Due Dates and Comment links for upcoming Opportunities to Comment on Regulatory Proceedings where Stop Energy Sprawl expects to submit comments (overall summary):

  • Table of responses from interested New York State Legislative candidates. Thank you to all those candidates who replied for giving their input on the proliferation of large-scale wind & solar on forest and farmland to the detriment of small communities.

  • The questionnaire that was provided to Legislative candidates. We sent emails to all incumbent candidates. For challengers listed on the Board of Elections website and/or Ballotpedia, we sent emails to the addresses listed on campaign website and/or Facebook. For those without an email, other methods were applied as time permitted.

Stop Energy Sprawl Candidate Questionnaire

  • In yet another attack on Home Rule, New York Governor Hochul has released the Executive Budget Proposal for Fiscal Year 2025, which includes Part O of the Transportation, Economic Development, and Environmental Conservation budget bill entitled the Renewable Action through Project Interconnect and Deployment (“RAPID”) Act.  The RAPID Act seeks to move the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (“ORES”) from the Department of State to the Department of Public Service and seeks to consolidate and expedite permitting procedures for major renewable energy and electric transmission facilities under a new Article VIII of the Public Service Law.

     If passed, the RAPID Act will undermine sound environmental review of major electric transmission facilities by requiring ORES to render a permit decision within a single year, or the facility shall be automatically approved, regardless of project size or potential impact on public or private conservations land.  The RAPID Act will constitute a significant deprivation Private Property Rights by extended the power of Eminent Domain to the construction of major electric transmission facilities by large-scale solar and wind developers, said power being currently limited to regulated utilities granted a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need. The RAPID Act will undermine the protection of natural resources by allowing conservation easements to be extinguished anywhere in the state, including the Adirondack Park and Catskill Parks, for the construction of major electric transmission facilities by large-scale solar and wind developers, said authority being currently limited to regulated utilities granted a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need.

     If passed, the RAPID Act will further erode home rule and local decision-making enshrined in the New York State Constitution, Local Government Bill of Rights, Statute of Local Governments, and Municipal Home Rule law, usurping the rights of local governments to determine how communities and property within their jurisdictions develop, and contravening the purpose of comprehensive planning outlined in Section 272-A of Town Law.

     We MUST oppose state or federal action that would weaken or eliminate New York’s long-standing tradition of home rule and local government authority.  Now is the time to call on the Governor of New York, members of the State Senate, and members of the State Assembly to ensure that Part O, and particularly the offending provisions identified herein, be excluded from the New York State budget or any other legislation. 

  • DOWNLOAD RESOLUTION

    A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PART O OF THE GOVERNOR’S FY 2025 ARTICLE VII REVENUE BILL REGARDING THE SITING OF MAJOR ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION FACILITIES, ALSO KNOWN AS THE “RAPID” ACT

    WHEREAS, New York Governor Hochul has released the Executive Budget Proposal for Fiscal Year 2025, which includes Part O of the Transportation, Economic Development, and Environmental Conservation budget bill entitled the Renewable Action through Project Interconnect and Deployment (“RAPID”) Act; and

    WHEREAS, the RAPID Act seeks to move the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (“ORES”) from the Department of State to the Department of Public Service, and seeks to consolidate and expedite permitting procedures for major renewable energy and electric transmission facilities under a new Article VIII of the Public Service Law; and

    WHEREAS, if passed, the RAPID Act will undermine sound environmental review of major electric transmission facilities by requiring ORES to render a permit decision within a single year, otherwise the facility shall be automatically approved, regardless of project size or impact on private property or conservation lands; and

    WHEREAS, if passed, the RAPID Act will constitute a significant deprivation of Private Property Rights by extended the power of Eminent Domain to the construction of major electric transmission facilities by large-scale solar and wind developers, said power being currently limited to regulated utilities granted a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need; and

    WHEREAS, if passed, the RAPID Act will undermine the protection of natural resources by allowing conservation easements to be extinguished anywhere in the state, including the Adirondack Park and Catskill Parks, for the construction of major electric transmission facilities by large-scale solar and wind developers, said authority being currently limited to regulated utilities granted a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need; and

    WHEREAS, if passed, the RAPID Act will further erode home rule and local decision-making enshrined in the New York State Constitution, Local Government Bill of Rights, Statute of Local Governments, and Municipal Home Rule law, usurping the rights of local governments to determine how communities and property within their jurisdictions develop, and contravening the purpose of comprehensive planning outlined in Section 272-A of Town Law; now therefore be it

    RESOLVED, that ____________ strongly opposes the passage of Part O contained in the Governor’s Article VII Revenue Bill relating to the expedited siting of major electric transmission facilities, the use of Eminent Domain, and the extinguishing of conservation easements, and be it further

    RESOLVED, that ____________ calls on the Governor of New York, members of the State Senate, and members of the State Assembly to ensure that Part O, and particularly the offending provisions identified herein, be excluded from the New York State budget or any other legislation, and be it further

    RESOLVED, that ____________ opposes state or federal action that would weaken or eliminate New York’s long-standing tradition of home rule and local government authority; and be it further

    RESOLVED, that the Clerk of ___________ is hereby directed to provide a copy of this resolution to Governor Kathy Hochul, Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado, State Senator __________, Member of the State Assembly ____________, and all others deemed necessary and proper.

Opposing the RAPID Act

Battery Energy Storage Systems

  • We are writing to express our deep concern about battery energy storage systems that have been built across New York and the inherent health and safety risks that accompany them. Stop Energy Sprawl is a statewide coalition of citizens who live near existing and proposed wind and solar projects. Of all the stakeholders in New York’s renewable energy policy, we are affected the most.

    Our greatest concern is for the safety of residents who live near battery storage facilities, and for emergency responders who will have to contain any fires. We have reviewed the Working Group’s recommendations. While they improve both the prevention and containment of battery fires, they could be strengthened by the ideas discussed below. Although energy policy is controversial, fire safety should not be.

    We submit the following comments:

    1. Containing and extinguishing battery fires requires special expertise. Most such storage systems are in remote rural areas covered by small, volunteer fire departments. Adequate materials, equipment, personnel and training for local departments is essential, but they will inevitably have limited experience. Most local fire departments have never confronted a battery storage system fire.

    Given the combination of severity and infrequency of such fires, the state should consider developing a specialized, dispatchable unit of responders to assist locals in these emergencies. This would be comparable to DEC HazMat teams or Corrections SWAT teams, providing expertise in situations the local departments have never encountered before.

    We trust that the Firefighters’ Association of New York State and the National Fire Protection Association are reviewing these recommendations, and we would defer to their views on this subject. It is essential to understand how they intend to contain and extinguish battery energy storage system fires, as this will play an important role in what safeguards should be put into place from a health and safety standpoint, including how to handle shelter-in-place orders that were issued as fires broke out in multiple towns last year.

    2. The state should maintain a complete inventory of battery storage facilities, including their location, size, technological design and physical layout (cabinet vs. walk-in). In the event of fire at a facility, it will be critical for the state to quickly identify other battery systems of similar design, in order to assess whether they have the same vulnerability. A comparable example is the Dept. of Transportation’s bridge inventory system, which after the 1987 Schoharie Creek bridge collapse allowed it to speedily identify and inspect all state bridges with piers in water. Such a function could be housed within NYSERDA, the state Office of Fire Prevention and Control or other appropriate state agency.

    3. It is critical to identify and remediate any toxic contamination of groundwater resulting from battery fires or other malfunctions, including chemicals used to extinguish the fires. Nearly all residents living near battery storage systems rely on private wells for drinking water. Following a fire or other leakage from a battery storage system, the Fire Code should require operators to test all private wells within 1,000 feet of the system. In the event of groundwater contamination as a result of the incident, the operator, at its sole expense, shall provide a reliable alternative water source for as long as it is needed and address the contamination in accordance with all federal and state legal requirements.

    4. The Working Group recommendation for further study of water supply prolongs risk. Even where water is not appropriate for direct application, it is necessary for soaking surrounding areas to prevent fires from spreading. The National Fire Protection Association has found that water is the most effective agent for cooling a Battery Energy Storage System. Because most of these systems are in areas with no public water supply, we recommend that the Code require installers of storage system in such areas to develop a well, or ensure access to a natural or man-made water body holding a sufficient amount of water to fight any fire that could occur, as determined in site plan review, with dry hydrants for emergency firefighting use. This could be done while the development of guidance continues, as the report recommends.

    5. We note that some school districts, in response to the state’s electric bus mandate, are planning on installing their own battery storage systems. Because our information so far is anecdotal, it is uncertain how widespread this will become. It is clear that these storage systems can pose even more risks than those at generating facilities, due to the proximity of most bus garages to school buildings. Any school bus storage systems need to be held to standards as strict as all other systems. At minimum, the state Education Department should be consulted on this subject in order to provide guidance to school districts.

    6. Finally, there is the problem of the many existing systems already built that do not meet the proposed conditions. The code should require that all existing systems be upgraded to the new standards within no less than five years.

    We commend the Working Group for its efforts so far. Implementing these recommendations will alleviate some of the concerns of New York residents about battery storage systems.

March 26, 2024 Oppose the RAPID Act Presentation

Sample Opposition Letters for individuals:
Oppose RAPID Act #1
Oppose RAPID Act #2