Special town meeting started on time, 205 members present
A quorum, a good start
The moderator has decided to take the articles in reverse order Article 3 first- acceptance of MGL chapter 32B section 18
Article passes unanimously- 244 town meeting members present 7:10PM
Now on to Article 2 - Zoning bylaw- Padanaram Village Business District
Some questions about the specifics of the article
Article vote called and passes 243 in favor and one opposed
On to article 3 authorizing a bond to design and construct two wind turbines of $9.5 million
Moderator is laying down some ground rules, the decision before the TM is whether or not to authorize the funding
Moderator will allow the opponents to present a power point presentation of their concerns
First the Alternative Energy Committee will presnt the project
Dr. Ron DiPippo is speaking and showing a Power Point presentation
My battery is dying and I am going to have to log off.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Special Town Meeting blog
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
29 comments:
As a first year town meeting member I wondered why Mr Sharek goes over all the rules of town meeting before every session. But after sitting near Mr. Carney and Mr. Travers at two meeting I now know why. These men who you would think on the surface would know how to act are like children that are misbehaving.
I have witnessed them heckling the speaker and on at least two meetings Mr. Carney (ex select board member) has stood up and Made stupid comments either about a member of finance or yielding his speaking time. These men are clearly at the meeting just to hear themselves talk. Maybe they should think about giving someone new a chance to sit in there seat.
I do not believe any town board or the town itself can legally justify harm to residents in the name of financial gain. The chairman of the town board is an attorney , as well. Best I can tell, the town board does not believe the warnings raised by the residents. Had they bothered to speak with the other towns in New England dealing with these wind turbines they would have taken a more precautionary approach.
This selectman made a huge mistake by publishing his perception of the information before him. Now it's up to the courts .
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100113/OPINION/1130319
To the residents who hired Mr. Beauregard as their attorney, you deserve exactly what you are going to get. An attorney that represented the company that dug up and desecrated an obvious graveyard in Westport several years ago. And presented a defense completely denying the company's guilt in this hideous crime againt humanity! The wind turbines will be built on the planned site and you will pay many thousands for absolutely nothing.
To the anti wind turbine people of Chase Road. Attorney Beauregard, your chosen legal beagle, is in this for the $$$$$. I certainly understand that you are upset and want to get even with the town officials. This is called being human. Your attorney will provide you with the legalities, as it pertains to the legal system. You have been educated on or about wind turbines but now you will learn about the judicial system. Your attorney will file certain legal forms and the project will be put on hold until the courts decide to throw out the injunctions. If I lived along the area of concern, I would make my contributions to legally delay the constructed. The only winner in this project is the town of Dartmouth and your attorney Beauregard. In other words your attorney is the cost of a ticket that shall provide you with a ride, but like all rides they come to the end and all you have is a used ticket. Good luck!
My only hope is that more residents join the lawsuit and that residents and attorneys from other towns join in a class action lawsuit against the lack of safe setbacks from Massachusetts residential homes .
The Wind Energy Siting Reform Act is going to the Massachusetts senate this Thursday - This act will be the catalyst for a much larger lawsuit . Dartmouth will be ground zero for the class action litigation.
The Wind Energy Siting Reform Act will automatically take local control over the siting of industrial wind power plants and associated roads and transmission lines. Under this Act, the state Energy Facilities Siting Board will have the power to forever alter the character and prosperity of Dartmouth. The health of our environment and economy depend upon local control, and we oppose any effort by the state to override our community rights.
The beneficiaries of the Massachusetts Wind Energy Siting Reform Act are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.
I am glad the matter is going to court. I believe the approval process was flawed. The town applied to ITSELF for pemitting to build the turbines and - surprise! - it approved it. The fact that one selectperson served on two of the vetting boards and also on the approval board is a breach of ethics and the blog record shows at least some of the selectmen had made up their minds in advance to allow the project to go forward. What is needed to lay things to rest is for a disinterested party - a judge - to make a ruling as to the legality of the process. If the town has to go back to the drawing board, so what - the wind will still be blowing next year. And they may still get their turbines. If the case does get thrown out, at least those who feel wronged will have had a real chance to present their side. This would be better for the town. Right now many people feel that two individuals are responsible for pushing this through with most of the rest unable or unwilling to take the time to understand the technicalities because they are not directly affected and so they just rubber stamped the recommendations.
In regards to the 2 people mentioned in the first post, perhaps you are new to this process? The obese buffoon and his girlfriend know what is good for the town better than anyone else. All you have to do is listen to them to verify this. Too much firewater over too long a period of time can do this to someone. Fortunately, the voters finally figured this out in the last election.
The Selectboard listened to the concerns of the neighbors and weighed them against the information presented and determined that the concerns were not sound or objective.
Just because you say something doesn't mean they have to believe it. If you seek redress then support your arguments with hard and fast FACTS not anectdotal evidence. And if you present a case, avoid ridiculous statements about exploding bats and fecal aerosol effect and the like. Those statements tend to detract from legitimate arguments about flicker effect and set backs.
The Selectboard is entitled to an opinion on this matter. They supported it unanimously along with the Fincom, Planning Board Technical review Committee, DPW and by an overwhelming margin town meeting.
But I guess using your logic all those people are wrong and you just happen to be right.
Thank god we live in a democracy where the majority of reasonable people can still drive the process.
Now because they didn't win in the Court of public opinion they have hired Atty Phil Blowhard to drain their pockets and drive up the cost of the project for the Town.
Good work Opponents, can't wait till I see the next effort
People saw exactly the reason Carney got unceremoniously bounced from the Selectboard in last election. He is unprofessional and tries to disrupt progress and an informational meeting with his buffoonery.
While Mr. Travers has some smarts he is rapidly turning into the next Bob Michaud in terms of over speaking on every issue. We're still waiting for his private fundraising effort on behalf of the Youth Advocate position. When can we sign up?
To David Brownell,
Since you came on this blog with no purpose other than to attack good, hardworking volunteer town officials, I thought I would enlighten the readership about you.
Back in the early 80's David cut a sweetheart deal with the state for a conservation restriction on his property for well over $2million. Keep in mind that this was a time when people thought real estate prices were going through the roof because a typical house had reached a value of $100k. Compare this to the deal that the Cornell farm got thirty years later for a larger parcel.
Now I am happy that the old Sylvia farm, now belonging to David who I don't consider to be a farmer(his hay looks more like cord wood than something you would feed an animal), has been preserved. However, if David Brownell had not cut a deal that paid him over a $million more than what he deserved, we could have used that state money to preserve much more farmland like the Piva property abbutting his.
Anyone want to take a stab at who our state rep was at the time of David Brownell's sweatheart conservation restriction deal?
Wow, I'm going to go to the assessor's data base to see what David's 109 acres is assessed at.
From a conservative stand point, I would like to know mr. lynam or Freidman answer this question....How low should taxes be at the Federal level...give me a percentage
I love the fact that Bill Trimble...a voting town member, sat on his laptop for over an hour while other town meeting members ast for hours listening to the information being presented at the meeting.
I work with people like Bill...getting paid to work but busy texting or surfing the internet.
"He is addicted to "Blogging" - ALL DAY LONG - look at the posting times!!!!! HE IS A JOKE!!!
My battery is dying and I am going to have to log off.
posted by Bill Trimble at 7:18 PM on Jan 26, 2010
Dartmouth will be ground zero for a class action litigation :-)
Article 3 passed 244 to 0.........
Our new Executive Administrator gave a short overview of chapter 32B section 18 stating that it only effected 40 town retiree's that have reached age 65 plus. I'm one of the forty retiree's that would like to thank our town meeting members along with David Chressman, elected officials and fin-com members for the royal screwing I received, along with the other 39 retired town employee's.
When asked, I decided to become a town employee. One of several reasons for deciding to work for the town was the health benefits and the retirement package. The town offered and I agreed to accept a smaller pay check for health insurance and a retirement package. Private industry provided a larger pay check but no health insurance and retirement was based on your ability to save or invest money. Private industry was also forced by the federal government (socialism) to contribute into social security. As you may not know the town of Dartmouth doesn't pay into social security. No payee no checkee.
Anyone, who has always worked for the town and is now at the age of 65 years can not receive social security. This all makes sense because they and the town never paid into social security.
Chapter 32Bs18 states that anyone who qualifies for Medicare part A shall be FORCED to accept Medicare part B. Most of the 40 town retiree's at age 65 years are not effected by this law because they do not qualify for Medicare part A. This means that this group shall continue to have the same town health insurance as provided for everyone else. The only retired town employee's who qualify are those who joined or drafted into the military service for their country. While in the military fighting for the so called freedom of my country, the government was paying into my social security. What in hell did I know or care about social security when people where trying to kill me.
After my town retirement, social security notified me at age 62 that I was eligible for Medicare part A and shall become eligible for Medicare part B when I reach the sweet old age of 65 years. As promised and knowing that I'm covered by the town of Dartmouth, I didn't accept Medicare part A/B.
Some 244 town meeting members voted to force me to accept Medicare part B. My out of pocket cost is 110.00 dollars per month above the amount I paid for town health insurance. I just want to take this time to thank everyone involved with the above mentioned screwing.
Thanks for the health insurance lies and may you all rot in hell. A long time ago I thought I was fighting the enemy, but the enemy is you.
This was posted on another thread. I thought it was worth a copy and paste. It looks like David Brownell personally screwed the taxpayers in a do nothing, get yourself set for life deal and he is still is not satisfied.
To David Brownell,
Since you came on this blog with no purpose other than to attack good, hardworking volunteer town officials, I thought I would enlighten the readership about you.
Back in the early 80's David cut a sweetheart deal with the state for a conservation restriction on his property for well over $2million. Keep in mind that this was a time when people thought real estate prices were going through the roof because a typical house had reached a value of $100k. Compare this to the deal that the Cornell farm got thirty years later for a larger parcel.
Now I am happy that the old Sylvia farm, now belonging to David who I don't consider to be a farmer(his hay looks more like cord wood than something you would feed an animal), has been preserved. However, if David Brownell had not cut a deal that paid him over a $million more than what he deserved, we could have used that state money to preserve much more farmland like the Piva property abbutting his.
Anyone want to take a stab at who our state rep was at the time of David Brownell's sweatheart conservation restriction deal?
If you thought sitting next to Carney and Travers was annoying, try sitting near Doris Copley! She kept up a running commentary throughout the entire meeting, then sat shaking her head and making rude comments about the speakers, the select board, the finance committee, and town meeting members.
I am curious as to why she WANTS to work for a town full of such “ignorant people” in the first place?
Is Ms Copley still working for the town? If so what is her current position?
Director of Development
Anyone try to watch town meeting on DCTV. Why such poor picture quality ?
"Now because they didn't win in the Court of public opinion they have hired Atty Phil Blowhard to drain their pockets and drive up the cost of the project for the Town."
"Good work Opponents, can't wait till I see the next effort"
The quotationed comments above just show the immaturity that a certain individual has when his/her position has been challenged. Degrading one's last name is uncalled for.
It is the opnion of the turbine opponents that this project was never looked at with a high priority to protect the Dartmouth resident otherwise the current turbine setback would have been changed. Case after case evidence that demonstates individuals being effected by the flicker and noise when turbines are located too close are now becoming more frequent.Yet in Dartmouth,these cases have fallen up deaf ears since the "scientific" analysis conducted has silenced these reported experiences.We firmly believe the efforts that individuals are taking to have their cases heard and resort to the judicial system to seek help is not just for getting to know their neighbor. It is the right and opportunity of U.S. citizens to go this route to address one's concerns.
I believe the opponents of the wind turbine project have not done the necessary analysis of the project proposed in Dartmouth. They seem to have turned a blind eye to all the care that was taken to present a viable project. This is not just a money grab, it is part of the fiscal control of our energy use, as well as a responsible step towards environmental stewardship. A coal burning energy plant 2 miles from their home would present far greater risk to their health and home values.
The only "blind eye" and deaf ear here is with the proponents of the project who apparently have no difficulty dismissing the lives of people in the name of money and prestige.
Thank you, everyone for all the "care" you put into this project. Too bad you didn't "care" that much about people.
Every town in Massachusetts has the right to vote in new zoning, by-laws or special permit applications . The town attorney should have explained what happens when the new rules affect residential property owners . This commonly called a" taking ".
A taking occurs when a government action violates the 5th Amendment property rights of a landowner by taking a piece of property without offering fair compensation. "Takings" include physical acquisitions of land, and may include regulations that unduly deprive landowners of certain uses of their property or have the effect of diminishing the value of property.
The Town of Dartmouth has offered mitigation to these homeowners . The mitigation offer at town meeting is a public admission of a taking . The town must deal with over 400 homeowners around this site . The demand will be for compensation .
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215. For instance, grand juries and the phrase "due process" both trace their origin to the Magna Carta.
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/static/multimedia/audio/0120dipippowind10.mp3
Dartmouth wind advocate Dr. Ron DiPippo, an engineer and chairman of the Dartmouth Alternative Energy Committee, says shadow flicker can be disconcerting and is opponents’ most valid concern. He also responds to an opinion piece in The Standard-Times by Canadian engineer William K.G. Palmer, who warned that even a small piece of falling turbine blade would hit the ground with the force of a Ford Crown Victoria.
This is a note to this sound track - Dr. Ron DiPippo admits the shadow flicker is a problem !
Hi All ,
Ronald DiPippo, Ph.D. Chairman, Alternative Energy Committee Town of Dartmouth wears two hats when it comes to net metering .Ron DiPippo is also a Renewable Energy Consultant -Geothermal & Wind Specialist as stated on his own personal stationary .
Dr.DiPippo wrote a letter on October 2,2009 on his own personal stationary begging Shaela McNulty Collins Hearing Officer Department of Public Utilities One South Station Boston, MA 02110 . This letter refers to himself and the AEC members that agreed to make a personal request of the state agency .
Here is the request : " We encourage the DPU to specify a single, favorable Rate Class in its final Tariff"
I would like some input on this letter . Here are the people that signed that letter ,who must be the ones referred to as we :
Edward F. Iacaponi, Ex-Officio; Nathalie Dias, Kevern Joyce, Arthur Larrivee, Paul Lopes,
Raymond Medeiros, Roger Race, Saul Raposo and Joseph Sousa
A review of the letter shows it is written on Ron DiPippo personal stationary as a wind turbine consultant and the members of the Alternative Energy Committee went along with this . This letter shows that the AEC was working as pro wind turbine advocates while working for the Town of Dartmouth as AEC members to forward their own agenda . The letter should have been written and addressed by the Town of Dartmouth
Please review the letter ;
http://www.env.state.ma.us/dpu/docs/electric/09-71/10509drthcom.pdf
Dr. Ron DiPippo did what he thought was best for the Town of Dartmouth. The members of the AEC understood this project was best for the town five years ago and did everything they could do to bring the positive aspects of this project forward. The AEC members and all the town officials know Ron is a "wind consultant." Just because he is a "wind consultant " doesn't mean he's working for someone else.
The town voted for this period it's a done deal. You people around the site need to stop the antics
How unbiased can a "wind consultant" be? Don't you think he has a stake in whether or not the project goes through and the turbines are built? At the very least, what about his reputation?
And, who among us wants to see our pet project fail, for any reason? What does that say about our credentials?
That's all a part of human nature.
Post a Comment