RUMFORD — About 20 people attended a special business meeting Tuesday to discuss proposed charter changes on how budget and initiated articles are voted and on a proposed wind ordinance.
Of the few who spoke, most were from out of town and most addressed the wind ordinance, a summary of which is not included in the warrant. Instead, voters are asked to visit the Town Clerk's Office to view it before voting on it and the charter changes on Nov. 2.
After there was little to no discussion on changing the charter to prevent a minority from trumping the majority on split-recommendation budgetary and initiated article funding matters, Finance Committee member Josanne Dolloff asked how restrictive the ordinance is for wind development.
The only person willing to answer was Neil Kiely, project manager for Boston-based wind developer First Wind, which has tentatively proposed a wind farm on Rumford mountains. He said it's on hold until Rumford develops a law to regulate such development.
Kiely told Dolloff that Rumford's proposed ordinance was essentially copied from Dixmont's ordinance, which John Maloney has labeled as anti-wind power. Maloney is a senior land-use planner with the Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments in Auburn.
“The Dixmont ordinance, as John Maloney testified, was designed to stop wind in that community, and it worked,” Kiely said.
He explained that there were two wind developers in Dixmont, one of which had a meteorological tower set up to measure wind. When Dixmont voters approved the ordinance, the developers left, Kiely said.
He said First Wind looked at the Rumford ordinance that was drafted by the Board of Selectmen's Wind Power Advisory Committee, and was told by committee members that it was modeled on Dixmont's.
But Kiely said the Rumford ordinance is exactly the same as Dixmont's except for some procedural changes and some situations that were made even more restrictive.
“So, they took the Dixmont ordinance, they didn't make it any more flexible or accommodating to wind, and that's the ordinance that's on the ballot for Nov. 2,” Kiely said.
Dolloff said Rumford voters must be mindful of the town's future generations for energy needs.
“I think we have to get back to what Mother Nature is supplying us with, whether it be wind, hydro or solar,” she said. “And I think that we can't have restrictions where we totally wipe out or close the door on anything natural.”
“We can't think of ourselves and what's happening today," Dolloff said. "We really have to look long term, and if this ordinance is going to close that door, I can't be in favor of it."
Dr. Albert Aniel of Mexico disagreed with Kiely's assessment, saying the ordinance “is not anti-wind.”
He said Maloney's statement is merely his opinion. Aniel said he believes the ordinance would protect Rumford residents, which is what it was designed to do.
Selectman Greg Buccina, reading from a prepared statement, said Rumford needs an ordinance and should vote for the one that is proposed, which he helped create.
Resident David Glover Sr. disagreed.
“My biggest concern, given how this proposed ordinance is written, it is — despite what some people would want you to think — anti-business,” Glover said.
“I think we do need an ordinance in place," he said. "I don't think this is the answer.”




Our business does not have it!
Obviously the voters in Rumford still don't get. There are fewer and fewer businesses in Rumford because of the excessive spending. The Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee and voters just keep on spending. Black Mountain is a private ski resort that should in no way be allowed to be a non-profit. The only purpose for it to be a non-profit is to get taxpayer money so skiers don't have to pay a fair price to ski, what it costs to operate; being non-profit allows Black Mountain to get taxpayers to subsidize their recreation. The Black Montain Board refuses to do any fundraising. They are fighting economic development in the community and fighting broadening the tax base so business like mine and families like mine are paying higher and higher taxes getting squeezed more and more year after year. Last year our home, business and personal property taxes saw a 22 and a 1/2 percent tax increase. We have been told to expect another jump this year. It simply isn't there to give people. Our property is worth less and less, truthfully we couldn't give it away in this town. Our business and our family have been in Rumford a lot of years providing good paying jobs with benefits, this may well be the last which will mean more lost jobs for Rumford people and lost taxes for you spend happy people make up for. It would be cheaper for us to pack up and move our business with all of the inventory and equipment and go to a business friendly state. We are seriously talking about salvaging what we can, then bulldozing our nice buildings, home and business, because nobody is going to buy here and then giving the town the land with the bulldozed buildings. If the town doesn't just take it they will end up with it for taxes because we will not pay anymore; why should we and why would we leave the town our nice, well maintained buildings after being screwed for staying, giving people jobs and getting bent over for taxes besides year after year. Just take a ride around, look at all the abandoned property! Hell, take a walk down Waldo St and on the Island. The industrial park and business park are a joke. The mill looks awful and no wonder, why in the world would they, could they afford after paying Taxford's outrageous taxes afford to put money into paint, keeping the place cleaned up and looking nice. Come the November election Rumford will be voting on the wind power ordinance. A yes vote will not only be a permanent moratorium on wind it will be a loud and clear signal to all businesses that Rumford has a permanent moratorium of business. If the wind power ordinances passes expect to see us move our business out of Rumford, bulldoze our home and business and leave the property to the town to deal with. You will get a new line of folks signing up for general assistance while they wait for their unemployment checks and when their benefits runout. We pay good wages with benefits, it is unfortunate that Rumford people from the Board of Selectmen on down through the voters are clueless and driving out all the jobs.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (5)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Enron East
I think Dr. Aniel has done the research. I find identical info in the 2 years I have been studying windsprawl. Read the book "Smartest Guys in the Room" and learn how the energy industry thinks. If the Boston outsiders want to make fast money they could sell junk bonds like Harvard alum Michael Milken. Jeffrey Skilling another Harvard boy felt he could write his own rules for Enron. Is the Harvard culture completely wiping out any common sense or morals from their students? George Baker, Harvard professor, built the Vinalhaven turbines too close to peoles' homes. If one uses common sense, one would build away from homes. That old Harvard connection again, with common sense absent. Several Harvard professors were touting the Enron model for case studies for their students. That it was illegal or nonsensical didn't matter. They got away with it for years. They felt entitled. So too do the wind developers. Their promises are exaggerations, The power produced is a SECRET!! What does that tell you? They are hiding something. It is not just about Rumford. Maine needs more communities to stand up like Dixmont and protect the citizens. Note that the windsprawllers are working to stop Maine from being a "home rule" state. It was turned down once but they are still trying.(LD199). Mass. is trying too. They want to plant turbines ANYWHERE regardless of people, zoning, State Parks, whatever. That would mean we the people will be trumped by corporate interests at their whims. That is not right. Candiceanne ... I know two families who sold their camps far below market value because the windsprawl in Lincoln would be right across the lake from them. Property does lose value, of course when the prime reason for purchase is blighted. The ordinance is pro citizen which is the way "life should be" in Maine.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Agree (6)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.windpower
I'm not opposed to windpower. I just feel that the winds projects aren't right for the area. Natives know the land and can sense whats right or wrong. It's like a father knowing that his daughter is dating a loser but she can't see it but he can and he's looking out for her and he is going to protect her. Its that way about where we live. I remember when they were thinking of dumping nuclear waste in Western Maine years ago and many people spoke up against it. If you grew up in the area you appreciate the land ..where you hunt ,fish, swim or just walk and you know the beauty and it becomes part of you ....you don't have to talk about it .It's just the way it is . I know that things change and sometimes you have to go with change but windtowers to me seem out of place. Wind developers just don't see it the way natives do .
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Agree (7)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Rebutal for Candiceann
You said, "Yes, Europe has reduced "stimulus" money to wind power, they don't need it any longer. Their wind industry is doing very well now and does not need the support."
Just where did you dream up that crock of crap. Here's a quote from an article that just came out that discusses why the Europeans are bailing from supporting the wind power scammers:
"The report from Spain’s Universidad Rey Juan Carlos — which was the subject of a George Will column in the Washington Post on June 25, 2009 — showed each “green job” that had been added by Spain’s aggressive wind energy program cost Spain nearly $800,000 and resulted in the loss of 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy."
With the current state of technology, commercial wind power is a lose-lose proposition for everyone except the developers and it's employees.
See for yourself:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/breaking-released-emails-show-wind-lobby-so...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Agree (17)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Are you really trying to pass of a US blog as European News?
I see nowhere that it says the stimulus funding is ending for the reason you gave. It is only an American Columnist's blog, not even a news report. Oh, Please. This is another whine on the green jobs that they can't figure out how to count versus jobs lost overall in a lousy economy. It also does not take into consideration Cap and Trade because Europe has already dumped two, yes two, disasterous attempts at Cap and Trade. Obama did not learn from Europes mistake and has pushed the same disaster on the American people, just wait until it hits.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (6)
Agree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Boo-hoo
“The Dixmont ordinance, as John Maloney testified, was designed to stop wind in that community, and it worked,” Kiely said.
So what's wrong with that Attorney Keilly? If the majority of the citizens in any given community vote for an ordinance to prevent Industrial Wind Power or any other potentially destructive business from forcing themselves on that community - why is it wrong? Attorney Kielly only has on evested interest here - he recieves a $200,000. bonus from his employer for each project site that gets approved for development. Just another corporate weasel attorney passing himself off as "just one of the folks" as he tries to improve his employers chances of feeding at the taxpayer trough once again. Rumford area citizens, give Attorney Kiely and First Wind directions to the southbound lane of the Kittery bridge and be rid of these snake oil salesmen once and for all.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (5)
Agree (17)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.rural Maine
Please look into the validity of the alternative energy wind mills create.
Manufaturing the wind mills cost more carbon foot print than the mill can mitigate in it's lifetime.
yes, agreed a noise ordinance should be in place across the board for any future businesses.
The paper mill has cleaned it self up through mandates of the federal government.(maybe they will work on noise levels)
Businesses can be green and still save our beautiful mountains.
Tourism and development create far more jobs in any town than huge turbines killing our environment.
If the same energy used in fighting growth of medicinal marijuana was spent promoting our farmers; an extra income could be had by any who worked the land.
Which, by the way, if you hike a little bit into our woods you can ask the animals how they feel.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (6)
Agree (11)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Gempaint is Alice Barnett she
Gempaint is Alice Barnett she is the sister of Dan McKay who is the son-in-law of Freemont Tibbett. Tibbetts and McKay live in Peru. Alice lives with a friend and her husband in Carthage and is not a resident of Rumford. The last information I had, she was not employed. Freemont Tibbitts is retired and Dan McKay works odd jobs. Alice and Dan have another brother who leases land to wind power developers. Tibbetts, McKay and Barnett sold off their land holdings and therefore could not benefit from wind power development. I learned all this when contacting the Town Offices of Dixfield, Peru, and Carthage when the regional anti-wind committee formed to try to find out what was going on with this group.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (18)
Agree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So what?
Wow, you're a regular Nancy Drew, but what's your point? I don't really see a conflict of interest. I don't see how they stand to gain financially by fighting industrial wind. This vote is ultimately up to the folks in Rumford, you are right. Those who are opposed to industrial wind in Rumford are generally opposed to mountaintop industrial wind developments in Maine. And while they may not be residents of a particular town, they are still residents of MAINE--they appreciate the beauty, they hunt, fish, bike, hike...not just in their own town. In addition, there are concerns of the cumulative impact that these projects could have. This isn't one project, it is one of many--one ridgeline after another. Maybe you should consider getting out of your Rumford bubble and think about what this area will look like and sound like when/if we allow these projects on every suitable ridge or mountain in western Maine. So while you're right that this particular vote is Rumford's, I don't think that means that those from neighboring towns should not have a voice.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Agree (16)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Something is very wrong with this
Tibbitts, McKay, and Barnett sold off their land while the brother held on to his and could make some money. Have you heard of jealousy? Barnett and company would rather not see the brother make good where they are not doing well. If the wind turbines don't go in, he doesn't make any money on the leases. Other than one selectman, Greg Buccina, the only Rumford residents who have been standing up opposed to the wind turbines are connected to big oil, Community Energy and Black Mountain Ski Areas Board which is mostly made up of the same people. The objection of Black Mountains Board is in direct difiance of the owners of Black Mountain, Maine Winter Sports and Libra Foundation which would like to make some money off leases and running tours making the ski area self-sustaining. Black Mountain is again at the Rumford trough today looking for a "donation" after they were turned down in June. The Black Mountain Board prefers donations to fundraising, leasing the land to wind power and running the tours spring, summer and fall to have this a four season facility that is a money maker. Rumford Selectmen have even declared an "emergency" so we can change the charter in November so when Black Mountain comes back to us in June and we say no again, they can't tie up the town, prevent tax commitment, and force us to vote again on it and maybe again and again hoping we will get it right, right being giving them the "donation."
I walked to the polls today to Vote NO AGAIN on the "donation" for Black Mountain. In the short walk I observed the following points of relevence and interest. We sure don't seem to think wind mills are unsightly if these ornaments are any indication.
On the other hand this is hideous but, we have accepted it for years and not demanded it be cleaned up.
Something is very wrong with this.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (9)
Agree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hello again, Candiceanne
Good morning.
I was saddened to read your comments in this forum, Candiceanne-- and as an anti-bullying advocate, I was also distressed to see tactics usually employed by middle-schoolers being used in a public arena such as this. Please, please stop these personal attacks on those who oppose your views.
You've mentioned as candiceanne and as commonsense that you would like to see an educational forum on industrial wind, and yet, each time one has been organized in your area, you have maligned the people who organized it, the people who spoke, and the actual topics discussed. You've inferred that these educational meetings were biased, but at least three wind developers were asked to attend the last one in Rumford, and they all declined the invitation to send their own experts to speak. I encourage YOU to take the lead, just as those good citizens have done previously. YOU can arrange the speakers, the venue, the topics. It is every bit as much YOUR right as it is the right of those others who have worked tirelessly on this topic in the past. You cannot wait for others to design something of which you would approve-- but you have it in your power to do it, yourself. You could have it arranged within a week. I know, because I've done it, and I would be happy to help you with any logistical details, if you need help.
It's not okay to defame others. It's not okay to complain about something unless you are willing to give an equal or better effort to change that which you are dissatisfied with. It's never okay to resort to the type of bullying which you do here online, protected by a screen name and not looking your opponents in the eye. Please, candiceanne. This is a serious topic, and it deserves to be dealt with in a mature and reasoned manner. Whether you are a resident of Florida who comes 'home' to Maine on a part-time basis, or a former governor who was born in New York but who chose Maine as his home, or whether you are a native, born and bred-- we are all human beings, and we are Americans. We all love this state. This issue deserves a thoughtful and factual discourse. I believe you owe several people a sincere apology for bringing their personal lives into the spotlight. Especially when you are unwilling to do the same.
I would love to sit down with you and have a candid conversation. I believe two women, working together, can solve all kinds of problems. I'll even come to you, and take you to lunch. What do you say? Can we stop this vitriol and have a meaningful discussion and/or respectful debate? We women should be peace-keepers, even when we are at odds. You may email me at home at roomtomove@tds.net or call 628-2070 any time. I'd appreciate the opportunity to speak to you personally.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. ME
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Agree (7)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Thank you for the compliments Karen.
Karen, coming from you, after the lies you told commonsense before your Rumford meeting which he/she attended after you insisted it would not be what he/she said it would be and absolutely lived up to everyone of his/her expectations and then some, I take this as the highest complement. You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the A$$, Miss Realtor who wants to get out of earning commissions by having laws guaranteeing the price want drop on property. There is not one untrue thing in what I said. The four people I mentioned are related exactly as I sai. Their land situations are exactly as I said; you can verify with public records. You had your "candid" discussion with commonsense though from what he/she had to say "candid" was definitely not the word they would use to describe it, I am exceedingly grateful I have not wasted my time with one of these deceitful discussins. (you all will have to look back to posts from the joke of a meeting Karen's group held in Rumford for commonsense's specific comments and the discussion between the two before the meeting, I was smart enough to skip it.) If you are not completely clear yet, I am candiceanne ONLY, I have this thing about if you are going to say it you should be willing to put your name behind it and I do. Then again, I don't have to worry about one of you folks walking into my business and threatening me, my family and my business either. I have attended many meetings including the meeting in which Andy Fisk was the presenter and several workshops with the Rumford Board of Selectmen.
What many of us want is a forum composed of impartial speakers. That being not wind power advocates or anti-wind power fanatics. We would like ie to have scientists speak on noise and other issues that would be part of wind power but also apply to other things as well. Many of us are not fixated on wind power. We think that a comprehensive vision for Maine should be looked at not a discriminatory, reactionary approach taken to economic development and Maine's future. There was and is money in the economic development budget of the Town of Rumford for this purpose; I have spoken to Town Manager Carlo Puiia and Economic Development Committee Chair Phil Blampied about this but like the Wind Power Advisory Committee, nothing. Sorry, I have not been sitting on my hands doing nothing, I go to meetings, I make calls, I have meet several times outside meetings with those that should be taking care of this but, as we all have seen, NOTHING. We got a truly hideous Babe the Blue Ox to the tune of $6000 in economic development money last year but, we can't get a meeting with appropriate experts to educate people on an important economic development issue they are being asked to vote on. Does it get any more messed up than that?
I also would have been at the "advisory" committee meetings if the meetings weren't being kept a complete secret. I would have been wasting my time of course since the public involvement was limited to five minutes according to their "rules" when they finally put something on the town's website. No wonder no one from the public showed up, 5 minutes for the public to be involved, right.
I have not been a part-time resident of the state. I have been back for the longest, most miserable and discouraging 16 months of my life. No we do not all love Maine either. A good many of us are just plain flat out fed up which is why so many businesses have left and so many houses stand abandoned. A lot of the rest of us who provide jobs and work in the community are still here because we have ethics, morals, and values; we keep our promises and we made commitments and are unwilling to break them because it goes against every thing we believe in and we are still big enough suckers to refuse to give up hope and leave. If you hadn't heard 70% of the people in Maine are on welfare. Some of us look at Maine like we look at a drunk or a drug addict, when they hit bottom they will be ready to change, we just keep hoping and praying Maine has finally hit bottom. That was my hope when I came back. I hoped I was coming back to help Maine rebuild and I hoped that finally, finally, I might be able to make a home in my home state and my kids might be able to, so far, I see I was sooooo wrong. The great bloodletting of business, young people and anything else good is still taking place out of Maine with no reduction in flow indicated. That is heartbreaking. I see 80% on welfare very soon.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (5)
Agree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Candiceanne, you are right
Candiceanne, you are right not to waste your time on Karen. Well put, she wouldn't know the truth if it bit her on the A$$. I met with her when she was her after she lied to me in this blog about the meeting. All I got in the blog was lies, all I got when we met was more lies, all that came out of her mouth during the presentations, more lies still.
If this ordinance passes we expect to close up our business and bulldoze the buildings and our home after we move out the inventory and equipment and salvage what we can from the buildings. Our closing will cost Rumford more good jobs with benefits that Rumford apparently doesn't want. We are done being taken advantage of. We are looking at out of state locations where businesses are welcome.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (4)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Doubt it
You are making a lot of assumptions about a family and basically spreading rumors that are unfounded. If you are against this ordinance or are pro-wind, then I suggest, as I have to someone else on here, that you focus on your task at hand which would be educating yourselves and your community best you can and vote as you wish. While we in Maine have a fear of outsiders (which First Wind most definitely is), I would not worry about those from the next town (not really from away) who are trying to educate Maine citizens on the facts they have gathered re: industrial wind. Those of you who are in favor of this project can hold a forum or speak up at meetings just the same anytime you want to make the effort and go to the expense.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Agree (7)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So your definition of
So your definition of "outsider" is anyone who supports wind power develeopment, rather than the traditional definition of not being from Maine.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (4)
Agree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I was unaware of the familial
I was unaware of the familial connectins of Tibbetts, McKay, and Barnett and the reasons behind their issue with wind power until I was informed by public officials when I called to find out about public meetings being held. It seems it was not a secret in Dixfield, Peru or Carthage.
As I have so often stated, it would be wonderful for all of us if the Rumford Wind Power Advisory Committee had done what they were mandated to and provided education on the advantages and disadvantages of wind power. There is and was money in the economic development account to bring in qualified, independent experts to speak on noise and other issues in which they are qualified experts. Instead of doing that, the committee appointees did what they intended to when they got a meer 25 signatures to force the selectment to hold a special town meeting to vote by show of hands to get a a moratorium after the people voted in June 751-364 in favor of wind development. You see, when ALL voters have the opportunity to vote, the special interest could not get what they wanted so they had to rig it so that only a fraction of the people, under 50 at an evening meeting as opposed to more than 1000 by austrailian ballot at the polls, got to vote to get what they wanted. That just is not right. Then those folks got on the committee and drove out the ones that wanted to do the right thing, educate. It is now October 13, this will be on the Nov ballot and there is nothing in the works for educating the voters, so we go in without what we are entitled to, being informed voters via the committee providing resources. Given that any forum would have in all likelihood been held at the very large Muskie Auditorium, more than just Rumford citizens certainly could have attended with the program piped into the gym and cafeteria if need be. Our loss for sure and what a waste.
Interesting that you consider the 72nd Governor of Maine an outsider.
- 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.Doesn't matter
King is an outsider. The company is very much from away. What happens in these rural communities--the anger and divisiveness, the human and wildlife impacts--is no concern of his or theirs.
We can go around and around on this, but the bottom line is that experts have been brought but those in favor of wind power did not like what the experts said. Then you say that the experts were not good enough. This on top of all the appearances by wind company executives with all of their presentations. The information is out there. The dead horse has been beaten. What's left to say, really?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Agree (5)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Sorry pictures did not go through
I have a call in to Patty for help to send the pictures.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Comprehensive not descriminatory
Do Not let these out of towners deceive you, this is a flat out permanent moratorium and is nothing short of anti-business as David Glover and Josanne Dolloff said. This ordinance, if passed will be the final nails in the coffin for Rumford. You will not see any businesses coming here period.
I hope you all took notice that the majority of people attending and speaking at this meeting opposing to wind in our community were out of towners. They are not interesed in what is best for us or our community They have an agenda and you can be darn sure our best interests are not part of it.
No were that wind turbines have been built have land values been adversely effected. Even they cannot tell you if you specifically ask them to name a place it occured of one it has. What they will do is talk about a report generated by a realty group that projected it could happen, recommending that wind power companies be forced to guarantee property values. Two problems with that, great way for realtors not to have to do their jobs if the are guaranteed a the price. Secondly as we have recently seen with the nationwide property value plummet other things effect property values.
Yes, Europe has reduced "stimulus" money to wind power, they don't need it any longer. Their wind industry is doing very well now and does not need the support. The idea behind stimulus for new industry is that it is new and to get it going to be self-sufficient. We here in the United States are decades behind. Once our wind industry gets moving it wont need any assistance either besides the fact oil, gas, and coal which has been around a century is getting a huge subsidy in the form of cap and trade which will then convert into mega additional profits from inflated prices we will be paying forever.
The "advisory" committee did not do its job to "educate the citizens on the advantages and disadvantages of wind power" they ignored our 751 to 364 in favor of wind development and developed a permanent moratorium instead of advising the planning board to develop an accross the board noise ordinance that would address any and all current and/or future activities in the town, a non-descriminatory ordinance. Fire the advisory board, throw all these carpet bagger out of towner with their self-serving agendas, and vote NO on this economic bomb.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (28)
Agree (6)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.ordinance
A mile set back from property lines is protecting property values as well as citizens health.
IF these big wind machines did actually make money or energy we would welcome this form of alternative energy.
Instead; Big Wind is on a fast track expediting towns approvals . They receive stimulus money as soon as these 480 foot monsters go up. The turbines do not have to be hooked to the grid.
I do not know what happened to Kathryn Skelton and her investigation into these scams.
I never see a photo simulation in the press.
Please read between the lines. Europe has cancelled stimulus funds for wind energy after ten years of investing in jobs and energy; then seeing neither is there to offset the tax payers investments.
We need to protect future generations of this malady and give them the earth's resources
intact.
I do not know what wind companies give land owners for price value, but surely development is spreading our way from Bethel and Rangeley.
If towns need money; invest in tourism; vistas, water, hiking, sking and yes maybe a casino.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (10)
Agree (16)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hooray Dave & Josanne
Mr. Aniel does not live in Rumford and should not have been allowed to speak. Mr. Buccina is beyond center field and needs to move to an anti business community. And don't forget to bring Aniel and the others who wrote that ordinance. In fact the tickets wouldn"t cost anything if you can jump on one of those wasteful firework rockets that would help with the very quick move.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (18)
Agree (8)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.