Published on March 9, 2005

MONTPELIER — Opponents to installing wind towers on East Mountain want the Public Service Board (PSB) to rule on a conservation easement attached to the neighboring Champion lands before allowing a hearing on the project to go forward.

Hearings on East Haven Windfarm’s proposal to erect four wind towers on the summit of East Mountain are scheduled to begin next Monday, March 14.

A citizens’ alliance, however, known as Kingdom Common Group has asked PSB to reject the application or suspend the hearings on grounds that the wind farm has failed to prove its case.

In a motion dated March 4, the group argues primarily that the hearing should be suspended until the wind farm “has legally sufficient permission to throw waste ice on the property it does not own.”

The adjacent land singled out by the motion is part of the former lands owned by giant paper company, Champion International. In a conservation deal struck several years ago, the land was turned over to Essex Timber after conservation easements had been imposed guaranteeing public access.

According to testimony filed with the board, the blades of the turbines will throw ice at a distance of roughly 790 feet.

The motion charges that “those ice throws will impact at least 280 acres of land, most of which is not owned by EMDC (the wind farm).”

Reached late Tuesday night, Windfarm’s vice-president Dave Rapaport suggested the motion would not carry much weight.

“We’re quite confident in prevailing with the Public Service Board in disputing this motion, and going on to get a certificate of public good,” he said.

He argued the project is consistent with the values of thrift and efficiency “that made Vermont, Vermont.”

The group’s motion comes several weeks after a decision over using the adjacent land as a safety zone was handed down by the three easement holders — the Agency of Natural Resources, the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, and the Vermont Land Trust.

Essentially the decision said that authorization to create a safety zone on land encumbered by a conservation and public access easement belonged exclusively to the Legislature.

In its motion, the group charges that the wind farm wants the board to impose a requirement “that a substantial portion of land over which the easement holders have both a public access and a working forest conservation easement be converted to a commercial use in direct contravention of the terms of the easements.”

The motion further argues that legally the “board’s power of condemnation cannot be used to acquire an interest in the adjacent conserved lands.” The lands were protected, it says, “because of important public values.”

In addition to endangering public safety, the motion argues that ice throws will also threaten an old growth forest on the land.

At the time the three stakeholders handed down their decision, Mr. Rapaport said he believed that PSB would not require the developers to include a buffer or safety zone.

The group is also asking the board to grant their motion for a summary judgment on grounds that the developers have not answered concerns the project will have on migrating birds, bats, and the character of the area.

“The East Haven Wind Farm has all the trappings of a white elephant for Vermonters, even (if) it may have substantial tax and other economic benefits for its promoters,” says the motion.