NARROWSBURG, NY — A public hearing was held at the Tusten town meeting on the new camping zoning law. Citizens turned out to voice their concern over the law, saying it doesn’t go far enough, while one person said it goes too far.

The purpose of Camping Local Law #1 is to regulate campgrounds and campsites as well as the use and storage of recreational vehicles (RVs). It address five areas: campsite non-commercial, campsite travel trailer/camper commercial, campsite tent commercial, campground or recreational vehicle park and travel trailer.

One of the reasons this law came about is because residents of Perry Pond Road complained that there are abandoned RVs on vacant lots. They were at the public hearing and continued to raise questions. Someone said that it used to be RVs needed a permit and must be removed after a certain time. Now, they said, people are making a “country get-away” by leaving an RV on vacant land and only paying taxes on the land, not any kind of structure or house. The board pointed out that in the law it states an RV would need a permit. Someone would get two permits per year, each lasting 45 days (in section 6.2.3).

One resident, Lance Brodmerkel, who lives outside of town “in the country,” said he has lived here his entire life, and has always had an RV on his property next to his house. He said he doesn’t see what the issue is; “If it bothers you, don’t look at it,” he said.

More questions arose about the law. People wondered how these laws would be enforced, many saying that people aren’t going to follow the rules and no one is going to do anything about it. They asked the board if they (the board) would be the ones to hold people accountable, but the board said it would be up to the police. To that, one audience member responded that the police aren’t going to do anything, “They aren’t going to answer a call at 2 a.m. about a party on a campsite.”

As more and more questions arose, Councilman Tony Ritter wondered, “Does it create more problems than it solves? We should create policy that answers questions and doesn’t open a can of worms.”

Supervisor Carol Wingert wanted to make the point that the zoning re-write committee put a lot of work into creating this law. They will take the public’s comments into consideration and continue working on it.

Commercial solar in Tusten? Not so fast—there’s a moratorium

At a previous town meeting Councilman Ned Lang asked the board if Delaware River Solar could make a presentation about its commercial solar projects in the area. Two representatives came to this meeting to answer questions. They said there is only one project being looked at in the Town of Tusten. The project is on land that Ned Lang owns.

Councilwoman Brandi Merolla said she was surprised to see Lang’s name on the project docket, and asked if it was a conflict of interest. Lang said it wasn’t, that commercial solar would be in the public’s interest.

The Delaware River Solar representatives said one 2-megawatt solar array would generate enough power for approximately 300 homes. They said they have visited half a dozen town boards and have heard people’s feedback. It was mentioned that the Town of Fremont passed a law allowing commercial solar, whereas the Town of Delaware passed a six-month moratorium on commercial solar.

Stephen Stuart of Sullivan Alliance for Sustainable Development was there and said, “This is a brand new program.” He asked that the board take its time in crafting good zoning regulations. He also urged the board to look at CUNY/Pace solar farm guidelines for their review.

Merolla had questions for the representatives. In response to her questions, they said the panels are spaced far enough apart that when it rains on a panel the maximum distance of run-off would be four feet. They also said vegetation can grow under the panels. They said Delaware River Solar would be the owner and maintainer of the system.

However, any project will have to hold off as there is currently a solar moratorium in the Town of Tusten. The board voted on the moratorium at the February 2016 meeting. Merolla said they will vote on it again after the six months is up, as they need more time to put into place proper protective zoning laws.