What follows are comments made by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, addressed to Robert A. DeLeo, the Speaker of the House of Representatives:

 

The Martha’s Vineyard Commission opposes the House’s recently proposed changes to the Wind Energy Siting Reform Act. While it is important to move ahead with the development of renewable energy, it is also important to do this in a responsible way that respects vital environmental and community concerns, as well as the rights of the citizens of a community to act through their elected bodies — city councils, planning boards, town meeting, RPAs (for the two with regulatory authority) — to control the development of their communities.

Many months of discussions with representatives of the administration and the Senate resulted in a balancing of these interests in the Senate bill (SB2260 — An Act relative to wind siting reform) which led to the MVC agreeing not to oppose the bill. However, the House version (H4687 — An Act relative to comprehensive siting reform for land based wind projects) changes or eliminates several important features of the Senate bill to the extent that the MVC now opposes the adoption of the House version as currently proposed.

Two items are of greatest concern to the MVC:

• Role of Regional Planning Agencies with Regulatory Authority: In establishing the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, the commonwealth set up an effective mechanism to balance potentially competing interests — allowing needed development while protecting the “unique . . . natural, historical, ecological, scientific, cultural and other values . . .” of Martha’s Vineyard (Chapter 831 of the Acts of 1977, as amended). For 35 years, the MVC has effectively managed this delicate balance. The House version of the Wind Energy Siting Reform Act should reinstate the wording agreed upon with the administration and included in the Senate version, which specifies that an applicant or other proponent of a wind turbine aggrieved by a denial or conditional approval by a regional planing agency with regulatory authority has the exclusive remedy of an appeal under the planning agency’s respective special acts.

• Appeals to the Energy Facility Siting Board: The Senate version gave the responsibility of establishing standards for wind turbines and hearing abutters’ appeals to the Energy Facilities Siting Board. Although the MVC has concerns with this entity’s neutrality in setting these standards and in arbitrating appeals, it would be even more problematic to give this authority to the Department of Energy Resources, under the supervision of the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs — a department that has the express mandate of promoting wind energy— as proposed in the House version of the bill.

An appeals process to a neutral entity is a fundamental component for ensuring regulatory due process and equal protection; it should not be to a body whose mandate includes promoting renewable energy. Enclosed is the letter the MVC sent to the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs last year in response to the original draft legislation, before the changes to the Senate bill, which explains our concerns in more detail. The MVC was encouraged that the wording of the Senate bill responded to our concerns.

The MVC urges the reinsertion of the above referenced Senate bill language into the House version of the Wind Energy Siting Act.

 

Christina Brown is chairman of the Martha’s Vineyard Commission; Mark London is executive director.