On April 11, 2019, Apex Clean Energy officially informed the towns of Yates and Somerset that: “… Apex Clean Energy has decided not to advance the Lighthouse Wind permit application for a 2019 submittal at this time.”
This is good news for our towns, but not great news.
Interestingly we’ve discovered that, a week earlier, this same APEX firm informed leaseholders that: The Lighthouse Wind Project is "no longer being pursued at this time" although "leases will remain in place for two (2) years" unless "the state (NYS) will allow the overrule of local laws"; otherwise "Apex will pull out of …Lighthouse Wind."
This methodology of sending different messages to different recipients is disappointing, at the least; and unprofessional and misleading at its worst. Which is the correct message? As Apex has historically been less than straightforward in its official communications with governmental agencies such as town boards, county legislatures and state agencies, it is clear that the message delivered to leaseholders during the first week of April is the true message.
Given that we will not reduce the protections of our constituency via town law changes, as well as clear statements from the state that local laws will not be overridden, its time for Apex Clean Energy to face the music.
The Lighthouse Wind Project is dead.
Apex Clean Energy needs to own up to the fact that they chose a poor project site. They now need to take the bitter pill and tell the public what they’ve told their leaseholders in private: The Lighthouse Wind Project will not move forward.
APEX Clean Energy should do the right thing:
1). Immediately and officially withdraw the Lighthouse Wind Project (NYSDPS Matter: 14-F-0485) from the Article 10 process.
2). Immediately withdraw the Lighthouse Wind Project from the New York Independent System Operator Project Connection Queue.
3). Immediately remove all meteorological (MET) Towers from the Lighthouse Wind project area.
4). Immediately cancel all leases and pay the leaseholders what they are owed through the end of their lease contracts. The majority of our towns' constituencies may have been on different sides of this issue with the leaseholders, but we are all neighbors. We have all suffered through this Apex era together and they deserve the lease payments they are owed.
These actions by Apex will begin to heal the wounds they have so deftly opened in our community and allow us to aggressively prepare our towns for suitable economic investment.
It would be Apex’s appropriate farewell.
JOHN RIGGI, Lyndonville, Yates town council member