Article

Answer the questions

Mass Audubon recently abandoned its plan to install a 200-foot wind turbine at Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary due to grave concerns about noise, risks to resident wildlife and migratory birds, and potential disruption to valuable habitat. Does Mass Audubon's extensive review and decision to reject a project half the size of the town of Wellfleet's reflect the machinations of an irresponsible minority or a principled decision based upon a thorough and unbiased review?

Members of Save our Seashore, among other concerned individuals, have raised many valid questions about the proposed wind turbine in Wellfleet. No commission or board in Wellfleet, or any town, is beyond public scrutiny, even if that public consists partly of nonresident taxpayers. Approximately 60 percent of the taxpayers in Wellfleet are nonresidents, who by definition do not vote in that town. Are the legitimate concerns of abutters to the proposed installation, resident and nonresident taxpayers alike, to be dismissed with accusations of maligning the will of the town and the democratic process?

Among SOSS's concerns are: radical change to the landscape, financial viability of the project, noise, safety, the effect on property values for nearby residents, adverse impacts on wildlife and unfragmented habitat, and implications for all users of the national park.

The Wellfleet Energy Committee, Wellfleet Board of Selectmen and other town officials must more fully investigate these concerns with the understanding that the town of Wellfleet has a responsibility to all of the aforementioned constituencies. The questions of SOSS and others warrant detailed answers... more [truncated due to possible copyright]  

Members of Save our Seashore, among other concerned individuals, have raised many valid questions about the proposed wind turbine in Wellfleet. No commission or board in Wellfleet, or any town, is beyond public scrutiny, even if that public consists partly of nonresident taxpayers. Approximately 60 percent of the taxpayers in Wellfleet are nonresidents, who by definition do not vote in that town. Are the legitimate concerns of abutters to the proposed installation, resident and nonresident taxpayers alike, to be dismissed with accusations of maligning the will of the town and the democratic process?

Among SOSS's concerns are: radical change to the landscape, financial viability of the project, noise, safety, the effect on property values for nearby residents, adverse impacts on wildlife and unfragmented habitat, and implications for all users of the national park.

The Wellfleet Energy Committee, Wellfleet Board of Selectmen and other town officials must more fully investigate these concerns with the understanding that the town of Wellfleet has a responsibility to all of the aforementioned constituencies. The questions of SOSS and others warrant detailed answers before the town of Wellfleet proceeds with this project and spends any taxpayer (resident and nonresident) money on permitting and other related expenses.

Mass Audubon recently abandoned its plan to install a 200-foot wind turbine at Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary - half the size of the wind turbine proposed by Wellfleet - due to grave concerns about noise (for neighbors, employees and members), risks to resident wildlife and migratory birds, and potential disruption to valuable habitat. Does Mass Audubon's extensive review and decision to reject a project half the size of the town of Wellfleet's reflect the machinations of an irresponsible minority or a principled decision based upon a thorough and unbiased review?


Source: http://www.wickedlocal.com/...

JAN 22 2010
https://www.windaction.org/posts/24278-answer-the-questions
back to top