“If a town says no to a large industrial wind project I would use all the power of the governor’s office to ensure that is the end of the project,” Dunne said in his statement. “I will ensure that no means no.”
Supporters of wind energy strongly oppose putting decisions about projects in the hands of voters in one town and have vehemently fought legislation to give towns power to veto projects.
The Public Service Board process is designed to consider the overall public good of the state over that of a select group of people, argued Rep. Tony Klein (D-East Montpelier), chair of the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee. “I’m pretty disappointed,” he said of Dunne’s position.
But the stance won Dunne new praise from fellow Democratic candidate Peter Galbraith. Dunne’s press release includes a quote from Galbraith lauding his stance — a surprising development just 11 days before the primary election. Galbraith has long called for banning new wind projects in Vermont.
“Matt understands the anguish that large-scale wind projects cause many Vermont communities,” Galbraith said in the release. “His statement today is a big step in the direction of renewable energy policies that serve the interests of Vermonters, and not the corporations.”
Galbraith’s inclusion in Dunne’s press release raised the question of whether Galbraith, considered by many to be trailing Dunne and fellow Democrat Sue Minter in the race, planned to drop out and endorse Dunne. Not so, both said.
“I’m not dropping out,” Galbraith said, adding he had no plans to curtail his campaign either. “I’m running all the way.”
“I don’t think you will see him dropping out,” Dunne said.
Galbraith argued that he and Dunne have combined forces before. Just before Galbraith entered the race in March, the two spoke at a press conference about refusing corporate campaign contributions.
Galbraith said he’s willing to praise other candidates who support his goals. “I’m running for governor to do something, not just be governor,” Galbraith said. “One of the things I want to do is protect Vermont’s ridge lines.”
Dunne insisted Friday that his wind stance was a clarification, not a change, for him. Galbraith indicated, however, that he saw it as a change. “He’s come around to a good way of thinking,” Galbraith said.
Immediately though, Dunne’s wind stance infuriated renewable energy advocates, who argue that allowing single communities the power to approve energy projects means most projects that serve a greater public good, including cell towers, telephone lines and the controversial Vermont Gas Systems pipeline — would never be built.
“When you support a local vote on energy siting … you show a total lack of understanding of why we even have a regulatory process,” Klein said.
A vote by a host community is also unlikely to resolve all the controversy surrounding a wind project. Lowell supported siting the Kingdom Community Wind project in town, but the abutting town of Albany didn’t.
Klein, who has already endorsed Minter in the race and said he was surprised by Dunne’s announcement, argued Dunne was pandering to public sentiment over controversial projects. “In a tight race, boy, it smacks of opportunism,” he said.
Minter has said she prefers less divisive sources of renewable energy and wants a more customer-friendly Public Service Board. “Wind is part of the mix,” she said.
Dunne said his support for allowing communities to vote on projects extends only to wind because it’s proven so divisive in Vermont. Asked why it shouldn’t also apply to Vermont Gas Systems’ 41-mile natural gas pipeline project, he said, “This is where I’m drawing the line.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Will Sue Minter try to soften her anti-environmental, anti-democratic energy platform? Or will she double down on it?
Will she give back all of the campaign money from the mountain destruction lobby? Or will she try to raise more?
How do wind turbines address climate change? They destroy the very elements of our environment that we need to protect the most to adapt to the changing climate. And the renewable industrialists always fail to tell people that the more big wind and solar we throw up on the regional grid, the more new natural gas plants the region is going to have to build.
This conversation has been captured far too long by the likes of Klein and Burns who care nothing for the people whose lives are being destroyed by wind energy. An appropriate stance at this point is to call for addressing the problems before any more wind energy development is considered in Vermont. Apparently Paul Burns, Tony Klein and Sue Minter are fine with a regulatory process that has consistently allowed harm to public health and the environment at extraordinary levels never seen before in Vermont.
As for Dunne’s statement, didn’t Shumlin say the same thing a few years ago?
Who is going to step up and pay the back taxes on the Therrien’s property in Sheffield. The town of Sheffield which has benefitted from millions of dollars from the wind project, has put their 50 acres and home that they had to abandon for health reasons and to protect their children up for sale. Where are the champions of social justice? How can anyone support an industry and take campaign donations from people who knowingly are causing harm to neighbors of wind projects? When did causing sleep deprivation in children become acceptable Vermont policy? Tax sale is Aug. 10. The Therriens already sought abatement and were denied. Shumlin, Springer, Recchia, Chen, Welch, Sanders, Leahy, Klein, Burns, they all know about it and don’t care. Do you?
Matt Dunne is showing that he is not a zealot and cares more about Vermonters than finger in the wind politics. This is OUR state, owned and run by its towns and citizens, not big industry or industry funded “private non-profits”. And as Annette has stated above, the deployment of these renewables is driving the demand for frack gas, something the new neoliberal “environmental community” has been mum about. To support industrial scale wind is not only to support the destruction of Vermont’s mountaintop environments but to support frack gas development and pipeline deployment. It is utter madness. Time for an honest conversation. Readers should also know that Matt Dunne and Peter Galbraith were the only Dems to show up for the Irasburg debate earlier this month together with Phil Scott and Bruce Lisman to respond to questions from residents impacted by industrial scale wind and solar. Sue Minter,with her uncompromising stance on the siting of industrial wind at all costs, was a no show. Hmmmmmm….. Matt and Peter are showing their progressive roots and concern for their constituents on matters that impact them and our natural environment.
My compliments to Matt Dunne for this baby-step in recognizing that the PSB process is broken. I have lived in four communities during the last 10 years, and served on three planning boards. Regardless of the issue, each Town will tell you how they struggled repeatedly with the PSB process, felt their rights were violated, the decisions possibly politically-motivated, and their needs ignored.
Mr. Burns philosophy of “We need to destroy the environment, in order to save it” makes no sense. He has turned many former VPIRG supporters against his organization. And this is not in any way a NIMBY issue. Not only is the term offensive and derrogatory, but plenty of folks oppose these projects who do not live near them. Yet Mr. Burns uses the term continually.
Mr. Klein needs to listen closer to folks who serve in their local communities, and understand their complaints. And Matt Dunne would be wise to consider abolishing the PSB entirely. It is simply a board, and a process, that has outlived its usefullness.
Good for Matt Dunne. Wonder what it really means.
It’s worth noting that the more communities inform themselves about industrial wind, the deeper their understanding that it makes no sense environmentally, and the less willing they are to agree to sacrifice quality of life, wildlife habitat, and flood protection for a technology that simply has no place in Vermont. It would probably help Paul Burns to deepen his thinking on this issue if he owned property in Windham. Come on Mr. Burns, head on out to Windham! Lots of homes for sale, but no buyers. You can pick up a real steal.
Tony Klein argues that listening to the concerns of Vermonters is “pandering to public sentiment”; Incredible. Hard to believe he was an elected representative. What’s your alternative? Pander to Energy Lobbyists, large scale developers and Ridge Line destroyers? I’m pleased to see Matt Dunne believes in democracy and agrees that “no means no” BUT those who are truly informed about renewable energy in VT understand that all solutions in Vermont should be Vermont sized: not industrial scale. Peter Galbraith is the only D candidate calling for a full scale ban on ridge line destruction. If you don’t want to pander to the developers, don’t want to pander to the destroyers and don’t want to pander to the investors – if you care about the environment and Vermont’s ridgelines – then Peter Galbraith is the obvious choice for Governor.
I don’t see why coming out in favor of community control is interpreted as “anti wind”. What’s wrong with trusting the judgment of Vermonters? The pro-wind people say that Vermonters are overwhelmingly in favor of wind development? But then they don’t trust Vermonters with the actual decision? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
I have been “hammering” Matt Dunne on FaceBook for months pressuring him to move against these wind developments. His new position to give our towns like Windham and Grafton the final legal say in sitings on their ridgelines while encouraging also shocks me since, at best, his position has been to suggest the sitings be shared among all regions of the State. Let’s hope this is not a politician seeing an opportunity to get more votes. Matt is a big Bernie supporter and Bernie continues to be pro wind. Be warned anti wind voters and be careful here.