While parking spaces and chairs were difficult to come by Tuesday, Jan. 6, at the Jackson Community Center, something else could be found in abundance - voters.

More than 120 townspeople packed the building on the Village Road for a special town meeting and, by more than a two-to-one margin, 84-36, they voted in favor of a six-month moratorium on the construction of industrial wind turbines in town.

The vote came after a half-hour of discussion on the moratorium, which was brought before townspeople as the result of a petition drive.

Three different companies have expressed interest in erecting wind turbines in Jackson. Although two of those companies have been eyeing the town for some time and have signed leases with private landowners, some residents did not learn of these developments until this past fall.

The possibility of industrial wind turbines being erected in Jackson has drawn various reactions, and those differences were reflected Tuesday evening in the discussion that preceded the moratorium vote.

On one side were those who argued the moratorium was necessary in order to give the town time to get more answers about wind turbines and to create a new ordinance dealing specifically with wind turbines. Supporters of the moratorium said they did not see it as working against wind turbines.

"All we're trying to do is gather information," said Bob Moore. He later added, "We're not standing in the way of progress."

Others said due to the preparation required, it would be at least a year before any company could begin erecting turbines in town. They said that would make the moratorium's six-month time frame a moot point.

"Why slap 'em [the companies] upside the head with a moratorium?" asked one man. "There's no need of it."

One man stood to read a letter from a relative who could not attend the meeting. The relative said the moratorium would "jeopardize" the potential tax benefits of the wind turbines, and asked if having additional wind power would mean that "our sons and daughters won't have to die on Middle East battlefields."

A number of people groaned in reaction.

Although the warrant for the special town meeting said the moratorium would be for the "issuing of permits allowing for wind turbine construction and development," some moratorium opponents worried it would prevent any of the three wind turbine companies from essentially doing anything in town for six months.

Town attorney Bill Kelly said that was not the case, and reminded people the article specifically referred to permits. He later said the moratorium "does not stifle the town's ability to enter into a lease with somebody." When asked for his professional opinion on the moratorium, Kelly cut right to the chase.

"In short, I think it's a good idea for every side," he said.

Kelly said developers want an ordinance that lacks ambiguity, something that he said exists in the town's existing regulations. Ambiguity, he said, begets conflict, and conflict can result in court cases. Kelly said he had spoken with two of the three developers, and both had indicated they were not opposed to the moratorium.

"This [the moratorium article] shouldn't be viewed as a conflicting question," Kelly said. The moratorium, he said, would allow for the town to develop clarity, and added, "I think everyone benefits from clarity."

Aside from choosing a moderator - veteran gavel-wielder Gary Stacey filled that role - the question about the moratorium was the lone official article on the warrant. There was a separate line that said the meeting would also include "discussion on the status and findings regarding proposals received."

That line referred to proposals solicited by selectmen following a special town meeting last November. At that meeting, residents authorized town officials to "receive and evaluate proposals" from wind turbine companies interested in leasing a piece of town-owned property, then instructed the officials to "report the findings back within 60 days at a special town meeting."

Three companies - Boston-based Citizens Wind (an offshoot of Citizens Energy Corporation), Portland-based Mt. Harris Wind, LLC (an offshoot of Competitive Energy Services) and Maine-based Ra Power Solutions - submitted materials in advance of Tuesday's meeting.

The piece of town-owned land in question, and that which the proposals center around, is a 350-acre parcel of wooded land in the northwest corner of town. Part of the land lies on a ridge that stretches from Dixmont to Thorndike, along which two of the companies (Citizens and Mt. Harris) hope to build a larger, three-town wind turbine project.

Both of those companies have secured leases with private landowners on either side of the town-owned land in Jackson, which makes that particular parcel desirable to both Citizens and Mt. Harris. Representatives from the third company, Ra Power, told selectmen last week they have an interest in pursuing a smaller project that would be limited to just the town-owned land.

Kelly said it was not easy to compare the three proposals because they each had a different format. One is in the form of a lease, he said, while another is in the form of an option to have a lease and the third is essentially in the form of a proposal for a lease.

The attorney drew laughter when he admitted there were pieces of the proposals that he did not understand.

"There is more clarification that is needed in terms of how much money would be paid for lease payments," Kelly said.

Kelly suggested in the next month or so he could draft a proposed ordinance dealing with wind turbines and bring it to the town for comments and suggested revisions.

Kelly, who worked with the Town of Freedom on its wind turbine issues, said he would look at ordinances dealing with wind turbines in other communities and use those to create a draft ordinance for Jackson.