Published: April 30, 2008 09:31 pm      

POWER COALITION: Changing course on protocols

Argument has held up project funding

Nine months of negotiations and thousands of dollars in lawyer fees later, members of the Niagara Power Coalition have decided not to move forward with a set of protocols that would guide how the Host Communities Standing Committee operates and approves projects.

Coalition members — which together with the New York Power Authority make up the standing committee — have been arguing with the power authority over project approval in a series of marathon meetings.

The argument has essentially been whether every single member must vote “yes” for a project to be approved or if that can be achieved by a majority vote. Coalition members fear that insisting on consensus would amount to giving the power authority veto power but also can’t insist on their way because the power authority controls the annual $3 million per year for projects.

Eventually, members took protocols with a middle ground compromise — an arbitration proceeding — back to their respective boards, but it was rejected by the Niagara County Legislature and the Lewiston Town Board.

At a meeting Wednesday, the coalition voted to take a new set of protocols developed by the county — which includes majority voting for project approval — back to their boards. They plan to bring it to a vote at their next meeting. Niagara Falls School District Attorney Angelo Massaro said a lawsuit could come if the power authority objects to the revised protocols.

A series of speakers at Wednesday’s meeting expressed their frustration at the process and the power authority’s insistence on consensus. Hodgson Russ attorney Robert Fluskey, representing the Town of Lewiston, stressed the need for coalition members to be on the same page going into the standing committee meeting, lest “we get into a four-hour discussion with NYPA about commas.”

The power authority was not at the meeting and had not yet received a copy of the new, amended protocols when contacted later for comment. Spokesperson Connie Cullen said the power authority was disappointed they weren’t given the opportunity to discuss the protocols.

Cullen said the power authority was reserving further comment on the protocols or possible courses of action until it can review the new protocols.

In response to a question of whether it’s possible the power authority would release funds without a consensus-based project approval structure for the standing committee, she said, “As the power authority has said before regarding funding of greenway projects by any standing committee (there are four standing committees total), the funds have been set aside for projects that are approved as consistent with the greenway plan and that meet agreed upon criteria.”