[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Backcountry residents to hold press conference downtown Monday to oppose wind ordinance and Boulevard Plan amendment  

Credit:  East County Magazine | May 3, 2013 | eastcountymagazine.org ~~

On Monday, May 6 at 1 p.m., East County residents opposed to the proposed County Wind ordinance and Boulevard Plan amendment will hold a press conference outside the County Administration Center at 1600 Pacific Highway (by the fountain on the west side.) 

“On May 8th, the Board of Supervisors will make a life-altering choice for rural East County residents and valued resources,” a press release sent by the Protect Our Communities Foundation and Backcountry Against Dumps. Supervisors must choose to either “sell out to the taxpayer-subsidized wind industry and developers and turn the ruggedly beautiful Boulevard/Jacumba area into an unnecessary industrial energy sacrifice zone and fire trap,” the rural residents say,  or”protect and defend the ratepayers and real people and resources in the predominantly low-income fire-prone area from expensive, unreliable, and dangerous industrial wind turbine projects and related web of electrical infrastructure.”

Speakers will include rural residents and a fire official speaking out on dangers posed by industrial wind projects in our region.

  • Donna Tisdale, Chair Boulevard Planning Group, President Backcountry Against Dumps, Secretary The Protect Our Communities Foundation
  • Mark Ostrander, retired Cal Fire Battalion Chief and veteran of many major firestorms
  • Impacted neighbors of Infigen’s 25 Kumeyaay Wind turbines in East County: Ginger Thompson, avid Elliott, Rowena Elliott (Manzanita tribal members)
  • Impacted neighbors of Pattern Energy’s Ocotillo Wind turbines

The Final Environmental Impact Report for the project recognizes 21 significant and unavoidable impacts related to excessive noise and ground-borne vibrations; permanent increase in ambient noise; wild land fire; visual, biological, cultural and recreation resources; land use; division of communities; community character and more: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/pds/advance/BOSMay8POD10-007.html

On April 11th, the Boulevard Planning Group voted unanimously to oppose the Proposed Project, the Limited Large Turbine Alternative, the proposed Noise Waiver and/or the removal of C-weighted sound level limit (intended to address adverse low-frequency noise / vibration impacts on neighbors); and to support the Limited Small Turbine Alternative, C-weighted noise compliance, and the urgent need to address electrical pollution and infrasound that has now been documented at turbine impacted homes, locally, and those abandoned near other turbine projects–globally.

The Planning Group also asked Dr. Wilma Wooten, Public Health Officer, to revise the 2012 Public Health Statement that denies impacts.  Wooten inexplicably ignored not only mounting evidence in medical journals, but also Manzanita tribal members right here in East County who have  illnesses consistent with Wind Turbine Syndrome, as a study at Cal State San Marcos has concluded.

Iberdrola, developer of Tule Wind proposed in Boulevard, is seeking a noise waiver from the Supervisors claiming no impacts. However, the company is being sued by 60 neighbors of  its Hardscrabble Wind in New York state. The same noise expert that previously testified in support of Tule Wind is being sued for ‘professional negligence’ over noise impacts at Hardscrabble: http://windeffects.org/iberdrola-hardscrabble-complaint/#.UYQXDrWbMfY; http://www.fox23news.com/news/local/story/Special-Report-Is-going-green-destroying-the/b9mYUXWlv0eZfsrgPCJHYw.cspx

Supporters of the wind ordinance are primarily wind and energy industry developers and utility companies who claim that the projects are needed to meet renewable power goals set by the state of California.  However supporters never analyzed off-site alternatives such as solar on roofs and parking lots in San Diego to meet our region’s energy needs.

Source:  East County Magazine | May 3, 2013 | eastcountymagazine.org

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.