Orland Town Council Chair on wind regulations: They don't think we need anymore and I don't either
But Town Council Chair Ed Rankin believes current regulations shouldn't change because they meet state approved standards and cited two prior temporary wind bans as evidence. Rankin explained, "And our planning board has worked very hard, done all their homework and visited a lot of sites. They don't think we need anymore and I don't either."
https://www.foxbangor.com/news/local-news/7546-orland-residents-vot...
************************************************************************************
Orland voters narrowly reject wind moratorium
ORLAND — Residents voted 282 to 277 against the moratorium, which would have temporarily prevented the town from accepting any proposals from a wind developer. In 2013, residents voted 439 to 258 in favor of Eolian’s concept.
Travis Bullard, Eolian’s project manager, was also in the town’s community center when the votes were tallied. He said the vote “affirmed the town’s support for wind energy....
http://www.ellsworthamerican.com/featured/orland-rejects-wind-morat...
Total number of Orland voters who cast their ballot today - 559
Total number of registered voters in Orland - 1635
Views: 434
Comment
-
Comment by Gary Campbell on January 22, 2015 at 12:34pm
-
You absolutely MUST get DEP to hold an adjudicatory hearing. Only then will the developer be required to answer your questions under oath. Only then will you be allowed to cross-examine them. Take it from me, these hearings provide loads of info that DEP otherwise will not have. Only through a hearing will DEP get the truth they need to deny a permit.
-
Comment by Nikki Fox on January 22, 2015 at 11:43am
-
Eric, The ordinance was approved by Orland voters when it was written in March 2011. We are arguing that there is much evidence that has come out since then about the damages giant turbines have on resident's health and property value. And there are many parts of our ordinance that are insufficient to protect the citizens (which is the supposedly the sole purpose of the ordinance). It has all fallen on deaf ears.
They are definitely serving themselves and the company. We have been in touch with MMA in the past without much help. We have also had legal council, but are struggling financially to continue.
-
Comment by Donna Amrita Davidge on January 22, 2015 at 11:26am
-
state approved standards are bullcrap I would think- after all it is the expedited wind law that has made it possible to do this horrendous despoilage- without knowing details here-
-
Comment by Eric A. Tuttle on January 22, 2015 at 11:05am
-
So no official vote of approval has been given by the town citizens?
No prior authorization for the Select Board to act on behalf of the community on the issue?
This sounds like the PB and SB are serving either themselves or a select few. If you have legal council consult with the council, if not, get someone who will contact MMA on procedure. There are laws that govern how this should be handled at the community level.
-
-
Thanks for all your comments and questions. There are 90 homes within a mile. Several within the 1/2 mile setback (2 of whom we know have not yet signed waivers). Many are in Dedham and Ellsworth, and have no say. The company was invited to present at our June 2013 town meeting, where a straw poll was taken to find out the support for the project. That vote as also split down the middle. DEP has had their (not open to the public) preapplication meeting. We will be requesting a public hearing.
As far as our ordinance goes, the moratoriam we voted on was supposed to allow the PB time to review and strengthen our ordinance. We have asked the PB many times to review it to protect us, and they will do nothing, besides calling us a "special interest group". So infuriating.
-
-
The ordinance is Law, at the town level, so long as it is equal or better in standards than state law, it must be obeyed by the select board and planning board. Though weak, you can call for improvements in the ordinance that provides better protections for the community. The purpose of Government at any level is to "protect" its citizens. If there is a feeling that there are insufficient protections, on any issue, those protections can be strengthened by a revision of the Ordinance. I would not hesitate to attempt another moratorium, for the purpose of revisiting the Ordinance language. Though consult legal advice on that. Maybe the Ordinance itself, was improperly adopted and improperly influenced in its language?
-
Comment by alice mckay barnett on January 22, 2015 at 8:37am
-
Does anyone live with-in a mile from proposed turbines? Has the company had a public meet about the project? Is DEP having nay meets soon?
-
-
Yes, a moratorium. Our ordinance was adopted in 2011, without many of us in the proposed neighborhood even knowing about it. And with the wind company reps in the room while it was being written.
We have been asking the planning board and selectmen for many months to review (and revise and strengthen) our terribly weak ordinance. Their answer was to get a petition going, which we did. We turned one in and they did nothing, so we started a second to call a town vote with a notary of the public since they wouldn't act. They were (I assume) finally advised by a lawyer to go ahead and let the town vote, but choose secret ballot instead of the open town meeting the petition requested.
-
-
If so...... Were they legally Removed from the Voting Roll of their previous Residence?
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/21-A/title21-Asec112...
B.
2. Change. A change of residence is made only by the act of removal, joined with the intent to remain in another place. A person can have only one residence at any given time.
-
-
Did any new wind proponents establish residency in Orland in the last few weeks in order to be allowed to vote against the moratorium?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Maine as Third World Country:
CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power
Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.
Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT
******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********
(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/
Not yet a member?
Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?
We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi
Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!
Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law
Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future
"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."
https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/
© 2024 Created by Webmaster.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine