Rich land owner opponents of a plan to build the nation’s first offshore wind farm have filed yet another frivolous lawsuit in the attempt to save their precious view from the scourge of Cape Wind.
What has gotten them in such a fury this time? Seems they didn’t like the conclusion just about everyone has come to when looking at the project. That it will not have any negative impacts on the environment of Nantucket Sound. They are particularly upset that Ian Bowles, the state’s secretary of energy and environmental affairs, has given approval for the portion of the project that sits in state waters.
Bowles limited his regulatory rulings to only the parts of the project that are actually in his jurisdiction (the audacity!), this it seems has sent his opponents into a frothy mouth legal fury. Last Friday opponents sued because they felt that his environmental review should have included the rest of the project (the part located in federal waters) because well, they said so.
It is unclear if the judge will even allow such a frivolous law suit to move forward. The attorneys for Cape Winds opposition have stated publicly that they hope to use this lawsuit to slow down the hearing process. John Spillane, a lawyer representing the boaters and property owners who sued, said “I’m inclined to think this suit will put a chill in the process.”
Opponents of the project have tried legal tactics before. They sued to keep the meteorological tower (used to collect wind data) from being installed in the sound. That suit failed. Ironically it make be that law suit which keeps this one and some further suits (threatened by others) from moving forward. That case set a legal precedence which will make it hard for state agencies to expand jurisdiction into federal waters.
Isn’t it great being rich? While the planet burns you can go on complaining about your view, smugly knowing you will be at the front of the line for the escape pods.
I wouldn’t know as I am far from what one might call rich :)
Most of the opponents of Cape Wind are not rich. I loathe Cape Wind, and I don’t own property at the Cape or Island’s. The NIMBY argument obfuscates other valid issues, such as;
· “Federal vs. States rights”,
· “Lack of coastal zoning”,
· “No competitive bid”,
· “Developer land grab”,
· “Illegal spot zoning”,
· “No siting provisions”,
· “Navigational hazards to major transportation and commercial routes”,
· “Dangerous radar interference in busy airspace”,
· “Homeland Security re: radar interference”,
· “Inadequate, misleading Environmental Impact Statement”,
· “Effects on marine-life and fishing industryâ€,
· “EIS critical mass of adverse and unknown effects including socio-economic”,
· “Untested technology / maintenance for harsh, corrosive and inaccessible marine conditions”,
· “Safety of search and rescue operations by helicopters or surface vessel in adverse sea or weather”,
· “No exit strategy re: technology failure or obsolescenceâ€,
· “Special Energy Bill exemptions to this developer”,
· “Violation of State Sanctuaryâ€,
· “No comprehensive ocean policy”,
· “Tax benefits and subsidies over $800m. to developerâ€,
· “Loss of opportunity/ time/ money/ resources better spent to develop state-of-art technology required to utilize more energy-productive off-shore wind energy sitesâ€.
Sherrie S. Cutler, A.I.A.
ECODESIGN, Inc., President
Environmental Planning and Architecture