Interesting "Your View" letter in The Standard Times from someone in Dartmouth related to, you guessed it the turbines. The writer compares the living conditions being located next to the "mall sprawl" and the turbines. Sorry no link. It seems the ST.com site isn't quite updated this early to reflect the contents of the e edition. If I remember I will check before I publish and update. If I don't it is on Page A4
The paper also has a piece on the turbines and the strain on relationships. There is no doubt that the social impact this issue is having is a significant one. That impact will not disappear any time soon unfortunately.
We have often been compared to Falmouth on this issue. Indeed if one follows the events in that community, there have been some very interesting parallels in the way things have progressed here.
The one significant difference in the dynamics between the two communities which cannot be forgotten nor simply dismissed is the fact that Fairhaven turbines are privately owned and located on leased land. This is a difference for our Town that eliminates a fair share of the "options" available to Falmouth.
Yet despite that difference, the bottom line solution in both communities comes down to the bottom line. In Falmouth, the issue went to a town wide vote recently seeking the authority to borrow $14 million dollars to implement the "solution". The vote was solidly rejected.
There are competing interpretations to the actual "meaning" of the vote. In the end it doesn't matter whether it means most people support wind turbines or not. What it means, without dispute, is that the vast majority of voters were not willing to borrow $14 million dollars as a solution.
Falmouth turbines still spin. Right now for twelve hours a day.
Wicked Local Falmouth has a pretty interesting and well written, and in my mind balanced, piece on the dilemma faced by the selectmen in that town after the town wide vote.
As concerns recent action by that board, quoting from the article:
The July 1 discussion was a public conversation among the selectmen, and not a public hearing in which the public would speak. That chance likely will come in the future, Chairman Brent Putnam said from the outset.
“The board decided it would be appropriate to have a board discussion before we began to have public comment. This is a preliminary discussion, and the board anticipates future meetings with public comment,” Putnam said.
Might be beneficial for the same here, sometime shortly after July 15th. A board discussion. Not interrupted or sprinkled with public comments, statements or speeches.
Believe it or not, just because you show up at a meeting, doesn't entitle you to speak. You don't have that absolute right. You never did.
Just imagine what we all might learn from simply observing a discussion by the board, indeed any board, in a public session yes, but without interruption.
After the discussion, absolutely hold a public comment session, be it on the same day after your discussion, or an entirely different session. Believe it or not, there are a whole bunch of people who would like to hear more than sound bites about the thought process, especially those made in reaction to sound bites from the audience.
Just wishful thinking I guess. As is the thought that I hope everyone takes the time not only to read the Wicked Local piece, but a moment to digest the dilemma.
Anyway, enough for today. Be safe.
Based on past meetings and certain peoples politeness, do you honestly think certain people would be able to hold their tongues? I have seen certain people act very much like children when their views and beliefs were not in line with what a board is discussing. I dont see why these people (both sides of the issue) would act any more adult.
ReplyDeleteIf you set the parameters for the same, make it known in advance, and act accordingly, then yes. Might there be a bump in the road, or two or three, very likely. If the meeting is run correctly however that is all the same will be, bumps.
DeleteIf every meeting and every topic and every issue is an open line format, you end up exactly where we are on so many issues, which is stalled in traffic.
If it can't happen, it isn't a result of the audience. It is a result of the board.
All the facts need to be on the table no matter who likes or doesn't like the facts and people need to listen.
ReplyDeleteThe local news leaves out negative information when making a comparison between the Falmouth wind turbines and the Fairhaven wind turbines. The Falmouth turbines have about 100 residential homes within one half mile of the turbines. My guess is Fairhaven has 700 or more homes within one half mile.
At one time it was thought that the Falmouth wind turbines were alone with their noise problems because they were gear box driven turbines built in 2005. The newer wind turbines you would assume would address the noise issues. Now you have to stop and ask what are the Fairhaven wind turbines ? A little research shows that are built on a licence from a German manufacturer based on a 2005 gear box driven turbine.
Another comparison we never see is the noise problems around the single Scituate wind turbine owned by the same owners of the Fairhaven wind turbines which also is the same model.
These facts could be heard after a public comment session without interruption. We all could learn from just observing a discussion by the board.
The problem right now is there is a feeling of mistrust because all the data is not on the table and people are screaming for the information at public meetings.
The only way to resolve the issues is; who, what, when, where and how.
Lets not worry about was is happening or happened at other towns.We have our own set of circumstances which are ever changing depending on who is speaking.Let the turbines spin until the BOH ,selectman,an town council get their ducks in a row.
ReplyDelete