EXTRA...

Sneaky moves for Buzzards Bay wind farm

Sneaky maneuvers could harm ocean sanctuaries
Efforts designed to help Buzzards Bay proposal

The Massachusetts Ocean Sanctuaries Act was designed to prevent development in Massachusetts state waters in order to avert destruction of environmental habitat and to protect natural resources. It also helps make Massachusetts one of the most attractive destinations for tourists from all over the country...

Last week, however, the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed a version of the Ocean Management Act which I believe was a Trojan horse to slip through a massive change in the Ocean Sanctuaries Act without public input and without a public hearing... The change would allow large scale renewable energy facilities to be constructed in ocean sanctuaries in Massachusetts state waters.

The change in the Ocean Sanctuaries Act appears to be an attempt to assist one project proposed by Patriot Renewables to construct 120 wind turbines in Buzzards Bay. Back in 2006, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs ruled that the large scale wind farm proposed by Patriot Renewables is not permitted under the Ocean Sanctuaries Act...  MetroWest. 
__________

This week's action in Legislature on the Buzzards Bay proposal

SEND RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE (H 4527) House 34-114, rejected a motion to recommit to the Ways and Means Committee the section of an ocean management bill that would open the state's ocean sanctuaries to renewable energy development. Currently only traditional energy facilities are allowed in state waters. The motion also instructs the committee to hold a public hearing on this section that removes a major obstacle facing Jay Cashman, an ally of House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, in Cashman's effort to build up to 120 wind turbines in Buzzards Bay. Supporters of recommitting the section said that the proposal has never had a public hearing and should be required to go through the regular legislative process. They noted that the turbines would hurt the area's fishing industry and recreational fishing by blocking access to fishing boats sent out across the bay. Opponents of recommitting the section said that it is simply designed to treat traditional generating facilities and renewable energy projects equally under state law. They noted that the section is being fully debated on the House floor and argued that there is no reason to send it back to committee. The House eventually approved the entire bill including the controversial section. (A "Yes" vote is for the motion to recommit the section to Ways and Means and instruct the committee to hold a public hearing. A "No" vote is against the motion).
__________