintendent, $5,200; Town Board members, four at $3,259.75 each; Water bookkeeper at $3,100; Deputy highway superintendent at $2,500; Historian, $600; and Town supervisor at $0.

The hourly rates include: Highway motor equipment operator, $23.40; Code enforcement and zoning officer, $21.53; Court clerk, $14.69; and deputy clerk, $11.52.

BARKER – Three administrative law judges will meet with Apex Clean Energy and stakeholders in the Lighthouse Wind project on Thursday to discuss many issues with the proposed project.

The pre-application conference begins at 3 p.m. and is expected to take about two hours. The conference will be at the Barker Volunteer Fire Department Hall, 1660 Quaker Rd.

Administrative Law Judges David R. Van Ort and Sean Mullany, of the Department of Public Service, and Richard A. Sherman, of the Department of Environmental Conservation, will lead the session, identifying issues that need additional study by Apex.

The company is applying to the Public Service Commission to build up to 71 wind turbines that could peak at 620 feet high. The proposed project site is along approximately 12 miles of Lake Ontario shoreline and extends approximately 3 to 4 miles south of Lake Ontario.

The turbine locations are not final. The spots for the towers will be influenced by a number of factors, including environmental studies, wildlife studies, electrical studies, land leasing, cultural assessments, and public input, according to a notice from the PSC.

Apex on Nov. 23 filed a Preliminary Scoping Statement to determine the nature and scope of the studies Apex needs to undertake to develop the information that must be included Apex’s formal application for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need.

The pre-application conference is expected to give Apex direction on what issues it needs to address for the next phase of the application. Taylor Quarles, development manager for Lighthouse Wind, said the company expects to submit the next application this summer, and then the community and stakeholders will have a year to submit comments.

Another issue to go before the judges on Thursday will be how to divvy up $70,350 in intervenor funds. Apex by law needed to provide $350 for every proposed megawatt for local municipalities and citizens’ groups to hire experts to help review the project.

“Lighthouse Wind” is a 201-megawatt proposal. The intervenor funds are supposed to go 50 percent to municipalities and 50 percent to citizens’ groups. The project covers two towns in two different counties.

Yates officials have requested a 75-25 split with the two towns getting most of the funds to pay for attorneys and engineers to review the Preliminary Scoping Statement.

If the judges approve the Yates request, that would mean there is $52,762.50 for the two towns. Yates has asked that money then be split in half with Somerset and Yates each receiving $26,381.25. That would leave 25 percent of the intervenor funds, or $17,587.50, for other local parties or citizen’s groups to participate in hiring experts for the review.

Somerset offciials, in a letter to the PSC, identified up to $95,550 just for Somerset in reveiwing the initial Preliminary Scoping Statement. That includes the expense of attorneys, engineers, an ornithologist to study the impact on wildlife, an expert on raptor migration to study the impact on wildlife, a real estate valuation advisor to study the potential impact on real estate values, and an audiologist to study the potential adverse health effects caused by the proposed project.

Yates, in its request for funds, identified $26,381.25 in costs for legal and engineering services.

Photos by Tom Rivers – Yates Town Supervisor Jim Simon has been a vocal critic of the Lighthouse Wind project for Yates and Somerset. Simon voted for a resolution officially opposing the project at today’s Yates Town Board meeting.

YATES – The Yates Town Board with new leadership in Town Supervisor James Simon cast a unanimous vote tonight in opposition to Lighthouse Wind, a proposal by Apex Clean Energy for up to 71 wind turbines in Yates and Somerset.

The Town Board’s decision follows similar actions by the Somerset Town Board, Niagara County Legislature and Orleans County Legislature. State Sen. Rob Ortt and Congressman Chris Collins have also been public with their concerns about the project, notably their view the turbines that could peak at up to 620 feet high would jeopardize air missions from the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station.

The Orleans County Legislature opposed the project last month, citing the shift from local control or “home rule” in deciding the fate of Lighthouse Wind. That decision rests with a siting board where five out of seven members are state officials.

The Yates Town Board was critical of the new Article 10 process, taking away home rule. The Town Board had other reasons for its opposition. Here are some of the stated reasons in the official board resolution:

The large-scale turbines do not comply with the town’s comprehensive plan;

The project will create significant negative visual impacts from aesthetic points in the community and region, including but not limited to the Lake Ontario Shoreline, 30 Mile Lighthouse, and state and local parks;

The location of residences and land designated for residential development is inconsistent with the development of utility-scale wind turbines in town;

Many of the residents at the meeting, including Agnes LaPorte of Somerset, front left, applauded in support of the board’s resolution.

There are significant resources in adjoining towns that would be harmed by the construction of utility-scale wind turbines in Yates;

Available information indicates that noise impacts in the current rural area – based on World Health Organization standards – would negatively impact the health and quality of life of residents;

The local economy has shown great recent strength in agricultural-based manufacturing that would be impaired by the loss of productive farmland;

The placement of the STAMP (Science and Technology Advanced Manufacturing Park) in nearby Alabama (Genesee County) demonstrates the attractiveness of the area to employers who create far greater job growth and require less public support;

There are areas of significant residential and recreational activity that would be impaired by the turbines’ noise, visual impact and other hazards, including shadow flicker, ice shedding and blade throw;

Large-scale, multiple-tower wind energy facilities may present risks to the property values of adjoining property owners not part of the project;

Significant avian flyways and habitats may be negatively impacted;

Bat populations, as documented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, may be unable to sustain losses typical of such projects;

Taylor Quarles, development manager for Lighthouse Wind, said Apex Clean Energy will keep working on the project, working to address concerns from the community.

There are significant wetland and other surface resources that would be negatively impacted by the large scale modification required for the project.

After the resolution, most of the 50-plus people at the meeting broke into sustained applause.

“I feel now we’re pulling all in the same direction,” resident Roger Barth told the board.

The board vote was unanimous. One board member, Brad Bentley, didn’t attend the meeting.

John Riggi was elected to the board in November and campaigned strongly against the turbine project.

“This resolution was a long time coming,” Riggi said.

He said a survey by the town was helpful in building board support against the project. The Town Board on Dec. 28 announced the results of a town-wide survey about the turbine project. There were 1,187 respondents and 770 or 65.59 percent said they oppose it, 353 or 30.07 percent said they support it, and 51 or 4.34 percent with no opinion.

“The survey opened a lot of eyes,” Riggi said at the Town Board meeting.

Wes Bradley said the survey results showing strong community opposition to the project convinced him to vote for the resolution against Lighthouse Wind.

Taylor Quarles, the development manager for Lighthouse Wind, told the group that Apex remains committed to the project and will be working the next month to address concerns raised in the preliminary scoping statement for the project.

The town will work to submit a final application this summer that Quarles said would be open for comment for a year.

“We’re already hard at work working on our responses,” Quarles said.

Provided photo – Dennis Vacco, an attorney helping the Town of Somerset fight a proposed wind turbine project, speaks on Wednesday outside the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station. Somerset Town Supervisor Dan Engert is to the right of Vacco.

NIAGARA FALLS – Three retired pilots and former high-ranking officials have written a joint letter to Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other state officials, expressing concern about a proposed wind turbine project in the towns of Somerset and Yates, and the impact of tall turbines on the the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station.

“The future of the NFARS, its current and potential military usefulness, could very well rest on the decision made by your administration on this proposed project,” according to the letter from W. Robin Pfiel, Col. USAF (ret.), John J. Higgins, Col. USAF (ret.) and Thomas Keough, Col. USA (ret.). The trio served in high-ranking capacities as a former commander and vice commander of the 107th Airlift Wing, and the former vice commander of the 914th Airlift Wing.

U.S. Rep. Chris Collins and State Sen. Robert Ortt also have voiced concern that the turbines, which could peak at about 600 feet high, could cause problems for flights and radar from the base in Niagara Falls.

“If the base were to lose its competitive advantage in the area of encroachment, its position with the next BRAC would be seriously compromised,” the trio of commanders/vice commanders wrote in their letter. “A decision to permit the APEX project will create estimated 5-10 full time jobs. If the next BRAC were to recommend and succeed in closing the NFARS the cost will be nearly 3200 jobs!”

The letter was shared with media on Wdnesday when Save Ontario Shores members gathered at the Air Reserve Station with Daniel Engert, Town of Somerset Supervisor, and Dennis Vacco of Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman LLP, special counsel to the Town of Somerset. Somerset officials are fighting the project, which could include up to 71 turbines.

Apex Clean Energy is the developer for the project. Taylor Quarles, development manager for Apex’s Lighthouse Wind, said the company is confident it can address any concerns with turbines and their impact on the Air Reserve Station.

Apex will detail the size, location and turbine manufacturer of all turbine sites in the next step of its application, expected to be submitted in the summer, Quarles said today. The company has submitted a preliminary scoping statement, which Somerset, Yates and SOS officials say is vague on details.

Quarles said Apex will address any concerns with the Air Reserve Station, Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Defense. Apex will do studies that will be reviewed by the FAA, DOD and other interested parties in the project.

“The studies will have information so reasonable decisions can be made by the regulators,” Quarles said.

In the letter, the former Air Force Pilots identified three areas of concern with the turbines on the Air Reserve Station:

1. “The current C-130 operations maintain a number of low level training routes (generally 500 feet above ground level (AGL), but as low as 300 feet AGL, on some routes. These routes depart NFARS on a common departure path, in a northeasterly direction. In the area of the lake shore, east of Wilson NY, the individual routes commence with a turn in various directions, as per the routes design. Additionally, there is an established high speed route, established primarily for fighter aircraft, that is in the same general area; and it is also cleared down to 300 feet AGL.”

2. “As the Air National Guard in its MQ-9 remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) mission, it is intended to station MQ-9 aircraft at NFARS. Their mission would have the RPA depart NFARS, proceed to Lake Ontario, and fly up to the Fort Drum ranges, utilizing the existing MOA and restricted area over Lake Ontario. After the mission it would return to back to NFARS and would transit the area of concern in its recovery to NFARS.”

3. “The intended development area is in the flyway of migratory birds. We are concerned that a westerly shift in the flyway, as a result of the wind turbines, could heavily impact flight safety at NFARS.”

Photo by Tom Rivers – Monday’s year-end meeting for the Yates Town Board was the last meeting for Town Clerk Brenda Donald, who is retiring, and John Belson, the town supervisor. Belson lost a close election in November to Jim Simon. Donald and Belson were both thanked for their service on Monday by the Yates Town Board.

(Editor’s Note: This article was updated from an earlier version that stated Somerset hired GHD Services LLC for engineering work. The town has instead hired Wendel for work reviewing the Lighthouse Wind project.)

YATES – The Yates Town Board has retained a Buffalo law firm and also an engineering company to review the preliminary scoping statement from Apex Clean Energy’s wind turbine project and also help the town prepare comments for the New York State Public Service Commission.

The town plans to use intervenor funds from Apex to pay for the legal and engineering services.

The Public Service Commission required Apex to set aside $70,350 for municipalities and citizens’ groups to hire consultants to help review the PSS. That money represents $350 for every proposed megawatt in the project.

Apex wants to build a 201-megawatt wind turbine project in the towns of Somerset and Yates.

If Apex proceeds with the project to a final application stage, it needs to provide another $1,000 per megawatt or $201,000 for the community to review the document and comment on the studies from Apex.

Yates on Monday voted to hire Hodgson Russ in Buffalo and GHD Services LLC, an engineering firm with a Buffalo office. GHD has experience reviewing large-scale wind energy projects.

Yates wants to use intervenor funds to cover the expense for the work by Hodgson Russ and GHD.

The Public Service Commission set up the intervenor funds to be split 50 percent by a local government where the project is planned, and the other half for citizens’ groups.

Dan Spitzer, an attorney with Hodgson Russ, is asking the PSC on behalf of Yates to set aside 75 percent of the $70,350 for the local governments. The Apex project, Lighthouse Wind, covers two towns in two different counties.

Spitzer said during Monday’s Town Board meeting that the two towns are clearly taking the lead in reviewing the 125-page preliminary scoping statement from Apex.

Spitzer requested that the 75 percent or $52,762.50 be split in half for the two towns with Somerset and Yates each receiving $26,381.25. That would leave 25 percent of the intervenor funds, or $17,587.50, for other local parties or citizen’s groups to participate in hiring experts for the review.

Spitzer said Yates and Somerset will try to coordinate the review as much as possible to stretch out the dollars for the two towns.

Spitzer, in a Dec. 28 letter to the PSC, said Yates didn’t budget for the expense of hiring experts and also is under the 2 percent property tax cap. (Click here to see submissions to the PSC.)

“We really don’t want to see taxpayers pay for a private application,” Spitzer said during Monday’s board meeting.

The PSC has set a Jan. 12 deadline for comments on the Apex preliminary scoping statement. The Town Board moved to hire Hodgson Russ and GHD in order to meet the PSC deadline.

Hodgson Russ attorneys Daniel A. Spitzer will be paid $270 per hour and Charles W. Malcomb, $265 per hour, for their work on the PSS. GHD engineers will be paid the following per hour: Camie Jarrell, $141; Dave Britton, $177; and Robert Adams, $187.

Two incoming members of the Yates Town Board, John Riggi and Town Supervisor-elect Jim Simon, will take office Jan. 1. They said after Monday’s meeting the outgoing Town Board should have refrained from hiring Hodgson Russ and GHD until the new board was in office.

Simon said there still would have been time to meet the Jan. 12 deadline for comments by waiting to hire consultants next week.

‘They never came to us and asked our feelings’

Photo by Tom Rivers – State Sen. Robert Ortt attends a meeting at the Barker Fire Hall on Dec. 7 attended by about 200 people. Ortt told that group he would work to defeat a proposed wind turbine project in the towns of Yates and Somerset.

YATES – A Yates town official says he is “really disappointed” with recent public declarations from elected officials against the Lighthouse Wind project.

Wes Bradley, a Yates town councilman, said county legislators, a state senator and congressman did not reach out to Yates officials about the project before making their public comments, denouncing the project. Apex Clean Energy wants to build up to 71 large-scale wind turbines in the two towns.

Bradley said this morning during a Yates year-end meeting that he is most disappointed with the Orleans County Legislature, which voted on Dec. 16 to oppose the project.

Legislators on Aug. 27 said they would hold off on a public stance on the project until after a town-wide wind survey. The wind survey results were presented this morning, with 66 percent of the respondents saying they oppose the project.

“They couldn’t wait 12 days,” Bradley said about legislators and their vote. “They never came to us and asked our feelings.”

County legislators said on Dec. 16 they wanted to get on the record with the Public Service Commission. The deadline for comments was Jan. 6, but was extended on Dec. 16 until Jan. 12.

Legislators said they have heard “the voice of the people” and want to state the county’s opposition to the project to the PSC. Legislators opposed the project that they said would “place commercial wind turbines within this quaint, beautiful Town of Yates,” according to the county resolution.

The Legislature also opposed the state’s Article 10 law, which gives the state the power to site the turbines, not the local government leaders.

Bradley said the Legislature’s talk about “home rule” through Article 10 is “lip service.”

Brad Bentley, a Yates town councilman, also said he was disappointed to see the Legislature come out against the project while it’s in the preliminary scoping stage. All of the studies haven’t been done and Apex Clean Energy hasn’t disclosed the locations and size of the turbines.

“I take issue with the county,” Bentley said. “It seems they want home rule but that’s quite a lot of hypocrisy.”

State Sen. Robert Ortt and Congressman Chris Collins also came out publicly against the proposed Lighthouse Wind project, where the turbines could peak at about 600 feet high.

Ortt was the first to say he opposes the project and will work to defeat it.

“My focus will be to kill the project,” Ortt told about 200 people at a meeting on Dec. 7.

That meeting was organized by Save Ontario Shores, a citizen group opposed to the project by Apex Clean Energy.

“Sen. Ortt has never spoken to us,” Bradley said. “He never asked us our opinion.”

The next day after Ortt’s comments, U.S. Rep. Chris Collins sent a letter to the Department of Defense and Federal Aviation Administration officials expressing concern over the wind turbine project along the Lake Ontario shoreline.

Collins said the project could jeopardize 3,000 jobs at the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station military operating area.

“Protecting the military missions and jobs supported by the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station (NFARS) is my main priority,” Collins said in a news release on Dec. 9. “The proposed wind turbine project along the Lake Ontario shoreline has the potential to jeopardize the base’s operations and viability. Any project that puts the base’s future at risk is unacceptable. NFARS has survived a number of closure attempts, and I will continue to do everything in my power to guarantee its doors remain open.”

Bradley said Yates officials were never contacted by Collins and his staff about the issue.

“He never spoke to us and got our input,” Bradley said. “They all made these statements without ever talking to us.”

Taylor Quarles, the development manager for Lighthouse Wind, issued a statement today after the wind survey results were announced. Quarles said the full application hasn’t been submitted. He thanked the Yates Town Board for refraining from judging the project in its early stages.

“The Yates Town Board has taken a very responsible approach in waiting to take a position until all of the relevant information has been collected and submitted as part of the application process, and we encourage others to follow its lead,” Quarles said.

Photo by Tom Rivers – Wes Bradley, a Yates town councilman, discusses a town-wide survey on a proposed wind project. There were 1,187 respondents and two thirds said they opposed Lighthouse Wind. Brad Bentley is next to Bradley during this morning’s Town Board meeting.

YATES – The survey results are in and about two thirds of the 1,187 respondents said they oppose the proposed Lighthouse Wind project by Apex Clean Energy.

That company has submitted a preliminary scoping document to the state Public Service Commission. The company says it wants to build up to 71 large-scale wind turbines in Yates and Somerset.

Yates residents, in a survey mailed just before Thanksgiving, were asked 10 questions, including, “Based on your knowledge of Lighthouse Wind, are you in favor of or opposed to this project at this time?”

There were 770 respondents or 65.59 percent who said they oppose it, 353 or 30.07 percent who support it, and 51 or 4.34 with no opinion.

The survey was mailed to 2,608 registered and non-registered voters. The 1,187 returns represents a 46.57 percent participation rate, which town officials this morning said they were pleased with.

The results will be submitted to the state Public Service Commission. Wes Bradley, a Yates town councilman, worked on the survey with a representative from both Apex Clean Energy and Save Ontario Shores, a citizens group opposed to Lighthouse Wind.

The results are similar to a town-wide survey in Somerset in June. Somerset town officials mailed about 1,100 surveys and 644, or nearly 60 percent were returned.

The Somerset survey showed 61 percent “strongly oppose” the project while 17 percent “strongly support” it. Another 6 percent said they “moderately oppose” it while 12 percent “moderately support” the project.

Save Ontario Shores also did a survey in October, sending out 1,235 to Yates property owners with 421 surveys returned. Of the respondents, 77.9 percent of Yates property owners say they oppose the project.

The percentage of opposition fell by nearly 12 percent in the Yates town survey. Taylor Quarles, the project manager for Apex, said there is growing support for the project in the community.

The company will work to address residents’ and community concerns about the project, and will offer more specifics about size and location of the turbines in the next document on environmental impacts, Quarles said. The preliminary scoping document is intended to identify concerns that need further study, he said.

The Public Service Commission set a Jan. 12 deadline for comments on the preliminary scoping document. Dan Spitzer, an attorney for the town, said the review is a “process” with input from the town and community. There will also be opportunities to comment on the Apex application if the company proceeds after the preliminary stage.

Quarles said Apex would like to submit the next stage of the application in the summer, and then work with the community and state officials to address any concerns with the turbines.

Jim Simon, the town supervisor-elect, said the town survey is additional validation of strong opposition from residents to the project. He said Apex should not proceed with the effort given the limited support.

Here are the 10 questions residents were asked to answer on the survey and their responses:

1) Many topics are currently being studied regarding Lighthouse Wind. These proposed wind turbines would change the appearance of the landscape within the town. Do you have a concern about this?

Yes – 793 (66.92%), No – 365 (30.80%), No Opinion – 27 (2.28%)

2) As currently proposed, the electricity from this project would be delivered into the New York State electrical grid. Should the Town of Yates attempt to negotiate a separate agreement with electric suppliers for more favorable rates?
Yes – 840 (74.53%), No – 133 (11.80%), No Opinion – 154 (13.66%)

3) If Apex eventually seeks a PILOT (Payment-in-lieu-of-taxes) from COIDA (County of Orleans Industrial Development Agency), should this be granted?

Yes- 307 (26.84%), No – 654 (57.17%), No Opinion – 183 (16.00%)

4) In 2015, the Town of Yates tax levy was $852,205. What percentage of decrease in the Town of Yates tax levy would you like to see come from this project? Circle one answer.

0% – 94 (8.39%), 25% – 164 (14.63%), 50% – 239 (21.32%), 75% – 90 (8.03%), 100% – 369 (32.92%), No Opinion – 165 (14.72%)

5) What effect do you feel wind turbines would have on property values in the Town of Yates?

Increase – 81 (7.00%), Decrease – 807 (69.75%), No Change – 269 (23.25%)

6) Taking into consideration requirements of the Article 10 review process, do you feel the study of health issues is important?

Yes – 909 (77.69%), No – 208 (17.78%), No Opinion – 53 (4.53%)

7) Taking into consideration requirements of the Article 10 review process, do you feel the study of wildlife issues is important?

Yes – 891 (76.02%), No – 247 (21.08%), No Opinion – 34 (2.90%)

8) Taking into consideration requirements of the Article 10 review process, do you feel the study of possible effects on the operations at the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station is important?

Yes – 822 (70.26%), No – 260 (22.22 %), No Opinion – 88 (7.52%)

9) Do you feel New York State’s “Reforming Energy Vision” is an effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Yes – 350 (30.54%), No – 516 (45.03%), No Opinion – 280 (24.43%)

10) Based on your knowledge of Lighthouse Wind, are you in favor or opposed to this project at this time?

Favor – 353 (30.07%), Oppose – 770 (65.59%), No Opinion – 51 (4.34%)

YATES – The Yates Town Board will present the results of a town-wide wind survey this morning that was sent in by more than 1,000 residents.

The town mailed 2,608 surveys last month. The survey asks 10 questions, including whether residents favor a proposed Lighthouse Wind Project. Apex Clean Energy is proposing to build as many as 71 wind turbines in Yates and Somerset that would peak at about 600 feet tall. Those turbines would be about 200 feet higher than the ones in Wyoming County.

Town Councilman Wes Bradley served on the survey committee along with Save Ontario Shores member Richard Pucher and Taylor Quarles, the project manager for Apex Clean Energy.

The survey results will be presented at 10 a.m. as part of the Town Board’s year-end meeting at the Town Hall, 8 South Main St.

LYNDONVILLE – The public can weigh in on a proposed cleanup plan for Monroe Electronics, which is part of the state’s Superfund Program.The DEC will discuss the cleanup plan during a 6:30 p.m. meeting on Jan. 7 at Village Hall, 2 South Main St. The state will also accept comments about the project until Jan. 22.

Monroe Electronics is located at 100 Housel Ave. The company has operated from the site since 1972, manufacturing electrostatic measuring instruments and other electronic devices. Before Monroe Electronics operated here, the property was the site of the former DuPont/Barre Lime and Sulfur Company where various pesticide sprays and dust mixtures were manufactured, according to the DEC.

In September 1986, Monroe Electronics submitted a Hazardous Waste Disposal Questionnaire as a requirement of the Community Right-to-Know survey. Monroe Electronics indicated that it dumped 1 to 4 tons of TCA at the Housel Avenue facility outside a former door on the west end of the building in the early 1970s. The owner indicated that TCA and waste oil was spread along the driveway on the east side of the building.

A remedial investigation was completed in multiple phases between 2011 and 2014 and included installation of over 30 soil borings and monitoring wells. Several monitoring wells were constructed in “clusters” to monitor groundwater quality in the overburden (shallow and deep) and the upper bedrock zones.

The drilling program also included installation of five soil borings inside the active manufacturing building. Field investigations included testing of soil, groundwater, surface water, sediment, soil vapor, and indoor air both on-site and off-site to define the nature and extent of contamination.

The contaminants of concern at the Monroe Electronics site include industrial solvents in groundwater and arsenic in soil. The two specific industrial solvents known to be causing environmental impacts at the site are 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) and trichloroethene (TCE). TCA and TCE are chlorinated volatile organic compound (VOCs) that were used for cleaning and degreasing components in the manufacturing process. These two chemicals, as well as their by-products of degradation, have been detected in groundwater at concentrations above Class GA  Groundwater Standards and Guidance Values.

Based on the results of groundwater sampling conducted to date, it is clear that the overburden and bedrock aquifers beneath the site are contaminated by chlorinated VOCs originating from one of two subsurface sources: 1) a source of TCE near the gravel parking area at the east end of the building, and 2) a source of TCA located at the west end of the building.

These dissolved contaminant plumes are thought to be co-mingled at some point beyond the northern property boundary and undergoing limited reductive dechlorination. As a result, the extent of VOC contamination in groundwater off-site appears to be limited to the area near the site and does not extend far beyond West Avenue to the north, the DEC said.

The DEC, in consultation with the state Department of Health, developed the proposed remedy after reviewing the detailed investigation of the site and evaluating the remedial options in the “feasibility study” submitted under the state’s Superfund Program.

The site is listed as a Class “2” site in the State Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. A Class 2 site represents a significant threat to public health or the environment and action is required, the DEC said.

The remedy proposed for the site includes:

Enhanced In-Situ Bioremediation, involving multiple injections of bioamendments and degrading bacteria into the bedrock aquifer, to treat chlorinated volatile contaminants in groundwater beneath the manufacturing building and immediately downgradient;

In-Situ Chemical Reduction, involving injections of liquid-phase reducing agents (e.g., zero-valent iron) to supplement the bioremediation groundwater remedy and boost the rate of abiotic destruction of organic contaminants in groundwater;

A vegetated soil cover in areas where surface soil exceeds the applicable soil cleanup objectives for arsenic. The soil cover will be a minimum of one foot of soil placed over a demarcation layer (e.g. a layer of orange snow-fencing), with the upper six inches of soil of sufficient quality to maintain a vegetative layer;

Indoor air monitoring program to address potential exposures related to soil vapor intrusion during and following the active remediation phase;

An environmental easement that will restrict use of the site to commercial or industrial purposes in conformance with local zoning laws, prohibit use of any structure on the site for residential purposes, restrict use of groundwater for potable or process water, and require compliance with the approved Site Management Plan;

Development of a Site Management Plan, approved by the DEC, to ensure that the institutional and engineering controls are properly implemented and monitoring requirements adhered to.

For more information, click here.

LYNDONVILLE – The Lyndonville Lions Club has announced the winners of the annual Christmas decorating contest.

Kevin Johnson and Yates Town Supervisor John Belson served as judges of the contest.

Lynne Johnson, the Lions Club president, said it was difficult for the judges to narrow the list to five winners because “so many houses were beautifully decorated for the season.”

This year’s winners include:

Eric Morton/Rose Carter of 65 Eagle St.
Jim Scharlau of 10262 Millers Rd.
Alex Seaman of 1559 North Lyndonville Rd.
Serena Starr of 201 Maple Ave.
Barb and Julio Tice (and extended family), 8 Eagle St.