Archive: Opinions

Hello Town Board,

Now that the Solar Law has passed, I'm hoping you will consider amending it. I understand a local law and changes to it likely won't be able to stop the state from allowing 1000 to 2000 contiguous acres of land changing from farmland, growing crops to feed people and animals, into industrial sites, but what I am hoping to do here is mitigate what I see as damage.

It's often stated when someone doesn't want something, they are being "Not in my backyard," or NIMBY. Yes, I don't want an industrial site literally 100 feet from my backyard when it's been "zoned" for agriculture for the last two centuries. What's wrong with that? I didn't move to the country to live in the city and even if I lived in the city, I'd likely not choose to live 200 feet from a factory. Is the city of Ithaca allowing factories to move into Fall Creek? If there's any question these sites are industrial, the assessment changes from agriculture to industrial when the land is leased.

I'd like to ask the town to put in the acreage limit on solar "farms" or solar "cities" as they are more like cities than farms and setbacks of at least 2000 feet. The county suggested 10 acres which the town thought was too low, saying that many projects with community solar in mind, would be 12 to 15 acres. So, what was wrong with Joe Wetmore's suggestion of 25 acres? This cap may still be too low for some. Rush, NY put on a 150 acre cap. In addition to a cap, why can't we put required setbacks into the law. Right now, it looks like it's a hundred feet. That's not even the distance from this room, board chambers, to the library. Why not 2000 feet? Out of 1000 acres, you'd think one acre setbacks from residences and roads would be easy to do.

We are not talking about community solar here. We are talking about over 1000 to 2000 acre solar powerplants complete with substations. Some will argue that the state has already cut local control out of this. I'd suggest we don't just accept that and Lansing set 25 acres as a cap and oppose certain elements of article 23, if not the whole law. If that's too low, even a 150 acre cap on a contiguous solar array is better than nothing, or treat each parcel as a separate project. I wouldn't be allowed to merge multiple properties without any local oversight. With no cap, there will be no pause at the state siting board when it's considering the equivalent of a one story, 1000 acre, 43,560,000 square foot building, being the landmark structure for Lansing.

This article suspends Home Rule in a way unprecedented in New York. It's my understanding it also takes away our taxing authority, with the state negotiating those taxes. I believe the state will then take its cut or should I say, take the entire tax, and send a portion back to the town. I'm told this will not happen. After the state's behavior this year, I'm skeptical of that.

One of the arguments made at the town planning and town board was that article 23 took a lot of power out of the town's hands, so there was little the town could do to regulate this. That's true, but other towns are challenging the article, fighting for home rule just as was done with fracking. Rush, New York's cap was challenged, but:

"Invenergy has invoked New York's climate vision in trying to move projects forward. The company asked the state to override Rush's 150-acre cap, arguing it would effectively block any large-scale solar project and "prevent the state from achieving its renewable energy goals". On Monday, the siting board pushed back, demanding that Invenergy calculate the cost of complying with Rush town law before considering a waiver. "

I believe in solar. I also believe the town should have a say in what these projects look like. I also know that community solar, which we've already seen in Lansing, is very different from industrial solar. Some of the companies involved in community solar don't even get involved in industrial solar because of the strong pushback from communities. I hope you'll take on this challenge.

I understand the financials of this move to solar for landowners. A main argument for these leasing arrangements is some farmers don't want to farm anymore, it's their land, and they should be allowed to use it as they wish. Farms get a large tax benefit to work the land and have for as long as they've farmed it. This was to keep the land open as a source of income for farming because market rate land assessment would drive them out of business. I understand that benefit will go away and some back tax abatements will have to be repaid if it's leased to solar, but part of the reason given for this exemption all these years was so the land would be protected. This leasing to solar companies goes against the spirit of that arrangement.

The local and state solar laws say one of their purposes is to protect prime farmland. I don't believe they do that. Once these industrial scale solar arrays are built, they'll be there for the rest of my life and likely my children's lives. Can it be reclaimed one day? Sure, but so can a brownfield. Putting measures in the law so the land can be reclaimed one day is not the same as protecting farmland.

I try not to be cynical about the state government, but I don't see how these solar cities will benefit our town. The tax money will apparently go to the state under Article 23 to maybe come back to us, they will control what land will be used, and these solar panels will not lower the cost of electricity for Lansing. The only beneficiaries are large land owners who were already benefiting from agricultural tax rates even if they decided not to farm and leased the land instead. The farmers leasing that land will now have to find other nearby land that likely hasn't been prepared for farming. My question is when is enough?

A complaint I am hearing is everything that the city of Ithaca doesn't want is finding its way to Lansing. Now part of our identity is slipping away, not because there aren't people to farm the land, but because there's more money to be made using it for an industrial purpose. Is that not always the case? Isn't that exactly why we have zoning? From the looks of things, many industrial arrays are built on top of landfills. The solar cities in Lansing will not be. Thank you,

Mike Sigler
Lansing, NY
v16i37