.

All Boards

Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
Posts awaiting your approval 0
Paul Shaw April 15, 2014 at 05:13 PM
Nepotism, cronyism and patronage are a routine form of governance. Three disgraced former HouseRead MoreSpea kers made a visit to the State House, they were greeted with a standing ovation from legislators whose office they dishonored. Massachusetts is notorious for helping family and friends ease onto the state payroll system . Just sayin.....
Frank Haggerty April 15, 2014 at 08:39 PM
Deval Patrick said today at the anniversary of the Boston Marathon Bombings , "We share theRead Moresam e fears, the same hopes, the same community," - Don't believe a word he says ! If he really cared he would do something about the wind turbine victims in Massachusetts. The wind turbine victims are bleeding from the inside out !
Brian Elder April 15, 2014 at 11:10 AM
Dr Smoke, Speaking of repeating every few weeks, are we about due for your five medical doctorsRead Morepos t.
Blowin Smoke April 15, 2014 at 12:00 PM
Mr. Elder - yes, you'll see that link again, if someone posts about fictional health impacts. OrRead Morei f you're tired of the letter from five Falmouth doctors, I could use the MA DEP/DPH study instead. Or this recent release from the Australian Medical Association... https://ama.com.au/position-statement/wind-farms-and-health-2014
Brian Elder April 15, 2014 at 12:08 PM
Dr Smoke, I don't dare say I'm tired, you will tell me it is a nocebo ,or is it plosebo, orRead Morewhatever , all this health talk, and you have never even spoken to me.
Frank Haggerty April 12, 2014 at 05:40 PM
Section 1983 Litigation "Section 1983 Litigation" refers to lawsuits brought underRead MoreSecti on 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code. Section 1983 gives an individual the right to sue state government employees and others acting "under color of state law" for civil rights violations. Section 1983 has spawned a tremendous amount of interesting and lucrative litigation, as well as a wide selection of law review articles and CLE seminars. Treatises on the subject include Nahamod's Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Litigation: The Law of Section 1983 (West Group), Schwartz's Section 1983 Litigation (J. Wiley) and Gelfand's Constitutional Litigation Under Section 1983: A Treatise for City Attorneys, Public Interest Litigators and Students.
Frank Haggerty April 12, 2014 at 01:27 PM
Folks , Here is the offer that Town Manager Julian Suso told you April 7, 2014 at Town Meeting that Read Morethe Town of Falmouth received no documentation. On March 26, 2014 ten days before Town Meeting the Mass Clean Energy Center released this press release with quotes from Julian Suso . If it walks like a duck and looks like a duck it is a duck ! Here is the offer ten days before Town Meeting : http://www.masscec.com/news/energy-officials-approve-relief-funding-falmouth-community-wind-project
Frank Haggerty April 12, 2014 at 01:29 PM
Folks Please read the truth ,March 26, 2014 : “The action of the Massachusetts Clean EnergyRead MoreCe nter to grant the Town of Falmouth financial assistance is a recognition of the ongoing strong partnership with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the development of wind energy and other renewable energy facilities in Falmouth,” said Falmouth Town Manager Julian M. Suso. http://www.masscec.com/news/energy-officials-approve-relief-funding-falmouth-community-wind-project
NortheasternEE April 14, 2014 at 05:48 PM
That's about right 20% is lost. In mission while coal plants continue to spew pollution in case the Read Morewind changes- :-) And we all know wind is always changing.
mark cool April 15, 2014 at 06:52 AM
Wind is as fickle as weather, and electrical wind generation is as fickle as weather to the thirdRead Morepo wer according to US Energy Information Agency, Summary Statistics for United States (2010). No matter the shear number of more utility wind turbines or the net wind energy produced, the physics of wind energy is such that the change in power of a wind turbine is proportional to the cube of the change in wind speed. Translated, this means that if the wind speed cuts in half, the power output will cut to one-eighth. Interpreted, this means commercial wind energy has very ineffective economic value. In reality, we can no longer afford the luxury of throwing money away. It's simple physics applied to data.
Charles Ochs April 15, 2014 at 12:07 PM
It's interesting to stop by this site every few days, and catch up on the "blather" andRead Moreth e "spin", especially from the Oil Trolls. What is clearly going on here, however, is a severe case of "Monday morning quarter-backing" WHAT ?? Yes--folks, I hate to break it to you, but this "debate" has already happened. The Oil / nuke industries, and their Trolls, have LOST, and we have been moving forward now for over a decade. Yep--the train left the station, and many of you (we know who you are) missed it! Now-you all can go back and forth forever with various talking points, but the Elephant in the room"--Global Climate Change--is very much upon us, as the more observant of you know full well. The UN has now put forth a new "theory" that says we have only about 15 years left to make the changes required to NOT have most of Cape Cod under water by the end of the century. Many others say that it is already too late--that we have already "blown it" and now--the only logical action is to prepare for the coming changes. Boston is taking this very seriously. So is South Florida, as well as New York. So--What do those folks know that certain posters to Falmouth Patch do not know? A LOT, so it seems. But what they know, of greatest importance, is that the DEBATE about this is over--and settled. Climate change is upon us. The cause is 200 plus years of fossil fuel pollution. The ONLY way to reverse any of this is to STOP burning all that stuff. Does it take a rocket scientist to figure this all out NO ! Unfortunately, however, the collective IQ of America is (only ) 97, so we have a large percentage of our population seemingly incapable of digesting some simple facts, as given us by Science. So be it. The train has left the station. No-one cares if a few Luddites got left on the platform. You will all be dead soon, and your grandchildren will be left wondering why their ancestors were such fools.
mark cool April 14, 2014 at 04:46 AM
Ikea is putting the US taxpayer's money where their mouth is in that they’re living up toRead Morethei r corporate responsibility. Building a wind farm in downstate Illinois large enough to ensure that its stores will never have to buy a single kilowatt of power again. All on the coattails of federal subsidies (you the tax payer) - "But right now wind power is a struggling business. Cheap natural gas and the end of a federal tax break for wind-power producers have left wind generation unprofitable." "The key federal subsidy for wind-energy generation, the Production Tax Credit, expired at the end of 2013. Right now, Olson acknowledges, wind-power generation needs government incentives to make money." "“We will not lose money during this process.”" http://www.commercial-news.com/local/x1445038983/IKEA-buying-wind-energy-project
sue hobart April 12, 2014 at 08:44 AM
the public is not even involved... Its just a bunch of town meeting members in Falmouth . MostRead Morepeop le in falmouth don't give a rip what is going on. Until it effects them personally. So glad to be finalizing my "divorce from this God forsaken town in a few days.
Blowin Smoke April 12, 2014 at 10:26 PM
Ms. Hobart writes "the public is not even involved... Its just a bunch of town meeting members Read Morein Falmouth". But Falmouth's 244 town meeting representatives ARE THE PUBLIC, and are elected by every precinct. They aren't some clique of politicians - they're your neighbors, and their names are all listed at: http://www.falmouthmass.us/clerk/tm16.pdf
David Moriarty April 13, 2014 at 09:15 AM
It's time for Falouth to have a open town meeting for all citizens of Falmouth to attend andRead Morevote.We have lost control of our town.
Paul Shaw April 10, 2014 at 09:33 AM
Town Manager Julian Suso said the town has not received an agreement ????? JustRead Moresayin.... http://ww w.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140409/NEWS/404090325/-1/NEWS
mark cool April 10, 2014 at 10:03 AM
Wind Spin 101 ~ I find it ironic that Mr. Suso proclaims that a significant amount ofRead Moremisinformatio n has been generated on this article, when he, the primary town negotiator with Mass CEC, offers no information what so ever relative the negotiations he has been apart. Either he has been delinquent in his task (which would make him privy to terms) or he hides something that otherwise may have derailed the adoption of the article. It's obvious he knows more than his nice speech let on. SPIN
Frank Haggerty April 10, 2014 at 10:41 AM
The wind turbine projects in Massachusetts have a long history of leaving out negative informationRead Morea bout commercial wind turbine projects. Mr. Suso offered the suggestion that all the emails and news stories about Article 25 were misinformed yet in front of the entire Town of Falmouth Town Meeting never told about the negotiations with the Mass Clean Energy Center and never informed the public what was going on with the offer. The information came from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Press Release which was reported in the Cape Cod Times and WXTK radio two days in a row. Do people deserve to know the truth, even if it isn't in their best interest? Is truth always the best choice of action? In "On the Decay of the Art of Lying,"
mark cool April 10, 2014 at 08:13 AM
So much for Blowin’s ‘Bro-mance’ on Mr. Suso. One year ago Mr. Suso stood inRead Moresuppo rt of Selectmen and the Finance Committee to fund the removal of the Town’s turbines. Two night ago, he apparently forgot the history of this town problem. Mr. Suso clearly clearly fails to understand business principle, and the simple actuality of what was proposed in Article 25. The article was premised on the false notion that the wind projects were approved based on "sound" logic and science that somehow qualified them to be a legitimate business operation. How can this project be considered a sound business worth promoting when; it requires subsidies to exist, and more important - It Violates the Law? The simple truth clearly missed by many folks is that we continue to throw money at a project that’s a terrible investment and that continues to break the law - absurd! As for Town Meeting passing Article 26 (authorizes $46.5 million for the design and construction of a water treatment system to alleviate “repeated water quality problems” experienced by municipal water customers). Only a year ago at Town Meeting, after “repeated noise problems” experienced by municipal citizens, Town Meeting rejected removal of the wind turbine noise sources. The town body has become hypocritical if one basic health need is worthy of financial remediation, but another basic health need is not.
digger April 10, 2014 at 09:39 AM
I am reminded of a quote worth considering as it surely applies to this ongoing lunacy andRead Moreillegalit y: Martin Luther King observed: "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" Mr. Cool is exactly right, "How can the Falmouth wind project be considered a "sound business operation" if it violates several laws and regulations? Mr. Suso is perpetrating continued negligence...willful or otherwise.
mark cool April 10, 2014 at 10:20 AM
Regarding the '$300,000 from the town's free cash into the reserve fund that cushions knownRead Moreshortfal ls in the town's wind turbine operating revenue.' A reserve fund is to be used for extraordinary and unforeseen expenditures - according to the town's finance director and the town's own definition. The reserve account funds cannot be used for known reoccurring operating expenditures. Mr. Suso, in his Dec 23, 2013 Budget message to Selectmen quite clearly stated that FY2015's reoccurring operating wind debt was $176,589 and added the future reoccurring operating wind debt will increase to between $250K - $280 annually. And according to Ms. Petit and the town's own definition, the General Fund (not a Reserve Account) is to support the needs of the operating budget. If the Wind Energy Reserve ($300K from the TM and likely the 'bribe' from the state -$500K) is to be used to pay operating costs, then the Town is not following it's own rule.
See more »