Home
CWWgroup 's Library tagged → View Popular
SCIDA Public Hearing on UPC Cohocton PILOT January 18, 2008 Letter by James Hall
- Based upon overwhelming public outrage opposition, and the written statement of the developer and their willingness to pay $4,400,000 per year, it would be malfeasance to approval a PILOT. SCIDA has not provided transparency of their motive of continuous favoritism of UPC Wind. SCIDA must publically disclose the exact amount of fees and financial compensation that will be derived from their approval of this PILOT. Amounts of $100,000 to $600,000 for SCIDA approval of EACH wind project, has been rumored. SCIDA must disclose in advance of a PILOT approval, any and all fees that they will be paid by the developer coming out of this and any other project. - cwwgroup on 2008-01-20
SCIDA Public Hearing on UPC Cohocton PILOT January 18, 2008 Letter by Judith Hall
- The Cohocton projects do not appear to fit the requirements for financial help from SCIDA. What permanent employment is being created? Why if the amount of power to be sold to the grid is what they portray can they not afford to pay full industrial taxes on the project? Where is the proven need for the additional electric supply in Steuben County and more important Cohocton, your concern was about the cost of that electric not the need for additional production? - cwwgroup on 2008-01-20
10 Jan 08
MEDIA/PRESS RELEASE - David P. Miller attorney for Cohocton Wind Watch
-
The Steuben County Supreme Court, by Decision dated January 9, 2008 has made a ruling in the Town of Cohocton wind turbine case.
In the matters of Cohocton Wind Watch and James Hall et al. against Canandaigua Power Partners et al, and two related cases, acting Supreme Court Justice Marianne Furfure has determined that with one exception in one case, the petitioners in each of the three pending lawsuits have standing to proceed with the actions. In addition, Judge Furfure denied the respondents' motion to dismiss the cases, finding that the petitioners did not violate the stature of limitations and that the petitioners did not fail to exhaust their administrative remedies by not appealing a decision of the Town's Code Enforcement Officer to the Town's Zoning Board of Appeals. Finally, Judge Furfure declared that all of the individual property owners whose lands are to be a part of the wind turbine projects are necessary parties to the actions.
Judge Furfure has given the petitioners additional time to serve some of the landowners with copies of the petition in the actions, and has given counsel for the respondents sixty days in which to serve their answers to the petitions upon counsel for the petitioners.
Dated: January 10, 2008
David P. Miller
111 N. Main St.
Naples, NY 14512
(585) 374-2130
- cwwgroup on 2008-01-10
-
The Steuben County Supreme Court, by Decision dated January 9, 2008 has made a ruling in the Town of Cohocton wind turbine case.
In the matters of Cohocton Wind Watch and James Hall et al. against Canandaigua Power Partners et al, and two related cases, acting Supreme Court Justice Marianne Furfure has determined that with one exception in one case, the petitioners in each of the three pending lawsuits have standing to proceed with the actions. In addition, Judge Furfure denied the respondents' motion to dismiss the cases, finding that the petitioners did not violate the stature of limitations and that the petitioners did not fail to exhaust their administrative remedies by not appealing a decision of the Town's Code Enforcement Officer to the Town's Zoning Board of Appeals. Finally, Judge Furfure declared that all of the individual property owners whose lands are to be a part of the wind turbine projects are necessary parties to the actions.
Judge Furfure has given the petitioners additional time to serve some of the landowners with copies of the petition in the actions, and has given counsel for the respondents sixty days in which to serve their answers to the petitions upon counsel for the petitioners.
Dated: January 10, 2008
David P. Miller
111 N. Main St.
Naples, NY 14512
(585) 374-2130
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20▼ items per page
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Sponsored Links
Ads by Google
Groups interested in cohocton
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo
“But, there sure is going to be other litigation,” he added. “And it's not going to be on procedural changes that could have been done differently, we're not asking for a municipality to do something over. We're going to look at fraud. We're going to look at criminal conduct.”
- cwwgroup on 2008-01-20