Appeal Article 78 Decision on Cohocton LL4-2019

This group is not opposed to renewable energy projects that are responsibly sited.  We are opposed to allowing larger than 500 foot turbines to be located at same setback to residences who chose not to participate.  This is the injustice that was made in the adoption of Cohocton LL4-2019 under circumstances of Direct and Indirect conflict of interest as defined by Cohocton Ethics Law.

STAND WITH US TO PROTECT ETHICS LAWS IN TOWN AGAINST MISUSE OF RULE OF NECESSITY.  WE NEED YOUR HELP TO FUND THIS APPEAL.

The Article 78 lawsuit requesting to annul Cohocton LL4-2019 allowing 650 foot turbines was recently denied by Monroe County Judge acting on behalf of Steuben County.

Despite denying the annulment request, the standing of plaintiffs was accepted, “allegations are sufficient to establish he may suffer a direct environmental injury different from that of the general public and within the zone of interest protected by SEQRA and has met his burden of establishing standing to maintain the instant SEQRA proceeding.”

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=gc23jm4WxIxK5nL/SwDTCw==

One of the most concerning parts of the judgement is about the application of the Rule of Necessity (RoN) where Town Board members had a direct or indirect conflict of interest. The position from our attorney from law case study was that no New York court had accepted application of Rule of Necessity for Legislative actions involving passage of Laws, only for administrative actions of a Town Board where there was a conflict of interest. The decision accepted the RoN in this context of Renewable Law passage.

The precedent set by this decision should be of concern for every small Town in New York who may have a Town Board of leaseholders or who indirectly are pro-renewable. Just like in Cohocton; it enables a prospective developer to come in, request a law change, prepare the law change language, and all supporting Environmental Assessment Forms and impact studies for the Town Board. The only thing the Town Board has to do is vote. Clearly provides no objectivity or independence in decision making for a law applicable to an entire Town versus the footprint of a specific project. This should scream to you “dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power” where there are conflicts of interest.

As a result, we have decided to appeal the decision to the Appellate Division of the Fourth Department. The Fourth Department consists of 12 judges from 3 judicial districts and in so providing more objectivity in decision making than a single County, lower court, Judge.

WE NEED YOUR HELP TO FUND THIS APPEAL. See link below for Go Fund Me site and thank you for your donation to help protect small town residents and neighbors exposed to renewable projects today and in the future.