Liberty at stake in Frankfort
In reference to Mr. Orlando E. Delogu’s recent opinion piece about the Frankfort wind ordinance: This is not the first time we have seen this man’s biased, personal views backed up by reference to his position at the University of Maine. As a taxpayer and Maine resident, I am disgusted.
As for the Frankfort ordinance, Mr. Delogu’s opinions aside, there are really only two legal questions: First, does the ordinance comply with the constitutions and statutes of the United States and the state of Maine? And second, was it legally enacted at a proper town meeting? Nothing else really matters.
I have read the pending lawsuit, and it is full of personal accusations, and quite a lot of whining. It is obvious to any who read it that the suit is really just about bullying a small town into voting to rescind an ordinance that wealthy special interests don’t like.
The real question here is: Are the people of Maine going to stand up for their rights to self government at town meeting, or are they going to cave to wealthy special interests from away? Are the residents of Frankfort (and every other Maine town) in charge of their own destiny, or do they have to bow down to people from away, and to UMaine professors who seem more interested in protecting special interests than in what is right for the people of Maine?
The bet is liberty. Do we stand, or do we fold?
David P. Corrigan
Concord Township
Invest early
At the Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce we take the issue of education seriously. Our Building Bridges program brings employers and educators together so that teachers can better understand what will be expected of students in the real world.
That good work will be wasted, however, if our students are not ready to learn the skills they need to thrive in the 21st century. Key to that readiness is early childhood education, and that’s why I join with other business leaders in our state to support investment in our youngest children.
The research is clear. The first five years of life are critical to a child’s development, and this research is backed by strong empirical evidence showing that investments made in these early years pay big dividends later on.
According to an America’s Edge report, for every dollar spent on early education there is a total return to the local economy of $1.78. Conversely, for every dollar cut we lose a total of $1.78.
Lawmakers in Augusta and Washington are weighing many important and competing needs at a time when public resources are scarce. They face some difficult decisions.
But if they take the time to read the America’s Edge report, they’ll find that investing in early childhood education is an easy call.
John Porter
President and CEO
Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce
Tank offers economic hope
I am writing this letter to support the effort to put a propane facility in Searsport.
I have lived in Searsport all my life and my family goes back for generations. I have very strong ties to this community, its heritage, the ocean and our port. I have been a volunteer firefighter for 15 years. I know about the dangers that come with a town that has an opportunity and turns its back on it.
Right now, we have an opportunity to welcome DCP Midstream to the community. I attended a town hall meeting last week and watched as a few people from Searsport, most who had moved here to retire, and many people from outside of Searsport were negative about the project.
This is a sad time for our community. We have an opportunity to bring jobs and economic revenue and there is a chance we will turn our backs on it. On March 10 we will vote on a moratorium that will stop the project, kill the jobs and put opportunity aside.
Many of the retirees seem only to care about themselves and their interests. What about the citizens in North Searsport? We live here too, we all need less of a tax burden. This project offers us some hope. It will be in an area that already has tanks. We heard that it could hurt tourism — very few if any people here are making a year-round living on tourism. I ask you to vote no on the moratorium.
A.J. Koch
Searsport
Our shared responsibility
Do we share a moral responsibility to help those with developmental disabilities? It was not that long ago that the dominant treatment to helping individuals was to institutionalize them. Helping those with development disabilities now involves new approaches personalized to meet each individual’s needs.
Today there are better ways to enable individuals with developmental disabilities to have more control of their lives and receive the treatment they deserve. People with developmental disabilities often face challenges they may not be able
to meet on their own. Organizations providing services must individualize the care they give. Some individuals require 24-hour supervision and care to ensure their safety and well-being, while others need various supportive services.
The treatments provided by organizations dedicated to assisting people with developmental disabilities are by no means extravagant. It is basic, pragmatic, cost-efficient and transparent, specifically tailored to the needs of each individual. The tremendous support for Special Olympics shows how our society has changed.
Nevertheless, for the eighth time in the last nine years, proposed state budget cuts are again targeting these crucial services. We need to re-evaluate this trend. People with developmental disabilities in our communities should not be a continued target of budgetary reductions. Caring services for those with developmental disabilities is our shared responsibility.
Anthony Zambrano
Executive Director
Downeast Horizons
Choose all schools
BDN columnist and Republican strategist Matthew Gagnon doesn’t like the prospect of his kid going to the elementary school with the ”crumbling building” while the kids on the other side of the road get to go to the school with the “much newer building” and “better technology.”
His solution? School choice. Let the families decide. (I wonder which families will choose the crumbling building? Not his, that’s for sure.)
My solution? Fix up the crumbling building so that none of our kids have to go to a crumbling school. How to pay for it? Tax dollars. But oh, that’s not the Republican way. (See the BDN’s Page 1 article, “Creating Jobs: What can a governor do?”: “LePage … went on to pitch a tax cut to go on top of another tax cut that already passed last year.”) So it looks like “school choice” will be this year’s Republican “big idea” of how to more fully divide our society between winners and losers.
Sol Goldman
Bangor
Goldman, you’re spot on. Republicans love to screech about their love and pride for the country — they go so far as to demonize the President for not wearing a flag pin on his suit, but they’re the first to look out only for themselves, even at the cost of others. The answer to bad schools is to find the means to relocate to another school? Come on. All our schools should be exemplary. I find it disgusting that there is only concern for failing schools when there is a direct interest involved. That’s shameful and selfish behavior.
I am shocked, I say SHOCKED, that a Republican would only be interested in himself. That is as startling as discovering that water is wet or fire hot.
Yep. I chain my employees to their desks. I kick homeless people when they ask for spare change. I turn a blind eye to people who are cold in their homes this winter. I ignore the plight of orphans and want no one else to have healthcare but me. My middle name is Scrooge.
*sarcasm*
On the 200th anniversary of Dickens’ birth, and in acknowledgement of Scrooge’s dramatic change of heart, I know there is hope for you.
Republicans in the State House are prepared to throw the Governor under the bus to get a budget passed over his threatened veto. Independents are taking a long hard and skeptical look at “Richie Rich” Romney as the November election nears. In short, many independents and the moderate remnant of the Republican Party are setting down the bitter Tea Party brew that Dick Armey and the Koch brothers have cooked up. I talked to a Republican doctor a week and a half ago: He is voting for President Obama this fall.
Let the “true believers” of the GOP continue to drive Romney rightward. I am enjoying the spectacle of this circular firing squad.
On the 200th anniversary of Dickens’ birth and in recognition of Scrooge’s change of heart, I know there is hope for you.
Moderate Republicans in the State House are ready to throw the Tea Party Governor under the bus to get a budget passed over his threatened veto. Independents, having seen Romney for the plutocrat that he is, are moving towards President Obama. Most Americans are finding the Tea Party brew of Dick Armey and the Koch brothers too bitter to swallow.
I will enjoy the circular firing squad of the Republican presidential primary contest. Romney will have moved so far right by this summer that President Hoover would not recognize him as a fellow Republican.
On the 200th anniversary of Dickens’ birth and in recognition of Scrooge’s change of heart, I know you will change, as well.
Moderate Republicans have defied Governor LePage in the State House on the budget issue. Independents are drifting away from Romney towards President Obama. The Tea Party brew cooked up by Armey and the Koch brothers is too bitter for most Americans. As Romney moves incessantly to the right into the GOP’s circular firing squad, the country is seeing him for the plutocrat that he is.
Funny thing is I have paid attention to all of those conditions I have mentioned above. I expect that there is a not a liberal among today’s posters that has paid as much attention to those causes as this Republican has.
Someday you may realize the difference between being compassionate and being maudlin, being compassionate yourself and DEMANDING compassion from others. Good luck with that.
You will find no post I have ever made demanding compassion of anyone. I ask that posters here be logical and historically accurate.
Sadly, the Republican base believes five things that are demonstrably untrue: (i) President Obama was born in Kenya; (ii) Saddam had WMD at the time of our invasion in 2003; (iii) Saddam was tied in to the 9/11 hijackers; (iv) tax cuts pay for themselves; and (v) climate change is a hoax. Bill Buckley said that his duty as a conservative was to criticize and distance his party from the crazy element. I know of no prominent Republican who has done that. Bill’s son, Christopher, voted for Obama in 2008.
“I am shocked, I say SHOCKED, that a Republican would only be interested in himself.”
What is the implication of this statement?
It is a playful reference to Claude Rains’ line in Casablanca. It stands in contrast to the post below that compares the entire American left to the “Gulag.” You need to have a talk with the poster who used those words, as he has clearly lost his sense of perspective and is posting with anger, not wit.
You should fine tune that sense of humor.
You should acquire one. Never have I accused my opponents of supporting concentration camps. The readers of these posts will judge for themselves.
*sarcasm*
Really?
The answer to making all schools great is to remove the bad kids. Many kids are just occuping space, disrupting classes, and preventing the good kids from learning. Send the bad kids home and let their parents educate them. It’s that simple!
And you, of course, would volunteer to judge which kids were “bad” and beyond redemption, and which were deserving of an education? Kind of like the guy that pointed which direction the Jew should go in when they stepped off the train at Auschwitz.
When I think of the American left , I think “Gulag”. There is only one way to think and the left knows which way that is. How long before you guys roll out the re-education camps?
Do we have to with the WWII references?
Read the poster above that mentioned Auschwitz.. Goes around, comes around.
I try to remain apolitical, but I obviously have left leaning views on social issues. I have always felt the left are more tolerant than the right. Probably due to the religious fanatics who have hijacked conservative issues.
——————————
Oh Right the I’m innocent ploy. I have read your posts. You have taken every left wing stance that comes down 95.
Only on social ssues Cheescake. I am more conservative in other areas. I defy you to produce a comment from me that is “lib” leaning in any other area. I seem to remeber being associated several times with Rush Limbaugh and you asking me how I liked it.
——————————
You are correct my apologies. Thanks for the “mind” jolt. Never the less I think we are moving to a my way or the Gulag mentality. I know its know not PC but I grew up learning that there was “more than one way to skin a cat.” I think the left has forgotten that lesson.
By the way, My cat is safe. Don’t call PETA.
I think that we are a little responsible for our current ills. Left and right. I wish there was a right down the middle party. I would be a member of that one. Live and let live, use the planet, but don’t trash it, America is better for some, but it’s a little great for everyone, everyone pays an honest assement in taxes, each according to their ability. You know, the American way. Not the welfare way and not the top 1% way. We could call it the Pan party, half elephant, half donkey! Lol.
——————————
Here you are talking all reasonable and such and then you say “each according to their ability . You know, the American way.” …….But that has never been the American way and is more akin to the the Soviet Way and that is the sort of talk is what scares me.
We have a President willing to assassinate Americans. Have you not heard of numerous instances of Soviet leaders dealing with their political opponents this way?
Even an atheist such as myself should take pause when the healthcare law mandates what type of insurance Catholic Hospitals must provide for their employees even if it violates their own personal faith. I am not sure the founders ever figured that the central government could become so powerful that the official state religion and its tenants would be established by a healthcare bill.
Actually, am, that is just a part of the necessary fix for the school system. The Education Department needs to be eliminated, and each state needs to take the responsibility for the school systems. The teachers’ unions need to be disbanded, and the teachers need to be required to teach rather than indoctrinate. We need to get back to the basics instead of offering classes in subjects that will do nothing for the students futures. And extracurricular activities should be rewards for the hard working students, not for social gatherings or cliques.
By the way, uniforms have proven to be one of the best tools when it comes to leveling the playing field and promoting education. It’s working for my grandson.
Yes it is, but it isn’t the only problem. You’ve got blinders on to the moral atrocities of your own vaunted political party. I’m willing to bet that most Republicans and Democrats want the same thing, it’s just that we have different reasons for them and different solutions to the problem. Yeah it might be selfish, but at least he’s honest about why he wants the building fixed. I wouldn’t want my kid to go there, for sure.
Why people don’t get together and do fundraising events until they have at least some of the money for fixing the building. Or they could loby construction companies to do the work free of charge and have them write off the labor cost as charity work and get a tax break. Everyone wins if we don’t continually look to government for answers.
The two schools in question have been under Democratic leadership and control since they were built. How did the Democrats allow this school to deteriorate in the first place? Did they squander money elsewhere buying votes?
Schools aren’t political entities.
John,
What has happened to the days when parents provided early Childhood education, and may I say did a great job at it. What you refer to is nothing more than another freeloading government babysitting program.
ANTHONY,
Well said, and may I say that most would agree with your letter. Cut the millions of freeloaders and all of our budgetary problems would be solved.
SOL,
School choice is a very bad idea. It’s not workable and would be very costly in comparison to what we have now.
Obviously, too many parents don’t do a good enough job providing early education for too amny kids. I hope the majority do, but we should be willing to help the kids of those who don’t.
Read the research on early childhood education and then make some informed comments on this topic please.
By all means let’s look at some real data…
After some prodding,
yesterday the Obama administration released the long-overdue first
grade evaluation of the federal Head Start program. As expected, the
results show that the $7 billion per year program provides little
benefit to children – and great expense to taxpayers.
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/14/long-overdue-head-start-evaluation-shows-no-lasting-benefit-for-children/
The last research I saw showed lots of help to younger kids in Head Start over those who weren’t, but by fifth grade, the difference disappeared. This doesn’t make a waste of resources, but gauge the real benefit when making funding decisions. I was in the Ed program at UMO in the 90s, and this fact was treated as an inconvenient truth.
Sol Goldman–The republican tax cuts mantra and it’s concurrent gutting of our treasury by deficit war spending are the single largest causes to our weak economy, polarized social structure and crumbling infrastructure. If we want to see a strong America, it is time to talk about building new, healthy tax structure which meets our needs. Schools and teachers are one facet of these needs.
I know a person that just had her taxes done. She had $22k in income from part of a years work, is single, has two children. She paid in $800.00 in Fed taxes. Her refund is computed @ $4,500.00. In other words she gets back $3,700 more than she paid in.
Is this a “healthly tax structure”?
To Mr. Koch, thank you for your service to our town.
Not all of us who are against the tank are retired or from somewhere else. And many of us do depend on tourism. I would not be able to live and work here if Searsport were not a tourist destination.
There is no guarantee of tax relief if the tank is built.
The moratorium is a time-out. It is a 2-month hold on the project. It is an opportunity for a committee representing different voices in the town to look at the project in light of our comprehensive plan. After 2 months, the committee might recommend that DCP be allowed to go forward. Or, it might ask the selectmen for an extension. It will be up to the selectmen to grant that extension, or not.
People in town would like a say in this matter. Unfortunately, we were denied that say at our town meeting last year. This is an opportunity for us to have the discussion as a town.
I agree with you that this is a sad time. It makes me sad to see the town divided. I believe that the divisive rhetoric is being fueled by DCP’s PR people. That makes me even sadder. I can understand DCP wanting to go forward with their project. But the moratorium is a Searsport issue.
I am grateful for the democratic process and the opportunity to vote on this moratorium.
First off, there is no “time out” on the moratorium. You apparently have not read the whole thing and understood what you were reading. Re-read section 5, then come back and tell me that there is a time out, and that it’s REALLY in the selectmen’s hands to extend the moratorium or not. Again, another fine example of TBNT not telling people the truth and hiding their agenda.
The moratorium is indeed a “time out”, a pause in the process. It is legal and democratic.
If anyone has a hidden agenda, it is DCP. They subverted the process. They got the planning board to change and combine ordinances to their benefit not Searsport residents and with no public vote. They gamed the system by ensuring that residents thought they were allowing Sprauge, in order to be competitive, to increase the hight of their cranes. Instead we were tricked into voting for an insane project to build the largest Propane tank on the East Coast.
In fact the moratorium is the only real, informed vote the people of Searsport will have on this project.
You didn’t read my comment very well. There is no time limit on the moratorium, and as long as TBNT feels they are making “reasonable” progress on the issue this can be extended indefinitely. Again, READ the facts before you make statements. Read section 5 paragraph D again.
Oh for Pete’s sake SFD220, take a chill pill and read the whole moratorium in full and in context. The time limit is clearly stated in Section 4 A and B. It clearly states that the moratorium is retroactive to November 23, 2011 and is effective for 180 days (May 20,2012). Since the town meeting is scheduled for March 10th, if the thing passes it will indeed give about 2 months to study this project. Section 5 that you insist proves your point does no such thing.
As usual David is spot on. It’s unfortunate that the university system seems to be used over and over again to lend credibility to agenda driven idealogs. Frankfort may well become the test case for these parisites looking to profit at the taxpayers expense. Almost 30 Maine towns have enacted legal, binding ordinances recently. Are they too in their sights????? Having observed the process in Frankfort I too am disgusted with the situation. Both Bullard and Kenworthy stated they didn’t want a project where they weren’t welcomed. That was of course until it didn’t go their way. Unfortunately all that seems to be left for them is to try and discredit anyone that had anything to do with the ordinance. I know one member of the commitee that was actually quite “Green” and pro wind about a year ago. Strange what a little unbiased researh will do.
“Both Bullard and Kenworthy stated they didn’t want a project where they weren’t welcomed. That was of course until it didn’t go their way. ”
That’s sort of like Angus King stating in writing that community support is an essential criterion for his wind farm siting. Of course he has gotten nothing but community outrage, but that doesn’t stop him.
Watch what they do, not what they say.
John Porter, Anthony Zambrano, Sol Goodman: good letters.
I am not quite sure why Mr. Koch, who is running for selectman, would be against anyone in town having a say in the process that might allow DCP to come to our town.
Apparently he is oblivious to all the tourism businesses in town. Maybe he should come down from North Searsport and talk to all the residents who pay a lot of taxes to live near the DCP installation who will lose property value and employment if the tank goes in.
Is Mr. Koch one of the paid DCP canvassers that are getting $100 a day to try to sway the vote in Searsport? While running for selectman? Is he being offered a job from DCP if the tank goes in?
First, I’m not against the people in town having a say. I am against however, the blatant and open disregard for the processes already in place to review and amend our land use ordinances and comprehensive plan. I am also completely aware of the tourism “businesses” in town, and also well aware of the traffic that they bring to “our” Main St. I have spoken with a couple folks who will live well within a stones throw of this proposed facility and are completely at ease with the project.
I’m also very upset with the public slander of my fellow firefighters, statements to the effect that we aren’t trained or equipped to handle an incident involving propane, and that we are “just volunteers” upset me greatly. So please, before you folks make statements, please do a little more research and get the facts straight.
You will, Sir, need a thicker skin if you want to to be a public servant. You will also need a much healthier appreciation of the the contribution that tourism makes to Searsport and to Maine. That traffic you see on Rt. 1 is the life blood of Maine in the summer. Would you prefer it if the traffic were just propane trucks from Mack Point? Do you have a clue what Searsport would be like without the tourists, the businesses that are supported by them, the “Summer People” and the “Retirees”? It would be a sad town, a poorer town, with fewer people and higher taxes. Is that the Searsport you want?I have always supported firemen. But it is no slander to say that Searsport FD is not equipped for, nor has the experience to deal with a fire in the proposed 22.7 million gallon tank or in the mile long unloading pipeline. Are you trained for or have the equipment to “hot tap” a burning propane railcar that can’t be allowed to burn itself out because it is next to a full chlorine car? This goes far beyond a BBQ grill gone wild or a propane truck accident.You should vote FOR the moratorium. You need to fully educate yourself, keeping an open mind, on all the facts on this issue. You need the extra time.We know, from their own playbook, that the first thing DCP did was win over the Fire Chief and fire department. It’s what they do. Make some nice promises for some new equipment and financial support and training and your in. But again, you are running for public office,so you need to look at the bigger picture. Think of the whole town, unless you are running for selectmen of north Searsport and not all of Searsport.
Maybe you read a different comment, but no one is slandering fire fighters here.
I have the facts and am not just believing what DCP tells me.
Some people are for this and some are not. The vote is a simple declaration of asking for a time out. It has been done many times before in towns all over Maine.
It might only delay the process for 2 months.
DCP wants this on the fast track with minimal questions asked.
The Army Corp of Engineers has already started to delay the fast track that DCP was on because
there are so many issues involved here that have not been clearly dealt with.
No blatant disregard for any democratic process here, no dissing fire fighters or any other public servants, just people asking questions. If they are wrong, then answer them.
When this goes to the planning board, then five people who we did not vote for make the decision. We have the ability to comment, but they can do as they please.
BTW, when will we ever see a clear view of the tank from right in front of it on Route 1?
It is always hidden behind something and in some weird perspective. What is so shameful about showing us the tank in all its glory?
Yes, Sol, and watch “school choice” turn into taxpayer money going into for-profit educational programs. They want it all Sol. They want to privatize all public services and make money using our tax dollars. And, once that happens there will be no going back. That is the ALEC agenda. There will nothing left that the ‘public’ will have any say in. We will have given away all of our public assets and our rights to decide.
Maine doesnt get many new investments and infrastructure becuase its people attack capital. What sane investor want to make an investment where the people are constantly divided and argumentative about every type and proposal. Where the Government – at least in the past- immediately seeks to regulate, control and tax , or if one branch cooperates another stifles
Moosehead , pittston, LNG no matter where it was proposed, an now a simple tank in an industrial , chemcial port area
Believe it or not, this is democracy in action. We have the opportunity to debate these issues.
It is not always pretty, but it is our town and we need to discuss it.
If we just say yes or no without discussion, then we are in Stalinist Russia.
I support Mr. Koch’s right to state his views, I just question his conclusions.
We will all vote in our town about this issue and all the facts will come out as to whether
DCP is telling the truth or not.
There is a lot of smoke and mirrors there.
Skullfire,
By your argument, we must not question new investment of any kind? That is, we should allow prostitution, pot farming, and wind developers without discussion? Of course not! The issue is where do we draw the line. I suggest we question investments that are not in the interests of the people of Maine.
prostitution and pot farming and not legal and do not involve permitted structural capital investment , you argument of including them as some reference is not even rational .
Wind develpment is legal and there is a process for input.
The tank is planning to be cited in an industrial area where planning has already assigned to area for such development where chemicals and tanks already exist. There is also a process for input but your solution is not to allow it?
This tank only benefits DCP and their efforts to corner the propane market in Maine.
To DCP “hiring local” means people from Maine, but even that would be illegal discrimination. People from Searsport, get in line.
This tank promises a net loss of jobs, falling house values, falling tax revenues, and higher tax rates for us all.
It is not what Searsport wants. We have the right to say so.
Wind development is legal and there is a process for input… you are correct, but surely you noticed when the public protests they are ignored? The legislature passed into law LD2283 the “expedited permitting law” and they never even discussed it? It was passed “under the hammer” with no discussion or fact checking. So “legal” is not gospel by any means., and the input is a waste of time when the DEP and LURC ae instructed to LISTEN to the people but ignor them and continue to let special interests have their way. 17 lawsuits were settled in Mars Hill. That development was “legal” but the developers’ lies and misrepresentations were egregious and worthy of compensation. Why does the wind industry not accept stricter regs. and save themselves lots of money paying out suits? Answer: Because it is not their money, it is tax dollar freebies so they don’t care.
A thought provoking letter, Mr. Corrigan. Wind developers always state right up front that if the community doesn’t want them, they’ll go elsewhere. Then they proceed to buy and bribe their way into the community, which gets torn apart in the process as neighbor turns against neighbor. This is the first time a developer has been told “NO” by the majority and come back with a lawsuit. It certainly shows their true colors. I would recommend anyone interested in industrial wind, whether for or against, attend one of the showings of the award winning documentary “Windfall”, which is coming to Maine in February and March. This documentary follows the process that every town goes through when the wind developers show up on their doorstep, and the next town might be yours.
David Corrigan is seeing our government through the eyes of the little guy. Time after time the working class hero is woken up from his duty and told to watch out.
Over 350 working guides, lodge owners, camp owners and life-time mainers wrote their opinion of the destruction GRID scale WIND will bring to the Downeast Lakes region. Under 50 paid workers told LURC of job losses if GRID scale WIND does not proceed.
All though the working citizen is busy they stopped to tell the governing body their opinion.
If local control is not honored then say good-bye to liberty.
I like the word “proper” town meeting as Carthage’s moratorium vote was illegal from the beginning. (we have the tape)
Windfall , the movie, shows small town agonies over big money.
Sunday March 4, 2012 1-5 pm Dixfield High School
good food too.
The Frankfort law suit is being made to intimidate residents to vote to rescind the legally passed wind ordinance. Eolians local minions are spreading disinformation to residents telling them that as a result of the suit, that their taxes will go up. It is no coincidence that nearly simultaneously, the law suit was filed and then Eolians’, local supporters approached Town Selectmen with a petition to have another vote on the ordinance. I find it fascinating that one of the filers of the suit lives in a Town with a restrictive wind ordinance.
Funny how quickly this came about. Does FirstWind have some connection to Eolian? How much tax subsidy money goes into the lawyers’ pockets? Are these the jobs the developers tout when invading Maine small towns? Good letter Dave. I hope Frankfort holds tight. Can the Public Advocate’s office help them? They are wise to the wind industry now.
Great letter Mr. Corrigan. This is Maine and home rule is still alive and well in this great state. Local decision for wind projects is available in many situations and Mainers will not cave in to outside special interests. If the wind developers want to force towns into hosting monstrous and outdated industrial wind developments, they need to go elsewhere. Get out of Maine, because we will not give up home rule in our precious state.
Maybe it’s deliberate — because he wants a job from DCP Midstream — or maybe it’s simple ignorance, but in either case A. J. Koch is joining with this Denver-based company in contributing to the current divisive spirit in Searsport by disseminating a lot of false information in his letter about the proposed 14-story-high liquefied propane tank.
I guess he attended a different DCP dog-and-pony show in Searsport’s Union Hall last week than I did. Perhaps it was because he was too busy listening to the company employee from Auburn standing next to him giving him a glowing testimonial about the benefits of DCP employment. Perhaps his eye was on the prize of getting elected selectman. By any stretch of the imagination, though, there were a good deal more than “a few” people from Searsport opposed to this thoroughly unnecessary project that Maine doesn’t need and that, in fact, is not really intended to benefit Maine. As for people from out of town, the ones I heard the most from were members of trades unions, at least a few of them sent by their locals on pain of being fined. They were understandably eager to get in on the supposed 18-month construction period.
A strong majority of those present — people from all parts of Searsport, rich and poor and in between, natives and non-natives alike — spoke out against Big Tank because, as was well demonstrated just a few years ago with a proposed LNG terminal, they can envision how this dangerous behemoth towering over the bay and Route 1 will negatively affect a municipal tax base in which small business owners dependent on non-industrial activities have more than double the impact as engines of the local economy than the three foreign multinational corporations that run our modest port facility at Mack Point combined.
That strong majority of citizens speaking out against Big Tank not only fears the economic impact of losing scores of existing jobs, we seriously worry about property values — everybody’s property values — plummeting, homes and businesses becoming unsaleable, and this town turning into a grimy industrial blight. Furthermore, not a few of us have real concerns about the danger posed by having nearly 23 million gallons of liquid propane stored a short distance from homes, businesses, a fuel tank farm and a chemical plant. Not a few of us worry about the impact on local safety of at least a 30 percent increase in fuel tanker trucks turning onto and off our already busy local Main Street.
Mr. Koch may dream about getting one of the handful of $70,000-a-year jobs plus full benefits for people with GED certificates the PR wizards at DCP are holding out as carrots. Or perhaps he already really is one of DCP’s small army going door-to-door at $100 a day interfering in our local democratic process by dishonestly lobbying against a moratorium question that, in fact, merely seeks a timeout from the company’s headlong rush to build. We only want to take in all local viewpoints, sort out the facts and judge the potential impact for ourselves. Who knows, maybe a majority of citizens really do want Searsport to become Bayonne, N.J., but we should be allowed to decide that for ourselves.
Mr. Corrigan,
I agree with you 100%.
It seems that in the earliest stages of project exploration industrial wind developers always promise “we don’t want to build where we’re not wanted”. But once a community fairly and legally presents opposition, the developer brings out the team of lawyers who beat the small community into submission. Definitely not the kind of people I want as a neighbor.
I’m not entirely sure I know or at least like what I suspect I hear when Mr. Koch in a follow-up comment to his letter says “you folks” but I kind of doubt he speaks for all volunteer firefighters. You know what upsets me, Mr. Koch, it’s your attempting to monster anyone who questions whether a 14-story-tall refrigerated propane tank is a good idea for Searsport by suggesting they’re somehow questioning the integrity and competence of our local fire department.
Especially in the past few years under the direction of Chief Jim Dittmeier with his renewed emphasis on training, the Searsport Fire Department continues to earn the confidence of town residents — ALL town residents. It doesn’t matter that the men and women of the department are volunteers, they’ve demonstrated to us they’re more than capable of handling just the kind of fires ordinary citizens are most concerned about and why they willingly vote a big chunk out of their property taxes each year to ensure they have a department that’s up to the job.
When it comes to grass and woods fires, residential and commercial structural fires, motor vehicle fires, these volunteers are well equipped and well trained to do the job. We’re also sure they know what to do when propane enters the picture — that is, when a fire involves a barbecue tank, a house tank, a local fill station or even a tanker truck. When called upon to look after our fellow taxpayers from the industry sector over by Mack Point, most of us are pretty confident they even know the best way to deal with a fire involving a rail tank car containing as much as 34,000 gallons of propane (hint: probably get back and let it burn).
What few of us and I suspect more than a few volunteer firefighters lack confidence in is their ability to deal with a fire involving nearly 23 million gallons of propane, the amount Big Tank would contain. Throw in such factors as homes and commercial businesses nearby and under a mile away the largest chemical plant in the state, a railyard with chemical tankcars including liquid chlorine, and tank farms at Mack Point with perhaps 46 million gallons of ethanol, gasoline, and other volatile petroleum products. In the face of such a conflagration and undoubtedly multiple explosions devastating up to a mile or more out from the epicenter, it’s doubtful Bangor, which has one of the finest totally professional fire departments in the state, could do much better than Searsport.
Chief Dittmeier and Mr. Koch should have learned something from the relatively painless lesson the department received last summer when fire broke out in a heating oil tank at the Irving tank farm at Mack Point. Even with the assistance of six area towns and industry-donated foam equipment, that fire took nearly five hours to quell and, judging from radio traffic sometimes verging on hysteria, there were some very panicky moments. The fortunate thing is the tank was entirely empty and the only thing burning was a neoprene gasket that goes around the circumference of the internal floating roof.
It’s unfair and unreasonable for the people of Searsport to expect their fire department to deal adequately with fires when they approach an industrial scale. It’s folly for any of the firefighters to believe they can.
RE: Frankfort’s wind ordinance
deserves court challenge
By Orlando E. Delogu, University of
Maine School of Law
Posted Jan. 27, 2012, at 8:17 p.m.
http://bangor-launch.newspackstaging.com/2012/01/27/opinion/contributors/frankforts-wind-ordinance-deserves-court-challenge/
My remarks are fashioned after the onion piece “Frankfort’s wind ordinance deserves court challenge” By Orlando E. Delogu, University of Maine School of Law http://bangor-launch.newspackstaging.com/2012/01/27/opinion/contributors/frankforts-wind-ordinance-deserves-court-challenge/ To which David Corrigan is referring.
This is an example of how the highly
trained wind industry lawyers roll over a small town. In this case,
the plaintiffs have accused the town of
persistent trampling of the plaintiff’s “due process.”
=========================================================================
Contracts between the plaintiffs and Eolian
to begin development of the facility were entered into. As
information became available and discussions continued, the contracts
were nullified and an ordinance set barring development to go
further. A wind facility ordinance was agreed upon by the town that
would bar the development of industrial wind power from proceeding in
the town of Frankfort.
The
plaintiffs determined that the land in question was suitable for a
modestly sized (4-6 turbine) commercial wind energy facility and were
angry at the decision. They then brought this lawsuit.
The wind energy developer, Eolian Renewable
Energy. Claims that the regulation imposes noise limitations only on
wind energy facilities and that other, considerably louder noise
producing activities remain unregulated. However, noise produced by
an industrial turbine is unique from other background noises. Its
incessant beat night and day is unlike other even louder sources of
noise. They also produce ultra low frequency pulses the effects of
which on people are not conclusive.
The plaintiff’s attorney
raised a number of issues. For example:
The town enacted a zoning-type ordinance without having a
comprehensive land use plan (CLUP) and the ordinance also imposes setback
requirements on wind energy facilities that are incapable of being
met. They would be
outside the limits set.
The plaintiff’s attorney said that the
ordinance in its detail and time consuming burdens (burdens not
imposed on other commercial activities) is not a good faith
regulation of wind facilities but is, in reality, a prohibition.”
It faced detail, time consuming burdens not
imposed on others. However there are no appropriate others by which
to judge this by and this issue deserves all the time it takes to responsibly come to a conclusion.
The plaintiff”s attorney went on to say,
“These (and more) are pressing issues that Maine courts will
ultimately have to decide, as an increasing number of Maine towns
whipped up by fears, misinformation, and NIMBY attitudes enact
ordinances similar in tone and substance to Frankfort’s. Other
towns are cooing similarly; whining and lying.”
They also said that
The Waldo County Superior Court, however, may avoid these
important issues for now, but only because plaintiffs have laid out
even worse flaws in the two ordinances — a pattern of inappropriate
behavior by the town in the enactment process — behavior that
violates fundamental principles of fairness and constitutionally
protected “due process” rights.
Sounds like the supreme court is being
threatened. (They apparently can’t keep corruption out of their
language.)
Lincoln didn’t have a CLUP and the Rollins windsprawl went thru by crookery. If Frankfort cannot make an ordinance without a CLUP, then a development cannot be approved either, without a CLUP. Prof Delogu is simply pandering to windsprawllers for his wind buddies on campus. There are several at least on campus who do not share his enthusiasm for wind folly. They are engineers who understand the facts and not lawyers who try to make a compelling case out of BS.
exactly
CLUP = Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Useless comment.
In other words: You didn’t understand it. It was an awkward post to be sure. I wouldn’t hold that against you at all.
NOTHING worse than large entities bullying small towns to despoil the environment. I’ll listen if proposals are in good faith, but not if they involve deceit and bullying.
Beat it, wind bullies.
BDN, here’s a big story. Industrial wind…who’s for it, and who’s not, and why. Is industrial wind a good idea?
Inform the people.