Greenporters hopping mad about cable project, blame Islanders

Upset by a PSEG proposal to extend an underground electrical cable to Shelter Island Heights from a residential village street, Greenport residents took their protests to Village Board members on September 15.

They called the plan poorly researched, dangerous and unfair, and said both the village and residents would be forced to deal with loud construction noises and electrical wires running under their street.

“It is astounding that so little time from this board has been dedicated to this issue, for a project that has been discussed for over a year,” said Marissa Winkler, a Fifth Street resident. “Do you not owe the residents of Fifth Street more than the time you have dedicated thus far? I am stunned.”

More than 30 residents packed into the meeting room, furious with a Village Board they believed was rushing to approve PSEG’s plan of running a cable under Fifth Street. As the more than hour-long public comment period dragged on, some in the crowd grew more frustrated, openly shouting and booing at times.

The controversial project would run a cable under Peconic Bay to the Heights to provide more reliable electrical service to the Island.

A cable project started from Crescent Beach to Greenport by LIPA in 2013 lasted for months, with numerous delays, until the power company eventually pulled the plug. PSEG has since taken over the project.

LIPA had preferred to build a substation on the Island near the Shelter Island Historical Society next to a residential neighborhood, but vocal residents opposed that plan and the Town Board passed a resolution banning all substations on the Island.

This ban infuriated some Greenporters, who met informally with Village Trustees earlier this month.

“This is all because Shelter Island refuses to have a substation,” said Tom Spackman. “This is being thrust upon us.”

Mr. Spackman, who works as a voiceover artist, said the construction project would prevent him from working. His home recording studio is already equipped with floating floors and soundproofing to keep out noise.

“None of that will stop what we’re talking about here,” Mr. Spackman said. “There’s no way I will be able to work. I know a little something about [decibels] and sound and what it does.”

Michael Osinski, who owns a oyster harvesting business in Greenport, said the Village Board should take note of the previous failure and how Southold Town has since refused to allow an underwater cable project again.

Mr. Osinski said the Village Board was being duped by PSEG into taking on another lengthy project.

“They’re going through the densest part of the North Fork,” he said. “Why? Because they think they can wave some money in front of you and you’ll buy it … They will walk all over you and all you will see is the bottom of their boot.”

Others were concerned the cable could pose a health hazard for residents due to “electromagnetic effects” flowing from the cable itself. Village administrator Paul Pallas said no studies exist that show cables are linked with negative health effects.

“Nothing’s disproving it, either,” a resident sitting in the audience retorted.

Some Village Board members praised the positive effects a more reliable electric system — and the substantial fee PSEG has promised to pay — would have on the village budget.

“Our problem is we don’t have the money,” said Trustee Doug Roberts. “This is potentially an entire year’s worth of taxes.”

Under a tentative deal pitched by PSEG officials in private meetings with some of board members, the company would pay the village $1 million for the project and provide free repaving work for the affected roadways.

PSEG also agreed to pay a $10,000 fee for every day it goes beyond the projected three-month completion time.
Board members agreed that — before any decision was reached — the village would need to do more research and get additional answers to residential concerns about noise, disruption and health effects.

Village trustees and PSEG representatives are planning to schedule a public meeting to discuss concerns about the project.