March 31, 2012
Massachusetts, Opinions

The community’s ‘metal’ is being tested

Mark J. Cool, West Falmouth, MA

As a Falmouth taxpayer, I respect the town’s argument that budgetary costs liabilities must be components of consideration regarding the town wind turbine turmoil. I can appreciate the immediate and short term fix, customized curtailing of turbine operations, that may positively affect energy savings, debt liabilities, as well as existing sleep and health disruptions of residents.

The Selectmen cite fiscal, energy sustainability and energy conservation goals. As well they should. But what are those goals for? The Selectmen cite the Climate Protection Action and Strategic plans. As well they should. But still, what are those plans designed to do? Goals and plans such as these, are for the protection and welfare of the People!

The undisputed context of the situation in Falmouth remains being primarily about the acceptable health condition of affected residents. Is there anything so elementary? Therefore, it remains incumbent upon town officials, as well as town meeting members to ensure that there is no foreseeable danger to, or risk of exposure upon, resident’s health.

It’s vital that Falmouth uphold these fundamental principals of public health protection while more information becomes available. It’s of paramount community interest and expectation that all residents, all neighborhoods and all villages comprising Falmouth, be given these basic protections ‘equally’.

Fiduciary duties are at odds with community ethics and integrity in Falmouth. The community ‘metal’ is being tested. Democracy in the United States, however, is still based on majority rule ‘while protecting the rights of the minority.’

Will wind turbine victims be the recipients of our Country’s underlying principle of protection? Will it’s spirit be realized by Town Meeting, or will Neighbors choose to look the other way?

URL to article: