http://rutlandherald.com/article/20140219/NEWS02/702199917
Published February 19, 2014 in the Rutland Herald NoSAG to celebrate and plan By SUSAN SMALLHEER Staff Writer SPRINGFIELD — The price of success is often a lawyer’s bill, activist groups learn. North Springfield Action Group will hold a celebration this evening at 7 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church on Fairground Road. The event will also include a briefing on last week’s Public Service Board decision to turn down the proposed 37-megawatt biomass plant. The gathering, at the Springfield Unitarian Universalist Church, will be a public “thank you,” said Robert Kischko, chairman of NoSAG, which fought the North Springfield Sustainable Energy Project. Kischko said he and others would give an analysis of the decision, but he said the group also needed to brainstorm about fundraising efforts to pay off its legal bill, which included hiring experts to evaluate and testify against the project. “The average citizen can’t fight the big company,” said Kischko, who said the group had several successful fundraising events in the past couple of years of fighting the biomass plant. NoSAG would not disclose the amount of the legal bill. The Public Service Board, in a unanimous decision, said the project did not warrant a state certificate of public good — since it ran counter to the state’s goals of reducing greenhouse gases — and said the plant’s projected efficiency rating was not high enough. The board said the amount of electricity generated by the project could be made up by increased conservation efforts. The board also noted that the impact of increased truck traffic on the transportation network could be counter to “orderly development,” a key requirement of Section 248 in the state’s utility law. The main developer behind the project, Adam Winstanley of Winstanley Enterprises LLC of Concord, Mass., said last week immediately after the decision was made public that he would abandon the project after two strong rejections by the Public Service Board and its hearing officer. Kischko said Monday there was no reason to doubt Winstanley’s announcement that he wouldn’t appeal the decision. “We’re very pleased and very encouraged by what Adam said,” said Kischko. Kischko, himself an engineer, said the group hoped to stay in existence and organized, and to remain vigilant about any proposed projects that raise pollution-related concerns in the Springfield area. “I’ve done a tremendous amount of reading and research on power plants,” said Kischko, who said that the impact on neighborhoods and towns is long-lasting and far-reaching.
A fundraiser disguised as a thank you celebration. At least they're consistent in misrepresenting their real objectives!
ReplyDeleteI'll start baking cookies and saving my returnable bottles. How about a car wash! Let's have a bonfire and sell hot cocoa too!!! This is fun stuff, what business is next on our target list!
ReplyDeleteWait until that dead meat and fish starts stinking up the area in warm weather, you'll wish you had the smoke to cover it up!
I object to the bonfire on the basis of greenhouse gas emissions.
ReplyDeleteNo car wash either, it would cause pollutants to enter the groundwater.
Hey, right on, Jeananon! Those folks need to show a little consistency. I suppose if they stopped breathing out all that CO2, that would sail your boat too?
DeleteCan I come? I have a truck and I will be sure not to drive it there.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they should re-write their mission statement from fighting anything that might cause pollution problems (um...we have regulatory bodies for that), and start fighting FOR some acceptable business to come in and create jobs for this community.
ReplyDeleteThis is great news! Now we will find out how many folks were really against the plant. Those would be the givers. Those for the plant, will be paying attention to how long it takes to pay off the bill. Let's see which majority speaks the loudest.
ReplyDelete