Thursday, October 1, 2026
More than 60 North Shore residents attended a rally last week to hear updates on Propel NY’s plan to install 90 miles of underground transmission lines across southern New York state, and to voice their concerns. The event was led by Glen Head residents Christine Panzeca and Dough Augenthaler, both of whom actively oppose the project.
While some of the complaints that were detailed at the July 1 gathering, at Glenwood Landing American Legion Post 336, have been raised by residents before, a new point of discussion for many was the joint proposal filed by New York Transco and the New York Power Authority in April determining parameters for the $3.2 billion project.
Construction is slated to begin later this year, and expected to last four years, with completion anticipated in May 2030. Crews are expected to progress 50 to 150 feet per day.
The New York Independent System Operator chose the project in 2023 as a solution to problems like increased demand on the state’s power grid and its vulnerability in severe weather. Before construction can begin, Propel NY must secure a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need from the state Public Service Commission as well as a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, and the PSC must also approve Environmental Management and Construction Plans.
Panzeca urged rally attendees to submit public comments to the PSC and the Army Corps opposing the project.
“A few comments from a few individuals in the community are not enough,” she said. “You need thousands of voices across every impacted community to make a difference.” The deadline to file comments with the PSC is July 17.
Transco and NYPA, Panzeca said, are leaving “many important details of the project to later phases,” including traffic mitigation, environmental safeguards and emergency planning.
Augenthaler echoed concerns about traffic, naming impact on business, emergency vehicles getting down streets and busses bringing students to school as potential problems.
Shannon Baxevanis, Transco’s director of communications and public Affairs, said that the Environmental Management and Construction Plans would provide more specifics.
“That’s where the details (are),” Baxevanis said, “the meat and potatoes of not only how we’ll protect the environment and communities with various measures, but also the construction methods, the locations, more — how we’re going to build this.”
Residents have previously said they are concerned about potential electromagnetic fields produced by the cables. Panzeca said there are worries about EMF in locations where the cables would converge, and Augenthaler pointed out that New York state standards for EMF readings may not take into account existing transmission lines along with the new lines.
“We are in compliance with the state standard for EMF across the project,” Baxevanis said, adding that with the joint proposal, entities working on the project have committed to post-construction modeling to confirm compliance with the EMF standards.
The North Shore School District and the Village of Sea Cliff have both submitted statements to the PSC in opposition of the joint proposal. North Shore’s initial statement said that while the district does not oppose the state’s pursuit of reliable and modernized transmission infrastructure, it does not believe the joint proposal does enough to mitigate impacts to “student safety, school transportation operations, emergency access, instructional continuity, the district’s statutory obligations to provide educational programs or safe access to educational facilities.”
The joint proposal does include some specific conditions for transmission line installation, such as limiting construction times around schools.
Sea Cliff’s statement focused primarily on concerns about the project’s impact on Hempstead Harbor. It stated that while the village does not oppose the development of electric transmission infrastructure in principle, it does not believe the Propel NY project should be approved, because it was devised under earlier state clean-energy planning assumptions that are no longer in place. Additionally, the village asserted in its statement that the joint proposal “does not provide sufficient detail, analysis, or enforceable standards to allow for a complete and informed assessment of the project’s effects.”
In a joint letter, Oyster Bay Town Supervisor Joseph Saladino, Hempstead Town Supervisor John Ferretti and North Hempstead Town Supervisor Jennifer DeSena wrote that the project should not move forward without “transparency, accountability and real protection for residents.”
One Glenwood Landing Resident, Cecelia McCann, has submitted a statement to the PSC in support of the project. McCann wrote that she believes the joint proposal fairly balances the competing interests of customers, transmission owners, the environment and the public, and adheres to the PSC’s policies.
“I would say a lot of the concerns that we were seeing in these written oppositions that were filed in response to the joint proposal…,” Marykate Guilfoyle, Transco’s strategic communications manager, said, “they’re looking for details that just … are not available yet, because we’re not at that stage of the project where we [have] detailed construction timelines.”
Guilfoyle added that now that the Environmental Management and Construction Plans are being developed, more in-depth details will be available once they are complete.
