You may have been expecting Part II from yesterday's post, or perhaps something else. Sorry if you are disappointed. Instead I submit as follows:
A comment to my post entitled Tuesday's Notes, Part I? issued the following challenge (for the complete comment please see the post):
A comment to my post entitled Tuesday's Notes, Part I? issued the following challenge (for the complete comment please see the post):
As an aside - I have a suggestion for what I would think could be an interesting blog post if you are ready for a challenge. Take yourself back to your university debate team - you have been assigned the "against" side of a topic - in this case the Fairhaven Wind Turbines. You may agree/disagree personally but you still need to formulate your arguments. Can you do it? How would you present?
I agree it would make a very interesting blog. In fact, I have all ready done it, I just haven't made it public. Each and every issue I approach, I do my best to analysis the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and formulate a "winning argument" for each side.
So in further answer to your question, "Can I formulate an argument for the "against" side for the topic "Fairhaven Wind Turbines"? Yes. Just as anyone "against" should be able to formulate the "pro" side argument.
"How would I present?" Very convincingly actually, if I were to accept that challenge. That is what one is suppose to be able to do in a "debate team" exercise (Yes I know this isn't the answer you were looking for).
This is not, however a debate team exercise. If this were a debate team issue, as the commentator so aptly put it, "You may agree/disagree personally but you still need to formulate your arguments." In that context the argument would be presented solely to win the "scholastic" debate.
In anticipation of another "nice way to bury the issue" comment, what else would you like me to say? Are you expecting me to provide you with a "winning" strategy?
There may actually be one or two of you out there who would like to hear my thoughts on how you could pursue a course of action that might just get you at least some of the results you want, and perhaps a great deal more then is merited. Believe it or not that just might happen at some point. Just not in a "debate team" challenge and just not at the present moment.
Some of you may find this hard to believe, but I am not a total "gung ho" supporter of this project for a number of reasons.
Walking away from it at this point however, or putting it on hold, based on all the information I have, are not realistic options. Neither is it as simple as some would lead you to believe.
There are distinct differences between this project and let's say the Falmouth one, which in my opinion make it an unrealistic option. I would also note it is yet to be determined just what the long term outcome for the Falmouth project will be. Even putting the project on hold is not an option, in my opinion.
There would be significant ramifications to that or terminating the contract without legal cause, and the real potential for a number of consequences that could leave everyone worse off.
Walking away from it at this point however, or putting it on hold, based on all the information I have, are not realistic options. Neither is it as simple as some would lead you to believe.
There are distinct differences between this project and let's say the Falmouth one, which in my opinion make it an unrealistic option. I would also note it is yet to be determined just what the long term outcome for the Falmouth project will be. Even putting the project on hold is not an option, in my opinion.
There would be significant ramifications to that or terminating the contract without legal cause, and the real potential for a number of consequences that could leave everyone worse off.
If the lawsuit pending does in fact prevail, then the project dies all on its own.
This may provide little solace to some in the interim, but if you have everything you say you have in opposition to this project, you should very well be able to kill it.
If you do, my hat is off to you. I say that truly.
This may provide little solace to some in the interim, but if you have everything you say you have in opposition to this project, you should very well be able to kill it.
If you do, my hat is off to you. I say that truly.
John-You hold your cards close to the vest as a public official but your general message is clear. It is important to be able to debate both sides of an issue for oneself and come to an educated and personal decision. Sometimes we get caught up in rhetoric or just "go with the crowd". Neither of these are good ways to make important community decisions. More specifically, your comment, "There may actually be one or two of you out there who would like to hear my thoughts on how you could pursue a course of action that might just get you at least some of the results you want...Believe it or not that just might happen at some point." seems to just be a way of pulling strings. Seeing is believing...you may have some great insights, but unshared, who can hold their breath?
ReplyDeleteIt is very unfortunate for the residents that a real public debate didn't occur prior to the selectmen signing a contract with such significant financial and human impact.
ReplyDeleteI went to the forum last night and am glad I did. Eleanor Tillinghast was excellent presenting a very rational case on how IWT in Fairhaven will likely not saving us money but will actually cost ratepayers and taxpayers in higher distribution charges and the energy output is negligible. The natural landscape of Little Bay will be forever changed, homes will be devalued and that tax burden will shift to others. Not to mention the possible ill health effects - or at the very least - "annoyances".
There were many who drove from Falmouth with the sole incentive to warn the residents of Fairhaven. I found their presence and testimony to be very compelling. To all the naysayers - there may not be robust evidence to prove the link between IWT and ill health effects - but please atleast concede (Any parents out there? Anyone who has cared for a newborn baby night after night?) that chronic sleep loss does indeed affect quality of life and over an extended period could certainly lead to negative health effects. The Falmouth folks were in a state of disbelief that the town of Fairhaven was actually forging ahead with construction after their experience. It was almost embarrassing.
Bob Espindola passed out his financial evaluation on the project and offered up some fresh ideas on energy alternatives. I also saw Jaime DeSousa and Phil Washko - I am optimistic that their presence was a show of open-mindedness and a willingness to hear from different perspectives.
I was disheartened none of the existing selectmen came - nor did Jeff Osuch. I believe as town officials who championed this folly, kept it alive in private executive sessions and signed the contract on our behalf - they should have been there. What else is new - I guess.
I was very impressed by Sumul Shah (Solaya/Lumus/Fairhaven Wind LLC). Not only did he attend the meeting but he showed a lot of mettle by standing up and facing the music. He handed out business cards and tried to answer concerned residents' questions. I saw many from WW shake his hand at the end of the meeting and tell them how much they appreciated his participation even though they are completely against the project. The Falmouth people did not seem as smitten as it was revealed that he was a technical adviser on their failed project - and frankly they are pissed.
I pray that the lawsuit does prevail and this project becomes moot because it is clear to me that the Fairhaven turbines are not properly sited (closer to residents than in Falmouth!) not to mention the lackluster financial gain to the town (if any).
Speaking of financials - there was an interesting quote in a handout from last night - it was attributed to Charlie Murphy in the 9/23/2010 Neigh News (from an earlier debate re: siting of a cell tower in Fairhaven). It was simply "Sometimes the cost of a good neighborhood is priceless."