Last night, the Select Board approved the warrant for a Special Town Meeting to be held Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Dartmouth High School Auditorium (155 Bakerville Road). The warrant has three articles, a bond authorization to procure and construct two wind turbines, a Padanaram business district zoning bylaw, and the acceptance of a section of Massachusetts General Law which allows the town to have retirees apply for Medicare coverage. I will post the warrant to this blog ...
... when I have the final copy.
These three issues are imporatnat matters for the town and I urge Town Meeting members to make every effort to attend on the 26th.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Special Town Meeting warrant approved for Jan 26th
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
36 comments:
Since Town Meeting members have to vote on the bond authorization for the two turbines, those who are in opposition to the turbines should contact their precinct's town meeting members and let them know how they feel about the project. Town Meeting members should vote according to what their precinct wants, and the only way to do that is by contacting them. (Perhaps even contacting TM members outside of your precinct could help. Let as many people know of your concerns and let them help you. That is what you elected them for - - to represent you. Get your message out to them. Don't let your precinct members vote subjectively based on their own thoughts about wind turbines and their proximity to residences, because that likely could happen if they don't hear from you.)
Click on "Dartmouth Town Hall Website" on the left-hand side of Bill's blog. On the town's homepage, click on "departments"; click on "Town Clerk"; "Town Meeting"; and finally, "Town Meeting Member Listing."
The names and telephone numbers for each precinct's members' names are listed. Contact them.
Town Meeting votes on January 26th. Unless you are a Town Meeting member, you will not be allowed to speak at the meeting. Let your precinct representatives do that for you.
The first thing residents should know is the towb has to come up with $550,000.00 of taxpayer money before the project even gets off the ground .
This whole project will involve alot of items that are left out .
Five Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars -The first year - Lets hope those Sodar tests are right !
Here's the by-law :
SECTION 34 – LAND-BASED COMMERCIAL WIND TURBINE BYLAW
Section 34.805 Application Filing Requirements
"The applicant shall submit a fully inclusive estimate of the costs associated with removal, prepared by a qualified engineer. The amount shall include a Cost of Living Adjustment for removals after 10, 15 and 20 years. The SPGA shall require the applicant to provide a form of surety (i.e., post a bond, letter of credit, establish an escrow account, or other) at the SPGA’s election at the time of construction to cover the costs of the removal in the event the town must remove the facility. The amount of such surety shall be equal to 150 percent of the anticipated cost of compliance with this section."
It doesn't help when some make ill informed or misleading statements like the last comment. The comment is just flat wrong. I explained this already in comments to another post but here it is again,
The condition for that part of the permit is that the town set aside 10% of the proceeds from the wind turbine generation into an escrow account until $500K has been accumulated. That account would be available for repairs or removal of the turbines at the end of their life. If used for repairs, the account would then be replenished from the generation account until $500K was reestablished. The amount would be adjusted for inflation over time. There is some question whether the DOR will allow such an escrow account so that was a condition for the condition. I suppose if not allowed by the DOR, the Town Meeting would have to appropriate the money to the account.
The flip side to the 'call you town meeting representatve' is for proponents of the turbines to contact their TM reps as well. I'd be surprised if there is much opposition town wide.
Bill , The turbines should be named after you ! Would you consider having the honor of having both towers named after you ? We could give it a catchy fraise like the "Trimble Wind Turbines" . For the next twenty years everyone will remember what you did for Dartmouth. A plaque could be placed at the base of the turbines in dedication to William Trimble your friends and family will remember you for all the good you did for Dartmouth over the next twenty years !
How about it ! Lets get the Trimble name on the turbines , lets get someone to second it at Town Meeting ! Great job Bill !
Okay , I got the picture now we are going to get a the bad news a little at a time .
First you get the permit and tell everyone you need another $500,000.00 for an escrow account .
If town meeting votes in the funding you'll have to tell them next about about the roads into the turbines. My guess is the narcel weight is around 52 tons with rotor another 43 tons . The blades weight is 1.5 tons or 3000 pounds each .
How much to build two service roads to the turbines to hold the capacity of the trucks and turbine parts ? Will we find this out later also ?
Thank you Select Board, AEC, Dr. Dipippo and ALL those who spent years on this project! This is something Dartmouth can be proud of, the way of the future.
Wind turbines, solar energy, and other forms of clean energy will become more popular as times goes along.
This should move forward at Town Meeting. It is for the good of all Dartmouth residents.
The town is going into the wind turbine business . We can't expect to go to the Bank of America and get all the funding for the turbines. As with any new business the town will have some up front cash needs , $500,000.00 for MDOR requirements of our by-law and some pre-construction cash for the turbine site funding . The money can be sought through prop 2 1/2 override or a debt exclusion that will only cost taxpayers a equivalent of a cup of coffee on their tax bills . The money could also be taken from the excess in our current budget . This is a good deal . We need forward thinking people .
As it relates to all you Chase Road people contacting your elected town meeting members, forget it. Town meeting voters will approve the construction for the turbines. You could call for a town wide referendum. You'll need several signatures, but this action will cost the town additional finds and I have a gut feeling that most town voters are for the wind turbines. You can file for a court injunction, but I believe you need standing. In my opinion, a lawyer will be costly, and not worth the fee's. You Chase Road people need to attack this through the election process. The standard times opinion section indicates that only 50 people, mostly along Chase Road, appose the turbines. Allow me to explain that a well organized group of 50 people can contact several friends, and family members so as to make a difference in the April town elections. Find a candidate to run.
Also, I've been a proponent for changing our form of Government, from town meeting, to town counselors. Get rid of town meeting. If you had this turbine discussion with a counselor representing you location, it would have made a difference. You are a group of ( 50 voters x 10 = 500 votes.)I truly believe you can rouser up 10 voters each, and have an impact at the April town election.
Frank1,
The construction costs are all included in the bonding amount, including the cost to get the turbines into place. Wind turbines are frequently erected in areas that have no roads to start with. This type of wind turbine construction is done successfully all the time. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Once more, the $500K will come from the proceeds of the wind turbine generation and is to be placed in escrow. Not up front as you say.
If you have concerns about the finances of the project go to the Finance Committee meeting on Thursday night. They may discuss the Town Meeting article for the bonding.
They should call these the Twin Towers in Dartmouth .
Also the residents around the turbines should be able to find an attorney that will take the case for no money up front .
There are attorneys that will take this for 1/3 of the lost property values .
Also this has attracted a lot of national attention . This could be a great case for an attorney that wants recognition and may file just for the advertisements
Trimbles Twin Turbines? Trimble Towers sounds too much like a housing project.
Well Bill, you have made that proverbial list in Dartmouth. Which means in general, that you are doing a great job being objective and looking at the town's best interest as a whole. I trust you take the nonsense related to this for what it is worth. Nothing.
I think the posters were refering to New York to show how easy Dartmouth residents can be taken advantage of !
Twin Towers
So, those people are at least partly right. If the DOR does not allow the escrow, then the Town will have to appropriate the amount. Isn't that correct in the interest of fairness?
Jack Spillane, columnist for The Standard-Times, wrote about the Dartmouth wind turbine project on his blog. Check it out:
http://blogs.southcoasttoday.com/new-bedford-politics/
So far the NIMBY's trying to extort money from the town have failed miserably. Great. So far, the blood sucking lawyer trying to take advantage of the NIMBY's and the town has failed. Priceless.
There are far more tactful ways for Dr. DiPippo to have expressed his opinions of the neighbors opposing the turbines in their backyard (Standard-Times, Jan.4th.) Why make remarks that could be construed as disrespectful, insulting, and highly unprofessional?
Take Action Now
Ronald DiPippo the chairman of the Dartmouth Alternative Energy Committee believes the residents around the wind turbines are misrepresenting the project ! He more or less accused them of lying ! Here is part of the Jan 4th story :
"As evidenced by their comments and questions at several public forums and in op-ed pieces in The Standard-Times, opponents have been scouring the Internet for misinformation from anti-wind Web sites instead of studying the history and details of our own project, readily available on the town's Web site. They continue to repeat the same fears about various possible impacts from these graceful, clean, renewable sources of electricity. Fears are not easily dispelled, but the facts speak for themselves.
They fear shadow-flicker; the town has pledged to mitigate this potential problem, even shutting down the turbines if need be. They fear loss of property values; studies by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the National Association of Realtors show that wind turbines have no statistical effect on property values."
The preceding comment is a attempt to put words into someone else's mouth. There is no reason to do that except to cover up the weakness of your own argument.
The opponents did not make a convincing case as evidenced by a unanimous vote to approve the permit. That should not come as a surprise. As Dr. DiPippo points out, the opponents of wind projects present the same imformation all over the world. And they consistently lose the argument because much of what is on the Internet does not stand up to scrutiny.
In response to the comment about what happens if an escrow account is not approved, the supposition about the Town Meeting was my take on what should happen and not included in the Special Permit. The text of the Special Permit can be found here
Steve sherk ,
Can you tell me what kind of debate you are going to allow on town meeting floor for this article? Will you allow people to speak on the whole project because my understanding is that the Select Board is the board to issue the permit to build the towers and that town meeting is only voting to approve the funding of it. So will you limit debate to the financial part of this project or will you allow people to speak on the health issues and property values issues like during the public hearings. What ever you decide I just think you should let town meeting members know before hand so that they can have their comments ready.
Perhaps the nearby residents will benefit by having the turbines redirect the airflow from the adjacent wastewater treatment plant? Maybe even sending the odors over to that hideous looking excavating business across the street.
You are forgetting the small amount of financial gain the town is gambling 9 million dollars on.
Dipippo quotes a 50% chance that the windmills make $1 million per year.
Town budget for 2010 according to the town web site is $75 million.
So the million dollars generated comes out to 1.33% of the total town budget.
Is 1.33% enough money to risk the town's water supply?
In fact, Dr. Dipippo states a 50% chance that the project generates a TOTAL of $20 million. The TOTAL amount to be earned on the turbines over 20 years is only 26% of THIS YEARS budget.
How much will it cost the town if one of these turbines leaks chemicals or oils into the our water source that they will be sitting on top of?
The relatively small amount of revenue the turbines may generate just don't seem worth the risk.
to 12:42
What is the odds of the sewer pipe from your property leaking and contaminating the water supply?
Anon 12:42- when you take things out of context, like your only including the 50%/$1,000,000 benefit and not the more likely 90% benefit as fully explained many times you lose all credibility.
Do you really think we are all that stupid?
The debate on town meeting floor should be germane to the article. If the article is to ask for the funding, then the debate should be only for the funding, not the health aspects, wind shear, fuzzy flitters, height or how close to homes. That already has been debated.
They issued a permit and don't have FAA approval yet ? What else is missing ?
If the height of the pole to the hub would have to be reduced to 293 feet from 328 because the FAA just said you can't then the project is not economically feasible.
I'd like to see the date on the letter or email from the FAA .
Bill could you post the information on this site about the tower information from the FAA and when exactley did you or the town receive the information stated in todays paper Jan 8 2010
To 6:33
More lies. It will still work fine.
The economics of the wind turbines are such that the reduced height will mean a little less generation. Even with a reduced height, the return is very favorable.
The town received word yesterday that the north turbine was not approved by the FAA. The fact that the FAA approval was pending was not new information or hidden in any way. It was introduced and discussed at the Special Permit hearing.
Frankly, I getting tired of the conspiracy theories. First, opponents are against the wind turbines because they are too tall. Now if one is shorter, they are against it because ... why?
Last evening, the finance committee voted unanimously to recommend the turbine article to town meeting based on favorable economics and overall environmental benefits.
Speaking for myself, the last question to be answered before my vote was "would I live near a public works project like this?". Since there were no project opponents present last night, I am posting my answer here.
The first house I ever bought was 81 South Ave. This house sits less than 200feet from the base of the Smith Neck water tower. After standing under the Portsmouth turbine and comparing it to the Smith Neck water tower, it was clear to me that the water tower was a far more imposing structure. The answer to my question was that not only could I say that I would live near a public works facility like this, but I can say that I have lived near one.
ANON 5:10pm In case you can't do second grade math yourself:
I'll give you the max mentioned by Dippipo, 32 million dollars. Over 20 years is 1.6 million per year. That's 2.1% of 2010's $75 million budget. 2 percent.
What do you think the 2025 town budget will look like? I hope you don't think it will still be $75 million.
Town leadership can't manage the money they have now, what makes yo think they're suddenly going to be responsible with more money?
Since a million dollars is such an insignificant sum to you, why not just pay it yourself and save us the trouble of getting the windmills.
c'mon anon 5:47, second grade math is my specialty. I do not think our budget will be $75million 20 years from now just as I don't think eectric rates will stay the same 20 years hence.
And given the very tight budget we are workng with here in town an extra million dollars or so does in fact go a loooooooong way so let's keep the math honest please.
Post a Comment