http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120303/NEWS02/703039971
Published March 3, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
Springfield candidates on woodchip plant
By SUSAN SMALLHEER
Staff Writer
SPRINGFIELD — The hottest topic to emerge in Springfield in years has half of the candidates for the Springfield Select Board sitting on the fence.
The strongest support for a proposed 35-megawatt wood-fired power plant in the North Springfield Industrial Park came from Larry Kraft and Peter Andrews, while David Yesman, Peter MacGillivray and Select Board member Terri Benton said they saw both pros and cons about the project and had yet to make up their minds.
“In general, I support it,” said Larry Kraft, who lives in North Springfield, where the plant would be located.
Kraft said he had confidence in the town and state review process. “It needs to pass that review first,” he said, before he felt the Springfield Select Board should weigh in.
Andrews said he supported the project, but said that traffic and access to the proposed site had to be addressed, as well as the size and aesthetics of the plant.
“(Rep.) Cynthia Martin said it all when she pointed out it would be 10 stories tall,” said Andrews, who spent his professional career as a wastewater engineer for large commercial projects.
Winstanley Enterprises LLC and Weston Solutions are proposing to build a $100 million, 35-megawatt wood-fired power plant in the North Springfield Industrial Park on land already owned by Winstanley, next to the former Fellows Corp. headquarters it has transformed into 36 Precision Drive.
The project was the topic of two public hearings this week.
Each of the five candidates were in the back of the Springfield High School cafeteria Tuesday, listening to dozens of people either criticize or support the Winstanley project.
Yesman said he had been educating himself about the Winstanley project, as well as biomass plants in general.
“I’m still learning about it,” Yesman said. “I hear a lot of things from the opposition and I hear things from people interested in it,” he said, noting he had attended a meeting of NoSAG, the North Springfield Action Group, which is opposed to the biomass plant.
Yesman said he was concerned about the amount of town water the plant would be using, and its impact on local aquifers. Traffic is a big problem for the residents, he said.
MacGillivray said he had been on the Internet doing research. “The concept is good, and it would have a tremendous impact on the tax rate. Some of the issues that were brought up the other night, I found very interesting,” he said.
He said he felt the traffic problem could be resolved with some work to area roads.
And he said he had personally asked the American Lung Association for information about the type of pollution coming from wood-fired plants.
“I truly have not made my mind up all the way,” said MacGillivray, noting the health impacts and the use of town water reserves were big issues.
“I’m still looking at all the facts,” he said. “Obviously the tax impact would be wonderful to the town of Springfield, but at what cost?” he said.
Benton, the one incumbent in the race, said she was “intrigued” by the proposal, in particular the so-called thermal loop that would take the waste heat from the power plant and sell it to customers in the industrial park, and provide low-cost heat to a green grocer greenhouse and a fish farm.
“The ultimate decision is in the hands of the PSB,” Benton said. “The ultimate question is, ‘Is this the right business for Springfield?’”
People rightly have concerns about air pollution, she said.
“We have to be open to what they’re saying and get as much information as we can and what the project would be before giving it a flat no,” she said.
All five candidates said that economic development was the top issue facing Springfield, and stressed that the only way to tackle high taxes was bringing in business.
“We need to be more business friendly,” said Andrews, who said he hadn’t studied the town budget, but would vote in favor of it.
Only Yesman said he wouldn’t support the proposed town budget, saying that taxes were too high and spending needed to be cut.
Yesman was chairman of the Budget Advisory Panel, which at one time during the budget process called for a 10 percent across-the board cut, but later backed off that request.
“Our biggest challenge is a tax rate and our lack of economic development,” Benton said.
Both Benton and MacGillivray said the only way to cut taxes was to bring more business to town, or to help existing business to expand.
“We have to get out there and change the thought process of the town. We don’t have to be just a manufacturing town,” said Benton, 54, the manager of Citizens Bank in Springfield, who said her experience with people at the bank kept her in touch with people’s concerns.
MacGillivray, 68, a semi-retired pharmacist and native of Springfield, who sold his Springfield Pharmacy in 2001 and since then has worked for Kenney Drug all over the state.
“I think we’re headed in the right direction, with the rec center, 100 River St. and the involvement by Springfield Hospital,” he said. “I think there’s a lot of positive things coming out of Springfield. I have an open mind and I love doing an analysis of both sides of the question. It goes back to my scientific education. I enjoy looking at both sides.”
Yesman, 70, a real estate agent who spent almost 40 years in the machine tool business, said he had the experience and time to devote to the board.
“I can hit the ground running,” Yesman said.
Kraft, 63, director of the Springfield Hospital Foundation and the longtime MC for the Apple Blossom Cotillion, said he would bring energy and a positive outlook to town office.
“I would bring an activist temperament to the select board. I think the meetings need to be livelier,” said Kraft, who served two terms on the Springfield School Board recently.
Andrews, 67, a semi-retired engineer with Dufresne-Henry Engineering, now is in insurance and does consulting for Stantec, another engineering firm.
“I’ve been in town a long time, and been involved in management a long time, too. I think I’m pretty good listener and can cut to the chase,” he said.
re: "David Yesman, Peter MacGillivray and Select Board member Terri Benton said they saw both pros and cons about the project and had yet to make up their minds."
ReplyDeleteABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Springfield desperately needs decisive leadership that can comprehend hard data. If these candidates are unable to assemble all the facts, weigh the pros & cons, and make an educated, rational decision free of emotional bias, then they are not viable Select Board candidates!
You three just lost my vote. Last thing Springfield needs is more of your type that lack the testicular fortitude to take issue, preferring to play politics with our town's future. A future that is currently rudderless without any plan or even an abstract goal.
Springfield is in a unique position to bargain for favorable electrical rates. Yet these stooges can't even see a deal staring them in the face.
Use your town meeting vote wisely. Springfield needs strong leadership with a vision.
Glad to hear you are an expert based on the small amount of information that has been supplied, but one meeting with the project developers and one public impassioned bitchfest is not the sole source of information I want my town officials using to make a decision. God forbid we give a couple of them credit for wanting to take the time and do the research needed to make an informed unbiased opinion, unlike yourself.
DeleteNo NO NO...Don't confuse what their thoughts and comments meant. What they were doing was called "riding the fence" they did not comment either way in order to avoid losing votes. They were not trying to gain more knowledge...they have had months to get that together. Instead they all three rode the fence to purposely avoid taking a stance one way or another. I say vote John stettner as a write in!
Delete3 months?...hmm only been two meetings in 2 weeks. Damn I think we have hit our idiot quota on this blog.
DeleteHere I come to save The daaaaaaaayy.
DeleteMighty Mouse is on his Waaaaayyyy
Two meetings and they are supposed to have decisive answer. I would prefer my town leaders to attend all the hearings, listen to all the facts presented. Before making a decision. As they have stated with exception of Mr Yesman who is against the project that they believe this will be a good opportunity for the town. However there are more facts to be presented.
ReplyDeleteSince when does two meetings (one 3 hr informational and one 3 hr PSB hearing) make anyone an expert on biomass? I would be suspect of any candidate that is not reviewing both the pros and cons. Benton and MacGillvray are the only two candidates that understand we need business to offset taxes. Yesman is a smoke and mirrors guy who will help drive what is left of this town into the ground. Kraft wants to make meeting more fun, are you kidding me and Andrews has an ax to grind.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I was given some hope by the comments of two people.
DeleteTerri Benton, who is up for re-election, noted the importance of being open and gathering all the information, "before giving it a flat no."
This was a very heartening comment that made me believe it wasn't a done deed and that the town really could say no if it is not in our best interests.
Peter MacGillivray, while remaining open-minded, said," tax impact would be wonderful ... but at what cost?"
This is indeed the question. As a struggling and impoverished town (like Fair Haven), Springfield has been targeted for a large biomass plant that will clearly have negative impacts on our quality of life.
The most serious aspect of this appears to be the impact on air quality, which would be made more severe given the proposed location of the plant in the middle of a bowl of hills which could contain the particulate matter, which is very dangerous to breathe.
There is also the question of increased truck traffic, bad for many locations, including picturesque towns like Chester that rely on tourism as an important source of income. (Springfield could also attract tourists if it got its act together!) Heavy truck traffic will add to air pollution and take a toll on our roads, apart from generally lowering our quality of life.
There are also serious concerns about the amount of wood required to run the plant. At the hearing, a forestry manager had interesting things to say about the culling of "junk" trees adding to the health of the forest, and that these trees would not be cut except for pellets and wood chips, and this makes sense. But if two new plants are opened--the one in Fair Haven has already gotten the green light--and continue to burn all this wood year after year, could the forests really stand up to it? Loggers also mentioned that they now truck their products long distances. I would hope that other uses for this type of product could be found. At the public hearing Hally Whitcomb mentioned a growing demand for wood chips in agriculture and gardening and there will probably be more local demand for pellets as more individuals buy pellet stoves for their homes.
The other question is the demand for water created by the biomass plant. This potential threat to our water supply was addressed in great detail by Jean Willard and others at the hearing. I understand that the town is investigating whether it would really be possible to supply the necessary volume of water and I hope this is undertaken with great seriousness.
Finally there is the issue of global warming. I think most people are beginning to realize that this is a real threat and we are seeing it--our first major snowstorm in early March? Vermont has voted to reduce greenhouse gases yet biomass plant are major sources of carbon (as well as other toxins), as bad or worse than coal plants. Large scale biomass is a real step backward in terms of slowing global warming.
So really,is this the way Spring wants to go? How much improvement has the prison brought to the town? Let's not be desperate! Let's not be a dumping ground! Let's work for better things for our town and bring in truly renewable energy like hydro (for which the town has such potential), solar, even wind. Agricultural projects, manufacturing, let's bring in some really nice stores that aren't in other towns. We don't have to ruin our quality of life like this.
I hope to hear more about Peter MacGillivray and Terri Benton's views on the matter. At present they are looking to me like the best candidates for the board.
Wendy Thompson
Correction to above: I haven't been able to read the Rutland Herald article yet and look forward to it. My quotations from the candidates come from an article in The Shopper.
DeleteWendy Thompson again
So what you are saying is that the three candidates that actually want to find out all they can about this project should have been following Adam Winstanley around since 2007 when he first started thinking about this concept. Have YOU personally talked to any of these people to see what type of research they are doing? Of course not...that would mean you had to get involved. DUH
ReplyDelete