RUMFORD — With a pending $60 million wind farm project on the line, Boston-based wind developer First Wind has rented an office at 180 Congress St., spokesman John Lamontagne stated via e-mail late Tuesday afternoon.
“We are not planning to staff it full time, but (will) instead use it as a base of operations as we launch our efforts to inform the citizens of Rumford about the benefits of wind energy and the serious flaws with the anti-wind ordinance that was placed on the Nov. 2 ballot,” Lamontagne said.
Earlier this year, First Wind proposed a $60 million project to build 12 turbines on sections of Black Mountain and a nearby mountain.
Their Longfellow project instantly created a rift between pro- and anti-wind residents in Rumford.
Voters, however, enacted and then extended a moratorium on such projects to develop a law regulating such development.
Few residents attended the first of two public hearings on Monday night on the proposed ordinance that was described as a protective measure for townspeople.
It was drafted by the Board of Selectmen's appointed Wind Power Advisory Committee and promptly labeled anti-wind by First Wind's Director of Development, Neil Kiely, and as anti-business by Selectman Mark Belanger.
When presented to selectmen on Sept. 15, the board approved it 4-1 with Belanger the lone dissenter.
Since then, board Chairman Brad Adley attempted to put a second less-restrictive ordinance on the ballot but withdrew it last month after learning it's only a state template and not a working ordinance.
Adley and Belanger have also been threatened and publicly accused of taking bribes from First Wind, because of their stance on the proposed ordinance. Town Manager Carlo Puiia said he, too, was also targeted.
Adley and Puiia declined to reveal who they said threatened to start a recall against them for “unethical behavior” if they put a second wind ordinance on the ballot.
“It's like a car accident, it's gotten personal,” Adley said recently.
“It got nasty. I got a call from a lady in New York and a couple of threatening e-mails from her after."
"I've gotten nasty e-mails," he said. "It's almost like there is an outside influence working this and there very well could be. It's like they're using a playbook.”
All Puiia would say is that it “was local residents that were discussing the removal of two selectpersons for unethical conduct and myself included.”
He said no town official has taken any bribes.
“It's very ironic that those that point the finger at the developers for having a lack of ethics would resort to tactics of bullying or insinuations that would be damaging to the credibility of the individual that's serving,” Puiia said.
Messages to Belanger have not been returned, but he spoke about being threatened by committee members via a letter to the editor published on Sept. 29 in the Rumford Falls Times.
“It troubles me to think that members of this committee and others who support them would resort to political blackmail to coerce the majority of the board,” Belanger wrote.
“I can assure you that I have not taken anything from First Wind, not even as much as a coffee,” he said. “They were nothing but professional throughout this whole process.”
Late last month, First Wind polled 175 Rumford residents by phone to learn whether they favored the Longfellow project and to create an awareness of the proposed wind ordinance. Lamontagne declined to reveal what they learned.
Residents can view and discuss the ordinance at the special business meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 12, in Muskie Auditorium at Mountain Valley High School, and at the second public hearing at 7 p.m. Thursday, Oct. 14, in Rumford Falls Auditorium.
Kiely, from First Wind, is scheduled to talk about the ordinance at both meetings.
Lamontagne said the First Wind office at 180 Congress St. is considered temporary pending the outcome of the Nov. 2 vote. Balloting is from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Nov. 2 at the American Legion near First Wind's new office.
“We will be making a permanent commitment to an office in Rumford if the proposed Longfellow project is allowed to proceed,” Lamontagne said.



Fight the Corruption
There is so much money, power and corruption behind the wind industry it is almost beyond comprehension. As a means of leveling the playing field I suggest that every community pass new laws. These laws would have to do with the killing of rare and endangered species. Because the propeller style wind turbine is so deadly, setting up a wind farm is really no different than deliberately trying to shoot at these species or set up deadly snare traps. It is a very deliberate act with a totally predictable outcome to protected bird and bats. They will be killed. Local laws need to be passed that make it illegal to "Take" protected bird and bat species with the propeller style wind turbine. In legal language "take" means kill. The propeller style wind turbine needs to be designated as an illegal means to kill. Then the wind business can be designated as an illegal activity and circumvent any need for mortality mitigation and incidental take permits. These are the wind industries most precious tools for their corrupt activities. For those that do not know, the incidental take permit was created during the 1990's in Washington DC specifically for the wind industry and with the help of the USFWS. It allows the wind industry to legally kill protected and endangered species.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Agree (4)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.say what?
Candiceanne, do you have a problem with reading comprehension? I said I do not know anybody there nor do I own property there. I do live in Lincoln a mill town which has the same problems as Rumford. Town officials who love to spend and do not know how to cut. The mill got a big tax break to restart and our taxes went up.Whatever bribes the windsprawllers offer it is not worth the environmental degradation. The DEP and the NRCM have decided not to do their jobs and protect the environment, so it is up to the people to enact a tough ordinance. If your residents voted for wind power it is because they were not informed of the truth. The wind industry will exaggerate, twist and invent new "facts". They are not to be believed. When any Maine community is presented with the facts they will vote windsprawl down. Check the disaster the wind industry has wrought on the European economy with the labor riots over gov. spending. C02 has risen. Coal imports have gone up. Where are the benefits the wind industry promised?(blowin' in the wind) It is like in Jay when the mill controversy split the town. Rumford will get along fine without windsprawl as well as all other Maine communities. Now Candy, are you leasing land to FoulWind? That is usually the case when pro winders speak out in small towns.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1)
Agree (5)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.beware
Rumford...TIME OUT!!! Look what is already happening to your town. Infighting and suspicions, accusations and threats? Is it really worth it? Get a tough ordinance on the books and protect the citizens. If you get in too deep the windsprawl company will threaten your council either directly or in a veiled sort of way with lawsuits if they do not get their way. They are the worst of the worst and will hire lawyers from Bangor to Portland to screw over your town. I do not know anybody from your area nor do I own property there. I can honestly tell you without reservation and for certain that these windsprawl developers are bad for any Maine town and you will be well served to show them the way out of town(and state). You do not need them .Thank you.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Agree (8)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Huh?
The people making the threats against our selectmen are on the committee that drafted the anti-windpower ordinance and you think we should reward their bad behavior? The people who drafted the anti-wind power ordinance were charged with providing education on the advantages and disadvanges of wind power and have provided none. But you think we should blindly approve their ordinance which is an equivalent of a permanent moratorium and discriminatory against one industry? The people of Rumford voted 751 in favor, 364 opposed in support of wind power development at our regular June australian ballot elections. If this were Congress and the President vetod we would only need 669 votes to over ride and have 751; this committee went against us and are putting a permanent moratorium in front of us. You think we should accept their veto of our wishes? We don't have to worry about the wind power developers threateniing our selectmen or Town Manager, the members of the committee the selectmen appointed are doing the threateniing now!
windsprawl, you admit you do not live in Rumford or the State of Maine so what concern is this of yours? Have you been to Rumford? Are you aware of our economic problems? Do you know that are property taxes are the highest in the state and going higher if we ever get a budget for this year which started July 1? Last year our town lost a huge chunk of its valuation with huge abatements given to two companies. Everyone else had to make up for the losses. Do you know what is like to find out after you should have received your tax bill for the year that your taxes will be 22.5% higher than last year on the exact same property? With this years increase, we are looking at a 26% or better increase in just 12 monthes. Do you want to pay my taxes for me? When you do, I will consider voting as you see fit rather than in the best interest of my community and my family.
The Selectmen and Town Manager may not be the brightest bulbs on the tree, after all if they were the scondrals who threatened them would be guests of the grey bar hotel, but they are not idiots either. They hold regular economic development meetings with the economic development committee and have laid out plans for this town that do not include giving away the town's available TIF to the wind power developers who will not be providing significant numbers of long-term quality jobs to area residents. What goes up, will get taxed, which means lower taxes for the rest of us.
Yes we should have ordinances in place to protect the community but not just from wind power development but from all existing operations and potential operations and activities as well. This committee blew it big time. They had the perfect opportunity to education on sound, visual impact and a lot of other potential issues that may or may not be an issue with wind power but may be of concern with something else. We cold have written one package to cover it all and avoided future problems with development and existing operations. We also could have done it in one nice smooth process and not run into problems like we are experiencing with BMOM disputing the majority NO vote on their initiated article request.
A reminder that a lot of the same people are involved in this wind power committee mess and the BMOM mess. They wont take NO for an answer. They thiink they know better than we do and they are sure they know what is best for us more than we do. Like BMOM in their minds we didn't get it right the first time we voted so they have to put together a permanent moratorium in the disguised as an ordinance to "protect us" for us to vote again and probably again and again till we get it right, unless we say NO and put together what is right for us and pass it. We will then have to keep saying NO to them till they get tired of it and go away.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (7)
Agree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.1st wind
I heard first wind speak 3 times last month (in public)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Tell you what you want to hear.
The wind company spokespeople will lie directly through their teeth to get what they want. Smooth talkers.
They have no problem stabbing the community in the back.
BEWARE.
They are not above using dirty tricks and fuzzy science.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Agree (12)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Looked at your previous posts
I went back and looked at your previous posts of which there are very few. I found this one in July which is one of your most recent.
"Who in the world thinks that Agnes King is more credible than John Carter? Just because he may be able to fool the masses into voting for him as a politician, doesn't make him more credible or more moral or more knowledgable.
And who believes that a poll by the wind industry (please quote your sources) is more credible than one by the Bangor Daily News?
That is just crazy talk."
I for one consider Angus King not only more credible, but far more credible than John Carter. Why? Because Angus King has been a proponant of wind power development since before he was Governor of Maine. He has spent much of his adult live learning about wind power, watching the technology develop and improve and he has done so both here in the United States and overseas where the have vastly more experience then we oil, gas, and coal addicts do. Angus King has also put his personal reputation and his wallet on the line. You haven't heard Angus King say, not in my backyard.
As for Jonathan Carter, he was all for wind power until a project was proposed for his "backyard." Then suddenly he is screaming it is so bad for the environment blah, blah, blah. NO ETHICS, NO CREDIBILITY, NIMBY. That is how I would describe Jonathan Carter.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (9)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.180 Congress St ?
Seems a little close to the voting booths....hmmm
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (7)
Agree (11)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Not as close as the canopy the candidates use on election day.
Considering that canopies are setup right out side the Legion Hall, Rumford's one and only voting place, directly adjacent to a very narrow sidewalk which to accommodate any candidates and those fighting for a cause to handout or speakout about whatever and they do not stay under the canapy but are on the side walk to meet and greet, as you are attempting to walk-in to vote. In perspective, 180 Congress might as well be 10 miles away from the polls. Besides that area worked real well for the union and all the folks we elected out of the years; lets see that would include, Ed Erwin and his wife Phyllis who held the senate and house seats respectively for years, Ida Luther, John Patrick and Bruce Bryant. All of these people worked out of the union office when it was in that building.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (4)
Agree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I for one welcome First Wind
I for one welcome First Wind and the opportunity to hear what they have to say. I also hope that the town will bring in a legitimate panel of professionals to speak concerning noise and other issues that not only would apply to wind power development but all activities in the town current and future that we should be considering and addressing.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (18)
Agree (7)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.