Is enticement of the appearence of easy money so overwhelming to this select board, that they can't hear their people anymore. A good 60 people out of the 75 attending this hearing wanted a more protective ordinance than offered by the select board and wanted it done so it could be voted on June 12th.
Buying into this wind to electrcity idea is risky, economically. To think that covering the landscape with enough of these machines will bring prosperity to us all is simply the same menality used to sell sub prime mortgages so that it seemed everyone could afford a house. Falling for this wind scam now because the money looks great will only lead to pay back of huge porportions later as the concept of wind to electricity fails, one wind turbine at a time.

What is this, singling out Dixfield for the biggest increase ? Between the past few RSU 10 budgets and, now, this budget, Dixfield is getting slammed and a little sick of this.

Canton, I don't believe, has any type of site or noise ordinance that would address wind turbine projects. This DEP public meeting was the town's first exposure to any type of rules and regulations expressively written for wind development. The DEP rules, as depicted in this article, are very questionable, leaving the town not sufficiency protected against loss of property values and concerns due to noise. This meeting should be a " Red Flag " alert to the town to consider a moratorium. The DEP rules are not that difficult to understand. The town has now heard, for the first time, some of their rules. Hopefully, the town will follow suit with almost all the other area surrounding towns and consider whether the DEP rules are adequate for their comfort. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

Read this following excerpt from a recent article in this newspaper and tell me how a town manager gets to tell the select board how to respond to a citizen petition, advocating the citizens be left out in the cold. Who is whose boss, anyways ?

"Town Manager Eugene Skibitksy said Tuesday that the board has no responsibility to place another ordinance before townspeople because a proposal to devise an ordinance was voted down at a town meeting in May of 2011. With that action, the town has agreed to follow the state Department of Environmental Protection regulations for wind development."

Scott, the vote at the town meeting took place at 9:30 pm on a weeknight and after 3 and a half hours of contentious give and take over municipal budget items. People were tired and an offer to discuss wind regulations wasn't too appealing and was voted down 30-25. This article only asked if people wanted to discuss the regulation process. It ran into bad timing. The question of whether to adopt DEP regulations in lieu of establishing our own regulations was never a part of this article. Your paper needs to talk to others beyond the town manager and bring truth to your stories.

It's also a "huge" jump from $7.62 per thousand to $16.86 per thousand when the machines are shut down and removed in fifteen years. You can hedge yourself against this event by settling upon a mil rate slightly less $16.86 per thousand ( after all, that is what you are used to now). This increased revenue and it is substantial for a 110 million dollar project can be tucked away in a rainy day fund to help the town get through what could become unforeseen circumstances down the road.

Ayatollah Kilbreth on the loose.

This is an extremely local problem with a need of local mechanism to address it.
The DEP protocol of handling noise issues was offered by the wind developer during the application process and is full of holes, which was either intentional or unforeseen.
The town needs to have record of these complaints and a follow-through procedure. This means acquisition of data and associated costs. The townspeople have a means to create funding for such a study through property taxation and a town warrant article. The Town Meeting occurs in March and the assessed value of this project occurs April 1st.
It is mandatory that the town start action on facing this problem right away before their credibility of acting on behalf of the health and welfare of the citizens is destroyed.

Crony capitalism is a term describing a capitalist economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials.
Most people don't see this as " Good Old American Principles " , but many, with money in hand, would seem to display a sort of pride in this device of profit that furthers the burden on the average person.

In a NRCM statement approving the 44 turbine Kibby Mountain Project :

TransCanada has agreed to significant land conservation arrangements, including contributing to the permanent protection of approximately 750 acres in the Mahoosuc Mountain Range.

Has Chief Stacy Carter ever thought that maybe indulging his department in State programs can come back to bite the Rumford taxpayers ?

the stronger the wind the more power they will generate. In 11 mph annual average winds, each Windspire will generate approximately 2,000 kWhs a year.

Although this report has some factual errors in it, it gets to the developer's point of view enabling them, yet again, advantage over the unheard and unreported voices of the people. There are concerns with these projects and, in time, they will be heard. The town managers/select boards of Roxbury and Woodstock have to change the " stack the deck" procedures that make it difficult for their citizens to voice their concerns. With both of these projects having impacts beyond the host community borders, concerns of citizens from other towns should also have a voice.
Several towns in the River Valley are patiently awaiting resulting public input as these projects go into operation. Dixfield, Peru, Sumner, Weld and Paris are proceeding with wind ordinances. Citizens,Town Managers, Select Boards and newspaper reporters have the responsibility inherent with their duties to give voice to others besides the developers.

Fortunately, this committee also has elected legislatures who have given effort to listen to their constituents throughout rural Maine and will deliver a strong voice of " common sense " to meetings this session. We, the people, who have researched and discovered the problems with mountaintop wind development will be there supporting those lawmakers who have shown us their willingness to listen and bring a roaring view of sensibility to the proceedings.

And, if you think $1.5 billion is going to be the final tab, have you forgotten the Boston Tunnel ? This project is running behind schedule and many parts of it are still in the design phase. Many parts that have been built are in the process of modification, mainly because, engineers haven't a clear picture on what devices will be needed to compensate for the erratic nature of wind driven electric generators.

If after a period of time,when municipalities within the district of certain state representatives have adopted ordinances or moratoriums effectively indicating their desire to opt out of the " Industrial Wind Zones " designated within the expedited wind law of 2008, wouldn't you think they would seriously rethink their position on Industrial Wind or have they "opted out" of their duties to represent their districts.

I do believe a hospital will help you in an emergency, while a furnace ain't much help without fuel.

Rhetoric is boundless. Cut to the chase. What is my electric bill going to look like ?

The likelihood of achieving prosperity through fantasy is intriguing. Converting wind to electricity and reaching a goal that would have 20% of Maine's electrical consumption come from wind, upon simple face value, is a fantastic thought. To think this path to energy makeover will lead to an electric vehicle revolution is " Disneyland " , imagination gone wild.
Each and every wind turbine, from imagination to development assaults the electrical consumer with added costs , costs which erode the consumer's ability to purchase other commodities, services or products. Reducing the people's buying power by forcing unneeded costs upon them fails the " Prosperity through Reality " test.
The author should consider pulling his head out of the clouds. Blind faith in fantasy, or the future as central planning dictates, falls flat on it's face value.

Politics, Friends and a developer in Carthage, Dixfield, Canton, Woodstock and Freedom
Posted by Dan McKay on October 3, 2011 at 7:08pm
View Blog
"DiMasi business ties questioned: His killing of bill benefited friend"
By Frank Phillips, (Boston) Globe Staff, May 1, 2008

Just months after House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi killed a bill that was designed to block a controversial liquefied natural gas project from being built on 73 acres in Fall River, the landowner, Jay Cashman, sold the property to the terminal developers and made a $14.2 million profit, according to a Globe review of real estate and legislative records.

DiMasi's actions, taken in 2006, raise questions not only because of his close relationship with Cashman, a wealthy contractor, but also because DiMasi's wife has been involved for at least two years in what the speaker last week termed a "business relationship" with Cashman and his wife.

Deborah DiMasi and Christy Scott Cashman are launching a cable television show premiering this Sunday night, one produced by a Cashman-owned company. Neither couple would describe the nature of the business relationship, nor say how much money, if any, Deborah DiMasi receives for her role.

"Relationships, money, and influence is what it is all about," said state Representative David B. Sullivan, a Fall River Democrat who, along with other local officials, has strongly opposed the LNG terminal. He said the personal connections between DiMasi and Cashman tainted the terminal legislation: "It smells bad."

DiMasi said in an interview that he was making public policy decisions and that none of his legislative moves were intended to help his friend. In addition, he said, he did not know financial details of Cashman's ownership of the Fall River property at the time.

Passage of the bill would have effectively prohibited the construction of an LNG terminal on the site and would have reduced the potential sale price of the property.

In another move that dismayed some New Bedford-area officials, DiMasi also shepherded legislation through the House last fall that would ease state permitting for a wind farm on Buzzards Bay. Cashman is seeking approval to construct 120 wind turbines in those waters.

DiMasi said he sought to open up Buzzards Bay to wind farm development because he strongly supports alternative energy, not because Cashman was interested in developing the site.

"We don't talk about those things. It was all policy-driven," DiMasi said.

Cashman declined to be interviewed. His spokesman, George Regan, said Cashman did not discuss his financial interest in the LNG terminal in Fall River or in the wind farm in Buzzards Bay with the speaker.

"He goes to great lengths to keep his relationship with the speaker personal," Regan said. "It is not related to business in any way."

While the nature of the cable TV show business relationship is not known, if Deborah DiMasi accepted money in the business relationship, it could pose a violation of state ethics laws that prohibit people with interests before the Legislature from providing anything of more than $50 in value to lawmakers. The prohibition extends to lawmakers' spouses and to their business relationships, as well.

DiMasi, as the public official, is the only one subject to penalties under the ethics law's provisions. Under the ethics rules, if the legislation was general in nature and not intended to benefit Cashman, it would not be a violation. DiMasi said that was precisely the case in these instances, that he was looking at broader public policy regarding both the LNG terminal and the Buzzards Bay wind farm, not trying to help a friend and business associate of his wife.

Violations of the law can draw fines of up to $2,000 and can also trigger criminal prosecutions at the discretion of law enforcement officials.

Cashman and DiMasi have long had close ties. Cashman has supported DiMasi politically, even loaning him his Back Bay mansion for a political event, and they socialize frequently.

DiMasi has previously recognized the potential for questions about his relationship with Cashman, addressing the issue of their friendship and his wife's business connection to the Cashman couple head-on.

In March 2007 DiMasi made an official disclosure to the House clerk outlining the potential for a conflict of interest, including the production company venture that involved the Cashmans and his wife. DiMasi said in his letter to the clerk that he was publicly disclosing some details of the relationship to "dispel the impression" that Cashman could "unduly enjoy my favor" in his duties as speaker. Such a disclosure does not immunize an official from the law's provisions, according to state ethics law.

Deborah DiMasi and Christy Cashman, who co-owns the film company with her husband, are producing a monthly book review program for NECN cable television. The firm, Saint Aire Productions, boasts that the show will "expose . . . the 'naked truth' behind the works of best-selling authors and feature celebrity guests."

"It's a private matter," said Regan, when asked what compensation Deborah DiMasi receives, or who is sponsoring or paying for the show. NECN also declined to comment. .

The show will be taped in the Cashmans' Dartmouth Street mansion. Its first airing is scheduled for this Sunday.

DiMasi already is the subject of State Ethics Commission complaints filed by the state Republican Party alleging that he has used his influence to help friends and associates.

The GOP complained this week, based on a Globe story on Sunday, that the state's association of ticket brokers retained a close associate of DiMasi's to help them with their agenda on Beacon Hill. The associate, Richard Vitale, never registered as a lobbyist; in 2006, Vitale loaned $250,000 to DiMasi based on an unusual third mortgage on DiMasi's North End condominium. DiMasi later supported a bill that strongly favored the ticket brokers' business interests, and it sailed through the House.

An earlier ethics commission complaint followed Globe stories describing how DiMasi had pushed funding for a new $13 million computer program, the contract for which Governor Deval Patrick's administration improperly awarded to a computer company whose lobbyist is a close friend of the speaker. The computer company, Cognos ULC, also has been the lead sponsor of a charity golf tournament chaired by DiMasi.

In each of those instances, DiMasi has denied that he took any actions intended to favor any individuals and said he was acting in the interests of state policy.

Cashman has worked on many taxpayer-funded projects. His company dug the outflow pipes for the Deer Island sewage treatment plant, and it also laid the track for the controversial Greenbush commuter rail line. He was also one of the major contractors on the Big Dig.

Last August, when the Massachusetts Legislature hosted the National Conference of State Legislatures, Cashman allowed DiMasi to use his Back Bay estate for an event to honor other senate presidents, house speakers, and legislative leaders from around the country.

Cashman also donated about $15,000 to the national legislative group for the conference. His cash donation was part of the $400,000 that DiMasi and Senate President Therese Murray raised from Beacon Hill lobbyists, their clients, and corporate interests whose business activities are often tied to legislative actions.

Cashman's firm has made large donations to the Old North Church Foundation, a favorite charity of DiMasi's wife, who is vice chairwoman of the foundation board.

Cashman's profit on the Fall River property stems from his purchase of 73 acres on the banks of the Taunton River, the site of a former oil depot, in 2000 for $2.6 million. He later gave Weaver's Cove Energy an option on the property to build the LNG terminal, a project that was hotly opposed by Fall River political leaders.

In 2006, as the Legislature ended its session, Fall River leaders pushed a bill that Governor Mitt Romney said he would sign if it reached his desk. The bill would have effectively blocked the terminal by imposing height restrictions on ships passing under state bridges.

DiMasi said he killed the bill because Romney refused to accept an amendment that also would have shut down the existing Suez Energy LNG Distrigas terminal on the Mystic River in Everett, a major source of natural gas energy for New England. DiMasi said his North End constituents and other neighborhoods face potential disaster if there were a terrorist attack against the Everett tank. He suggested it would have been inconsistent to block the LNG plan in Fall River and not shut down the Everett site as well.

"If I'm going to protect Fall River, why wouldn't I protect my constituents, my family?" DiMasi said. "If I'm suggesting a facility would be dangerous with LNG coming down the Taunton River, is it any less dangerous in my neighborhood coming through Boston Harbor? No."

DiMasi acknowledged that he never in his nearly 30-year legislative career pushed to close the Everett terminal.

Five months after DiMasi rebuffed Fall River political leaders, Cashman sold the LNG site to Weaver's Cove Energy for $16.8 million. James Grasso, a spokesman for Weaver's Cove, said the demise of the bill blocking the terminal did not play a factor in its decision to buy the land from Cashman. The Weaver Cove's decision to buy the land stemmed from federal regulators' approval two years before, he said.

"I don't think the legislation had any impact," Grasso said.

The LNG project received an unexpected blow in October 2007 when the Coast Guard ruled that it was too risky for LNG tankers to travel in congested areas in the Taunton River. The firm is appealing the decision, while also pressing ahead with alternate plans.

That's one precious lot of land you are homesteading, Alice. Million dollar views, southern exposure, a dream come true . Too bad , industrial wind has to ruin it for you and your following generations. There should be a law, or is THAT what Didisheim is talking about. Has he been to your place ?

I have yet to meet a fourth grader who pays an electric bill.

Now, for the drawbacks :
Your electric bills go up. Wind is a high priced alternative at producing electricity
Properties near wind farms become devalued, sound is a serious issue.
Their intermittent natures forces the industry to keep reliable producers at stand by.
They are high maintenance and, at best, have a hopeful twenty year life.
They are hand picked by the government, not the best ones to pick good business ventures.
And, most of all, your electric bills will go up and up and up.

Chairman Bill Hine's declaration of a neutral stance on wind power and it's relationship/impact to Peru citizens gets a robust "thumbs up" . Too many towns in the River Valley have given the option to decide whether wind power is right for their towns to greedy and dis-compassionate people of power.

Look around, if you can see a hill or ridge line, then a windmill could be in your backyard, sending it's thumping, throbbing noise down upon you. It's time to simply administer some rules to get them to quiet them down. With all the amazing technology at their disposal, it shouldn't be hard to do. Engineers, put your pencils to work and solve this problem and Rumford hills await you. Until then, please don't tell anyone, potentially exposed to the irritating and constant noise, that it is all in their imagination.

Chairman, The remedy to eliminating these alert citizens from speaking is to do what the Dixfield chairman did : Eliminate " Public Comment " from the Select Board Meeting agenda, then, you, " The Selected " become " The Rulers "

The millions of dollars at stake have nothing to do with the long term prosperity of Rumford. The millions of dollars is about investors seeking short term gains of 25% returns in a matter of five years, then it's the hell with these throw away energy things. Well established and time proven ventures are what Rumford should be aiming for. The labor force is skilled and are World Class Producers. Rumford has transportation infrastructure to move goods. It is traditionally industrial.
Not be so impatient, Mr. Belanger, and clutch for offers from "government welfare" , nonproductive, consumer crushing, idealistic invented fallacy called wind power.

Mr. Carroll's observation that electricity entering the grid is spread over a regional area is correct. A six state region, including Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island. There is also interchanges with New York and Canada.
As a premium priced electricity , such as wind generated electricity, enters the grid, it's premium cost is spread over the region and eventually pass to the customers.
Think of wind as like going to the gas pumps where a mandate forces distributors to hold a certain percentage of regular unleaded gas and a certain percentage of premium gas, regardless of how customer demand would normally establish holding amounts. For those of you who exclusively purchase unleaded gas, you will have to buy premium because the percentage allocation mandate is out of whack with true demand and unleaded gas becomes used up before demand requirements are met, therefore premium gas is all there is to buy. It begins as sort of a nuisance, happening perhaps, once a month, and within the overall monthly gas purchase, the extra cost of having to buy the more expensive gas starts as a small percentage, but the mandate escalates this occurrence.
In our state, as well as several other states in the region, a mandate similar to this is in place for electrical supply. We, as customers, are subjected to this mandate. The premium costs of wind power, small percentage now, will increase with these mandates.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of how wind power will skyrocket electrical costs. You will need to understand how the unpredictable nature of wind power affects the overall grid and creates problems that require engineering solutions , adding to costs.
What you are not seeing, hearing or being reported is the events taking place to make wind power fit into the grid. Here's where the big costs will take place. Denmark says it's 20% wind. The electrical customers pay 35 cents per kilowatt and it's not going anywhere but up.
Now, why would people in Massachusetts buy wind power from Patriot Renewables originating in Maine ?

New Page struggles from strategies devised by their competitors in China. Just the wind farms in Maine contribute 2/3 of a billion dollars to this competitor. Something doesn't smell good about this. King's wisdom has us subsidizing our competitor and the mill sinks deeper.

Is this the same DEP that mandated the paper mills to come up with the technology to cut emissions that polluted the air and waters of Maine. They didn't seem meek about challenging the mills to clean up their act, why do they quiver at the thought of adopting the same mentality towards the wind machines. The mills mitigated pollution with advanced technology designed by the " highly skilled engineering community " . The windies roared at the DEP about how they have created work for " highly skilled engineers " . Now it's time for the DEP to roar back and put these engineers to work mitigating unwanted noise pollution. Is counting bats all that is expected from the engineering professionals nowadays ?

Fortunately, there are several wind ordinances in effect throughout the state and are available online for Peru citizens to review.
I would suggest, once an ordinance is written, that it be shown to a wind developer for their reaction to whether a proposed development in Peru could be undertaken. If the developer determines a project can not comply, then the committee will have created a document presenting the citizens a chose of whether to allow wind turbines in town. A " yes " to such an ordinance says " NO " to wind projects. A "no ' to such ordinance says " YES " to letting the DEP determine the fate of wind projects in Peru.
Good Luck with your efforts, Peru.... Many area towns will be taking notice and hopefully follow your lead in gathering information leading to giving the citizens a clear chose.

Mr. Rogers also stated that any TIF proposal would require a vote from the citizens of Dixfield.
If tax revenue from a commercial venture is placed in a TIF program, there will be NO money to reduce individual property taxes.
Dixfield should really think about forming a committee of citizens to review and research wind turbine development as it has many unique characteristics that other commercial ventures don't have.
The selectmen and planning board have no interest in performing this duty.
As I watch Rumford, Sumner, Peru, Phillips, Weld, New Vineyard, Paris, Bethel and Wilton work towards addressing wind turbine issues, I wonder why Dixfield hasn't recognized the need to look at the possible risks to health, environmental and economic impacts.

For the people on the committee to study wind power for Sumner : If you feel overwhelmed by all the aspects you hear about industrial sized turbines, you are not alone. STUDY is the key word here and you can understand everything you will need to know to make a responsible decision your town can live with. Good Luck.

I wonder how often Governor King and Mr. Gardiner have heard " If I only knew then what I know now " ? If, in fact, there was 40 public meetings, they occurred several years ago when public awareness of the many issues plaguing the wind industry was in the initial stage and, yet, by the slim margin of 7 votes, the project was allowed to proceed.
The fragmentation of the community of Roxbury is repeated over and over wherever a project is considered. It is too bad an ex governor, once holding the job of unifying people with policy and vision, has now engaged in such an ugly, polarizing experiment.
To say people will get used to these highly visible, 400 foot tall machines is a bit premature. I'm more apt to believe if they had been disallowed in Roxbury, the tranquility of this community would restore itself ( can't be disturbed by what isn't there )
Finally, when so many other land use proposals find a huge boost in land values upon receiving a DEP permit to carry forward their projects, why wasn't this realized and tax assessment applied to this boost of land value when the DEP approved this project ? 2 years of lost revenues to the town. Who's looking out for who, over there in Roxbury ?

As you are aware, Frank, I'm am completely against wind power use as a grid scale electrical producer. It's ineffective production has negative impact on the pursuit of prosperity as compared to tried and true conventional electrical generating methods. Suppressing energy demand by demonizing it's use and the current way we produce it only leads the government to legitimize " skyrocketing the costs " and successfully decreasing demand by increasing costs. The government also is finding this a new way to siphon money to itself. In a truly free market, increased demand creates ingenuity among the producers, delivering lower cost product by competition.
That said, you do bring up a good point. With the overwhelming power of government making it seem impossible to stop wind development in Rumford, then a chose needs to be made to allow or not to allow at the municipal level. I believe the concerns expressed about noise, visual, and property devaluation, as well as questionable longevity of such projects are valid by evidence revealed from currently installed developments. It is my opinion, by right of " Home Rule " , that each and every town can be successful in stopping these developments within their borders and, I hope, we can always have " Home Rule " The point is before beginning the process of writing an ordinance, an honest assessment of opinions among the authors needs to take place. Are you advocating authoring an ordinance to prevent development on the grounds of it's negative impacts or are you advocating authoring an ordinance that provides the best monetary benefit to the town's coffers ? If it's money that is the driving force, then say so and roll the dice to favor maximum benefits to the town. The townspeople can decide if the benefits outweigh the impacts. The ordinance writers will never be able to produce an ordinance everyone likes, but giving the public honest reasons why each and every one is persuaded to produce either a " pro-wind " or an " anti-wind " ordinance is why they elected these people.
It would seem to me, as you have said, the numbers say an " anti-wind " ordinance is in the making. So be it and the sooner the better. From there the public debate can proceed and, you, and all are invited to participate.

A beacon of common sense, Bernice

If you want to talk about a confused man, how about the highway safety officer who works in division 7 of the state highway department in Dixfield. He will tell you your business signs had better be beyond the State Highway right of way or your driveway entrance to the highway lacks mandated sight distance, but go ahead and drive your recreational vehicle upon the pavement at 10 mph with just 4 seconds of sight distance to oncoming dump trucks and logging trucks coming at you at 50 MPH.

A recent attempt to speak to the MMA as a private citizen elicited the response that the MMA doesn't speak to private citizens, only to town government officials. Two new selectboard members were granted to be " Esteemed " by the MMA upon attending a session with them. There appears to be a good working relationship throughout all of extended government and the idea is to keep the people from speaking.

The same meeting rules were implemented by the selectboard in Dixfield a couple weeks ago, with armed police officer. Our Dixfield town officials will run around all over the state to attend extended government events, but won't make any effort to visit their tax paying residents.

Too bad the town manager and selectmen wouldn't take a pay cut to give the people who pay their wages a raise by reducing their property taxes.

Good job, planning board of Sunmer for not throwing caution to the wind.

If Mr. Boivin understood the principles of competition, he would not be so ready to rally for wind facilities. The wind industry competes for government money along with all the other programs government pays for. Many " wind subsidies " are due for review this year and if eliminated, a downfall to the wind industry will follow and the source of perceived income for Rumford goes " Bye-Bye "
Rumford residents should be uneasy about regulations favoring wind projects. A moratorium(s) extended to the end of the year, when the picture of the future of national energy policy becomes clearer can avoid exposure to a lot of economic risk.
Wind is still in the experimental stage. Be cautious, take your time, much is still not fully understood.

May 20th, a free supper at Dirigo High School, 3 to 7 pm. This will the second supper held to debate proposed River Valley Wind Projects. Pro and Con. I asked a Rumford Selectman candidate to attend the first supper, but he never showed after saying he would. I send to Mr. Belanger, the same invitation for the upcoming supper, please tell us about the wonderful world of wind projects as you see it.

What can you expect from 80 to 100 turbines proposed to be built in the river valley ? Look at what is happening in Germany where too much wind is too much to handle………..More than one third of Germany's 21,500 wind turbines are located in the nation's east. This concentration of generating capacity regularly overloads the region's electricity grid, threatening blackouts………….. one third of 21,500 turbines is 7170.………. Germany’s population is 60 times Maine’s population……………. The equivalent turbine number threatening to bring blackouts to the River Valley area is 7170 divided by 60, or 120 turbines………..Customers will not tolerate blackouts…….The solution: more technological adaptations to the grid to accommodate wind and big costs passed to the ratepayers. There are too many unforeseen consequences with wind to expect stability to occur, politically or economically.

The risks of this wind thing is becoming so apparent now. King and Gardiner desperately seeking the last avenue of funding available, a government loan guarantee, to save their Roxbury project.
Investors continue to shy away from wind, electing safer, long term and proven investments.
Grid operators exclaiming they are not prepared to accommodate wind and it will take mega-dollars from the ratepayer for required provisions.
Bribery from developers as more people are taking notice of the bad idea of wind.
Any town with notions of attaching town service investment to this wind investment had better start thinking " RISKS' The economic welfare of the community is at stake.
I would recommend each and every town appoint a committee to thoughtfully examine the potential economic risks with these projects. During this economic downturn is not the time to have a " bubble " bursting in our faces.

Ray,
What makes the " tinge of blackmail " even worse is the fact that the money is from us, the taxpayers and the ratepayers.

Where have our values gone ? Woodstock, along with all the towns in the Western Maine foothills, is poor , but proud. Our tradition of strength through self-reliance, our practicality, our facility to help one another in rough times is under question here and the consequences of forsaking our values will hurt us big time.
In practical terms, the Woodstock School is part of RSU 44 ( Andover, Bethel, Greenwood, Newry, Woodstock ). Studies by the School Board show current costs of keeping the Woodstock School in operation exceeds costs of centralizing enrollment. Thinking a one time gift from people residing nowhere near Woodstock and with absolutely no relationship to local education will change the results of the School Board study is very wishful. Enticing as this money seems, it is short term, while the school will continue to impact budgets in the years ahead. This is not a practical way to save the school and teaches the children values can be bought.
This will have immediate risks to the school. How many in Woodstock will pull their children out of the Woodstock School, as they assuredly will do, to make it known they won't allow their values to be compromised and their child will move ahead learning self-reliance, practicality, and the ability to stand together to forsake the evils of greed.

Having attended both the previous wind committee meetings and the current committee meetings, I am amazed with the two levels of approach. The previous committee spent many hours of critical study and educating themselves for benefit to Rumford citizens. The current committee seems lost and unsure. For the sake of the people of Rumford, let them vote on the first ordinance again and start having a series of public hearings so that they can see what wind power is all about.

Thank you, Frank.
Let me extend to you an invitation to the People's Meeting in Dixfield, March 10th, 4 to 6pm . There will be a free supper and I will save a place at the head of the table for you.

Wow, that's a show stopper. Just one part of the overall structure of a wind turbine. But, as often happens, what goes up is apt to come down. The photo adjacent to this comment depicts what cold temperatures and high winds can do to steel.

The good, the bad and the ugly of wind power projects. Dirigo High School, March 10th, with free supper 4 to 6pm, is the place for River Valley citizens to convene and share what is known about wind power. Several people from towns with projects in place or under construction will be there. Exhibits galore. Pictures, handouts, video presentations, the sound of turbines, something for everyone. All questions answered. Sound, visual, economic experts and representatives from the state will be there.
Attend and enjoy the good eats and neighborly get together after the long, cold winter.

I encourage all residents and tax-payers in the River Valley area to attend the March 10th supper and DEP meeting. This is not just about Saddleback Mountain and Carthage. Nor is it just about Colonel Holman Mountain or any one single ridge or community.

This is about Maine. Our mountains, our towns and our quality of life. This is about common sense and making wise decisions. This is about not rushing into something when it is not pressing or necessary, simply because outside influences have convinced us that we should support their plans.

For far too long, the wind industry had an open playing field with little or no opposition. They could and did indoctrinate Mainers with their promises of affordable, ‘home grown’ power. They touted wind’s ‘green factor’—claiming that wind-generated electricity would help reduce carbon emissions and counter global warming. They told us that it would enhance our national security and even… that it would ‘bring our soldiers home’.

And we bought it; hook, line and sinker. For awhile, we accepted it with no questions asked.

However, when finally asked to prove their statements, wind developers could not do so. When presented with factual data refuting their claims; they regrouped. They claimed those who opposed mountaintop industrial wind were selfish… that we ought to be dismissed as being nothing but NIMBYs.

I am proud to be a defender of my back yard, as well as the backyards of Mainers all across this state. For if we don’t stand up to protect our home and our way of life, who will? It is inherent in every living thing to do exactly that.

I once believed the wind lobby’s false promises and was a supporter of the concept of grid-scale wind energy plants. But then, I began to research this topic, and what I found was incredible. I was chagrinned to realize how little attention I had given to the science and economics behind industrial wind. But as is evident all across this state--and even, around the world-- the true facts are becoming common knowledge. When gauging reliable, constant, affordable and productive power sources, wind is at the bottom of the list.

Caught out in their misrepresentations of the facts, most wise industrial wind developers and proponents backed away from their original sales pitches. Now we see them taking a new tack. Today, it’s all about ‘jobs’. Temporary construction jobs. And, in their words, billions of dollars in ‘investment’. But this is not investment. This is ‘spending’. The spending of OUR money—tax-payer money—for a scant handful of full-time jobs, very few of which will be given to locals—if any.

While we want to see employees at Cianbro and Reed & Reed prosper, we also know that our local economies will not thrive due to the addition of these inefficient and towering machines. Small business owners may see a short-term boost in sales of gas, convenience store items and the like during those few weeks of construction. But once the developer has pulled out, that small economic boom goes with them.

And what are we left with? We are left with 400’-500’ tall turbines which can be seen for miles around, with blades which span an area over an acre and a half in size. We’re left with ancient mountains whose ridgelines have been forever altered, and hillsides with massive cuts criss-crossing them and clear-cuts scarring them. We’ll have high, low and ultra-low frequency noise and shadow flicker. And what was once Maine’s unique ‘quality of place’ and this state’s major economic driver is now no different than that which can be found everywhere else. Development of our pristine natural resources, for an industry which cannot deliver what they promise. The developer takes our cash. A few landowners profit from sales or leases. Optimistic and hopeful townspeople wait to see their taxes drop significantly.

Was it worth it? When the die-hard nature loving tourists stop coming, when folks ‘from away’ who’ve always wanted a wilderness retreat or a quiet cabin on a pond go somewhere else to buy their dream property--somewhere where the land is still protected and important—will it have been worth it? When CMP rate payers see their electric bills rise due to the cost of the new 450 mile long high voltage transmission corridor needed to transport the wind power to the New England grid—will it have been worth the sacrifice? When it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that we are not significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions due to the addition of wind to our energy portfolio, will we regret not learning the facts before giving our permission for developers to build their projects?

I urge citizens to take the time to research this important topic before we make irreversible mistakes. Attend meetings like the one in Carthage. Read articles. Google ‘industrial wind’ and related topics. Speak to scientists and energy experts and doctors and acousticians who are not going to profit from the proliferation of industrial wind. Take the time to consider the sources of your information, and then make an ethical and informed decision based on the facts you have unearthed.

We are in no hurry for additional electricity, but the developers are desperate to get the ‘go ahead’ for their projects, because our tax dollars are only available to them for a short period of time. They’ve seen which way the wind is blowing, and they realize they are fighting against time.

Please err on the side of caution and common sense before making a decision which has long-term (or even permanent) consequences.

Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine

AFS record hill looking for loan guarantee.whos making out on this .angus king and rob. gardiner?FOLLOW THE MONEY!

We are so close to eradicating wind projects from the River Valley. The developer is now resorting to buying out select groups, our snowmobile clubs, our extracurricular school groups and other special interest entities. Our town manager is preparing to persuade the 90% of our citizens on Common Road who are to be most affected and are totally against the project. He has an idea to form a TIF district of Common Road to provide funding for something over there.
March 10th, 4 to 6pm, a free supper, sponsored by Alice and Troy Barnett, who have seen their plans of building their own home for years blown away by proposed turbines to be less than 2000 feet away, will be offered at the Dirigo High School.
Following the supper from 6 to 8pm, the DEP will conduct a listen and record session on Patriot's application for Saddleback Wind. I think we have some good preparation taking place for them.
We have the forces, knowledge and passion to make this an event heard throughout the state. Our last event in Dixfield created a good rally, This time it will be a " Ruckus "
Follow this post in the coming days. I will reveal all that has happened during the last year and a half here, which surely won't be unlike the many stories that you with projects upon you have.

AFS Will be the biggest event Dixfield has ever seen.

Higher government subsidy sets up an experimental concept, reducing much pressure on the subsidized industry to competition from current proven technology. The pressure on towns to react quickly to establish rules is directly related to present federal government advantages given the industry. The real pressure on the wind industry is not of free market competition, but from obtaining government favors before the government changes their minds on extending these favors. The ridgelines are going nowhere. Landowners of property so coveted by this industry maintain the rights to current land use and the right to sell as townspeople wait for the higher ups in government to decide whether this wind experiment should require continued public funding beyond the experimental stage. Extending the time for citizens to decide how to address the wind concept may seem to be bucking higher government actions, but the impact is real and local and with the pains of economic reality being felt all over and with time the only way to measure this experiment, the pressure falls on everyone, occurring at the very time we are all at hopes for new formed money to balance budgets and calm our fears.
Rumford selectmen are under pressure to come up with the perfect regulations to protect the citizen’s physical and economic health. An overwhelming task as much is still developing as this industrial experiment proceeds. With much work to do on next year’s budget, priority of time is essential. This will be the most thought out budget preparation in Rumford’s history and getting the budget right far exceeds the conceived need to get the regulations of industrial wind in place. Setting the wind ordinance work on the back burner for now will not make or break the town. No one works well under pressure.

THREE GREAT COMMUNITIES, Canton, Carthage and Dixfield. One construction company from Massachusetts seeking permission to disrupt the area's quality and character for an experiment in energy production. If ever there was a time to cast healthy skepticism and realistic judgement, now is the time.
Isn't it curious that everyone is demanding money be set aside and up front to pay for the removal of these projects ? Doesn't seem to indicate an overwhelming confidence the experiment will be a success.
March 10th, in Dixfield, along with a free supper, the truth, the math, the economics and politics of this ill-conceived experiment will change public perception and acceptance for
" this energy bubble ." Be assured, they are not " A DONE DEAL " yet.

"Eddy's work is paid for by the town with funds provided by Patriot Renewables. " The " fuel " for construction of wind projects is the hard earned cash of the taxpayer. The " fuel " for operation is the new and bigger electric bills to come.
Last night was perfect example of the ways " our esteemed " would manipulate the public to enrich their power and pocketbooks.
What's going on behind the people's backs is " Ill Wind " and a "blow" to anyone working to make a living and paying the bills.

What do you want me to say. It's a special meeting alright and the wind developer has a special place in the heart of Dixfield's so-called town manager. He loves to manipulate, especially when out of site of Dixfield citizens. Now he has partners.
What people want is the truth. This meeting will be so full of spin, one, or all, of this esteemed bunch might just turn into a wind mill right before our eyes.
Canton, Carthage, Peru, Rumford, Wilton, Temple, Weld, Roxbury, Byron, Dixfield.......you all will want to attend this affair, if wind mills are what you are talking about, then TIFs will be presented to you also.

After hearing testimony ( testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter.) regarding a friend suffering a heart attack attributable to wind mills near his home, how can anyone with any semblance of connection to human welfare so callously show such disregard .Is it really happening or just a nightmare.

Opening up the meeting to allow the public to speak as topics were discussed was a magnificent move by the board. We all learned . Best educational forum on wind I have ever attended. I highly recommend anyone curious about wind turbines attend these meetings. The board will be visiting Mars Hill Wind project prior to the next meeting. They should be able to provide us with interesting observations.

Hopefully, First Wind can explain the funding snag that occurred on the Lincoln project, or why they had to pull out of offering sale of their stock to the public, or how they helped devise the Oakfield wind ordinance then changed the scope of the project, or why the Somerset County Commissioners withdrew from their impending TIF offer on a project in that county, or how any project they propose would succeed without generous taxpayer subsidy, or how they would answer Governor LePage about 6 cent per kilowatt electricity, or why the Rumford project would be beneficial to the gas plant, the hydro plant or the co-gen plant, or how they plan to campaign for public support to vote in what obviously become a First Wind wind ordinance. Sharpen up your sales approach, First Wind.

Let's apply a business plan to wind power. Make them bid into the day ahead market ( The traditional mechanism used to keep rates as low as possible ). Make them guarantee a quantity and price, as all other generators are required to do. Assess penalties when guaranteed quantities are not met .( This is the traditional rules ). Remove the Production Tax Credit which gives them a 2.3 cent per kilowatt head start over others. This places the burden of being successful on them. All other businesses are required to participate on a level playing field with their competitors, why not wind ?

Watchdog, impede knowledge, impede truth or is money blinding you to see no evil, hear no evil . While you play watchdog, look a good look at First Wind

I attended that workshop. The man from First Wind seemed pretty comfortable. Of course he is, this ordinance is for him and his outfit. Do you want to step up before the public and tell us about it, Mr. First Wind ?

Sounds like a good, healthy pursuit . I would recommend a DVD by Freemont Tibbetts entitled " Flight Over The Western Mountains " The history he narrates throughout the video is a perspective the Outing Club would find very informative, as well as entertaining. Another source of interest concerning the history of Colonel Holman Mountain would be the research done by Dr. Hebert. There is a lot of tradition with the mountains in our area.

Mr. Brown seems to realize that environmental consciousness extends beyond the DEP and each community has it's own unique character. The DEP has been given power to mandate wind projects throughout their jurisdiction, fortified by the political will of state government. They may and have exercised their option to disallow citizen participation in application process. This is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The DEP should either step aside and allow each community to make industrial wind decisions or advance a meaningful participation with extensive public meetings.
Unfortunately, adding to this bureaucracy's workload by setting up more public meetings is costly and works against the Governor's theme of reducing state government. Obviously, choosing to eliminate DEP decision making on specific industrial wind projects is a preferred scenario and is the best win-win situation for Maine's communities.
There is a great deal more to industrial wind than environmental considerations and making the DEP the scapegoat to the political will of the state should make the employees of the DEP uncomfortable and even ineffective.
What a sad moment it was when many Roxbury citizens took the long trip to Augusta to face off with the BEP and only to hear them say they were sorry but their hands are tied, their decisions are imposed by law.
Although the DEP is a state department, they should not be placed in the situation of basing their judgement on political whims.
I hope Mr. Brown will take a few moments to read any wind development application and evaluate the statements within as scientific or political.

Our legislators, newly elected governor and the people of this state are hearing you, Dr. Mills. You no longer have cover under the Baldacci regime.

Latest discoveries by health and sound experts reveal 7000 feet to two mile setbacks is required to mitigate effects from industrial wind turbines. The risks are too high and the benefits too little, as many are finding out.

Those who forgot the lessons of history are destined to repeat the same mistakes. In the 1970's under the leadership of Jimmy, America sought an escape from dealing with other countries to secure fuels to operate our economy. Wind, solar and, here in Maine, Biofuel was supposedly the answer. Biofuels, or wood to electricity, popped up everywhere in Maine. It turned out to be too expensive and too hard on the grid to sustain their existence, and they were quickly abandoned. They were too small in generation capacity, just like windmills. Because Government created their appearance, Government paid them well for their disappearance and we, the ratepayers have foot this bill and will until 2015. Do not forget this is history and repeating it would be a mistake.

One would only have to view the DVD recording made by relentless citizen advocate, Freemont Tibbetts, to see how the selected authors of this ordinance were influenced and overwhelmed to change a reasonable setback to a setback that effectively allows the turbine project to proceed and will bring daily anguish to a large part of our community.

When will our legislators come forth, face to face, to the public and explain their reasons for embracing industrial wind in Maine ? There has hardly been a word from any of them, yet they all voted for the expedited wind law of 2008. Is there any public servant who would put together a town hall meeting and enlightened us on why they so love these wind projects ? Wind developments are tearing apart town after town.
If our elected, esteemed officials truly want respect from the people they represent, they must step up , arrange a meeting with the public, and discuss this issue.
As Penny says, it's our money, our quality of life and our future at stake. Show us you care enough to talk to us.

In other words, the selectmen want to know if they can continue spending money like drunken sailors.

Let’s get real now. Wind turbines of the scale proposed for the destruction of the Western Maine mountaintops and environmental repercussions downhill and downwind do not last 20 years as everyone seems to take for granted. These machines have many parts to them : gears meshing with each other, blade tips whipping at 180 miles per hour, hydraulic systems straining against tremendous resistance to keep the machines facing the wind. Evidence is showing these machines wear out in 10 to 15 years, as part replacement and downtime for repairs becomes too expensive and stand to put the wind project in the red as costs exceed sales of electricity. I smell bailout.
If as a country, we are hell-bent to have these wind machines as a way off foreign energy dependence, be prepared to pay and pay dearly. Imagine how many wind turbines it will take to produce the energy requirements to adapt to electric vehicles and electrically heating our homes and businesses. There simply is not enough space and real money available to achieve this .
The money to keep this going has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is from the pockets of the taxpayers and electricity users. Money spent to sustain an unsustainable dream. This is no different than the dream scheme of giving every American the opportunity of buying a house whether they could afford it or not. That didn’t work out too well, except for a few, behind the scenes, wall street manipulators.
This is the next bubble to burst in our faces. Business models based on 20 years which expire in 10 to 15 years create bankruptcy . Will we be paying for their bailout with our government exclaiming they are too big and too important for our future to fail ?
The path to failure is already under way. The behind the scenes manipulation by greedy profiteers is occurring now. The government, as the main proponent for this scheme, prepares to protect it’s arrogance , never admitting to producing a failed policy. They will do this at all costs and we will pay the price.
Consider these facts :
1. Most of the billions of taxpayer money devoted to the creation of this scheme goes overseas to foreign turbine manufacturers.
2. Billions and billions are being spent to upgrade power lines to bring wind generated electricity from places far from the cities and industries which create the overwhelming demand . Billions to be paid by all electricity users.
3. Because of the unreliability of wind and the intermittent production of electricity from them, many more conventional generators are placed in stand-by mode. When the wind isn’t within the range of speed to produce, these stand-by generators are required to start. An emergency situation with emergency pricing taking effect.
4. Spain, one of the biggest developers of this “ green energy “ has a hurting economy and can no longer subsidized the wind projects. An example of the disastrous results produced by this scheme.
5. All of wind developers will tell you, they would never venture into these projects if it wasn’t for the taxpayer handouts they receive. Handouts which are subject to the whim of the politicians. Government is notorious for it’s “ subject to change “ attitude.
The many details and nuances involved in this scheme are overwhelming for us, the average American citizen, to understand. Mostly, we are left in the dark as politicians bombard us with their double speak and the profiteers devise their strategy beyond our sight. This is no “ gift horse “ we are presenting to our future generations.

“Do our public servants have our best interests in mind or theirs?”

Our public servants. Who are they ?

Starting at the top. Governor Baldacci who signed the expedited wind law of 2007 which sets a distinct number to the amount of wind generated electricity to be produced within the state boundaries. The governor, by this mandate, has , in as much as a king would do, over ruled free market development and has thrust his will upon the people.  Why would he do this ?  Is it the “ green “  that falls from the heaven of the federal government to the rescue of state bureaucracies strapped for cash to maintain their existence ?
Because this is a program created by government, it is a program that requires their “ administrative skills” . This , plainly, is in their “ best interests “.  The money that keeps them rolling comfortably along.. The taxpayer’s money. Consider how many state agencies are involved in this program, the DEP, LURC, the PUC, Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Human Services, the State Energy Department, to name a few.
Would any one of these departments bite the hand that feeds them ?
 On the local level, the “windfall  promises “ to towns hosting a wind project reveals  as much about human nature and the susceptibility to greed as  much as Bernie Madoff showed  us. Unknown companies of unknown qualities waltzed in and bought themselves into the hearts of many landowners and local officials.
The purchasing  of favors extends to many organizations through donations from wind developers. Many of these organizations are environmentally based and , indeed, the money becomes more appealing than  saving the very environmental assets of their promotion. Town official after town official have sidestepped their responsibility of  protecting the health and welfare of the citizens who pay them as a pot of gold glitters before them. As the devil would say to himself, “ Ah, greed, my favorite vice “
For you, Joe Six Pack, working everyday to make a living and pay your bills, Welcome to the new world. Your tax money is being used to create this “ industry of spin “ and will bite you again with bigger and bigger electric bills.  

I hope Mr. Powell has made enough money from wind to pay his electric bills.

Cheryl,

I am also a proud American.  Your recognition of our rights and the strength of country derived through civilized debate is the core of our existence as envisioned by our forefathers. Let the people be heard and the government be the servants of our will.

If the government can not muster the will to stop the bleeding of their bosses, the citizens, than it remains up to the citizens to do it.

Governor King, may I offer the folowing statements of wisdom to you:

Glory is like a circle in the water,
Which never ceaseth to enlarge itself,
Till by broad spreading it disperses to naught. William Shakespeare

The glory of great men should always be measured by the means they have used to acquire it. Francois de La Rochefoucauld (1613 - 1680)

You certainly have some fantastic visions, Governor, and the stage is a hard place to step away from.
While you continue your performance amongst the spotlights, seeking to amass your wealth on the backs of the hard working people of this state, reflect upon the words of Shakespeare and La Rochefoucauld, for the dignity in their thoughts will  always prove to be truer and stronger than corruption of man overcome by enticement of greed. 

I would direct Mr. Houston to a poll conducted by the Bangor Daily News which asked if one would want an industrial wind facility in their town. 2 out of 3 people responded "no".

The NRCM has endorsed 3 wind projects: Record Hill in Roxbury, Kibby Mountain and Stetson. These 3 projects were permitted during the initial wind onslaught upon Maine. Since then, much has been discovered about the " lightness of wind " and the vast destruction needed to accommodate them.

The NRCM has not endorsed any more projects since giving the green light to the above 3.

In a wind debate in Dixfield, a member of the NRCM emphasized tax benefits for this small town, which seems to me, to be more like throwing out a lure designed to capture support by creating visions of becoming rich with money. I thought the NRCM promoted the richness inherent with the unspoiled Maine landscape.

I wish this paper could find space on this website to have videos of local selectboard meetings for viewing, kind of like, you tube. Much goes on at these meetings that the public is never aware of.

These wind machine projects need to be stopped before all that's left is  junk steel sitting atop our mountains , skyrocketing electric bills, and electrical shortages. California went through this mess and had to hurriedly build several conventional plants to prevent black outs.

How do we stop them?

It's in our towns. Small groups are gathering together and producing the facts about wind power that you won't hear from the wind developers or state government.

In Carthage, "Friends of Saddleback Mountain", a small but growing coalition, has been formed . This group, along with many similar groups, join the vision of the people who make up the website, http://www.windtaskforce.org/

Our collective voices against the " wind monsters"  is growing.

WELL SAID, DIANA,

Wind power will have little or no affect on co2 emissions or oil dependency, but will have profound affects on our electric rates. Oregon recently allowed a rate increase due to the extra work required to accomodate the intermittent introduction of wind created electricity into the grid.

Wind power is simply an unworthy venture at the industrial scale. There is and there will never be a storage mechanism for grid developed wind power. The costs of storage are too prohibited.

 Craving up our mountain tops for these things is a criminal notion fueled by the same greed which put us into this current recession. We can get through this economic downturn, but creating an energy bubble destined to burst aint gonna help us.

This project is subject to LURC decision as Highland Platation is in unorganized territory. A public hearing will be scheduled. Voices from both sides will be heard. News from this hearing will be read by many people still undecided on wind projects. People from everywhere in Maine should use this time approaching this hearing to prepare their arguments and appear before this LURC committee. This could very well be " the monumental event " that determines the future of industrial wind power in Maine. You definitely will receive my help, Paula.

a six month moratorium on wind development is a wise move being made by many towns throughout Maine. It gives the citizens a chance to take a good look at their unique community assests and gauge how wind farms would influence them.

Certainly, when Dylan Voorhess addressed the people attending the wind debate in Dixfield, He didn't intentionly focus his arguement for wind power almost entirely on increased tax revenue for our small towns, or is this his new approach ? How shameful of you, Dylan. Perhaps for a few bucks, we can slaughter some more of Maine's unique resources. I am at this time denouncing my membership to this organization.

Is the present tax structure incoporated by the town determental when it literally forces long time residents from property or is it intended to extract the poorer from town to open the way for the more affluent ? The town was able to appease the state's wishes to decrease state revenues to the town by $77,000 with department cuts, but when a poor economy hits the folks of the community, hammer down !

right you are Ernest and if you are one with the drive,imagination and creativity to want to start new ventures in this country and it doesn't fit the government's agenda, well, you're shot down.

So, does mr. king plan to spend his money to maintain a workforce on the mountain to monitor erosion and water quality during this delay ? Can people expect mr. king to remove the ban on access to this mountain during the shutdown ? I guess there is no question now on what is driving this industry. Are you going to risk allowing climate change to destroy us because you can't put money in your pocket, mr. king and mr. gardiner ?

What will they do now? The state won't replace the bridge without an agreement. A project ,no doubt, advanced due to the federal stimulus money. The current bridge has been deemed to be safe for the next 5 years by the DOT. Removing and replacing the sewer main on this bridge has been estimated to cost the ratepayers of Dixfield a quarter of a million dollars. A tax increase during troubling economic times? Remember the other bridge across the Webb River on Coburn Ave. Dixfield taxpayers ended up paying over $35,000 in cost overruns on that project. Who is the real hostage here? Who ends up paying?

beautifully said taxpoor. I only hope someone you describes steps forward. I wonder how effective a person could run a campaign thru the web and use of cellphones, It always seems the richer one is, the better his chance in buying his way into office.