Wind Bill is Bad Policy for Massachusetts

I support wind energy projects that are appropriately planned, with community input and local boards and commissions having the ultimate authority for their approval.

It is important for me to say that in the very beginning of this writing because proponents of the Wind Siting Act in Massachusetts will often attempt to paint anyone objecting to this legislation as “anti wind energy” and that is simply not the case for me. Both the Jiminy Peak and Brodie Mountain projects are within my legislative district and in fact, I supported a public grant for the Jiminy Peak project.

Senator Michael Knapik’s stand on blocking the legislation during informal sessions of the Massachusetts Senate is applauded by me and many of my colleagues. We did our best to stop this bill in the House of Representatives, but despite our objections to it, the bill was passed and sent to the Senate. The vast number House members who supported this bill were from the Boston area or regions of the state where wind energy projects are unlikely to ever happen.

The bill was filed by Governor Patrick at the beginning of this legislative session and when I first heard of the bill and the well meaning intentions behind it, I was, like most people, favorable to the concept of a law that would help expedite wind projects. I mean, who wouldn’t be? After the energy price spikes of just a few years ago and the obvious implications to our environment by the continued burning of fossil fuels, moving to a clean and renewable energy source is a no-brainer.

Then I actually read the troubled bill and discovered that it essentially removed local decision making from the process and planning of these projects. It empowers a single state agency that permits projects and can over rule local decisions or special conditions on wind projects. The earliest version of the bill included a condition to allow these projects on state park and conservation lands. That provision was removed, but legislative supporters have already publicly vowed to file legislation in another session to possibly bring this and other removed provisions back. Scary stuff.

The Massachusetts Municipal Association and planning agencies like the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission are opposed to the bill because of the loss of local control. The expedited process which would be set up for the wind energy industry does not exist for any other energy sector in Massachusetts.

It is common practice for the legislature to do two things for a bill which has tremendous state-wide impacts. Typically the committee or committees charged with hearing the bill will take the show on the road and actually have hearings across the state to gauge support or problems with the legislation. This never happened. It is also common practice to have bills go before more than one legislative committee to have those committees review the bills from their perspective too. For example, this bill has implications for both Municipal and Environmental law but neither of those committees heard the bill. Despite the fact that the bill would create new costs for state government, there was not a single hearing held on it by either Senate or House Ways and Means. This bill had one hearing before one committee, Energy, over eighteen months ago.

This legislation would impact two specific regions in Massachusetts with the most wind; Cape Cod and most of the ridge tops in the western end of the state. These two regions are coincidentally two of the poorest and are made up of towns unable to staff full time planning and engineering departments. The “expedited” process, giving these towns only 120 days to approve or deny an extremely complicated wind energy proposal is a joke and an obvious bonus to the industry pushing the legislation. If a town is unable to approve or deny a project within 120 days, the project would be automatically approved at the local level and forwarded to the single state agency for final approval.

Proponents, in their zeal to push this legislation through will commonly use the sole example of the six years stalled Hoosac Wind, as the reason for it. But they ignore the fact that dozens of projects, including many in the Berkshires have been approved and built without lawsuits or local objections. When I reviewed information from the implications of wind projects in states that have an expedited process, my conclusion was that a slower, not faster process for these projects is in the public’s best interest.

Another rallying cry I have heard by proponents throughout the debate on the bill is that “it is easier to build a coal fired plant in Massachusetts than a wind farm”. If that is truly the case, and I for one don’t believe it is, then we should be using our time in the legislature to make it harder to build the coal plant; not easier for wind energy corporations to exploit the limitations of our small towns and trampling local control.

I remain opposed to this legislation. It sets a terrible precedent for how we allow our communities to make determinations about energy projects and will have consequences that we in the western most region of the state and in some of the poorest communities in the state will have to deal with for decades.

Denis Guyer
State Representative
Second Berkshire District

New Venture

Press Release: For Immediate Release






August 12, 2010



Guyer to create Community Development Corporation. Crane & Co Stationery Factory to be redeveloped for housing, commercial kitchens and agricultural food processing center. Plan also envisions retail and other economic development at site.



Dalton- Denis Guyer is creating the non- profit Berkshire Community Development Corporation, which will acquire and redevelop the Crane Stationery Factory at 63 Flansburgh Avenue into condominium style housing, commercial kitchens, agricultural value -added food processing center and other retail offerings at the 100,000 square foot site.



“When I made the decision to leave the Massachusetts Legislature earlier this year, I knew that working in some community development or agricultural role was where I really wanted to land. During my time in the legislature I have loved working closely with the folks in the agricultural industry and I have relished supporting projects that would create jobs and housing opportunities for working families. I heard that Crane & Co was deciding a future course for the Stationery building, so I went in and pitched my idea to them.” said Guyer.



Crane and Company plans to consolidate its Stationery Division operations into a single Dalton-based facility, moving operations from the Curran Highway, North Adams and Stationery Factory into the Ashuelot Park-Dalton site by late 2011.



Besides the redevelopment of the building into both affordable and luxury condominium units, Guyer also plans to create a commercial kitchen facility that will act as an incubator for new food businesses. Entrepreneurs looking to make and market their products will rent kitchen time and storage space as well as receive business creation support from the CDC. To support local agriculture, Guyer plans what is called a “value- added” facility, which would process locally grown dairy, fruits and vegetables into products such as jams, wine, salsa, cheese, granola and ice cream.



“We recognized that Denis’s vision for the future use of the Stationery factory was consistent with our desire to support a development project that is positive for the town of Dalton and our community”, said Charlie Kittredge, CEO of Crane & Co. “We would like to recognize the work and the input provided by the Town Manager and Select Board combined with some preliminary work performed by the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission. While the decision behind consolidating our Stationery activity was driven by the need to sustain and improve our business, it was none the less a difficult step to take and we are now pleased to have identified a potential use for the future of the building which will provide housing and business opportunities while at the same time supporting our local farms and agricultural economy”.



There are also plans to redevelop a portion of the building for retail use. “I am hoping to attract businesses that are related to the other ventures that will occur in the building, so an eatery based on a locally grown concept and a cooperative food market would both fit very nicely into this plan” said Guyer.



With this venture Guyer is in a way returning to where he started. “I began a twelve-year career at Crane in 1992, cutting envelope liners in this building, in a way it really feels like I am coming home” said Guyer.





Stationery Press Release FINAL VERSION 08-12-10