Published on June 28, 2009

David Coen and James Volz confer while their colleague John Burke delivers a comprehensive summary of public commentary. The three men make up the Public Service Board, which was in Sutton Monday night to hear testimony concerning UPC Wind Vermont’s application for a Certificate of Public Good. UPC hopes to build 26 wind turbines on ridge lines in Sheffield and Sutton. Photos by Joseph Gresser

SUTTON — Those keeping score at Monday night’s hearing of the Public Service Board (PSB) counted two people speaking in support of UPC Vermont Wind’s 26-turbine wind turbine project.  Those opposed to granting the project a certificate of public good fielded 53 speakers.

The three PSB commissioners and a crowd of more than 120 listened as nearly every aspect of the proposed project was treated with polite scorn by speaker after speaker.

The hearing followed the same format as the PSB’s April meeting in Sheffield.  David Cowan, UPC’s vice-president for environmental affairs, began by summarizing the company’s plans.

UPC, he said, plans to build 20 turbines in Sheffield and six in Sutton.  The ”wind resource” at the site, Mr. Cowan said, “is not the best in Vermont, but good.”

Ridge lines in Sheffield and Sutton, he said, have a “history of land use and timber management.”  Construction sites, Mr. Cowan said, can be reached using existing roads, although new roads will have to be built to connect the towers.

Mr. Cowan said the project will have low visibility.  He cited a study conducted for the company that examined sight lines in a ten-mile radius.  The towers, he said, would be visible from only 3 percent of that area.

The project, Mr. Cowan said, will provide renewable energy, tax revenue, and jobs.  It will also offset 80,000 tons of carbon dioxide each year.

When James Volz, chairman of the PSB, opened the floor to public comment, he noted the large number of people who wished to address the board and limited each speaker to two minutes.

Speakers immediately challenged UPC’s veracity on the project’s visibility, the amount of electricity it will produce, and even UPC’s method of measuring wind on area ridge lines.

Sheffield selectmen also came in for criticism.  Jon Day accused them of having “sold out the whole region.”  The Sheffield board recently signed an agreement with UPC that would provide annual payments of between $400,000 and $550,000 to the town.  Sheffield, in return, is to support UPC in its actions before state regulators.

Other speakers praised the Sutton selectmen for respecting the wishes of their constituents and opposing the project.

Mary Gray pointed out that UPC filed a single application for a project that spans two towns.  The company, she said, speaks of Sheffield’s non-binding vote, held in December, which favored, “in principle,” the UPC project by a vote of 120 to 93.  UPC, she said, does not mention Sutton’s March vote, which went against the project by a margin of 120 to 23.

Residents of the two towns, Ms. Gray said, are firmly against construction of the wind turbines 240 to 116.  “UPC says the towns voted clearly,” she said.  “That’s true as long as the facts are all told.”

Lin Saparoff of Barton was one of several speakers who questioned whether the proposed wind turbines would actually replace other power sources.

Noting that “wind blows unpredictably,” Ms. Saparoff said that backup power sources will have to be on constant standby.  These backup plants, she said, produce emissions even when they are not putting out power.

Rob Pforzheimer said UPC made faulty assumptions in its application for a certificate of public good.  The wind measurements upon which the

Leland Kinsey addresses members of the Public Service Board in Sutton Monday night. “I am a hiker, hunter, birdwatcher, fisherman, amateur astronomer, lifelong resident, whose family goes back five generations in this area,” Mr. Kinsey told commissioners. “I am opposed to this project for all these reasons.”

project is based, he claimed, were actually made on Burke Mountain, 13 miles away and 1,000 feet higher than the project site.

UPC, he said, states in its application that the area’s landscape does not have a high scenic value.  Although the company acknowledges that the view from the beach at Crystal Lake in Barton will be affected, Mr. Pforzheimer said, they suggest that the problem can be solved if people “focus on the beach.”

Jeff Smith of Meadows and Timberland, a forestry company that owns much of the land on which the towers would be built, said his company takes pride in being good stewards of the environment.

Wind turbines and forestry are a good combination, Mr. Smith said, providing revenue to the company during the long period between cuttings.

With the money provided by UPC, he said, Meadows and Timberland will be able to lengthen cutting cycles and produce larger and healthier trees.

On the other side, employees of the King George School, speaking on their own behalf, opposed the project because of they believe that its completion will mean the school’s closure.

King George student Gaby Mervis received an exemption from the two-minute rule when her testimony was delivered at a speed that was too high for the court reporter to capture.

Asked by PSB Commissioner John Burke to slow down, Ms. Mervis replied, “I’m afraid I won’t finish in two minutes.”

After Ms. Mervis concluded her statement by recalling the story of the goose that laid golden eggs, Mr. Burke remarked, “In all the hearings I’ve done, that’s the most words in two minutes.”

Many residents objected to what they said would be the generation facility’s negative effect on tourism.  Two visitors said they came to the Northeast Kingdom for peace and quiet and would be unlikely to return if the wind towers are built.

Others argued that the project would impair their ability to enjoy their homes.  Annie Gibavic harked back to her forbearers who, she said, were among the first settlers of the area.  While they were “forward thinking,” Ms. Gibavic said, her ancestors were “respectful of neighbors.”

An appeal to another aspect of history was made by Leland Kinsey of Barton, who said, “Our landscape, including the ridge lines, comes down to us having been through several cycles of use and abuse.  Each time the abuse was thought necessary.”

Mr. Kinsey warned, should the wind turbines be built, that “we in this area will have our horizons defined by huge, threateningly humming, well-lit, unwelcome machines.”

Garret Keizer of Sutton, speaking of those who suggest that idealism might prompt a community to sacrifice for the love of the planet, said “Idealism is cheap when the idealist isn’t the one picking up the tab.  And how can a person love a whole planet who hasn’t yet learned what it means to love a single town?”

State Representative Cola Hudson of Lyndonville reminded the gathering that members of the Northeast Kingdom’s legislative delegation representing three political parties had voted to slow down the development.

“The Legislature, you’ve been told, didn’t agree with us,” Representative Hudson said.  “And I’m not surprised because I know that Legislature.”

After hearing from all who wished to speak, the commissioners explained that the evening’s testimony would be used to develop lines of inquiry as the permitting process continues.

A Barton resident asked if Barton selectmen might still be able to intervene in the process, even though the deadline for requesting party status has passed.  Mr. Volz said the selectmen can ask, but it would be by no means certain that their request would be granted.