Mayflower Wind: Enterprise EDITORIAL and 17 Letters to the Editor (12/23, 12/30, 1/6) including full text of FHMNA President stating our position – Falmouth Heights-Maravista Neighborhood Association

With regard to the Enterprise editorial of December 23, “No Stopping Mayflower Wind,” we are very disappointed, particularly in that it differs dramatically from the more objective position expressed in the Enterprise editorial of December 31, 2021, “Mayflower Wind’s Power Lines.” Last year’s editorial seemed more understanding, including such statements that onboarding cables at Falmouth Heights Beach/Worcester Park “might not be the best idea” and concluding with “Surely a safe landfall for power lines can be figured out.”

As a neighborhood association, we are not a group of climate denying, anti-clean-energy activists; we are a group of concerned residents who, as our mission statement cites, want to “protect our beaches, estuaries and public spaces, preserve and improve the residential character of our neighborhoods, promote civic pride and the healthful and peaceful enjoyment of our neighborhoods.” We would hardly consider what we are doing as complaining as much as vociferously objecting to a large, foreign-owned, commercial-industrial project literally undermining our beach and park lands. If Mayflower or anyone else finds this “annoying,” so be it.

Enterprise reporters have attended the various select board meetings and the Falmouth public forum and have represented the Mayflower discussion and our position on this project reasonably well. We are, however, willing to bet that the author of the referenced editorial has not attended any of these, and it’s clearly demonstrated by comments made therein.

Criticism of the select board decision is unwarranted in our mind. Publicly elected officials are obligated by their civic duty to do what’s best for the people of Falmouth, and anything short thereof is demonstrably a dereliction of duty. The concept of “the greater good,” while a noble concept, is often used when the argument is short on justification or logic or requires the circumvention of existing standards or regulations to achieve an end. Falmouth might benefit by the “greater good, for all” if these cables were taken to an existing commercial-industrial location as opposed to being at the sacrifice and expense of residents.

Mayflower is targeting Falmouth Heights primarily due to its geographic proximity to their wind farm and also due to the fact they need a relatively large open space near to the point of intersection to bury their 60-foot-long transition vaults. What could be better for them than a beach and a park?

The parks in Falmouth Heights, Worcester Park and Central Park, were gifted to the Town of Falmouth by a 1903 deed of gift by Mrs. Elvira Godwin stipulating ”the parks shall always remain open for public use, and that no structure or obstruction shall be placed thereon.” The Enterprise has written about the significance of this deed in years past. The Kite Park was gifted to the town under a separate deed, with similar restrictions and that it shall always be used as “Kite Park,” and the reason it is so named.
Where do we go from here?

We believe that a thoughtful, well-planned, coordinated, consolidated, regional approach is necessary. Such an approach would be cost-saving for both transmission and shore-based infrastructure upgrading, with better utilization of landing sites and thereby hopefully alleviating the need to utilize densely populated residential communities such as ours.

David Buzanoski, President
Falmouth Heights—Maravista Neighborhood Association