Protecting People - Not Greedy Business Must be Government’s Priority

Cutting through the spin and statements made by Town Counsel Duffy, I started to question the motive of his comments as they relate to the Town’s decision to appeal the ZBA’s decision in Barnstable Superior Court. Duffy explained the suit was to protect the town.  The precedence set by this local suit may influence cases pending in US District Court claiming that the turbines represent a nuisance. Those claims, if won, would be paid for by the town’s insurance company.  Duffy further stated that the “town would be obligated to participate in the denial of those claims.”

My question is - why?  Why should the Town be obligated to participate in the denial of the claims when it’s the insurance company’s arse on the line?

Is the suit filed by Selectmen actually for the protect of the town as Duffy would have us believe?  Or is it more reasonable to believe that the Town’s suit is for the insurance company’s protection?  This whole situation places how Falmouth governs itself at risk.  Local autonomy in this case, seems being dictated by an insurance company that may have to satisfy ‘nuisance’ insurance claims. It’s notable to add that each Selectmen ‘executive session’  dealing with town wind turbines has been attended by legal representation for the insurance company.  Could it be that the Selectmen’s decision to sue the ZBA is being driven by private sector business interests? 

To keep it transparent, why wouldn’t the Town’s insurance company sue the ZBA, or the Town for that matter? It would make it easier for Selectmen to ration out legal representation funds.  It would give clear indication of the vested interests at play (town - as a representative of a citizen the town government is mandated to protect/ versus the insurance company).  The integrity of Selectmen’s wind turbine position would remain intact.  But most important, the principle of ‘Home Rule’ and local governance autonomy wouldn’t be cheapened by outside, private sector influences.

It’s very odd Selectmen endorse a policy protecting citizens from adverse wind turbine effect, but then capitulate to a position protecting the continuation of ‘nuisance’ risks upon Mr. Anderson.  

The explanation may possibly lay in the Board of Selectmen not getting good common sense advise from town counsel, or not having a clear appreciation of our community’s fundamental resource.  Falmouth’s value is all about it’s people.  This tenant of our community is found in Falmouth’s Local Comprehensive Plan Introduction.  

“The vision of the community is to protect and promote the distinctive natural, cultural, historic and economic attributes that define Falmouth, and make it an attractive and appealing place to reside and visit.  Local Comprehensive Plan is designed to promote and advance the community’s vision through coordinated goals, policies, and actions intended to guide the future growth and development of the town.”

The future growth of Falmouth will suffer if a citizen well-being is compromised by placating to private business interests and being unwilling to fix a ‘nuisance.’  

Risking a resident’s welfare for an insurance company’s profit margin leaves little doubt in anyones mind.  Falmouth is fast becoming one of the top worse places to live and visit, due mostly to it’s Selectmen having ‘mixed-up’ priorities.