Better Plan, Wisconsin

SENATOR FRANK LASEE BACKS UP HIS WIND BILL

SOURCE :www.postcrescent.com

October 25, 2011 

Tom Hallquist of Oshkosh recently wrote a letter to the editor (Oct. 19, “Ban may hurt energy independence”).

It appears that the headline for the letter caused confusion. My bill requires that the Public Service Commission use a scientific study to recommend a safe setback from people’s homes and animal dwellings. Wisconsin residents have told us about their health problems that have started when wind turbines were constructed near their homes.

Families and their children have experienced constant nausea, headaches, dizziness, agitation, inability to sleep and other sickness. Three families in my district have left their homes to preserve their health and safety, with others wanting to, but they are financially unable to abandon their homes or farms. They can’t afford two house payments.

There seem to be real health issues. We ought to get answers before others are harmed. We may find that we could eliminate all of these health problems by increasing the setback requirements. We owe it to Wisconsin homeowners and others negatively affected. It only makes sense to gather health-related information about possible side effects from existing wind turbine farms.

If there are problems, the time to find out about them is now. We shouldn’t take someone’s health in their own home for granted without real information. Once constructed, a 500-foot wind turbine could affect an area and children’s health for a long time. We need real facts, not people for or against turbines making rules that suit their purposes.

This is only fair, and it’s what I expect from good government.

State Sen. Frank Lasee,

De Pere

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

What can you do RIGHT NOW to help people in our state from harm created by turbines sited too close to homes?

Better Plan strongly encourages you to contact your legislators and ask them to support Senator Lasee's bill. Contact information below.

Who Are My Legislators?  To find out, CLICK HERE

Senate | Members | E-Mail Directory

Assembly | Members | E-Mail Directory

NEXT STORY

Wisconsin wind turbine moratorium sought by Sen. Frank Lasee, R-Ledgeview

Research needed to show wind farms are safe, he says

By Doug Schneider
Green Bay Press-Gazette

GLENMORE — The sights and sounds outside her son's window made Sarah Cappelle consider something once unthinkable: Trying to sell the home in which her family has lived for generations.

The two-story house off Glenmore Road has become less dream, more nightmare since wind turbines were erected in 2010 on farmland just to the southeast.

Worries about the effects of the structures prompted Cappelle and husband Dave to stand in support Monday as state Sen. Frank Lasee, R-Ledgeview, proposed a state ban on wind-turbine construction until studies have deemed the turbines don't harm humans and animals.

"It's not fair to put something so noisy and so large so close to people, unless you can be sure it's safe," Lasee said.

A bill he introduced Monday would declare a moratorium on construction of wind farms until the state Public Service Commission is in possession of a report that ensures turbines like those dotting the landscape in this southern Brown County town don't cause health problems. He wasn't sure if the bill would gain the support needed for passage in the chamber, but said proposing it is the right thing to do.

Wind farms have prompted passionate debate, but limited agreement, on their long-term impacts on humans. And lack of regulatory agreement in Wisconsin, particularly on the issue of how far a turbine must be from a property line, has tempered developers' enthusiasm about erecting wind farms. A corporation earlier this year scrapped plans for a 100-turbine development in the Morrison-Glenmore area.

Backers of wind energy say it is a clean, safer alternative to coal and nuclear energy, pointing to the fact that they don't consume fuel and don't produce ash or other waste. They also say wind-development could create thousands of jobs in technology and construction. Opponents say turbines can be noisy, unsightly, problematic for birds and bats and, most important, cause vertigo and sleep disorders. Concerns are growing about a condition labeled "wind-turbine syndrome," and a daylight phenomenon called "shadow flicker."

Regulators say the state's wind developments are safe, and that they fall within noise-emission limits.

The Cappelles believe their toddler son's inability to sleep, their 6-year-old's recurring ear infections and Sarah's never-ending colds are a product of the Shirley Wind development near their home.

They say that family members had never had health problems until the turbine near their house went into service last fall. That prompted consultation with a real estate agent — where they learned that no one likely would pay fair market value for a house with a view of a wind turbine.

"My mother grew up here. My grandmother was here for 50 years," Sarah Cappelle said. "This is where I always wanted to raise our kids. But now, I'm not sure if we should stay."

Lasee said he knows of at least three Glenmore-area families who have left their homes because of health problems that, while not formally diagnosed, didn't appear until nearby turbines went on-line.

—dschneid@greenbaypressgazette.com

ONTARIO WIND POWER FACES TEST OVER PROPERTY VALUES

by Dave Seglins and John Nicol,

SOURCE CBC News, www.cbc.ca

October 4, 2011 

Ontario’s wind power strategy will go under the microscope Tuesday in Eastern Ontario in what could be a precedent-setting case over the impact wind farms have on local property values.

Edward and Gail Kenney, retired civil servants who’ve lived on Wolfe Island for 48 years, are appealing their property tax assessments, set at $357,000, arguing that the 86 wind turbines erected around their home have driven down their property values and should be acknowledged in their tax bills.

“We figure we’ve lost 40 to 50 per cent of the value of these places,” Edward Kenney told CBC News as he looked out at the stands of turbines installed several years ago, some within 400 metres of his home — a distance no longer allowed by the Ontario’s environmental regulations.

The municipality of Frontenac Islands is fiercely contesting the case, fearing that if the Kenneys are successful it could have far reaching effects on tax revenues for the small, largely rural, lakeside community of just 1,300 people.

Tax officials watching case closely

In fact, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), a Crown corporation in charge of assigning values to properties for tax purposes, has twice offered to settle the case.

And though the Kenneys would welcome the end of this costly 30-month battle in front of Ontario’s Assessment Review Board (ARB), MPAC and the municipality insist on making no reference to the wind turbines as a factor in offering the deal.

Because of that insistence, the Kenneys are prepared to stand up without legal representation against the lawyers for the other side, solely on principle of the public’s right to know.

“In this small community,” said Edward, 72, who built the house there in 1965, “we’ve had enough of the secrecy, and the divisions it has caused, and we won’t have any part of that.”

Added his wife Gail: “The people affected by these turbines have the right to know.”

The Kenneys argue that there have been virtually no real estate sales in the last three years near the turbines on Wolfe Island.

“And the three that have been sold,” said Edward, “had been advertised for long periods of time and they sold at sizeable losses.”

The debate comes down to competing experts.

“There is no negative impact on property value, by virtue of the proximity to wind turbines,” argues Tony Fleming, lawyer for Frontenac Islands, which commissioned a consultant’s report by a certified real estate appraiser, Rayner & Associates. It concludes that based on existing sales data and comparisons of various properties on the island “the wind farm has had no measurable impact on value…over the last four years.”

Edward Kenney said he doesn’t think much of the report. “What other issues do we have? The turbines are our issue.”

Rose McLean, director of legal and policy support for MPAC, acknowledges this case could prove to be an important precedent. Though MPAC is studying the issue, she says “there is no evidence across the province that wind turbines drive down local property values.”

McLean says there’ve simply been too few sales of properties adjacent to wind farm turbines for MPAC to change its policy. Currently assessors are directed to deny any appeals or ‘requests for reconsideration.’

“There are not a lot of sales across the province of properties right next to turbines,” says McLean, “Less than 20 in the whole province, if my memory serves. So there’s not a lot of evidence yet one way or another.

“We’d certainly welcome some guidance on this (from the ARB).”

Only one tax reduction so far

To date, only one property owner in Ontario has had their tax assessment reduced due to wind turbine issues. It was in Melancthon, northwest of Toronto, home to 133 turbines in Ontario’s first and largest scale industrial wind farm. In that case a property adjacent to a transformer suffered consistent noise problems.

The only property owners close to turbines routinely enjoying a property increase are those who’ve leased lands to host the turbines themselves. The revenue from those lease agreements have added value to those properties as the turbines provide an annual source of income.

Edward Kenney, though, rues the fact the turbines have created a divided countryside — those for the turbines, who benefit financially, and those who suffer the noise and other negative effects.

The Kenneys’ appeal — along with an appeal by a second property owner in Amaranth (close to the Melancthon wind farm) — could have far reaching implications for municipal tax coffers in communities hosting wind farms if landowners are granted cuts to their taxes.

From Canada:

ONTARIO WIND POWER BRINGING DOWN PROPERTY VALUES

By John Nicol and Dave Seglins,

SOURCE: CBC News, www.cbc.ca

October 1, 2011

The government and the wind energy industry have long maintained turbines have no adverse effects on property values, health or the environment.

The CBC has documented scores of families who’ve discovered their property values are not only going downward, but also some who are unable to sell and have even abandoned their homes because of concerns nearby turbines are affecting their health.

Ontario’s rapid expansion in wind power projects has provoked a backlash from rural residents living near industrial wind turbines who say their property values are plummeting and they are unable to sell their homes, a CBC News investigation has found.

The government and the wind energy industry have long maintained turbines have no adverse effects on property values, health or the environment.

The CBC has documented scores of families who’ve discovered their property values are not only going downward, but also some who are unable to sell and have even abandoned their homes because of concerns nearby turbines are affecting their health.

“I have to tell you not a soul has come to look at it,” says Stephana Johnston, 81, of Clear Creek, a hamlet on the north shore of Lake Erie about 60 kilometres southeast of London.

Johnston, a retired Toronto teacher, moved here six years ago to build what she thought would be her dream home. But in 2008, 18 industrial wind turbines sprung up near her property and she put the one-floor, wheelchair-accessible home up for sale.

“My hunch is that people look at them and say: ‘As nice as the property is going south, looking at the lake, we don’t want to be surrounded by those turbines.’ Can’t say that I blame them.”

Johnston says she has suffered so many ill health effects, including an inability to sleep — which she believes stem from the noise and vibration of the turbines— that she now sleeps on a couch in her son’s trailer, 12 kilometres away, and only returns to her house to eat breakfast and dinner and use the internet.

Industry rejects claims of lower land values

Meanwhile, the industry rejects claims of lower land values.

“Multiple studies, and particularly some very comprehensive ones from the United States have consistently shown the presence of wind turbines does not have any statistically significant impact on property values,” says Robert Hornung of the Ottawa-based Canadian Wind Energy Association (CANWEA).

While acknowledging a lack of peer-reviewed studies in Ontario, Hornung says CANWEA commissioned a study of the Chatham-Kent area, where new wind turbines are appearing, and found no evidence of any impact on property values.

“In fact,” says Hornung, “we’ve recently seen evidence coming from Re/Max indicating that we’re seeing farm values throughout Ontario, including the Chatham-Kent area, increasing significantly this year as wind energy is being developed in the area at the same time.”

However, Ron VandenBussche, a Re/Max agent along the Lake Erie shore, said the reality is that the wind turbines reduce the pool of interested buyers, and ultimately the price of properties.

“It’s going to make my life more difficult,” says VandenBussche, who has been a realtor for 38 years. “There’s going to be people that would love to buy this particular place, but because the turbines are there, it’s going to make it more difficult, no doubt.”

Kay Armstrong is one example. She put her two-acre, waterfront property up for sale before the turbines appeared in Clear Creek, for what three agents said was a reasonable price of $270,000.

Two years after the turbines appeared, she took $175,000, and she felt lucky to do that — the property went to someone who only wanted to grow marijuana there for legal uses.

“I had to get out,” said Armstrong. “It was getting so, so bad. And I had to disclose the health issues I had. I was told by two prominent lawyers that I would be sued if the ensuing purchasers were to develop health problems.”

Realtor association finds 20 to 40 per cent drops in value

Armstrong’s experience is backed up in a study by Brampton-based realtor Chris Luxemburger. The president of the Brampton Real Estate Board examined real estate listings and sales figures for the Melancthon-Amaranth area, home to 133 turbines in what is Ontario’s first and largest industrial wind farm.

“Homes inside the windmill zones were selling for less and taking longer to sell than the homes outside the windmill zones,” said Luxemburger.

On average, from 2007 to 2010, he says properties adjacent to turbines sold for between 20 and 40 per cent less than comparable properties that were out of sight from the windmills.

Power company sells at a loss

Land registry documents obtained by CBC News show that some property owners who complained about noise and health issues and threatened legal action did well if they convinced the turbine companies to buy them out.

Canadian Hydro Developers bought out four different owners for $500,000, $350,000, $305,000 and $302,670. The company then resold each property, respectively, for $288,400, $175,000, $278,000 and $215,000.

In total, Canadian Hydro absorbed just over half a million dollars in losses on those four properties.

The new buyers were required to sign agreements acknowledging that the wind turbine facilities may affect the buyer’s “living environment” and that the power company will not be responsible for or liable from any of the buyer’s “complaints, claims, demands, suits, actions or causes of action of every kind known or unknown which may arise directly or indirectly from the Transferee’s wind turbine facilities.”

The energy company admits the impacts may include “heat, sound, vibration, shadow flickering of light, noise (including grey noise) or any other adverse effect or combination thereof resulting directly or indirectly from the operation.”

TransAlta, the company that took over for Canadian Hydro, refused to discuss the specific properties it bought and then resold at a loss in Melancthon. But in an email to CBC, spokesman Glen Whelan cited the recession and other “business considerations” that “influence the cost at which we buy or sell properties, and to attribute purchase or sale prices to any one factor would be impossible.”

Province says no change to tax base

Ontario’s ministers of Energy, Municipal Affairs and Finance, all in the midst of an election campaign, declined requests for an interview.

A spokesperson for Municipal Affairs says his ministry has no studies or information about the potential impact wind turbines are having on rural property values.

However, last February, before an environmental review tribunal in Chatham, Environment Ministry lawyer Frederika Rotter said: “We will see in the course of this hearing that lots of people are worried about windmills. They may not like the noise, they may think the noise makes them sick, but really what makes them sick is just the windmills being on the land because it does impact their property values.

“That’s what makes them sick is that, you know, they’ll get less money for their properties, and that’s what’s causing all this annoyance and frustration and all of that.”

When Energy Minister Brad Duguid declined comment, his staff referred CBC News to the Ministry of Finance, which oversees MPAC (the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation), which sets values on land for taxation purposes. They indicated that MPAC has no evidence wind turbines are driving down assessed values.

However, CBC found one household in Melancthon was awarded a 50-per-cent reduction in property tax because the house sat next to a transformer station for the turbines.

Losing the rural life

Almost all the people interviewed by the CBC rue the division between neighbours for and against the turbines, and said what they have lost is a sense of home and the idyllic life of living in the countryside.

Tracy Whitworth, who has a historic home in Clear Creek, refuses to sell it and instead has become a nomad, renting from place to place with her son, to avoid the ill effects of the turbines.

“My house sits empty — it’s been vandalized,” says Whitworth, a Clear Creek resident who teaches high school in Delhi. “I’ve had a couple of ‘Stop the wind turbine’ signs knocked down, mailbox broken off.

“I lived out there for a reason. It was out in the country. School’s very busy. When I come home, I like peace and quiet. Now, we have the turbines and the noise. Absolutely no wildlife. I used to go out in the morning, tend to my dogs, let my dogs run, and I’d hear the geese go over.

“And ugh! Now there’s no deer, no geese, no wild turkeys. Nothing.”

For the octogenarian Johnston, the fight is all more than she bargained for. She sank all her life savings, about $500,000, into the house, and she says she does not have the money to be able to hire a lawyer to fight for a buyout. But she is coming to the conclusion she must get a mortgage to try the legal route.

“I love being near the water and I thought, what a way to spend the rest of my days — every view is precious,” she said, as tears filled her eyes. “And I would not have that any more.

“And that is hard to reconcile and accept.”

Getting a mortgage on her house might not be that easy. CBC News has learned that already one bank in the Melancthon area is not allowing lines of credit to be secured by houses situated near wind turbines. In a letter to one family situated close to the turbines, the bank wrote, “we find your property a high risk and its future marketability may be jeopardized.”

From New York State

RESIDENTS IN WIND-TURBINE SHADOW SEEK NOISE, OTHER RELIEF

Source: LittleFallsTimes.com

September 7, 2011

By Linda Kellett

Fairfield, N.Y. —

“I don’t know how long my wife and I can stand it. It’s on and off. You can never get used to it.

NEXT STORY

From Michigan

RESIDENTS VOICE CONCERNS OVER WIND FARM NEWS

SOURCE:Connect Mid Michigan

September 7, 2011

SAGINAW COUNTY -- The Blumfield Township Planning voted Tuesday night to amend an ordinance banning a company from building a wind turbine within 500 ft. to 1400 ft. of a residential home.

Several wind turbines could be built in Blumfield Township. They are part of $250 million dollar project by NextEra Energy Resources that would span over Bay, Tuscola and Saginaw counties.

Several dozen residents turned out for a 7:00 p.m. meeting at the Blumfield Township Hall.

Many residents told NBC25 they attended the meeting in hopes of finding out more information on the project and to voice their concerns.

"I'm not against wind farm energy but I think the township should study alternatives before they make any decisions," said Emil Muellar, who owns property in Blumfield Township.

"I am concerned about the wind noise. We need to know how safe they are. How does it affect us and if it will affect our property values," said Roseanna DuRussel.

"There's a lot of questions. There's more questions thatn there are answers," said Blumfield Township resident Don Wendland.

Blumfield Township Planning Commission Board Chairman Bruce Landskroener said Tuesday's meeting was just to approve an ordinance amendment banning a company from building a wind turbine within 500 ft. to 1400 ft. of a residential home. They board voted to approve the change. Landskroener said the Planning Commission would recommend to the Blumfield Township board to bring in experts to answer any questions residents have.

"I think they need to do a little more research. I think everyone was disappointed they didn't have any answers, said DuRussel.

FROM MICHIGAN

RIGA TOWNSHIP WIND TURBINE UNLIKELY

READ ENTIRE STORY AT SOURCE: WTOL, www.wtol.com

July 7, 2011

By Tim Miller,

Opponents of wind turbines in Lenawee Co. may have won a bigger victory then they realize.

Thursday, the developers announced they are backing down.

Wednesday night, hundreds of people against wind turbines cheered at a meeting when the Riga Township trustees approved a new zoning ordinance.

It allows wind turbines, but puts major restrictions on where they can go.

Developers must have setbacks from non-participating properties, of four times the height of the turbine. Noise generated by the turbines cannot exceed 45 decibels during the day, and 40 at night.

Because of the strong setbacks, Exelon Wind and Great Lakes Wind, partners in the so-called Blissfield Wind Project, say they cannot put one turbine in Riga Township, despite having more than 4,500 acres of land available under signed agreements with landowners.

Doug Duimering of Exelon Wind said, “We don’t have enough land to place turbines legally in Riga Township. Being compliant with the technical limits in this ordinance is impossible.”

Duimering said they’ve determined Exelon would have to get almost every landowner in the township to sign on.

“Frankly, they need to be sited in the west where there is a lot of open space,” Kevon Martis of the Informed Citizens Coalition said.

Martis says the Riga trustees sided with the citizens, over outside developers.

But many in his group at first saw it as a compromise, and not the total victory it appears to be.

“It took a little while on the phone and we will be handling out some mailers and stuff around the township to make people aware,” Martis said.

Exelon Wind will now turn its attention to neighboring Ogden and Palmyra Townships, hoping any ordinance they approve would have fewer restrictions. The Informed Citizens Coalition likely has more battles ahead.

Exelon Wind says it will have representatives at any future meetings in the other towns.

Another wind developer, Juwi Wind LLC, has been interested in Riga Township.

An official told WTOL 11 he can’t comment yet on their future plans.

But if the surrounding areas use the Riga ordinance as a model, the developers’ green energy dreams may drift away.

From the UK

WIND TURBINES HIGH COURT HEARING: DAVIS FAMILY FIND PLENTY OF SUPPORT

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE AT SOURCE: The Guardian

July 2011 09:00

A COUPLE who have been thrust into the national media spotlight with their High Court wind farm battle say everyone has been “very supportive” so far.

Television cameras, photographers and reporters have been following Jane and Julian Davis’s plight since the trial started on Monday.

The case will decide whether the sound produced by eight wind turbines near to their farm in Deeping St Nicholas – which they claim left them unable to sleep – is causing a noise nuisance.

The couple were joined by their daughter Emily (21) at the High Court to hear opening submissions on Monday.

Mrs Davis said: “The High Court is a wonderful old building. It’s very atmospheric. It’s quite amazing to be there.”

She added: “Everyone has been very supportive. People have seen the story and made their own minds up about whether there is an issue or not.

“I think it’s less about wind farms than a family where things have gone wrong.”

The judge, Mr Justice Hickinbottom, visited Deeping St Nicholas for several hours with legal teams on Tuesday.

Yesterday Mrs Davis was due to give evidence to the court, while her husband will appear in the witness box today. Two of the defendants – Nicholas Watts and RC Tinsley Ltd – are due to give their evidence on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The Davis family are seeking an injunction for the alleged noise to be stopped by removing two turbines and modifying the operation of a third, and for their losses and damages of about £150,000 and legal costs to be paid.

Alternatively, they want the defendants to pay for a new three-bedroom house with the same acreage of land they had at the farm which is estimated to cost about £260,000, as well as losses, damages and legal costs.

Their story so far has appeared on the BBC, Daily Express, Daily Mail,