| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Fiscal fibbing and inciting Falmouth voters
Credit: Mark Cool | Posted on May 13, 2013 | falmouth.patch.com ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Who’s telling the truth and who’s crying “Fire”?
The two groups (‘Healers’ and ‘Friends’) are in final throws of a controversial campaign over question 2.
Why the alleged $25 million cost from the ‘Friends”? That’s a far cry from $14 million. The ‘Friends’ likely derive this figure from the projected revenue gain, that could otherwise be lost, if turbines were to operate without restrictions for the next 18 years.
Projecting a financial outcome is certainly necessary. But $25 million? I think it more essential that the gathering of the most accurate and reliable data should account for the projection.
The Falmouth Wind Turbine Options Process report concluded that if the turbines were to operate for the next 18 years in the 12 on – 12 off operational regiment, the end result would be an $8 million deficit. Interjecting this data into a projection, after all, is reasonable and rational given that Falmouth’s Health Board is on record stating residents will never be allowed less than an acceptable period of night sleep.
The ‘Friends’ however, provide a figure that neglects this “known.” The $25 million projection is fragrantly being used to incite and mislead voters. The projection is far from accurate, and is fearfully unreliable. There is nothing “known” that supports their claim that turbine removal will cost $25 million, let alone be operated with wild abandon 24/7. Especially given the recent nuisance judgement made by Falmouth’s Zoning Board of Appeals.
If the ‘Friends’ campaign touts a “sky is falling” platform, they license the ‘Healers’ to do the same. ‘Healers’ could easily have claimed that the cost to keep the turbines could result in the town’s purchase of at least 40 properties within 1/3 of a mile from the turbines. That would cost a minimum of $17 million and could reasonably rise to be in excess of $25 million if legal expenses, property management fees, insurance and loss of tax revenue (to itemize only a few) were to be included.
The ‘Healer’s’ campaign is based upon what’s known to be true. The Selectmen’s stated cost is what’s known to be true. The true tabulation to remove the turbines has accurately been determined and presented to the voter. Don’t let recklessly bad information set fire to reason.
Please – Vote Yes on 2.
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 educational 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 |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=37103 ]
