SCIDA Application Discrepancies, Resolution and Removal of Code Enforcement Officer Letter January 23, 2008 by James Hall

REQUEST return confirmation of receipt

January 23, 2008

Steuben County IDA
7234 Route 54 North
PO Box 393
Bath, NY 14810-0393

RE: Application discrepancies, resolution
and removal of Code Enforcement Officer

SCIDA Board Members:

The SCIDA has a responsibility to scrutinize the application for financial assistance from Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC (CPP) and Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC. First of all who owns the LLC? LLC's do not have subsidiaries, who are the members? Are you aware UPC New York Wind, LLC is not registered to do business in NY State? The applications also contain the same federal ID # for both companies. On the original application for CPP there is a number which is different and not a federal ID number at all. CPP and CPPII had not registered with NYS DOL prior to start of construction. There seem to be numerous inaccuracies on their applications. Do you have the $350.00 filing fees and will the 1% fee be provided at the time of your vote for the projects? The taxpayers of Steuben County are watching.

At the Tuesday, January 22, 2008 Cohocton Town Board meeting a resolution was passed that addresses the deficiencies of the proposed PILOT for the UPC/CPP/CPPII Cohocton Dutch Hill Project. The town board affirms that SCIDA should not accept and approve this PILOT at this time. Based upon the minuscule PILOT payment and in light of the fact that UPC in their application for tax exemption stated clearly their willingness to pay $4,400,000 per year, it seems that SCIDA must reject a PILOT for this project.

The vocal opposition of the Naples School District to this PILOT must be seriously respected by SCIDA. The extensive proof provided by CWW cannot be ignored.

Also and most significantly the Cohocton Town Board terminated Joseph Bob as code enforcement officer for the town. Mr. Bob publically acknowledged that he is NOT NYS certified and that he did not enroll or attend any classes to gain certification status during the 2007 term of his employment as code enforcement officer. This is a clear violation of NYS law. As you are already aware, Cohocton Wind Watch has standing in three separate Article 78's, at this time, before Judge Marianne Furfure. Part of the merits of these actions challenges the legitimacy of the building permits issued by the Cohocton code enforcement officer.

For SCIDA to approve this PILOT before the court hears the cases would be injudicious. If Mr. Sherron's assertion is correct (CWW disagrees with his interpretation) that SCIDA can lawfully approve PILOT's after construction has started, there should be no immediate or compelling need to authorize the PILOT for either UPC Prattsburgh or Cohocton Projects, at this time and with tax exemptions purported.

It is our hope that SCIDA will act responsibly and reject these UPC PILOT tax exemptions. The taxpayers of Steuben County would be defrauded under this PILOT.

Cordially,

James Hall for CWW
cc: Governor Spitzer, AG Cuomo, Senator Winner, Assemblyman Bacalles