Residents press for transparency on proposed battery storage as board denies FOIL appeal

Residents and community groups urged the Town of Saugerties to provide greater transparency about a proposed battery energy storage project and questioned whether review processes are being conducted independently.

Elizabeth Rees, who filed a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) appeal regarding records related to the proposed battery energy storage project, told the board she was concerned about a lack of transparency and asked the town to explain why the board was deciding the appeal rather than the town attorney, citing Chapter 52 of the town code. Rees asked the board to describe whether board‑level review applies to all FOIL appeals or only particular categories.

Dia Manceback, speaking for Stop Saugerties Battery Storage, raised concerns about “the appearance of conflict of interest,” noting that a town board member also serves as a local fire chief and is a liaison to the planning board and zoning board of appeals. Manceback requested clarification on safeguards to ensure an independent environmental review and to avoid any appearance of predetermination.

Several public commenters, including Linda Krause and other business owners, expressed broader opposition to a proposed lithium battery plant, citing concerns about fires at similar facilities, water use, chemical risks and the long‑term lifecycle of battery plants. Krause urged that decisions be brought to voters and questioned the scientific basis for siting decisions.

During the meeting the chair moved to deny the FOIL appeal filed by Elizabeth Rees (appeal dated 02/22/2026), citing the town attorney’s letter on the matter. The motion was seconded, discussed briefly and voted on; the board voted to deny the appeal. The denial was announced during the same meeting that included public comment and a planning‑process update.

The town and planning board roles were discussed in public comments: speakers noted that the planning board is the lead agency for environmental review of the current Thompson Road application and that the town board’s authority is primarily in zoning code updates. Several speakers requested clearer public notice and updates to committee membership and minutes on the town website.

The board’s denial of the FOIL appeal does not itself resolve the underlying questions raised by residents about the battery project’s environmental review, the role of liaisons, or potential conflicts of interest; speakers and the board said they will continue to update the public on the planning process and related county programs.

The meeting record shows the board moved to deny the appeal and carried that motion; community members requested further procedural clarity and additional public communications going forward.