ACTION ALERT :WORKING SESSION ON LD 1315 AND 1513 SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 11 TH, YOU HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO ACT!

Comment

Comment by Paula D Kelso on February 7, 2016 at 10:46pm

Here in Clifton early opponents got a moratorium question on a June 2010 special ballot. It was narrowly defeated in a huge turnout that forced us all out of the town meeting room to a standing meeting in the back yard and then a parade through the building to the ballot box. We were forced to mark our ballots in the open in front of the clerk and no attempt was made to guarantee that a person only voted once. About 3 weeks before the vote, the Planning Board suddenly realized that their new ordinance assumed that the developer would locate turbines as his preliminary talk indicated. If the developer decided to put turbines on the east ridge instead of the west, the turbines would be much closer to houses and Springy Pond than they had envisioned. The entire time while drafting the ordinance they relied on pre-application assumptions. Did they go public with the information, not on your life. Mum was the word, and the Ordinance passed with setbacks that assumed future application specifications that they had no way at that time of knowing or controlling. Pisgah Mountain LLC consistently cites the failure of the moratorium question and the resolution of the town meeting approving 'community wind' status for the project as proof in it's dealings with the state that their project received favorable community support. By the way, another issue that continues to rankle, the project did NOT have to go through the entire DEP site development process because the five 1.8 MW turbines did not require more than 2 (or is it 5?) acres of developed land. 'Splain to Lucy why many small commercial and industrial projects have to go to the expense and time of a full application process and this projected $25 million project didn't. (That's $25 million when talking about all that tax revenue the town will get, otherwise it's more like $20 million when talking about how much financial capacity they need to show for approval. Not that their app contained such fine detail as actual amounts and sources of financial backing.)

I was so naïve in 2009 and 2010, I assumed town officials genuinely would be impartial. In retrospect, the developer started working away at the town officials and influential citizens before he approached the Town with his project idea. Just a nice guy 'looking to make some money for me and my family'. He saw the playbook years before the rest of us did. How to approach, who to approach, what to say, how to frame the discussion. Zap and we were in the trap.

Comment by Monique Aniel Thurston on February 7, 2016 at 10:00pm

great letter Paula .Mainers should feel empowered and not intimidated anymore.

Too much abuse has been done to them and the truth is known and  the politicians are totally aware of the scam . As a reminder the first moratorium was asked in 2009 by the staff of the Rumford community hospital , a second moratorium was asked in January 2010 by the CTFWP .

We have been ignored  continuously because the wind industry lobby invaded the halls of Augusta for almost a decade now , pushing for their industry at the depend of the Maine residents living close to those projects and at the depend of Maine natural heritage. No other industry has ever been treated with such deference and fear . The current EUT committee must act and refuse any legislation that would facilitate the wind industry dirty work .         

Comment by Penny Gray on February 7, 2016 at 7:23pm

A truly excellent letter, Paula Kelso.  Dead reckoning. Absolutely on target.  

Comment by Paula D Kelso on February 7, 2016 at 5:40pm

Sent this to the EUT members and my rep and senator. Long, and could have been better, but said what I felt I needed to say. Hope it was somewhat on target. [Yipes, did a spell check and still multiple errors.]

Dear state legislators,

As a citizen of a town that has spent the last six years dealing with a wind energy facility development application, I can tell you that the expedited wind law and all of its attached regulation has been, and continues to be, an onerous burden for Maine towns, unorganized territories and their citizens. Having worked on town ordinances without any prior knowledge and education, I am constantly amazed at some of the amateur and unwise language in state laws and regulations. The proliferation of legal cases making their way to our highest court and some of the issues that that Court has been dealing with and commenting on bears witness to my assertion.

Here in Clifton, the wind developers guided the town officials in drafting and implementing the ordinance that was to regulate their facility. Not only was this unfair, it resulted in having a law written for a project instead of a law drafted to meet local goals and needs. Probably it is not realistic to think all laws and regulations could be devised in a vacuum and not in the context of one particular beneficiary or another. However, officials have to consciously and conscientiously approach drafting and putting to the voters legislation that is as clear, concise, and unambiguous as humanly possible. Then the voters can know what their choices are and what the results of enactment are likely to be. 

On the State level, the expedited act was percipitous and perhaps well meaning (though we have reason to doubt that) and has resulted in numerous and expensive legal actions for all parties acting in its wake. What was touted as a 'community benefit' has most often been a force for community disruption and even community destruction. To say nothing of the economic and environmental harm that wind power development on the grand scale now being proposed would inflict on our state and its populace.

I ask you to very seriously consider acting to place a moratorium on wind power development. This would enable time for the state and the towns to absorb the facts about this overwhelming development and the implications for our economic and environmental future. Most people appear to accept without question that wind energy is clean and benefical energy so we should suck it up, embrace it, put any doubts or negatives aside and move on into a better future. I've spent a lot of time learning about wind energy, its production, the development corporations involved, the policy decisions involved, the economic impacts, and yes the health and aesthetic impacts as well. 

I'd hate to live next to a coal or oil power plant, and wouldn't be keen to live next to hydro or a gas plant either. But as my Grammie always said, 'Two wrongs don't make a right'. Ignoring the negatives of wind power development does not translate into good policy. Ignoring or failing to explore negatives does not make for good laws or for their good implementation.

Our towns, our state, our nation, our globe have a lot of decisions to make. We can't always get it right, but we make better decisions when we trust and follow the precepts of democracy and our constitution.  That underpining of our political processes is there to ensure a fair and open debate of the pros and cons and an opportunity for all parties to be heard and their concerns to be considered. Many times, especially with the 'expedited' act, the process was short changed and the result has been a woefully sordid history of injustice and bungling decisions. Actions which proliferate contention and disruption.

A moratorium won't erase all that has gone on for eight years or more, but it seems to me it is the most equitable course at this juncture and the one most likely to right wrongs and set a more reasoned and reasonable course for the State and its people. As our elected officials your primary obligation is to the people of Maine, not to other states or to foreign-based corporations. A moratorium with a strategy for a full and open review and hearing of all the pertinent issues would surely be protested by the industry.  Please take the time to give thought to the idea of giving the State a breather to get its laws together and its people prepared for the enormous and voracious onslaught of industrial wind developments being proposed . We're sitting ducks out here and no one seems to care that we're at the mercy of these well organized and politically savvy corporations.

Sincerely,
Paula Kelso

Comment by Monique Aniel Thurston on February 7, 2016 at 2:59pm

dates corrected Eric, indeed the working session is on the 11th

Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on February 7, 2016 at 12:36pm

The latest Update that I have received from EUT. I agree Monique, and these names should be included in a LTE or an Op-Ed for exposure for such behavior.

Comment by Monique Aniel Thurston on February 7, 2016 at 12:18pm

whether it goes to their personal address or not they should not respond rudely to their constituents, please publish the names of folks who respond to you rudely. They are your elected  public servants and have the mission to correct an enormous wrong .Rudeness is made to intimidate .

 

Comment by Penny Gray on February 5, 2016 at 8:35am

My emails went to the personal list and I got an aggravated response as well.  Somewhere I thought i read that they weren't getting them through the legislative addresses.

Comment by Monique Aniel Thurston on February 5, 2016 at 8:27am

no , it is never too late , those people are our servants and the conversation about the scourge of wind does not stop at any bill, the request for a moratorium on scenic cumulative impact and all the unfinished recommendations included in the OEIS report are more relevant than ever.

Comment by alice mckay barnett on February 3, 2016 at 7:06pm

too late on addresses

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page