Issues arise with Tusten solar panels

Posted 8/21/12

NARROWSBURG, NY — At the recent Town of Tusten board meeting some problems were brought up concerning the town’s soon-to-be-installed solar panels. After working tirelessly to get the panels for …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Issues arise with Tusten solar panels

Posted

NARROWSBURG, NY — At the recent Town of Tusten board meeting some problems were brought up concerning the town’s soon-to-be-installed solar panels. After working tirelessly to get the panels for the town, the Tusten Energy Committee presented their plan to the town board, then the board signed a contract. The panels will be installed this summer. However, three obstacles might stand in the way.

The first came about after an article in a local newspaper about the solar panels stated an estimate for the cost savings quoted by Supervisor Carol Wingert at $600,000. It was then brought to her attention that the actual savings will be between $200,000 and $300,000. This prompted discussion at the town meeting, when Councilman Ned Lang questioned whether the savings are good enough, and whether the town should explore other options. He also said that there should be a contract stating what the cost per kilowatt hour should be. Tusten Energy Committee chair Brandi Merolla said it’s not possible to know exactly what the cost will be from year to year, but they do know the trends. She also said there will be a significant saving, at about 40%.

Secondly, someone reported the project to the New York State Department of Labor (DOL), saying that the workers would not be paid the prevailing wage. The DOL then contacted the board, saying that the workers must be paid the prevailing wage. According to the energy committee and town board, they do not have to pay the prevailing wage and the board is looking to appeal the decision.

Finally, the name of the company in the contract was reported incorrectly, so the town board passed a resolution to change the name from Atlantech Solar to Green Energy Partners LLC.

Merolla said they are still moving forward with the solar panels and they will be installed soon.

Main Street deck

The board voted to put the Main Street Deck project out to bid at the last town board meeting, and it was announced at this meeting that the cost to do so, as estimated by Chazen Companies, will be $16,700. The town board agreed that the cost is high. It covers the costs of developing the bid specifications to be put into the request for proposal (RFP), and the referendum. The board questioned whether or not the bid specifications have to be completed before the referendum is held. At first the board thought that the specifications had to be completed first, but after Councilman Tony Ritter pressed the point, Wingert said it might be possible to delay until afterward and that she would look into it. The cost of the bid specs would be included in the $106,000 grant. If the voters say “no” to the proposed deck in the referendum, then the cost of the bid would still be reimbursed out of the grant.

Narrowsburg fireworks

There was some discussion over the location of the Fourth of July fireworks. After the location where they had been held for years, on Firemen’s Field, was found to be dangerous to nearby eagles, the fireworks were moved in 2013 and 2014 to a property held by Councilman Lang, and he funded the fireworks. This year he plans to hold them at his property again on Friday, July 3, and contribute $5,000 toward the cost, with Rick Lander contributing $1,000. However, the Tusten Local Development Corporation announced that they are looking into relocating the fireworks to the original spot, at Landers field, and reinstating the carnival. They have spoken to the Department of Environmental Conservation, Bureau of Fish & Wildlife Services and the National Park Service to ascertain whether they can be held this year without risk to nesting eagles. They said the fire company would be OK with that. Lang said if the fireworks display were removed from his property, he might not contribute money, or not as much money.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here