FHMNA has recently received a letter from Elizabeth Saito, Managing Editor of the Falmouth Enterprise, inviting us to write a âconâ position âguest commentaryâ on Article 15. They plan to run at least one “pro” column as well. Ms. Saito stated that her âfirst commitment is to fair, balanced and objective reporting on SouthCoastâ.
In response, FHMNA President David Buzanoski, with input from the entire Board of Directors, has submitted the following article to be published this Friday, 3/10/2023.
âArticle 15 Lets The Tail Wag the Dogâ
Should the tail be allowed to wag the dog? A phrase sometimes referred to as âDundrearyâs Conundrum,â a metaphorical expression for a minor part directing the actions of the whole.
Article 15 makes no specific reference to SouthCoast Wind (aka Mayflower) but unfortunately it is impossible to separate the two. SouthCoast is the matter which has brought us to this point and the reason for the submission of Article 15. The petition, although perhaps well intended, is backed by support for the need for renewable clean energy, on which we all agree, but it misses the mark and is more about governance than energy. It is an attempt to undermine and override the educated, well thought out decision of the duly elected Executive Branch of our Town government.
Our stateâs prior administration, wanting to be at the forefront of wind generated clean energy, set arbitrary timelines to achieve decarbonization goals. So, the gold rush to meet these goals began and caused the early wind developers to compete for the low hanging fruit of any open waterfront property. This rush to secure cable landing sites to meet these goals prevented the wind developers from conducting a coordinated, well thought out, planned approach to deliver offshore power to the New England grid, which by the way, is still not ready to accept such power without substantial and costly upgrading. Multiple studies have concluded the need for such a planned approach, in fact the six New England states have recently made a proposal to the U.S. Department of Energy. âThe proposed approach is focused on developing more transmission for offshore wind, and building a coordinated transmission offshore could allow projects to connect back to the grid in more strategic locations, and reduce the upgrades needed on land. Such a system could reduce rates, be more reliable and resilient than one in which wind developers independently plan how their projects connect with the transmission systemâ, according to the proposal.
Mayflower approached the Town seeking permission to do test boring in Falmouth Heights, prior to disclosing the full and complete details of their project, which are still undergoing modification and is currently on âtemporary suspensionâ with the Massachusetts EFSB. The Town then suggested alternative locations to Mayflower and granted them permission âwithout commitmentâ for test boring at two sites, Falmouth Heights Beach and Surf Drive. Mayflower subsequently responded deeming Surf Drive unsuitable and nominating two sites in Falmouth Heights, Worcester Ave Park, and Central Park, as their preferred and alternative sites. At the same time, before obtaining the Townâs commitment for the project, Mayflower went ahead and filed applications with the state and federal governments for these two sites in Falmouth Heights. As Select Board member Doug Brown recently stated: âhad he known that Mayflower was only interested in the Heights location, he would not have voted to approve the preliminary testing.â
Mayflower has been quick to point out that it is ISO New England who requested they bring their export cables ashore on the South shore of Cape Cod, but make no mistake, it is Mayflower who has targeted Falmouth Heights. There are numerous reasons why the FHMNA believes such an industrial installation in our densely populated residential community is completely inappropriate, not the least of which that there are a number of more suitable alternative locations closer to where the power is ultimately destined.
The proposed Article 15 is way too broad to warrant consideration. We and others have used words such as open-ended or Carte Blanche to describe the petitionâs wording; if Article 15 were to be approved, it would make any and all locations within Falmouth vulnerable to indiscriminate testing. All wind developers, or other developers for that matter, should be required to submit a comprehensive detailed proposal to the Town, which would then be considered and deliberated on based on the merits of each individual application and location before any such testing is permitted. Just because they ask for testing or soil sampling is not sufficient grounds to be granted approval for same, regardless of the obviously stated fact in the petition that: âit must be approved by the Select Board or other Town bodiesâŚâ
Wind developers should not be dictating to the Town; the Town is the big Dog in this scenario and shouldnât be wagged by just any hairy Tail. Article 15 is a dangerous distraction that directs attention away from SouthCoast Windâs inadequacies and puts the town of Falmouth at great risk.
Letâs do whatâs right for Falmouth and allow our elected Town officials to do what they are required to do – to act in the best interest of Falmouth residents. Article 15 should not be approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave Buzanoski, President
Falmouth Heights – Maravista Neighborhood Association