Smith: Renewable power industry exploits poorest towns

Dear Senate Finance Committee,

I need to respond to something Sen. Becca White was quoted as saying in this evening’s WCAX coverage of S.236.

She says lower-income communities are disproportionately selected for these projects as a result of the argument. “Essentially forces renewable energy to go into communities that might not have the financial ability to make the case that something is aesthetically not in line.”

For many years, VCE has gotten calls from neighbors about poorly sited solar projects.  The neighbors knew their neighbors and talked to them.  What they learned was that the solar companies were targeting people who were in financial distress, with unpaid back taxes or behind on mortgage payments.  Our experience was that it was their neighbors who were concerned for people being exploited by the industry who helped to make sure that their neighbors were not being taken advantage of.

I have not heard anyone claim in testimony in your committee on this bill that concern about aesthetics is forcing solar arrays to go into communities that might not have the financial ability to make the case that something is not aesthetically in line.  We have found that solar sites affect people of all income levels.  I would like to see Sen. White produce some data and facts to support her claim.

However, it is a fact that almost all the big wind projects have been built in towns that have been on the list of the 10 poorest towns in Vermont.  That is no accident.  The aesthetics criteria has nothing to do with it.  It is well known that the people of Lowell voted for the wind project to get the money to offset their property taxes.  Poor towns have been targeted because they are vulnerable to monetary promises.  Iberdrola’s effort in Windham and Grafton was the outlier, with two fairly well-off communities torn apart by the proposal, and they were offered money if they voted to approve the project.  To their credit, they said no thanks.  But the other communities targeted for industrial wind said yes, because they wanted the money.

Sen. White has turned this situation upside down.  Aesthetics has nothing to do with it.  We are dealing with an industry whose large profits are undisclosed and unknown, empowered to choose the cheapest sites and not work with community members or talk to neighbors.  As you see from the data I presented, almost all solar arrays are approved, almost all without any opposition and most without any public input.  The Vermont legislature has given the industry tax breaks that I hear about frequently as robbing our communities of money that has to be made up by other property owners.  Sen. White is right that it is all about money, but that money is not being used to benefit the people who are affected by these projects.  It is making a lot of money for a few people in the industry, and their non-profit organization supporters.

Thank you for listening.