By JIM AUSTIN
Cooperstown Crier

CHERRY VALLEY — Town Supervisor Tom Garretson said during last week’s town board meeting that he wants to ``revisit’’ the idea of a wind farm on East Hill. His comment comes almost exactly two years after the adoption of a local ordinance with stringent setback requirements that short circuited Reunion Power’s plan to site 24 turbines there.

``Two years ago in 2006 I made the statement that the town board was committed to a project, maybe not the size that was presented, but a project. It’s been two years and the resource is still there,’’ Garretson said Monday in an interview. ``I want to see if there is support for a town project. I won’t say what size, but a project.’’

The wind on East Hill has been described as some of the best in New York State for generating electricity and Garretson would like to take advantage of that resource. He said that as supervisor it is incumbent on him to examine all the options open to the town.

``I’m not only the town supervisor, but also the budget officer and there’s been less money coming in from the federal, state and county governments,’’ he said. ``You have to take care of yourself. The wind just howls down here at my house, but clearly the resource is up there. That’s what I have to look at.’’

Garretson said he is only thinking out loud at this point. One of the first things he plans to do is speak with East Hill landowners who had leases with Reunion Power and those neighbors who didn’t to see if opinions have changed in the last two years. If the leases are still in effect, Reunion Power would have to be included also.

``There are a lot of things we have to figure out,’’ he said. And the ordinance that stopped Reunion Power may now stand in Garretson’s way. Whether it will have to be amended will depend on the size of a project and the adjoining property owners, he said.

``It may be a smaller scale. We’ll have to see,’’ he said. ``I’m not going to force anything on anybody.’’

If there is going to be a project, it will be handled differently than Reunion Power’s proposal.

``Two years ago I was in a situation where I hade to be reactive almost every day. Today, I can be proactive. We’re going to go at a pace that the town is comfortable with,’’ he said.

But finding a comfort level for residents over wind turbines may be a difficult proposition considering how Reunion Power’s proposal divided the town.

``The Advocates have always been in favor of a renewable energy package for the town of Cherry Valley. áIn fact, we called for such a package on the very day of the passage of the wind ordinance,’’ said Andy Minnig, an East Hill resident and founding member of the Advocates for Cherry Valley, which opposed the turbines.

``That package could and should include some appropriately scaled wind turbines and that puts us on the same page as supervisor Garretson. But we remain adamantly opposed to any industrial scale development on East Hill,’’ he added.

Minnig said that a ``socalled wind farm,’’ in the form of dozens of more than 400-foot towers, is an industrial installation and is simply a power plant in a new configuration.

``I would add thatájust because there is wind on East Hill does not justify some pro forma destruction of thousands of acres and the degradation of the living environment for scores of families,’’ he said. One might as well ask what is theáprice at which a parent sells its child?’’

According to Minnig, the town’s wind ordinance was written with the justification of the health and safety of the community in mind and Cherry Valley’s Comprehensive Plan calls for the preservation of the historic and rural character of our town.

``I urge everyone not to look backward to past controversy, but to respect these two very important, progressive documents, and to move forward toward some new and exciting innovations,’’ he said.

Mark Cornwell, the chairman of the town’s Alternative Energy Committee, said he knew no details about Garretson’s interest in turbines, but hopes any discussion will be productive.

``If we do start a conversation in Cherry Valley, I hope it’s a meaningful one. I don’t want to see any of the divisiveness of the past.’’

Barb and Rodney Perry are also East Hill residents. They agreed to lease land to Reunion Power and remain committed to wind turbines.

Their lease with Reunion is still in effect, said Barb Perry, who is the cochair of the Renewable Energy Advocates Coalition, an organization that promotes the use of all alternative energy.

She said they are in favor of anything they can do to stay global warming. ``This is the end of oil and we have to make changes in how we look at energy production, she said.

``This could be a tremendous opportunity for Cherry Valley to be at the forefront of sustainable energy production. This is not about me as a landowner, but about the survival of the earth and respect for the earth.’’

There are so many health issues related to fossil fuel energy production that it only makes sense to shift to clean, renewable energy sources, she said. Perry also has concerns about the divisive nature of past discussions of a wind farm on East Hill.

``I hope we can proceed in a safe manner and make people as comfortable as possible,’’ she said. ``I hope we can do it rationally.’’

Perry remains in contact with Reunion Power and believes the company remains interested in Cherry Valley. Sandy Gordon, a representative of Reunion Power, is an old family friend, she said.

``We have to stop thinking about my generation and start thinking about future generations,’’ Garretson said. ``This is something I feel needs to be done so we’ll give it a look.’’