NY Revises Code of Conduct for Wind Energy Companies
"According to the A.G., these disclosure requirements deter improper relationships between wind development companies and local government officials, such as improperly sought land-use agreements with citizens and public officials, and improper benefits being given to public officials to influence their official actions relating to wind farm development."..........
The New NY Code of Conduct:
- Bans wind companies from hiring municipal employees or their relatives, giving gifts of more than $15 during a one-year period, or providing any other form of compensation that is contingent on any action before a municipal agency;
- Prevents wind companies from soliciting, using, or knowingly receiving confidential information acquired by a municipal officer in the course of his or her officials duties;
- Requires wind companies to establish and maintain a public website to disclose the names of all municipal officers or their relatives who have a financial stake in wind farm development;
- Requires wind companies to submit in writing to the municipal clerk for public inspection and to publish in the local newspaper the nature and scope of the municipal officer’s financial interest;
- Mandates that all wind easements and leases be in writing and filed with the County Clerk; and
- Dictates that within ninety days of signing the Code of Conduct, companies must conduct a seminar for employees about identifying and preventing conflicts of interest when working municipal employees.
Read more at:
http://hudsonvalleynewsnetwork.com/2016/04/07/revised-code-conduct-...
In addition to getting rid of our terrible wind law, Maine clearly needs its own code of conduct which should additionally require wind developers to disclose any funds given to third parties significantly influencing public opinion, either directly or indirectly through intermediaries.
**********************************************************************************************************
Fair Use Notice: This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Views: 216
Comment
-
Comment by Paula D Kelso on April 8, 2016 at 3:08pm
-
Sorry, that was Superior Court, not law court, in my last comment
-
-
How about, like here in Clifton, where one of the owners of Pisgah LLC was also a municipal official (a selectman) and the town attorney allowed said selectman to sit at the Board table and to go into executive session with the Board to discuss the Pisgah law suit. When I complained, I was so harassed I had to leave the meeting. No one on the Board would admit or deny whether they had discussed the lawsuit or the project in the session. Of course, any decisions were made behind closed doors and weren't on the record. When the case came back from the law court, finally the Board excluded Mr. Williams from their executive session. Tell me, what are the ethics and codes of conduct relevant here? Citizens tsk, tsk in the safety of their homes, but who wants to take on a corrupt town government?
-
-
Marie Jane says: I totally agree about legislation and the mandates that got this country into this mess ......... we really did not have a say. BUT, in 2008 ish, we had been greenwashed......had we known then what we have learned to date, the wind industry and our government would not have gotten this far.....sticky fingers and corrupt and collusion galore! They did a masterful job of setting us up and implementing laws we did not question..........there may have been some out there in the general public who got it, but not many.........we had not yet started to hear truths or that the wind industry had started covering up noise issues known and shared with them by NASA in 1979 and then GreenGore got involved and the politics of wind evolved.............and I know that children are learning only one side of the renewable story; my 11 year old grandson and I did battle when I "bad mouthed" (by his standard) wind turbines........we have a lot of educating to do to make people realize that there is more to the story. I have suggested many times to our Legislators to revisit the laws ...... I have yet to hear back.........no surprise; they really do not know or want to know what we do....wonder why.........
-
Comment by Long Islander on April 8, 2016 at 2:38pm
-
Marie Jane - in light of the eight years of experience we have now had since the Maine wind law was forced upon us (never even debated by the legislature), I believe there is now enough information that undermines the rationale for said law and that we need such a moratorium declared so that we can reflect all the learning in far more sensible legislation. The current wind law needs to be gutted. The moratorium would stop any more damage from occurring until such time this can all be empirically assessed. The wind law came not from empiricism but rather from special interests with fistfuls of taxpayer dollars, lobbyists, lawyers and bag men.
-
-
Marie Jane says: These 17 AGs were on a mission to "investigate" exxon and tag them as "climate deniers" and NY came up w/this code; can't wait to see what the other 16 AGs come up with .......... the only thing these AGs should be investigating is the industrial wind turbine agenda and the wind industry........I have yet to hear what the Legal definition is of "Climate Denier" or the details of the suggested "Prosecution"..... Long Islander you say a very strict code of conduct (for Maine) would be better than none........A Code of Conduct implies legitimacy and credibility; we all know this not to be the case. I think a moratorium on all industrial wind turbine permitting and installations until the AGs investigate the wind industry is a better solution and then, it appears, we will have to figure out who should investigate the AGs........
-
-
Code of Conduct for bribery? How bizarre.
-
Comment by Barbara Durkin on April 8, 2016 at 1:35pm
-
Collusion, conspiracy, intimidation, fraud, bribery and public corruption...for the "Public Good". It's better defined as tyranny.
-
-
Marie Jane - I agree that the code does endorse wind. So while I think having a very strict code would be better than none at all, the laws in Maine which favor wind need to be eradicated. The other place where a code of conduct comes up short is it doesn't address outright under the table bribes. Too many inexplicable things have happened repeatedly in Maine which grossly favor the wind industry that it is hard not to conclude that key players in all the right places have been paid off.
-
-
I so agree, Mary Jane. This revised code blesses illegality, again! The AG identifies criminal behavior and provides cover for the criminals. Who else but wind developers would receive such a wimpy wrist slap for briibery involving public officials?
-
-
Marie Jane says: If I may. I saw this "code" post several minutes ago. I have copied the two comments that appeared (one is mine); see below. In my opinion this code of conduct merely recognizes the wind industry for what it is, corrupt, but further opens the door to let them continue to move the wind turbine agenda forward. Why give them recognition or acknowledgement through a superficial code when they do not recognize the common code of respect for industrial wind turbine neighbors' health and well being or respect for the environment. This is an industry that operates and moves forward through "gag orders"; the code does not it say that information will be made public.
Comments:
Stephen T. Sounds like AG Schneiderman is in bed with the wind industry: "Public officials throughout New York should encourage the growth of a strong, sustainable wind industry for the public good."Marie Jane says: Ditto Stephen T. comments.........this gives license and recognizes the industrial wind turbine agenda as worthy of support which it is not (my opinion). The AG states “Public officials throughout New York should encourage the growth of a strong, sustainable wind industry for the public good........" REALLY? And what is AG Schneiderman's basis for determining that the wind industry is for the public good..........FACTS please.XXX
Maine as Third World Country:
CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power
Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.
Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT
******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********
(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/
Not yet a member?
Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?
We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi
Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!
Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law
Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future
"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."
https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/
© 2025 Created by Webmaster.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine