In the lead article in Thursday's paper, "Parcel owners act against Lyme," and in a letter from Beth White on the same subject there is the implication that those of us who were involved in the drafting of a law governing the siting of industrial wind turbines in Lyme are against alternative energy. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The majority of the residents in Lyme have simply expressed a preference for a zoning law so that the citizens of Lyme, and not the developer, determine what the town will look like in the future.

Enfield is not the only town dealing with the many details related to wind turbines. Recently the Town of Ithaca temporarily shelved a law that would allow residential-scale wind energy facilities. That delay was caused after residents requested that the board reduce the noise threshold for a wind turbine to 5 decibels. The town was originally considering a threshold of a 10-decibel limit. As Harvey told The Journal's Tim Ashmore: "Our planning board can coordinate with other planning boards as well. The Town of Ithaca is our neighbor. The Town of Newfield is our neighbor ... I would think that our planning board and all these other planning boards ought to get together and come up with one law."

Wind energy is not a local issue. Small towns and schools don't have the high-priced lawyers and experts to evaluate a project or fight on their behalf when payment in lieu of taxes agreements are inked. Nor do they have jurisdiction on projects that might be just over the town or district line. Before New York began its push for renewable energy, it should have funded objective research into the proper siting of wind towers. Surely somewhere between 1,000 feet and 1 1/2 miles is a setback that most people and wind energy companies can live with. ...State lawmakers manage to issue a press release on every headline of the day, from sex offender registries to a proposal for a gas-tax holiday. They are strangely silent on the gradual, haphazard implementation of wind utilities across the state. The time of leadership has come and nearly gone.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation made the right decision in naming itself the lead agency on the Galloo Island Wind Project. Upstate NY Power Corp.'s plan to build 77 turbines on the mainly undeveloped island will have a major environmental impact on the immediate area. But the wind towers, transmission line and infrastructure will affect the region as well. ...This sets an important precedent for other wind power projects being considered in the region and state. The DEC is most qualified to conduct such reviews. It has the expertise and financial resources to take an independent look at the local, regional and statewide implications of such ventures.

While we're sure the PDC has spear-headed many worthwhile ideas for Perry over the years, the immediate gratification mentality being displayed by the PDC in their pursuit of the quick buck in the case of wind is astoundingly short-sighted. The wind industry themselves says the life of a project may be 20 years. What then? ...A Bliss man recently told us that promises of reduced taxes for the area are also blown way out of proportion, as he's saving a whopping $54 a year compared to last year. ...What's really at stake here - that you simply can not put a price tag on - is peoples' quality of life! Sorry fellas, but our quality of life is NOT FOR SALE AT ANY PRICE! As environmentalist Jon Boone said, "Perhaps people would be willing to sacrifice their quality of life on the altar of 'green' energy if it actually worked as they claim."

As you now know from my last report, it appears likely that a final decision on Hamlin’s much debated wind turbine regulation law will come later this month. For nearly two years this clash of neighbors, farmers, and town leaders, has swirled about this Lake Ontario community. ...While it’s not addressed much in public, I’ve been told by some that an overly restrictive wind turbine law could open up the board to a lawsuit from farmers and landowners who feel their right to do what they want with their own land is being prohibited. At the same time, a large number of concerned neighbors could consider legal action if they feel this local law doesn’t take into account their concerns about property values and quality of life.

In his March 27 letter to this paper, Paul Mason chastises Cape Vincent anti-wind residents and taxpayers as rumor-mongers and blames them for the divide in the community. He essentially says we are uninformed. That is a generalized argument all its own. But he is correct on one score. There is one thing, I must admit, we do not know for sure and I can't get an answer to at the St. Lawrence Wind Farm office. Perhaps he'd like to help us all out and give us the answer. Of all the members of the Planning Board, and/or any other board for that matter, how many members stand to profit from the wind farm? How much? Their families? How about state Sen. Darrel Aubertine?

I read the letter from by Paul C. Mason, Cape Vincent, "Uninformed Cape wind foes spread rumors." I may not have visited the office of the St. Lawrence Wind Farm, but I have attended their informational meetings and presentation of their Draft Environmental Impact Statement to the Cape Vincent Planning Board (which was incomplete) as well as the meetings held by BP and the presentation of their DEIS, which was also incomplete. ...When townspeople started to question how many, how big and where they were going to be placed, that is when everything got ugly. So now we are a town divided. Whose fault is that? Maybe it was the way it was done when they sneak behind closed doors. Maybe because it is a subject that divides families and friends. You cannot blame anyone who asks questions of these companies, after all the people who signed away the rights to their land for 20 to 30 years have lost their rights to question anything or anyone. So that leaves me. I still have all of my rights, and I intend to use them.

During the past year, several towns in the region have grappled with the issue of wind power, but none perhaps more contentiously than Meredith in Delaware County. Regardless of how you stand on wind power, Meredith has become a great example of townspeople with the legal right to control their fate actually exercising their democratic powers to take charge of their lives. A year ago, Meredith planners were working on an ordinance to regulate industrial wind turbines. After their work was completed, the town board made changes to their proposal, held hearings and passed a law many thought too lenient to wind-power developers. So, in July, when it was time to file to run for town offices in the November election, the planning chairman and others who opposed the town board's action decided to use the ballot box to get the power to rescind the ordinance they opposed.

I continue to be amazed, and alarmed, by decisions being made in regard to industrial wind installations without the foreign-owned developers first being required to provide proof of all of their claims. It has always been my understanding that good common sense business practices dictate that responsible persons first demand proof of claims being made before jumping into business with anyone, and then seek competitive bids in order to assure the absolute best service, goods, and financial agreement possible for the person, community, and/or entire region entering into these business deals. To date, neither has happened in the case of industrial wind energy development in Western New York. Sadly, what we are left with is the looming industrialization of our countrysides, the apparent indifference as to whether wind actually does what it claims or not, and many other unanswered questions.

"While renewable energy technologies can be more expensive than conventional sources in the first instance, the environmental, economic growth and public health benefits from their use justify the public investment," the Paterson report states flat-out. I would argue that this statement should be viewed as a working hypothesis, and doesn't deserve yet to be considered a proven fact. How expensive is too expensive? Which conventional sources? Some are far more polluting than others, for example. That quote from the report shows us the zeal of the alternative energies movement. With that zeal comes a touch of arrogance, because if you read through the Paterson report recommendations, there are thinly veiled justifications for running roughshod over local zoning and the opinions of those who actually have to live with solar panels, wind turbines or whatever. "The greater good" argument is just beneath the surface, and that makes me very nervous.

We find ourselves in the position of being aggressively pursued by wind developers who are, of course strong advocates of these large wind turbines. In my extensive research of the effects of these large wind turbine installations, it seems to me that the principal beneficiaries are the large wind developers and wealthy investors who reap significant tax relief from their ownership of these devices. The State should offer us protection when dealing with these financially and, it appears, politically powerful wind turbine developers. I would hope, that as citizens of New York, we could count on the State to assist us in resisting these large corporations who do not care or appreciate the damage these large wind installations would do to the scenic beauty of the Thousand Islands area and the consequent damage to our largely tourist/vacationer based economy. In general we have not found the State to be helpful in our situation. The literature provided on NYSERDA's website for municipalities appears to have been taken nearly verbatim from the press releases of the AWEA or the individual wind developers.

With all things missing in the DEIS, there is no way to consider impacts. ...Many valid concerns (no threats) were raised regarding sound, health, flicker effect, visual intrusion, waste water pollution, disruption of underground water sources, construction dust, torn up roads, inadequate bird and bat studies in such a sensitive area (Atlantic Flyway), no protection for threatened or endangered species, cumulative impacts of multiple projects, hostility amongst residents, lack of proper zoning and more.

I have been a resident in the town of Arkwright for almost 10 years. In my opinion, the town board meeting was not an indication of "the community coming together." A community is not together because the town supervisor declares that to the local media to sway public opinion. A community does not come together when proposing ideas and addressing important concerns to the leaders of our town is looked at as "confrontational questions" and "obvious objections." This is not about who agrees with wind power and who disagrees with wind power. The community is divided because Horizon is a huge company, no longer an American company, that has come into a small town with landowners desperate for money, in a society that no longer supports local farming, and a town board basing decisions on financial gains and nothing more. The result: 47 gigantic wind towers up to 330 feet and a turbine size of up to 300 feet, in an area that was considered residential/agricultural a year ago and has since been switched over to industrial zoning.

The town and planning boards of Lyme deserve accolades for their effort in developing zoning laws with regard to wind turbines. They have actually put the horse before the cart with every action they have taken on this issue. ...The town of Lyme draft zoning law embraces compromise; it allows for the placement of turbines within the town, including Three Mile Bay, while protecting those who will not be signing a lease with BP. BP states that they may not build in the area if the wind energy facilities law in Lyme is adopted. This may not be a bad thing. Everyone knows that wind turbines are the new sexy alternative energy solution right now. But technologies are changing and the wind is not going anywhere. If one wind developer leaves, another will fill its place – possibly with a smaller, more energy efficient product.

In Enfield, developer John Rancich has proposed building 10-12 wind mills on Connecticut Hill. The wind farm proposal is controversial, to say the least. About 50 people packed a public hearing recently about a town proposal to limit where wind farms can be placed in relation to the nearest road. The hearing came amid allegations of previously secret meetings that violated the state's open meetings law. Rancich contends the "setback proposal," as it is known in Enfield, will wipe out his plans for a wind farm. All of this tension makes you wonder if a wind farm is worth it. We have neighbor fighting neighbor and governments under stress to regulate something they are not familiar with. The end result is the building of large structures that could, if placed in the wrong spot, disrupt our county's landscape. That said, we aren't opposed to wind farms. We just want them placed in the right locations.

While the price tag was the final straw for Law, the momentum to stop the project grew from the tenacious grassroots opposition of those who lived near the beach, which in turn motivated their elected officials to turn up the heat on LIPA.......Siting a wind park visible from the sands of Jones Beach, the closest thing Long Island has to sacred ground, was a mistake.

As a veteran of the wind turbine war over East Hill in Cherry Valley, I have advice for residents of Fulton and Richmondville.

We urge you contact your County and Town officials and demand an open process and fair evaluation of wind turbine proposals. Attend public hearings and demand that the interests of the community are considered before the interests of the wind power companies. Finally, ask yourself if it is fair and acceptable to force your neighbors to live next to an Industrial Electrical Generating Facility that did not exist when they purchased or built their homes. Also please consider it is the wind power companies attempting to change the status quo, not homeowners that would have to see, hear and live with turbine and the inconvenience of the large construction project. If this is allowed to happen, what's next?

The villains in this scenario are the dysfunctional state Legislature and the energetic but too widespread governor. The state needs a plan for windmills. Where should they be placed to offer the most reward and the least damage? Instead, we have no policy and a bunch of entrepreneurs seeking a quick buck and then getting out.