DIXFIELD — Residents will have a chance to learn about a proposed wind turbine project for the Colonel Holman Mountain ridgeline at an open house at 6 p.m. Thursday at Ludden Memorial Library.
The session will be hosted by developers Patriot Renewables LLC of Quincy, Mass. A dozen or more “stations” will be set up by Patriot's scientific and permitting team.
A variety of maps showing the planned placement of turbines, transmission lines and substation as it relates to sound, wildlife and other factors will be on display with specialists available to answer questions.
A representative will also be available to discuss the environmental permitting process. A consultant from Eaton Peabody, the firm hired by the town with Patriot funding, will discuss the financial and tax implications of siting a wind turbine project in town.
The wind energy firm has planned construction of 13 industrial wind turbines on privately owned, leased land. The firm has several other wind projects under development in Carthage, Canton and Woodstock.
Report a correction
On Patriot Renewables' Payroll
Wind developers routinely demonstrate their largesse by offering to towns and counties a neutral and unbiased consultant to look at their finances for them. Wind developers offer to pay for that objective, independent counsel. And then... they recommend a firm like Eaton Peabody.
Of course they do.
If a representative from Eaton Peabody states that they are a neutral facilitator which doesn't represent industrial wind companies, please be very suspicious. They need to remember who their clients have been... and who they ARE. They need to think about what documents they might have signed and sworn to. What documents might be 'on record'.
I agree that wind developers SHOULD pay for consultants and attorneys if they are coming into a town and causing expense as those communities deal with proposals for wind energy plants. But I urge all towns to seek their own independent counsel... an attorney or consultant who has not been tainted by industrial wind. If Patriot Renewables, First Wind, Highland Wind LLC and others are on the up and up-- then they won't mind if a town hires a firm or individual who has no ties-- NONE-- to industrial wind.
Don't put your faith in Eaton Peabody. Not in this instance. In some capacity, they've already represented wind developers in Maine. Don't take guidance or advice from wind developers, or from me. I urge all townspeople to seek out truly independent advice. No matter which way you lean on the topic of industrial wind, your townspeople deserve unbiased, expert counsel.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just more propaganda
Just more "wonderful tales" from the developer. It could be worse, you could have First Wind LLC doing the development. Hopefully Patriot Renewables has at least a little bit of ethics, honesty, and scrupples - something totally lacking in First Wind's front men. But still, it's a failed technology that's starting to fail everyone's "sniff' test. The cost to benefit ratio is so unfavorable that institutional investors have lost all interest. Two day's ago First Wind LLC projected it's IPO's value of $24-26. per share. Yesterday, they reduced the projection to $18-20. and then this morning they pulled it completely - only to come back at 11:00 a.m. at $11.51 per share. That's 47% off what they projected just two days ago. People are getting wise to these heavily federally subsidized wind power boondoggles.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3) Agree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just love it when people who
Just love it when people who have absolutely no understanding of the stock market make these kind of assertions. As a retired Licensed Financial Consultant let me try to explain what all this means. IPO stands for Initial Product Offering which means the first issuing of a class or batch of stock by a company. The interesting thing about IPOs is that most of the money that you pay for the IPO share doesn't go to the company, in this case First Wind. Most of the money you pay gets gobbled up by those greedy wall street investment bankers/stockbrokerage houses like the now defunct Soloman Smith Barney/Citi Group who do all the paperwork, advertising and pushing of the IPO. From my personal experience working for one of those nasty firms (I refused to touch their IPOs among other products) the company who's name is on the stock is lucky to see 10% of the intial selling price. From my previous experience, I feel confident in saying that First Wind has been negotiating with the greedy SOBs handling the IPO and gotten them to come down on their take on each share in order to increase public interest and saleablity of the issue. Realistically when an educated stock buyer is looking at considering an aquisition they look to things like net assets and profit. With IPOs in new companies and companies experiencing rapid asset growth the numbers are often out of alignment, the same with profit. With technology it is often a gut feeling or knowledge of the technology that drives a buyer such as with google, microsoft, apple and yahoo which have certainly done very well by their investors. I remember getting my clients into Lucient Technology and my manager going nuts. But my clients made a killing on it because I knew about the company, the product line and the technology. On the other hand my manager was pissed because I wouldn't touch the companies IPO of GE which did turn out to be a real dog and cost a lot of the firms clients a lot of money and damaged a lot of consultants and the firms reputation. There is absolutely nothing unusal about the handling of First Winds IPO. $18-20 is the current projection for the price when it hits the market, it will be very interesting to see just what offers do come in. Which reminds me, do you know that stock purchases are based on offers just like buying a house? The price you see on the ticker on your TV screen or web page is just the last offer accepted. Anyone can make any offer and it will sit out their waiting for someone to accept it forever unless the offerer sets a date for expiration. So if you want to pick up First Winds IPO (or any other stock) you can place an order at whatever you are willing to pay with your favorite broker.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Turbines and taxes.
Let’s say Patriot Renewables gets to put up 13 turbines in Dixfield (about a $39,000,000. investment). If they actually intended to pay the current tax rate of 16.75 mills on their investment, they would pay the town about $653,250,000. per year in taxes. Sounds pretty good, right? Wouldn’t people’s tax bills go down in Dixfield? The answer is yes, but only by a very tiny amount.
What people forget is that a town’s school and county appropriation is driven by the town’s total value. Dixfield’s value right now is about $147,250,000 and if you drive that up by $39,000,000., then your county tax and school tax increases eat up any tax relief. Of course the other towns in the school district don’t mind a bit, because any increase in Dixfield’s share of the school and county budgets means a small decrease in their county and school taxes.
Even in small towns where the turbine project doubles the town’s value, the tax relief was only about $120. per $150,000. of valuation. The figures I just quoted were done by the State of Maine’s Municipal Revenue Division. Let’s face it, if you think the turbine project will reduce your taxes in Dixfield, you’ve got another think coming!
But Patriot Renewables has absolutely no intention of paying their fair share. If they get their way, they are going to ask for a TIF. So instead of paying the town $653,250. per year, they are only going to pay the town about $195,975 per year (30%) and put the other $457,275 (70%) back in their pocket. Of course you might get a little more by driving a hard bargain with Patriot Renewable’s legal team (Eaton Peabody), but don’t count on it. And to add insult to injury, Patriot Renewables gets to depreciate the turbines by 2-3% per year by claiming them as personal property. Sweet deal for Patriot Renewables, huh! (Not so hot for Dixfield.)
That $195,975 the town receives cannot be used for tax relief, either. It can only be used for “economic development” within the TIF district. No swimming pools and no ball parks for the kids either. Most towns reconstruct a few miles of roads at $250,000 per mile (again the roads have to be within the TIF district), hire an economic development director, and spend a fair amount ($97,000 in Burlington’s case) on yearly lawyer fees to administer the TIF. Lincoln is going to buy a building, tear it down and put up a parking lot…cost, $1,000,000. The state has to approve everything, too.
Some towns use a portion of the TIF funds to promote tourism. That’s kind of a joke isn’t it? They just covered their hills with turbines, so how are they going to promote tourism?
The TIF would be worth it if the project created enough good paying jobs, but the average is one good paying permanent job for every 6 to10 turbines. And as Patriot Renewables gets more projects across Maine, I see them centralizing repair work and keeping a skeleton crew in places like Dixfield. Vote yes on the ordinance...it's the right thing to do.
- 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.You really messed up the math
You really messed up the math Question Everything. On a project valued at $39,000,000 you put the taxes at $653,250,000 or nearly 16.75 times the value of the project, OUCH. I don't think anyone is paying annual taxes that are equal to 16.75 times the value of their property, who would or could own property. The assessed tax on $39,000,000 at 16.75 mil is $653,250.
The second part of your argument isn't completely true either as the people of Rumford can attest having been hit with a 22-1/2% tax increase last year when NewPage and Brookfield Power each got large abatements resulting in the loss of 18.6% of the towns valuation. The experience has carried over to this year even after the adjustments by the state for "sudden and severe" in which the state made adjustments to Rumford's school contribution and shifted some of the load to Dixfield along with the other RSU towns. The big change does effect school and county contributions but obviously not to the extent you suggest. Rumford did get a reduction in their school contribution this year but our mil rate only dropped 1.5 mil which is a lot less than 18.6%. You also have to take into consideration that the existance of the higher valuation certainly does not mean the town would increase it's budget.
I have no idea what Dixfield's valuation or mil rate is. Dixfield isn't voting on an ordinance on Nov 2 so it really doesn't matter and we can use any numbers for demonstration purposes. I am willing, for the sake of the arguement to use the valuation of $147,250,000 provided, the mil rate of 16.75 and the valuation of the project of $39,000,000. Using $147,250,000 valuation and 16.75 mil, Dixfield would raise $2,466,427.50 in property taxes. With the addition of the project raising the valuation of the town to $186,250,000 and to raise the same $2,466,427.50 the mil would drone to 13.24 or by 3.51 mil which is a 21% reduction. As previously stated a small portion of this may be absorbed by increased school contributions though with projects in the works in Roxbury, Buckfield, Rumford and other towns in the district that will be even less than the miniscule amount that would occur if only Dixfield had an increase in valuation. In this senario, using Question Everything's average home value of $150,000 in Dixfield which given my knowledge of the area is way high, at teh 16.75 mil taxes would be $2512.50 and with the wind turbines mil rate of 13.24 they drop by $526.50 to $1986.00.
It helps if you start by doing the math correctly.
- 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.actually
Dixfield IS voting on a wind ordinance on November 2.
http://www.dixfield.org/assets/documents/2010/Windmillfacility%20ordinan...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (1) Disagree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Dixfield Selectmen Withdrew the Ballot Question
"Wind Ordinance Question Withdrawn" October 27 SJ http://www.sunjournal.com/river-valley/story/932471 Dixfield's Board of Selectmen discovered some major errors in the ordinance and pulled the ballot question. You must have missed yesterdays paper.
- 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.I did miss this, thanks
I don't see that the citizen initiative regarding zoning has been withdrawn, though.
- 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.Tibbetts initiative looks
Tibbetts initiative looks like it could be a real problem for Dixfield. The way it is written hiking, hunting, snowmobiling and all other activities would be prohibited at elevations of 1000ft and higher. It also looks like any roads that pass to 1000 ft or higher would have to be closed and any houses at or above 1000ft will have to be removed. This initiative if passed is grounds for major abatements on any and all property with elevations of 1000ft or higher and any property that is landlocked by property with such elevations. Also any property that is no longer accessible by an existing road which will have to be closed because it travels to elevations of 1000ft or higher would lose some, most or all value. This could be a major problem for the remaining taxpayers in the town depending upon how much of the tax base is effected. It would not take a lot either since Dixfield doesn't have a lot of tax base to work with to begin with.
- 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.The ordinance you posted the
The ordinance you posted the link too, has been pulled.
- 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.Yes, I understand that.
Yes, I understand that. There is also a citizen initiative regarding zoning (that could impact industrial wind farms), as far as I can tell from the town of Dixfield's site this will still be voted on.
- 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.still up for vote
From today: Under serious consideration is the local ballot question on Tuesday. At that time, residents will decide whether to zone Colonel Holman Mountain as well as Sugarloaf Mountain in such a way as to essentially eliminate wind power development.
- 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.Eaton Peabody
Let us not forget that Eaton Peabody is the law firm that wrote the TIF proposals for Stetson, Lincoln, Lee, Winn, Burlington, Oakfield and who knows how many other First Wind projects. Never forget they work for the Wind Companies (the people paying their salaries), not for the townspeople.
I guarantee Patriot Renewables will be pushing hard for a TIF. With a TIF, Patriot Renewables will be giving the town about 30-40% of the taxes they should have paid, and putting the rest, about 60-70% back in their pockets. They are allowed to depreciate the turbines (as personal property) between 2-3% per year too. Another loss for the town! No tax relief for the citizens either way!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1) Agree (8)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.No Law Says TIF Mandatory
There is no law that says a town has to give aTIF to a wind power developer or anyone else. TIFs require the approval of the selectmen and the voters. If these developers received TIFs in these locations the people their chose to do so. If future projects receive TIFs it will be because governing bodies negotiated and the voters approved the TIF. There is nothing that says a TIF has to be negotiated or agreed to, there is that little two letter work NO we use frequently with small children for their safety (or should) that can be used wit TIF requests by wind power developers and any one else if we so choose. NO is a word that selectmen, the legislature, the governor, and voters in Maine seem to have difficulty with when it comes to spending money or giving money away including in the form of TIFs. If Maine in general got some backbone in this it would really help out financially. I know I don't run my house this way and I am sure a lot of the rest of you don't either. So why is it so hard for the state and local governments? We can take Former Rumford Wind Power Advisory Committee Member Charlie Hoff's advice and vote NO on Rumford's ordinance and also vote NO on any TIF that may be put before us at a later date.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3) Agree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just say no!
You are right. We just need to say no to TIFs. What I can't understand is why more towns don't say no. The only wind project in the state where the people said no was in Freedom and that was a project by Patriot Renewables with three turbines.
So if there is next to zero tax relief under regular taxation, and absolutely no tax relief with a TIF, and they create so few jobs and cause so many problems with their noise and loss of property values near them, why would any town let them in? Other than benefit some lease holders on top of the hills, I can't for the life of me explain it.
- 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.Natural gas prices continue
Natural gas prices continue to decline. Electrical demand is down. The gas to electric plant in Rumford remains idle most of the time. The existing wind farms in Maine provide more than is required to meet the State's mandated " Renewable Portfolio " New wind projects are showing up as losses to investors. First Wind's profit/loss disclosure reveals a failing company. If you don't need it and it will increase the cost of electricity, why build it ? People in Dixfield and Rumford have an opportunity on November 2 to stop this nonsense or at least delay it until wind can prove itself to be a needed and reliable source of electricity. Vote IN FAVOR of Rumford's wind ordinance with a YES. Vote IN FAVOR of zoning Colonel Holman and Sugarloaf Mountains in Dixfield with a YES.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (6) Agree (13)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Newly Resigned Rumford Committee Member Begs Citizens to Vote NO
Somebody missed yesterdays Sun Journal. Dixfield will not be voting on wind power the selectmen pulled the ballot question macmac. And in the Letters to the Editor, Charlie Hoff who was one of the big outspoken advocates for Rumford's ordinance, was key in drafting it and getting the selectmen to put it on the ballot, announce he has resigned from the wind power advisory committee and is asking people to vote NO on the ordinance. So Dixfield will be no ordinance on the 2 and if at least of one of the key people behind Rumford's proposed ordinance has his way Rumford will have a NO vote on November 2.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.