To the editor:
Several Portsmouth residents, who had previously requested to speak with the Town Council about the SouthCoast Wind (SCW) project, finally got their chance to voice their …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Register to post eventsIf you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here. Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content. |
Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.
To the editor:
Several Portsmouth residents, who had previously requested to speak with the Town Council about the SouthCoast Wind (SCW) project, finally got their chance to voice their concerns, at the May 25 workshop. With few exceptions, most speakers spoke against wind power and the effects of high-voltage cables traversing our pristine Sakonnet River to ultimately get to Brayton Point in Somerset.
What was missing from the three-plus hours of discourse was commentary from the Town Council about what they do and do not know and what they are saying or not saying to their constituents. Although I had kept notes and intended to speak to clarify some statements made, by 10 p.m., I think we were all ready to go home.
Some points to consider: Yes, there is currently no signed “Host Community Agreement (HCA)” but public records (highly redacted) show the town spent over $85,000 to a legal concern for something related to SCW. Should the council say that one is being worked on?
Yes, the town has $100,000 available of SouthCoast funds to spend on legal and engineering “research.” Has the council seen any reports? I have not. Are we analyzing a “Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS)”? I don’t know for certain, although I am a Town Council member.
I would also like to correct a statement made that no Portsmouth dollars have been spent on this project. I feel that this is not quite accurate as any related work done by the town’s solicitor is billed to the town, and not within the $100,000 funding, mentioned above.
Following the meeting, a councilor responded to a constituent’s e-mail where they said the naysayers were targeting the council “to short-circuit regulatory evaluation” of the permitting process. The reply included “The permitting authority by law is the Energy Facility Siting Board.” “Portsmouth only has one role in the EFSB process — filing an advisory opinion.” If the council has a “minor” say among the supposed 60 agencies and concerns that will be providing advisory opinions to the EFSB, should there be a financial reward (HCA)? Perhaps at a future meeting we will see if there is a “done deal” to vote on.
All citizens should know the above information and more. We, as a council, have an obligation to tell all we know and attempt to figure out what we don’t know and the effects on Portsmouth, both short and long term. I believe in green energy, in fact I have solar panels, but my “advisory opinion” is not running cables down the Sakonnet, the cleanest body of water in Rhode Island, and into/across parts of town, for the Massachusetts customers of Eversource Energy, at any price.
David M. Gleason
63 Massasoit Ave.
Portsmouth