Court date set for Pine Plains

Court date set for Pine Plains

Route 199 in Pine Plains near the proposed access for Carson Power LLC’s planned 10 megawatt solar project, which faces opposition from some neighbors.

John Coston

PINE PLAINS — The New York State Supreme Court judge in charge of the lawsuit brought by residents opposed to the Tier 3 solar project at Pulvers Corners has scheduled oral arguments for May 3.

On Friday, March 29, Judge Anthony R. Molé of Putnam Supreme Court called for the oral arguments to be held in Putnam County Supreme Court in Carmel at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 306.

A March 19 court hearing had been canceled by Judge Molé, who recently was assigned to the case after a string of other justices recused themselves from handling it for various reasons. Justice Gina Capone, who previously had been assigned the case, had scheduled the March 19 oral arguments.

The resident group, known as Preserve Pine Plains, is seeking an injunction against the solar farm project, proposed by Carson Power LLC of New York City. The group filed an Article 78 action against the Pine Plains Planning Board and developers of the project, which envisions a 10MW complex consisting of 24,000 solar panels on farmland at 454 Bean River Road.

Article 78 proceedings put the action of an official or agency under review by a court.

“Counsel must be adequately prepared to argue the procedural and substantive issues concerning the claims and contentions raised in the pleadings and the parties briefs,” Judge Molé wrote in a court notice to the parties.

“Each party shall be allotted ten minutes for their main arguments and prior to beginning argument, may reserve up to three minutes for rebuttal,” he wrote.

The judge previously had signaled to the parties that a review of the submitted papers in the case would precede a decision whether to hold oral arguments.

Since the petition was filed by Preserve Pine Plains Dec. 27, 2023, more than 120 documents have been submitted by sets of attorneys representing both sides of the case.

Mindy Zoghlin of the Zoghlin Group LLC in Rochester represents Preserve Pine Plains. The town is represented by Warren S. Replansky.

Developers named in the case are Pulvers Corner Solar 1 LLC, Pulvers Corners Solar 2 LLC, Nexamp Inc., SolaREIT 1-A LLC and Carson Power.

The residents’ group claims the Town Board failed to take a “hard look” at “significant adverse impacts” with respect to community character and town planning documents. It also claims the Planning Board failed to take a “hard look” at the project’s impacts on plants and animals and on aesthetic resources and “ignored identified areas of environmental concerns.”

In extensive rebuttal, town officials and the developers disagree with and challenge the plaintiffs’ claims.

In its application with the Town of Pine Plains, Carson power said it intends to honor the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service “Tree Clearing Window” to accommodate actions to eliminate risk of impacts to Endangered Bat Species in New York State. “In consideration of this window, tree removal will only happen in the window of November 1st to March 31st,” Carson agreed.

Latest News

Millerton’s 175th committee advances plans for celebration, seeks vendors and sponsors

The Millerton 175th anniversary committee's tent during the village's trunk-or-treat event on Oct. 31, 2025.

Photo provided

MILLERTON — As Millerton officially enters its 175th year, the volunteer committee tasked with planning its milestone celebration is advancing plans and firming up its week-long schedule of events, which will include a large community fair at Eddie Collins Memorial Park and a drone light show. The events will take place this July 11 through 19.

Millerton’s 175th committee chair Lisa Hermann said she is excited for this next phase of planning.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why the focus on Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Keep ReadingShow less
Military hardware as a signpost

It is hard not to equate military spending and purchasing with diplomatic or strategic plans being made, for reasons otherwise unknown. Keeping an eye out for the physical stuff can often begin to shine a light on what’s coming – good and possibly very bad.

Without Congressional specific approval, the Pentagon has awarded a contract to Boeing for $8,600,000,000 (US taxpayer dollars) for another 25 F-15A attack fighters to be given to Israel. Oh, and there’s another 25 more of the F-15EX variant on option, free to Israel as well.

Keep ReadingShow less
Truth and evidence depend on the right to observe

A small group of protesters voice opposition to President Trump's administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Amenia's Fountain Square at the intersection of Route 44 and Route 22 on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025

Photo by Nathan Miller

The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, and before him Renée Good, by federal agents in Minnesota is not just a tragedy; it is a warning. In the aftermath, Trump administration officials released an account of events that directly contradicted citizen video recorded at the scene. Those recordings, made by ordinary people exercising their rights, showed circumstances sharply at odds with the official narrative. Once again, the public is asked to choose between the administration’s version of events and the evidence of its own eyes.

This moment underscores an essential truth: the right to record law enforcement is not a nuisance or a provocation; it is a safeguard. As New York Times columnist David French put it, “Citizen video has decisively rebutted the administration’s lies. The evidence of our eyes contradicts the dishonesty of the administration’s words.”

Keep ReadingShow less