The Town of Oyster Bay is likely to extend its moratorium on battery energy storage systems for a fifth time, with town officials and a string of North Shore residents urging continued restrictions amid ongoing concerns about fire safety, environmental risks and the potential impact on nearby communities.
At the March 26 regular meeting, the town board opened a public hearing on a proposed local law that would extend the current moratorium for an additional 12 months, through April 30, 2027, if approved at the board’s next meeting.
The moratorium was originally enacted in February 2024, and effective as of April 2024. It was extended for another six months in October 2024. The board extended the ban for a third consecutive time from April 30 until Oct. 30 in 2025, and for a fourth time last September, to be enforced from October until this April.
Michael Montesano, special counsel to Town Attorney Frank Scalera, said the extension is necessary as the town continues reviewing state fire code changes and awaits possible action from Nassau County.
“The purpose of this proposed law,” Montesano said, “the reason we proposed to extend this moratorium is to protect our residents… we do not want to jeopardize anyone’s life.”
The moratorium covers proposals for battery energy storage facilities, including the Oyster Shore Energy Project, a proposed 44-megawatt project on Shore Road in Glenwood Landing on a one-acre parcel within the former Grumman property.
Jupiter Power, a Texas-based battery storage company owned by BlackRock, cancelled its contract to build the proposed Oyster Shore Energy Storage facility in May of 2025.
Montesano outlined the history of the moratorium, first adopted in April 2024 and extended multiple times since. He said amendments to the New York State fire code related to battery storage sites took effect Dec. 31, 2025, but that significant concerns remain.
“While the new code contains several additional requirements that will reduce the risk associated with best facilities,” Montesano said, “the risks still remain.”
He also referenced recent fires at battery storage facilities in Moss Landing, California, and Warwick, New York, noting the Warwick fire took firefighters two days to suppress.
Supervisor Joseph Saladino echoed those concerns, asking whether the science behind the technology had changed significantly since the board first imposed the moratorium.
“Has anything changed in the science to make this technology tremendously more safe in terms of fires,” Saladino inquired, “in terms of all of the important issues they brought to our attention.”
Montesano responded that “based on the information I’ve received and looked at I would say no.”
During the public comment portion, several Glen Head and Glenwood Landing residents voiced support for the extension and called for even stronger protections.
Andrew Lauder of Glen Head said he supports continuing the pause while more information becomes available.
“I think the moratorium is good,” Lauder said. He acknowledged that as more technology and information come out, battery storage systems may be viable in the future, but emphasized that “It’s not safe now.”
Doug Augenthaler of Glen Head said officials should not only focus on the storage facilities themselves but also on related infrastructure projects.
“The back door is Propel,” Augenthaler claimed. “Propel goes in if that’s allowed to proceed, it’s an open invitation for battery story all over Long Island.”
Several speakers sought to tie the issue to concerns over Propel NY Energy’s proposed transmission cable project, which would run through parts of Glen Head and neighboring communities. Propel NY Energy representatives have emphasized multiple times, including at their March 18 office hours event in Glen Head, that their project is not tied to any battery storage projects.
George Pombar of Glen Head, head of the Glen Head/Glenwood Landing Civic Council, said residents remain deeply opposed to allowing battery storage systems into their communities.
“We need your support in extending the moratorium; the stakes are high,” Pombar said.” We have many young families in the area that have children attending local schools next to the areas where the installations would be.”
Chief Donald Sinski of the Glenwood Hook and Ladder Engine and Hose Company also spoke in support of the moratorium, citing emergency response limitations.
“I do not have the manpower,” Sinski said, “or the technology to extinguish a fire that may occur at this magnitude.”
Asked directly whether there is currently a safe way to put out a battery storage fire, Sinski answered, “There is not.” He also affirmed concerns about toxic smoke and contaminated runoff.
The board did not vote on the proposal, instead leaving the public record open for 20 days to allow additional residents to submit comments by email, letter or phone. A vote is expected at the next town board meeting on April 14, following a hearing by the Nassau County Planning Commission.
“This is one of those issues that, for me, is straightforward and very clear,” Saladino said. “We will be voting at the next town meeting.”
