Neighbor Ready For Legal Action Without New PSEG Project Location

GREENPORT, NY — One Fifth Street neighbor, infuriated over a proposed PSEG electric cable project proposed smack in the middle of his residential community, near a park and playground, is ready to commence litigation against the Village of Greenport if a new location is not found.

Chris McShea has objected vehemently to the project, which involves cable that will run from Greenport to Shelter Island. He has voiced significant concerns over the potential health impacts of the proposed project, especially for his two small children, ages two and five.

McShea said he'd met with PSEG reps and a small group before Tuesday night's informational meeting at the Little Red Schoolhouse and said it became clear, "There was really not much research put into this entire project."

He added that he asked the PSEG engineer why the project was sited on a busy residential street near a park and an osprey nest, near a spot where summer camp is held five days a week for 50 children.

"His response was that it's the easiest, closest route," he said.

Despite the fact that PSEG said the electric voltage would be minimal and pose no risks, McShea says he has grave concerns about the long-term health impacts to his children. "It's a lot of voltage going down my block," adding that there has been research connecting electricity and childhood cancer. "I don't need that risk," he said.

Meanwhile, McShea said after seeing the Fourth Street location, PSEG engineer Emmanuel Lilimpakis was surprised the site had not been discussed previously. "He said, 'I can't believe we didn't come here before, that we didn't look at this spot,'" McShea said.

He added that the amount of money currently being offered is "silly" and said the project should not even be considered for less than $5 million.

Turning to Greenport Village Mayor George Hubbard, McShea said, "Is it true that you are the only negotiator, Mr. Hubbard?"

"No, it is not," Hubbard said; the mayor added that the entire board has talked about the matter in executive session.

Village Trustee Doug Roberts said the village board had not met anyone from PSEG until last week.

McShea asked if the board had yet pursued the Fourth Street idea with PSEG, adding that he believed it was "premature" to site the project on Fifth Street and that the project needs to be relocated.

"I don't want it on my block. My constitutional rights are being infringed upon," McShea said. "I'm going to do everything I can, not to allow it. It would be in everybody's best interests to find another location."

After he spoke, when asked by Patch if he was considering legal action, McShea said, "Yes."

Chatty Allen said Roberts had been "stirring the pot with misinformation. That's what needs to stop."

"It is the truth," Roberts responded, adding that he and other board members had only met with PSEG reps last week.

At Thursday night's village board meeting, which followed an information session with PSEG held Tuesday in Greenport, Martiza Winkler asked the board for a status update and suggested an electric utility appraiser, "so we can move forward with confidence on the compensation part of this deal."

Budget said her "fears were quelled somewhat to hear that the plan is not the same one that was in place at Conkling Point. "There's a big difference, potentially, in the noise, the vibration and the destruction," she said.

She added, though, that it was important to see it all in writing. "Have faith, but verify," she said.

Greenport Village Mayor George Hubbard said the village has received no written contract or paperwork. "I have received nothing from PSEG," he said.

Budget said at the meeting, an "informal agreement" was mentioned.

Village Attorney Joe Prokop asked who'd said there was an informal agreement.

Village Trustee Doug Roberts said he was the one who'd said it, adding maybe he shouldn't have used those words.

"There has been a discussion. We put out numbers discussed at the work session. I would say we are in the negotiation phase and can't really discuss" specifics, Roberts said.

Budget asked if the village was seeking an environmental engineer or electric utility appraiser to help with the contract and the fair value question.

Prokop said he'd reached out to the engineering firms; of those, one is supposed to have a proposal coming soon.

As for the New York State environmental review, Prokop said since both LIPA and the village have elected to declare lead agency status, the matter is being referred to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation for a decision.

He added that at this point, he has had no conversations yet with PSEG attorneys.

John Winkler said at the meeting with PSEG officials, the issue of Fourth Street was raised and PSEG reps said they would consider that option, which had never been discussed before that meeting Tuesday.

"This deal seems like what the Dutch had with the Indians, and we are the Indians. We are up against a corporation that can bury us in litigation," he said, strongly recommending the village hire an appraiser.

"Information is so sketchy. PSEG wants to pay everything upfront. They want to buy Fifth Street. What is Fifth Street worth? They are going to own that easement forever," Winkler said. "What kind of a value do you put on that?"

Chatty Allen said if the project moves forward, it will have a far greater impact than on one street, with work slated to begin near Chapel Lane and run all the way to Fifth Street before turning toward the beach. As a school bus driver, she said her runs will be diverted on a daily basis.

Linda Gordon said she lives on Fifth Street and had not heard about the PSEG meeting; she said advance notification for such meetings was critical.

As for the price being discussed, she said $1 million dollars might not even be enough to buy two houses in the village; she also questioned what the digging and work would do the the old infrastructure, such as sewer and water lines from 1966, near her home.

Resident Bill Swiskey said the village needed to write down a list of exactly what was expected of PSEG. He added that PSEG would need to file two separate traffic plans, one for Fifth Street and one for the work on New York State Route 25.

He echoed a question he'd asked at the informational session with PSEG, about whether the village would still get the proposed benefit package if the project fails, and told the board that point needed to be included in the negotiations. In addition, Swiskey said he'd like to see another member of the village board join the negotiations team.

"You're dealing with top management" at PSEG, Swiskey said. "It's no time for amateur night."

He added that the mimimum fee the village should demand is $5 million.

"Ten million," a man in the audience called out.

Doug Moore said he fully agreed the village should require ample renumeration for the project. "We don't know how it will impact us in the future."

The future should be part of a financial deal, such a via a lease, which could be "the gift that keeps on giving," he said.

Teresa Taylor of Sterling Avenue said the project be a boon for the entire village. Residents, she said, "are telling you, if you do this the right way, it will be so beneficial to us. This is not just about Fourth or Fifth Streets."

She added that she didn't believe in the 'Not in my backyard' concerns. "Everyone lives through renovations. You live with a mess and then it's done and it's good. We have to recognize that this is not going to be easy but there will be a result that will make it really worth it."

The meeting at the Schoolhouse this week followed a heated discussion on the proposed project last Thursday at the Greenport village board work session; a group of residents also met to air concerns earlier in September at Fifth Street Beach.