I’ve long advocated for policies that protect our environment while ensuring energy affordability and reliability for all New Yorkers. Our state’s renewable energy is a worthy endeavor. However, the mechanisms driving this transition, particularly the Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES), often strong-arm local interests and dismiss recommendations from local residents, other state agencies and environmental experts who offer contrasting testimony that runs contrary to project siting preferences.

ORES has undoubtedly accelerated development amid urgent climate imperatives. Yet, this streamlined approach often provides too much latitude, allowing projects to proceed with limited regard for expert recommendations, local zoning and conservation priorities. In upstate regions like Washington County, we’ve witnessed proposals that encroach on fertile farmland and protected habitats, sometimes spearheaded by out-of-state or foreign corporations. These developments, which undermine local control, risk irreversible harm to ecosystems that support endangered birds while displacing agricultural lands vital to our food security.

Consider the broader implications: Millions of acres across New York have been repurposed for solar farms, which, while innovative, underperform dramatically in our winter months, yielding just 5% to 10% of their rated capacity. These contributions represent drops in the bucket toward our energy needs, especially as the state aggressively pursues electrification. The result? A strained grid, escalating utility rates and heightened vulnerability to blackouts, burdening families and small businesses already grappling with high costs. It’s a scenario that demands we question whether the rush to “green” is yielding net benefits or unintended drawbacks.

Neighboring Pennsylvania offers a contrasting model worth emulating. There, farmers often lease modest portions of their land for natural gas extraction, which occupies far less space than sprawling solar arrays and delivers consistent power regardless of weather or season. This balanced integration supports rural economies without wholesale land conversion. In New York, however, ORES frequently bypasses local input, shielding developers from community concerns, zoning ordinances and even established conservation easements. Undermining local interest like this erodes public trust and builds a perception of hypocrisy. How can we claim to safeguard the environment while permitting the fragmentation of rare sanctuaries in the name of sustainability?

We must do better. I support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that incorporates renewables alongside reliable sources like nuclear and natural gas to maintain grid stability and affordability. Reforming ORES to respect local interest by mandating stricter adherence to Department of Environmental Conservation guidelines, enhanced public participation and comprehensive impact assessments that weigh ecological and economic trade-offs will protect communities and restore trust. We cannot advance clean energy at the cost of agriculture demands, natural heritage or fiscal well-being by undermining democratic processes.

As stewards of this great state, it’s important to prioritize reforms that truly serve our communities. New York needs an all-of-the-above approach that prioritizes local communities and household budgets just as much as our sustainability goals, and not as a one-size-fits all that puts state agencies first.