A Wind Project That Might Be More Than Hot Air . . .

John Brezinski has an idea: have Herkimer County develop a wind farm.

Wind farms, particularly in Herkimer County, have been a favorite target of mine. Although touted as “green,” their “foot prints” often extend over thousands of acres, radically changing the landscape and, for most people living near by, diminishing both their quality of life and property values. Benefits regarding “global warming” are speculative if not incalculable. They could justify more long distance power lines, such as NYRI — extending negative impacts all over the countryside. Consumers usually are charged more for such “green” power than conventional power, so it is not cheap. Companies seeking permits to construct such projects usually seek a “PILOT” or “payment in lieu of taxes” agreement — which amounts to a taxpayer subsidy not given to other businesses — to make their projects viable. And the power is simply not needed locally, because our so-called power ’surplus’ is the basis for the NYRI proposal. In sum, certain businesses request our subsidy and acceptance of negative environmental impacts for the “greater good” — of people living elsewhere, of ‘the earth’ — but probably for their own enrichment.

So why is Mr. Brezinski’s proposal worth looking at?

Several county officials met Thursday with Empire State Wind Energy President Keith Pitman to gain information about how much revenue can be made from wind projects, Brezinski said.

Pitman told county officials he would be able to give the county 75 percent of the revenue if he did a large project for the county, said Herkimer County Administrator James Wallace. That’s 10 to 20 times as much money as other developers are offering, Wallace said.

If the local benefit is great enough, it may make the local impacts more tolerable. (A year ago I wondered if some of the other proposals were simply ‘lo-ball’ offers that preyed upon Herkimer County’s economic desperation.)

Brezinski said he thinks the county should try to make it so that any project
it’s involved with developing will produce electricity to be used locally instead of sold to other areas. This could bring down electricity costs and attract businesses to the area, he said.

If the power is used locally, that reduces the need for lines and impacts to people not receiving a benefit. It also reduces transmission costs. This suggests that the cost of production and local distribution might be cheaper than if the County buys power from National Grid. IF cheap power can be created, it will be a business advantage.

Also discussed was the possibility of a small wind project that would place a few turbines near Herkimer County Community College to help power the college and possibly other county facilities, Wallace said.

Smaller projects mean smaller impacts mean fewer objections.

Not to get carried away, the County would be taking on both a significant investment and significant risk. Like other local government-run utilities, the expertise needed to be successful is likely to be lacking — hence the need for some professional management. And the negative impacts will still have to be dealt with in a way that is fair to neighbors.

But it is worth looking into … NOT for global warming . . . NOT for the ‘greater good’ … but for the possibility of bringing benefits to the people who will be paying the costs and living with the consequences.

A Big Win for the Little Guy . . .

The Jordanville Wind Farm received a “setback” in court according to yesterday’s paper. The ruling is being greeted with the usual moaning and groaning when governmental officials — and big business interests — don’ t get their way. But in reality, the ruling is a big win for the little guy. . . on two levels.

A Big Win for Open Government

As reported today, the Towns of Warren and Stark will now pay for their failure to comply with the Open Meetings Law. Anything decided by the towns in violation of that law is void. This is a good thing. When decisions are made illegally behind closed doors, it usually is because government is being co-opted by private interests for their own benefit and the expense of their neighbors. Some of our Towns in Oneida County need to read this decision and learn a lesson from it. When government runs openly and honestly, everyone benefits.

A Big Win for the Environment

Another aspect of the ruling is that government decisions that are made without a ‘hard look’ at their environmental impacts will also be set aside. This has long been the law, but it is often forgotten because, quite frankly, local government seems to have been bought off by business interests, it’s easier and less costly to ignore one’s environmental responsibilities, and it is unlikely that private individuals or civic groups will fork over the money needed to sue. This case, however, was the exception: people did sue — and they won. If they had not, GOVERNMENT would have simply continued to violate the law. Some of our Towns in Oneida County need to read this decision from the environmental angle and learn a lesson from it. New Hartford in particular should read very carefully the “Pyramid” case cited within this decision. Again, this decision is a good thing. If environmental impacts are ignored, it is usually the neighbors – - – the little guys who derive no benefit — who are hurt. When all the impacts are revealed and studied and mitigated, everyone benefits.

Wind: Not as Green as You Think . . .

In case you missed it in all the post election clutter, a local physicist, John Droz, Jr., had an interesting opinion piece in the Observer Dispatch on the negatives of wind farms. It is well worth reading. His conclusions:

“1) there is no consequential environmental benefit to industrial wind power, and 2) it is being promoted because it is an extremely lucrative business opportunity.”

The problem with wind energy is that without TAXPAYER/RATEPAYER subsidies, it would not be financially feasible — and it has a HUGE ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT.

One reason why electric rates are so high in NYS (contributing to our region’s decline) is the state requirement that major suppliers must buy any renewable energy that is developed, and must buy it at a certain minimum charge which is in excess of the cost of other forms of energy. This means that you, the rate payer, are being forced to subsidize a method of energy production that is not cost effective. If so called “green” energy were cost effective, there would be no need for forced purchases at guaranteed minimum prices.

Wind farm purveyors often seek property tax breaks from their host communities. The tax breaks have been cited as necessary to make these projects financially viable. Again, that should tell you that wind farms are not cost effective, and that you, the taxpayer, are being forced to subsidize private business — business that will create no jobs to speak of. To make matters worse, if any of the turbines were to catch on fire, or if there would be vandalism, the burden to resolve these problems would fall upon the local municipality — the municipality that is not collecting a fair share of taxes from the business.

Coal is to the US what oil is to Saudia Arabia. There is plenty of it and it is more cost effective than wind power. Someone said they would rather have 20,000 wind turbines than 20,000 coal plants. How about 2 coal plants instead of 20,000 turbines? That is probably closer to the truth. Environmentally, thousands and thousands of acres will be affected by wind farms, while a few strategically placed coal fired plants would produce a more reliable stream of electricity, at lower costs, and affect only a fraction of the acreage. Technology has progressed to the point that these coal-plants do not have the impacts they once did. Nuclear, of course, is another option.

If the power from these wind farms were needed locally, it might be reasonable to tolerate them. But the fact — often cited by NYRI — is that Upstate NY has more than enough power for its own needs. Anyone who finds thousands of turbines strewn about our landscape acceptable must also accept miles and miles of power lines to get the power to the downstate market. And that is why politicians who push tax breaks by Herkimer and Oneida Counties for wind farms while opposing NYRI are not making sense. You cannot have one without the other.

The bottom line, echoing Mr. Droz, is that, at least for Upstate, wind farms are not about protecting the environment, and not about producing power efficiently. Rather, they are about producing “profit” for certain well-connected companies and people.

There is nothing wrong with “profit” as long as ALL those bearing the costs share in it — but that will not happen. NYRI is not planning to reimburse homeowners along their power line for losses in property values, must less than give them a share of the profits.

People who are talking about going “green” are not looking at all the consequences and who they will fall upon.

Lawsuits in the Making?

Capital News 9 reports “Canal closing early leaves businesses high and dry.” It seems that canal marinas are taking a hit because boaters are in a rush trying to get out of the canal before it closes.

“This time of year most of your boats are headed back south because they got to get out of the system,” said Bernie Brandow, St.Johnsville Marina Owner.

This year they have to get out even earlier. An end of season rush could mean big business for Brandow and other marinas along the Mohawk. Except for one thing, boaters aren’t stopping.

“They’re trying to make up time so they’re not stopping at night for dockage or fuel. That’s basically the hold up here,” said Brandow. . . .

The problem is every time that lock opens one point five millions gallons of water flushes down stream and needs to be replaced with water upstream at the Hinckley reservoir. That’s where water is at its lowest level since 1915 when the reservoir was created.

Hmm . . . If the Mohawk Valley Water Authority was complying with its old agreement with the state, it would be contributing from its Gray Reservoir the equivalent of its entire draw from Hinckley for drinking water — about 21 million gallons per day (MGD) based on the Water Authority’s 2002 engineering report. Divide by 1.5 MGD for each lock closing and you get an extra 14 lock closings per day that would be possible if MVWA obeyed its agreement — TIMES the 18 locks between Herkimer and the Hudson. THAT’S 252 fewer lock closings a day that can be attributed by math to MVWA’s non-compliance. Sound’s like a lot of inconvenience to boaters, disruption to shippers, and lost business for marinas to me!

Shhh …. Someone might get the idea that MVWA should pay! There go the rates!

(See, kids, math can be fun.)

How about some more math? The flow out of the dam is now 120 CFS and the authority is not contributing the 30 CFS it is supposed to do. Would a flow of 150CFS be enough to keep the creek open for fishing? That is more lost business for some people.

Somehow the pictures of boats lining up, empty marinas, and no fishing signs are more compelling visuals than the one Mr. Becher uses with the fish tank and shot glass to show how “insignificant” the MVWA’s actions are.

Politically Correct Pinwheel Pinhead Pacifists . . .

I really got riled when I saw this story in last night’s OD: Students plant pinwheels for peace.

Students at Frankfort-Schuyler High School and Middle School participated in a world-wide gesture of peace Friday morning by planting pinwheels in the school’s courtyard during the Pinwheels for Peace project.

Pinwheels for Peace is an international art and literacy project where students make pinwheels, write creative and artistic messages of peace on them and then place them on display as an art installation at the school.

This is just more of the politically correct indoctrination going on in our schools that is burning up valuable time when children should be learning the “3 Rs,” wasting our tax dollars, and ultimately undermining our society by producing generations unable to think.

Let’s give our children the knowledge that they will need to figure out the world for themselves when it’s their turn to run things, instead of brainwashing them into a particular way of thinking.

Reconnect . . .

In response to my “Disconnect” post, “Anonymous” had some interesting things to say:

“These last two paragraphs suggest that you have bought into the “consolidation is panacea” mentality coming out of some segments of Albany. This supposition that the many layers of government in NY are in themselves the problem. The idea that if only we could do away with towns and villages, we could save all sorts of tax dollars, eliminate parochialism, and make NY government work smoothly. The assumption that there is some “one size fits all” solution that can fix it all. The suggestion that because something (like our system of government) is old, it must be outdated. . . “

“How could diluting my representation by increasing the number of other people whose concerns are the concern of my closet representative, ever enhance my access to services? . . . “

“I think it’s great that I have a level of government close enough to me that I can speak and be heard. I appreciate that those government services that most directly impact me are the responsibility of people who live in the same neighborhood I do. I know their quality of life is on the line, too. . . “

“I agree, though, that if all governments have narrow focus, people who should be working together end up working against each other. But consolidation is the wrong “c” word to be using. If the consolidation-sayers would put the energy they’re putting into forcing us to give up our local voice into building cooperation, collaboration, and coordination instead of wrestling for control, we could work together to preserve local identity while improving regional function.”

Wow! “Anonymous” sure got me thinking!

Smaller jurisdictions may make it easier for people to be heard, and to be watchdogs, over how their tax dollars are spent. Smaller government can be more responsive because it’s easier to deal with one person wearing 3 hats than 3 department heads. And if the people providing my services live in my neighborhood, they will see the results that I do.

But what constitutes a “neighborhood” is a matter of perspective. There is also such a thing as being too small. Smaller jurisdictions do not have the capability to provide services such as water, sewer, places to lock up criminals, and social work. And too many problems spill beyond jurisdictional boundaries. Here’s my take on our area.

New York Mills, Yorkville, West Utica, and the areas of NH and Whitestown lying in between cover 5 municipal jurisdictions, but are they different? Bicycle through them and they look very similar. They share the same water and sewer systems, and share the same local economy. “Downtown” and the cultural center (Stanley, MWP, the Aud, Zoo etc.) for all of them is Utica. People from them shop in the same places – now predominantly in New Hartford. They are ethnically similar and may even worship in the same churches. As I’ve noted in several posts over the last couple years, it is virtually impossible for one of these jurisdictions to do anything significant without affecting the others. The people’s “interests” are virtually identical. Why shouldn’t they share the same local government?

Contrast this with Rome. While Rome may look similar to NY Mills/Yorkville etc and aspects of the local economy may be shared, shopping is more Rome than NH, water and sewer systems are distinct, “Downtown” and the cultural center (Capitol Theater, The Fort, Fort Rickey Game Farm, Erie Canal Village) for them is perceived to be Rome (if not Syracuse). Rome can change its zoning and create concentrations of development and not create a ripple of impact to Greater Utica. At this point in time the interests of Romans are distinct. Romans do not need to share the same local government with people of the Mills or other parts of Greater Utica because their interests are divergent.

“Cooperation, collaboration, and coordination” sound good in theory, but are virtually impossible to put in practice. Consider the “financial officer” that New Hartford proposed to share with Whitestown. How would this person divide his or her time — proportioned according to population (about 50-50) ? or according to assessed valuation (more for NH)? or taxes taken in (more for NH)? or number of problems? How would pay be apportioned? Who would set work priorities? Mixed allegiances and responsibilities create problems. A servant can only have one master. This is the problem with the ’shared services’ idea. “Everyone” and “no one” would be in charge. Attempts at “cooperation, collaboration, and coordination” will degenerate into “competition.” It cannot work. So how have we dealt with regional issues?

There is the “regionalization” approach with 2 flavors currently available in our area: “sewer” and “water.”

Sewers were kicked up to the next level of government, the County, with creation of the “Part County Sewer District.” Policy is set by the Board of Legislators. Roughly half the County’s population is served by the District — and half is not. Since sewer users rather than county taxpayers pay all the expenses, half of the Board of Legislators setting District Policy have no stake in the outcome of what they do. This represents a true “disconnect” and loss of control by the people needing the service.

Water was split off and became a subject of its own government: an Authority. Need I say more about loss of control? But this was also a disconnect in another sense: Decisions over water became made by people with no responsibility for other aspects of our governance. There would have to be “cooperation, collaboration, and coordination” between the water authority and other units of local government to fix this, but then we will run into “competition,” which will not work.

We are in a “Goldilocks” situation: our local governments are too small to deal effectively with many of our problems, and the county level is too large . . . and creating separate governments or another layer for special issues results in a lack of coordination and competition.
Utica and its suburbs seem to share so much in common that our being separate is working against us. Having lived in both the city and the suburbs, I honestly can not say that people are less “heard” in the city, even when it had 100,000 people.

Before doing anything we need to talk, pro and con, and weigh out our options.

But please consider MERGER as a way to reconnect people to their government, and regain control. Take Utica, its suburbs, water, sewer, and anything else that has been split away: wipe away what exists and replace them with something new: one Municipality of Greater Utica.

It won’t be easy; it won’t solve all our problems; it may create new ones . . . But think about it.

Water Fight!

It was an interesting scene last evening down in Herkimer at the public forum on the MVWA expansion, and it was covered by the Herkimer Telegram, the Observer-Dispatch, the Sentinel, and News-10-Now. The Sentinel’s coverage seems the most complete if you only have time to read one article.

We got to see (again) Mr. Becher’s little demo with what appeared to be a fish tank, a plastic bowl and a shot glass to make a point that the MVWA’s withdrawals are insignificant. Then we got to hear Mr. Goebels of Canal Corp. explain why MVWA’s withdrawals ARE significant after all — in essence, when the tank is not full, the shot glass is important.

“We have a serious drought right now,” the Canal Corp. official said, but later noted that levels are supposed to fluctuate.” (Sentinel)

While I have no reason to doubt Mr. Goebel’s calculations on MVWA’s impacts on water levels, I have to question his conclusion that we are now in a drought. This year certainly does not seem to have been unusually dry to the point that most people would call it a drought . . . and there was that snowy February. Maybe some statistics are in order.

“It was built for one purpose: to supply water for canal needs,” he said. (OD)

Well, that may be true, but it has also been adapted for power-generation, and recreation use has been encouraged.

Additionally, there is downstream power generation, predating Hinckley. And I guess that is what makes MVWA’s attitude so disturbing, which was made clear (but unreported in the media) when Mr. Becher alluded to power being sold on the spot market at fluctuating prices. The impression was made that there was something wrong with a profit being made, and that this should give way to MVWA’s use. But isn’t that why compensating reservoirs were required — for MVWA to put into the system what it takes out — to neutralize its impact — so others can use the stream too? And isn’t it MVWA’s destruction of its compensating reservoir (along with expansion plans) that brought this controversy on?

None of the other interested parties on this issue comes with unclean hands.

Of all the uses of Hinckley water, only MVWA actually takes the water away, out of the West Canada Creek drainage basin.

Community Forum Tonight re MVWA . . .

There will be a community forum sponsored by Assemblyman Marc Butler tonight, Thursday, Aug. 16 at 7 p.m., in the Amphitheater at Herkimer County Community College to address the Mohawk Valley Water Authority’s expansion plans. Authority Executive Director Patrick Becher, representatives of environmental and sportsmen’s groups, local elected officials, and various others have been invited to come.

Hopefully this will be a truly public forum where the public is allowed to speak, and not a “dog and pony show” designed to push one point of view.

More information is available in the Herkimer Telegram.

Water for Herkimer County

Herkimer County’s legislature has finally realized that its long term future is in jeopardy if Mrs. Destito’s proposed legislation to give the Mohawk Valley Water Authority unbridled control over 48.5 million gallons per day of Hinckley Lake water is enacted into law.

If state legislation gave control of the reservoir’s water to the authority, plans for the next 50 years would include enough water to meet Herkimer County’s needs, authority Executive Director Patrick Becher and engineers told legislators Wednesday, Becher said.

“All of our long-range plans include that entire area,” he said.

Of course MVWA’s plans include Herkimer County. Nothing would satisfy MVWA and its leadership more than to make customers of even more Herkimer County residents.

But maybe Herkimer County residents don’t want MVWA to be their supplier. Why should they have to deal with MVWA to get their own Herkimer County water, whether it’s now, 50 years from now, or later?

No matter what “riparian rights” MVWA may claim, those rights do not include taking water out of the watercourse and sending it elsewhere. To do such a thing requires the State’s permission. That is because the water in the West Canada Creek, and Hinckley Reservoir, is the State’s resource, not the MVWA’s. It is for the State to decide (currently the DEC) whether a water resource, located in Herkimer County, should be used to satisfy needs elsewhere such as in western Oneida County. The State’s decision making, meanwhile, is governed by a body of case law on how that decision should be made, including Syracuse v Gibbs, 283 NY 275 (1940) which obliges the State to ensure that water supplies which are more available for use by one community are not absorbed by another. [BTW, western Oneida County is already supplied water from Lake Ontario, so it does not need Herkimer County water. But if Herkimer County cannot get all that it needs from Hinckley Reservoir, there are few alternatives.]

Mrs. Destito’s legislation would sweep all the State protections away, and , essentially, give the MVWA sovereignty over 48.5 MGD of water. This is unprecedented.

Herkimer County Legislator Bono wants a written guarantee on the percentage of water Herkimer County would get.

“I want a binding agreement,” Bono said

While Legislator Bono is well intended, Herkimer County cannot afford to be naive. It was MVWA’s breaking of an old agreement that has brought this entire issue to the forefront. Written agreements mean nothing to the MVWA . . . and no one should allow themselves to be blindsided by Mr. Becher’s soothing presentations. There is a history of undependability there, and history has a habit of repeating itself.

Mrs. Destito’s legislation needs to be killed … now!

Our Schools: How Bad Can They Get?

New Statistics are in and they don’t look good. In Herkimer County, the high school graduation rate is about 75%. In Rome, the RFA graduation rate is only 65%, and at Utica’s Proctor it’s about the same at 66%. But don’t worry . . . it could be worse . . .

In the Big Apple it’s 50%, in Syracuse (Dan Lowengard’s new home) it’s only 47%, in Rochester (at one time known for high teacher pay) it’s 39%.

Perhaps it is fitting that one of the worst performing school districts is in State Education Commissioner Mills’ backyard in Albany at 38%.

* * *
The Rome paper fittingly tells us about a little distraction from the 3Rs. If students have to go to SUNYIT for a special “STOP-DWI Program” program, then they must be missing at least a half day of school. It seems like every special interest wants to make their pitches to schools — and gets the “air-time” to do it. Nothing against “STOP-DWI,” but the students have basic academic subjects that are not getting learned. Maybe with fewer distractions, some of those graduation rates will come up.