Moratorium OK’d by board

You are currently viewing Moratorium OK’d by board
By Dan King
No new solar farms will be going up in the town of Whitehall for the next three months.
After more than an hour of discussion last Wednesday, the town board voted 3-2 to accept an amended three-month land use moratorium on solar farms. Councilmembers John Rozell, Stephanie Safka and Farrell Prefountaine voted for the moratorium, while Supervisor George Armstrong and Councilman David Hollister opposed it.
The three-month land use moratorium will not impact small solar panel setups on people’s properties, intended for their own use. It also won’t impact the three solar farms that are being grandfathered in – those on the properties of John Millett, Jr., Levi Cahan and Joe Terry.
Town attorney Erika Sellar-Ryan said the three projects are being grandfathered in because they are “vested,” meaning that a certain amount of time and resources has already been expended on those projects.
The moratorium, Sellar-Ryan stressed, is strictly to deal with land use issues. A committee will be established to look at the potential of creating rules and regulations related to solar farms.
Public hearing
About half a dozen people came to voice concerns about the moratorium, leading the town board to reduce the moratorium from its initially proposed length of six months.
Howie Osborne, who is planning a solar farm of his own, said he opposed the six-month moratorium. He argued the moratorium would kill his project.
“You’re discriminating against me,” he said. “I started three months ago and now you’re telling me I can’t. There’s a lot of laws you don’t enforce, how about junk cars?”
Fellow resident Dave Waters agreed, saying, “You got kind of the cart before the horse here. How are you going to tell Mr. Osborne he can’t have one when you already allowed three?”
“The moratorium is going to kill any project this year, it’s unequivocal,” added resident Bruce Kastor, a former attorney for the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance.
Points like that swayed Armstrong, who was initially on the fence about the moratorium.
“This delay could potentially kill projects,” Armstrong said, pointing out that solar projects must be up and running by Dec. 31, 2017 in order to receive tax incentives.
Hollister, unlike Armstrong, wasn’t on the fence. He had been opposed to the moratorium since it was proposed.
“If we put this moratorium in it’s going to kill Howie’s project,” Hollister said. “He can’t do any work for two year anyway. I think we can get all our ducks in a row by then at the planning board level without a moratorium.”
Hollister added, “As long as I’ve been on this town board, as soon as something comes into this town someone’s there to shoot it down. People here don’t like change – ‘not in my backyard’ – and that’s disappointing to anyone who want to actually do something in this town.”
Rozell said he supported the moratorium because he felt the town needed more information on solar farms.
“I think there’s still a lot of questions that need to be answered,” said Rozell, who proposed an unsuccessful attempt to table voting on the moratorium for next month’s meeting.
Safka agreed that the town still has a lot of educating to do.
“I love the idea of solar power, but it’s a new concept,” she said. “I think it’s very important to look at it. There’s got to be a balance, you can’t just say ‘everyone can do what they want’.”
The arguments made by residents, combined with a suggestion from resident Pete Terry, led the board to agree to a three-month moratorium.
Exceptions
There is a slight caveat to the moratorium.
Residents who feel they’ve put in a significant amount of their own resources into a solar project can apply for an exception to the moratorium. However, the state’s rules make it very difficult to be granted an exception.
Sellar-Ryan suggested the town use the state’s exception rules, which require a resident to meet some incredibly strict standards, she said.
“People can apply for relief from the moratorium,” she said. “It’s a very high standard and people don’t often make it.”
Kastor argued that the town should lower its exception standards.
“Nobody can meet those standards,” he said. “The town board doesn’t have to be as stupid as the State Legislature.”Taxes
After the board voted on the land use moratorium, those in attendance also discussed the impact solar farms could have on taxes.
Sellar-Ryan repeatedly stressed that the tax issue had nothing to do with the town’s moratorium.
Currently, each town pays a share of the county taxes, based on the total amount of assessed value within that town. Whitehall has about $203 million of assessed value and pays around 4 percent of the county taxes. With any increase in property value, the town’s share of the proverbial pie goes up and thus so does the tax rate. However, if other towns also see increases in property value, Whitehall’s share of the taxes would not go up.
Officials used the hypothetical situation that if Whitehall’s value were to increase because of solar farms, and other towns in the county were to get new businesses or solar farms, then Whitehall’s share of the tax burden would not be increased.
“It could have no effect or it could have a big effect,” Armstrong said.
“You don’t know what (the impact on taxes) is going to be, because you don’t know what other municipalities are going to do,” Sellar-Ryan said. “It doesn’t just matter what Whitehall does, it matters what all 17 municipalities do.”
The town of Whitehall, the village of Whitehall, Whitehall School District and Washington County all currently grant a tax exemption for solar. Tax breaks will take place for the next 15 years, but Borrego Solar’s contract with Millett, for example, is good for 25 years. So, after the first 15 years, Borrego will begin paying taxes.
“Borrego is going to pay a whole lot of taxes after the first 15 years,” Millett said.
He also pointed out that Borrego will not be exempt from paying fire taxes.
Board members agreed that only time will tell the impact solar farms will have on taxes.