LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]



Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Paypal

Donate via Stripe

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Battling with signs, over the Antrim Wind petition 

Credit:  By Mary Allen | Monadnock Ledger-Transcript | Friday, March 7, 2014 | (Published in print: Tuesday, March 11, 2014) | www.ledgertranscript.com ~~

If you drive through Antrim today you can’t help but see them: yellow/blue signs, urging “NO”; green/white signs urging “YES.” They are often side-by-side lining the highways and downtown streets.

As most Antrim voters know only too well, those signs are about changing the town’s zoning to add rules written by a wind energy developer. For the last two months, this question has been debated over cups of coffee, town-wide mailings, letters to the editor, and now in a duel of lawn signs perched in snow banks.

If there is an Antrim voter who hasn’t read the 11-page ordinance by now, they should before Tuesday. It’s available at Town Hall or online at www.antrimnh.org. And when you read the 11-page ordinance, keep these questions in mind: What is Antrim getting with this ordinance? What is the town not getting?

On the “what we are getting” side: If the ordinance passes, Antrim gets a new set of rules allowing wind energy facilities to be built in two zoning districts that cover more than half the town. The height limit for turbines will be set at 500 feet. The noise standards will be higher than the limits decided by the N.H. Site Evaluation Committee. That’s pretty much is all that is new. On the “what we aren’t getting” side – well, it’s a longer list: no requirement for environmental studies; no requirement for visual impact studies; no protection for property values; little assurance decommissioning costs will be fully covered; minimal property setback requirements; no noise protection assurances for seasonal property owners. And despite the impression created by a mailing to Antrim voters urging them to “support clean energy in Antrim,” this ordinance won’t create a renewable source of electricity for the town’s use. Or even New Hampshire’s use. The electricity generated goes directly into New England’s power grid. Property tax break for Antrim? Job promises? Zoning ordinances don’t cover those issues. Anyway, both are already decided. Taxes: Antrim’s selectmen have already signed a 20-year tax agreement with Antrim Wind Energy. It sets a yearly payment to the town from the wind developer instead of sending a tax bill to the developer.

Some taxpayers think it’s a good deal and others don’t. But given the fact that Antrim is the second largest town in the ConVal School District (plus a state-level debate over how renewable energy facilities are assessed in cooperative school districts), that agreement might be something our town regrets later.

Job promises? The N.H. Site Evaluation Committee covered that topic in its review of Antrim Wind Energy’s application. The 10-turbine wind facility will create five permanent jobs: a project manager, three technicians, and a maintenance position. Most technicians working for New England wind facilities come from the Midwest. The management firm selected by Antrim Wind Energy is based in Iowa.

It’s time to stop this debate. When a developer writes a zoning ordinance, it’s a sign of desperation. On Tuesday, I’m sticking with the message on the yellow/blue signs. Antrim’s zoning is not for sale. I’m voting “No.”

Mary Allen served two terms as a ConVal school board representative for Antrim; 12 years on the town’s zoning board and as an alternative on the Antrim Planning Board. She has lived in town for 39 years.

Source:  By Mary Allen | Monadnock Ledger-Transcript | Friday, March 7, 2014 | (Published in print: Tuesday, March 11, 2014) | www.ledgertranscript.com

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
   Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)
Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI TG TG Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook

Wind Watch on Linked In Wind Watch on Mastodon