Letter to Governor Kathy Hochul, September 3, 2025
September 3, 2025
The Honorable Kathy Hochul
Governor of New York State
New York State Capitol Building
Albany, NY 12224
Re: ORES Permit Application Number 24-03041, Hecate Energy Columbia County for Shepherd’s Run Solar Project, Town of Copake, Columbia County, NY
Dear Governor Hochul:
I write to you as President of Arcadian Alliance, a grassroots historic preservation and environmental advocacy organization in Copake, New York. On behalf of the Board of Directors, I respectfully ask you to veto the application for the Shepherd’s Run Solar Project (Matter No. 24-03041) in the Town of Copake, Columbia County. Comparable to your response to the wind farm off Long Beach, a veto is warranted due to strong community opposition, and the fact that the Developer has not done enough to build local support nor avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts. We implore you to take decisive executive action to stop this large-scale solar project from causing inordinate economic, environmental and social burdens on the rural farming community of Copake.
Hecate Energy seeks ORES approval to build the 42-megawatt Shepherd’s Run in the heart of the historic farming and residential hamlet of Craryville. The Project site was targeted by Hecate for its proximity to an existing NYSEG electrical substation. It sits on approximately 700-acres of land with 215-acres of solar panels along Routes 23 and 7 and adjacent to residences, small businesses, and the K-12 Taconic Hills School. Section 94-c exempts ORES from adherence to Local Law and SEQR, relieving the Developer of any burden to compromise. As a result, Shepherd’s Run would imperil 200-acres of prime farmland, 40-acres of wooded lands, the NYS DEC-protected Taghkanic Creek Watershed, and cultural resources including five National Register-eligible properties –thus threatening the viability of Copake’s farming and tourism economy.
Since 2020, Copake’s bipartisan Town Board has stood united in opposition to Shepherd’s Run for its inappropriate siting and scale. Most residents oppose the Project due to the anticipated loss of property values, local jobs and businesses, quality of life, and risk to public and environmental safety. Local volunteer fire departments do not have the manpower, equipment or training to handle a fire at a facility this large. State Senator Michelle Hinchey and Assemblymember Didi Barrett have written letters to ORES in support of the town. The Columbia County Board of Supervisors passed a unanimous resolution in 2020 opposing Shepherd’s Run as it was then proposed, and in 2023 passed a resolution that no permit should be granted unless the Developer proves that neither the Taghkanic Creek watershed nor water quality for the City of Hudson is impacted. And finally, ORES has not held Hecate accountable for the recommendations set out in the OPRHP’s May 2024 Adverse Determination Letter to develop “meaningful mitigation measures” with “a variety of history-based groups” intended “to offset what [SHPO] believes will be significant visual impacts associated with this undertaking.” Hecate has ignored the above concerns and demonstrated its unwillingness to resolve adverse impacts before proceeding with a potentially high-risk and damaging project that impacts so many lives.
The Arcadian Alliance applauds you, Governor Hochul, for your recent bold and sensible public statements recognizing the need for New York State to adjust the pace of the green energy transition to ensure consumer affordability and reliability. Now is also the time to re-evaluate the effectiveness and sustainability of the 94-c expedited solar permitting process, public support, and the ways in which it is threatening economic and environmental justice for rural communities.
Thank you for your time and consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
Catherine Mikic, President & Co-Founder
ARCADIAN ALLIANCE
Position Paper on Hecate Energy’s 2024 Permit Application to NYS for Shepherd’s Run Solar Facility JUNE 2025
Position 1: Stop a Solar Permit Precedent that allows the Developer to place unjust economic, environmental and social-cultural burdens on rural communities including risk to historic resources.
The proposed Shepherd’s Run solar project in rural Craryville, NY threatens five National Register eligible resources and their related landscapes: 1) c.1850 Niver Farmhouse; 2) c.1860 Sir William Farm; 3) c.1870 Craryville Depot Complex; 4) c.1818 North Copake Cemetery; and 5) c.1890 Vernacular Farmhouse. If approved, it would establish a precedent for a solar siting and permitting process that undervalues rural historic resources and community involvement, and relieves the Developer of any burden to compromise. The process holds no accountability for the social/cultural, environmental, and economic burdens unfairly placed on rural communities. Hecate consultant, TRC, prepared the 2021 “Historic Architectural Resources Survey and Effects Report” with inadequacies that include:
a. Poor Siting Poses Risks. The 42MW Project is proposed for the heart of the hamlet of Craryville, targeted for its proximity to open farmland and an existing electrical substation. Sited on the NYS DEC protected Taghkanic Creek headwaters, it poses a risk to the water supply for the City of Hudson, and the environment, fire safety, and quality of life for site-adjacent residents, businesses, and K-12 students at the Taconic Hills Central School.
b. Uninformed Historic Context Statement. An understanding of historic context is essential for identifying the significance of rural properties. Yet, TRC never sought input or knowledge from the local historic preservation community. As a result, they failed to recognize the link between natural features, rural settlement patterns, and land use by which the full significance of rural historic resources and their settings must be evaluated.
c. Disingenuous Evaluation of Historic Integrity. It was OPRHP’s opinion that “setting is an important feature of the [Sir William Farm]”. Notably as well, the 1859 Niver Farmhouse occupation by Mohicans was an event to reclaim their ancestral homeland. By not recognizing the significance of setting, location, and feeling, TRC is failing to protect “the cultural values that centuries of land use and occupation have embodied in rural America.” (NRB, 1999).
d. Unfounded Project Effects Analysis. The TRC Report concludes: “If a historic property’s setting is less important to its significance that its architectural merit or historic qualities, then changes to setting may not adversely diminish the qualities or character-defining features… that support a historic property’s NRHP eligibility. Therefore, the undertaking would have no adverse effect on a historic property.” (p.21) The report methodology is unfounded and we strongly disagree with this statement.
Position 2: Hecate’s 5/20/2025 response to the ORES Notice of Incomplete Application(NOIA)in Exhibit 9 Cultural Resource v2 continues to ignore the terms of SHPO’s recommended Mitigation Plan detailed in their 5/15/2024 letter to ORES (specifically referenced in the NOIA by ORES. The Shepherd’s Run application should be deemed incomplete unless Hecate shows proof that they have consulted in good faith with local history-based groups to resolve adverse impacts and mitigation measures in accordance with SHPO’s terms.
In summary, SHPO’s letter outlines the proposed terms of acceptable Mitigation Measures: "In order to move the Project forward", they recommend that Hecate Energy develop a Mitigation Plan for the Project that "contains meaningful mitigation measures" to "offset what the office believes will be significant visual impact associated with this undertaking". SHPO proposes Hecate's outreach to "a variety of history-based organizations within the impacted communities. The plan should establish specific preservation/history projects and/or funding" and "once developed and agreed upon, include it in the final Cultural Resource Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Plan (CRAMMP) submitted to the Office of Renewable Energy for review and approval...."
Hecate’s compliance with promised mitigation should be a condition of any Permit.
updated June 18, 2025