Listen to citizens committees on wind issues ~ Letter

Watertown Daily Times | Listen to citizens committees on wind issues

THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 2010

For three years I have spoken with many community citizens committees as they develop standards for turbine siting to protect the health, welfare and safety of the public. Renewable energy is a nice catch phrase, but when the turbines are up, there is no chance to renew a community subjected to improper protections and setbacks. Once the character of a community is gone, it is gone forever.

An important issue is the conflict of interest by board members holding wind contracts directly, or through family members. When a basketball referee bets on NBA games, he is immediately impeached for a violation of trust, and everyone can see that so clearly. However, when a town board member does the same thing, voting when he holds an economic stake in the outcome, it is somehow different. It is not. If you want to participate on the board, the answer is simple. Accept without amendment the recommendations of your independent citizens committees who have investigated and understood the issues of wind development. Protect the public by enacting those recommendations without developer-demanded changes.

Why is it that each of the citizens committees in Clayton, Lyme and Cape Vincent has recommended a noise limit above background sound levels, yet these limits are resisted? Those sound limits, as recommended by New York state, would allow non-contract holders, living in the midst of an industrial wind project, to negotiate payments for intrusive noise on their property. With the sound limits, the small landowner potentially impacted by the noise would have the option to receive payments for granting an easement. Who could be against that? It is the developer and contract holders who have no interest in sharing turbine payments with anyone. It complicates things. To make this scheme work, those conflicted who control the game must turn their backs on this obvious wrong.

After the failures of BP, does anyone honestly believe that a developer-drafted law provides for the protection of the community better than that recommended by the town- appointed citizens committees, recommendations rejected by those boards because the developers such as BP, Acciona and PPM tell them so?


This brings us back to the conflict of interest. The town boards must remove themselves from debate and accept the recommendations of their citizens committees. Cape Vincent, Clayton and Lyme must stop listening to those whose motive is purely profit, stop the debate and enact local laws as recommended by nonconflicted, honest and informed citizens who have developed recommendations to protect the public, while allowing appropriate wind development to proceed.

Paul Carr

Chaumont