Ordinance is pro-Rumford
We chose Dixmont's ordinance as a starting point because it was the most protective. These limits are in line with the World Health Organization's European section, where a long history of wind development has provided ample opportunity to discover where health-impacting mistakes were made.
September 17, 2010
by Charles Hoff
in Sun Journal
As a Wind Power Advisory Committee member, I wish to address questions surrounding the ordinance recently presented to Rumford's Board of Selectmen.
WPAC's goal in crafting this ordinance was the health and safety of Rumford's citizens. WPAC did not target First Wind; we addressed any potential wind power project in Rumford. WPAC's meetings are open to the public, meeting minutes are posted on Rumford's website, and there has been coverage in the media.
The board has questioned proposed setback and noise limits, and why we did not follow the state's "standard model." We chose Dixmont's ordinance as a starting point because it... [continue via Web link]