Turbines are the reason we won’t move to the County
Administrator | Apr 19, 2013 | Comments 26
Comments from a potential buyer of real estate in the Picton district.
My wife and I were planning to move to Picton. We like the city, the environment, the amenities and the people. Great spot. Once I heard about the turbines, I did a lot of research on them.
Here are my comments from a potential buyer (ex potential):
There is no way that I would consider buying anything close to the turbines, at any price. Because we liked Picton so much, we considered buying a house or a building lot, maybe 5 miles or more away from them. Even then, the pricing would have to be a great deal. Current values are too high for the chance we would take.
As of today, we have now decided to remove Picton from our short list of desirable places to live in. We feel that these turbines, notwithstanding the possible health issues, will destroy the beauty of the environment. Just the construction alone to get these things built will create havoc on some roads.
Also, even if we were to find a house away from the current 2 turbine projects, but still in the Picton area, we would always fear that more projects could go ahead, as the Green Act does not require city’s approval and seems to totally disregard people health and wishes and stupidly refute the fact that these turbines will greatly affect house values.
Finally, 100 % of all the people / friends that I spoke to about Picton / turbines have all said that I should stay away from there. Some of my friends said “If you like Picton so much, just go and visit there once a while. Why take a chance to live there with all these turbine projects”
They are right.
We wish the people of the Picton district the best in their fight against these projects.
Jean Theoret
Etobicoke
Filed Under: Letters and Opinion
@Jean, it is an interesting article, but not for the reasons you probably believe.
Gillespie, the lawyer representing those claiming damages, issued a press release about the same minute he got kicked out of court. He seriously inverted the truth of what had happened and found a couple of lazy journalists and a lot of anti-wind lobbyists ready to believe him.
The judge says clearly that there is zero evidence supporting property loss claims associated with wind turbines. This is not what Gillespie says.
Gillespie also claims a major victory regarding future court cases. The judge actually just stated normal practice; that when something changes you can come back and try again. That’s called business-as-usual, not some big door for legal action opening.
Gillespie has discovered a cash cow in people willing to bring unfounded and spurious suits against wind developments, usually before they are actually approved or in operation. Ask yourself who benefits from this? Is it the overtaxed legal system? Is it the people who give Gillespie large legal fees only to lose their court cases? Or is it Gillespie?
Given his highly inaccurate but very self-serving press releases, I would strongly suggest that Prince Edward County residents and others considering Gillespie as an advocate strongly consider whether that is in their best interests.
http://www.pembina.org/blog/714
http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/04/23/wind_turbines_have_reduced_property_values_court_says.html
Interesting article on the court decision on house values
No one is slandering anywone or bullying them the anti wind people are just expressing an opinion and giving facts. In fact the people you call anti wind are really not anti wind they just don’t want IWT’sin the county or anyplace else that is not suitable
Let me translate for you Fed Up. If you are so frustrated and angered by the content of these threads that you are pleading with administration for them to stop you may want to step back and stop reading them for the present. This suggestion is neither slander nor bullying. It’s just practical advice.
Bully. Slander is not “heat”–it’s just slander.
Donna, i accept your apologies.I do not have phobias. I was not anti or pro turbine when i started my research on turbine projects. I did not know anything about them.It was a matter of doing due diligence in doing research before making a decision. If anything, i was hoping that my in- depth research( 2 months)would be favorable to us moving there. It was not.
As for Mr.Barnard comments,i find them incomplete. There are studies that show no effects on home values, but there are more and more independent studies made by reputable firms that are now confirming that house values are being affected by turbines.Percentages of decrease will vary depending on proximity to the turbines.Home owners are now winning their cases when they ask for property tax reduction based on decrease in values for their homes.
I might be right or i might be wrong, but like Mark said the risk for a potential new buyer is there.
I did not send these comments to infuriate people but more to offer perspective from an outside view.
My opinion of the people in Picton, based on my prior visits,has not changed. The vast majority of the people were courteous and respectfull
Best Wishes
Jean
If you can’t take the heat get out of the kitchen, Fed Up.
@admin–how long are you going to let this nonsense go on?
Now people are brain washed Nazis if they don’t oppose wind power? Enough.
Mike Barnard would have made a great example of a subject for the infamous “obedience to authority” experiments conducted by Psychologist, Stanley Milgram. Milgram was attempting to understand the motivations of German soldiers who participated in the Holocaust (Godwin’s rule). In these experiments subjects, some of whom could have engaged English Literature degree studies and perhaps become stalwart employees of IBM, were instructed by an authoritative person’s assurances of scientific efficacy, to administer increasingly higher electrical shocks to others, despite the shock recipients pleas and cries of distress. Interestingly, almost all continued to administer higher shock levels even though they felt some concern. So despite the pleas and cries of real folk in the presence of Industrial Wind Turbine developments, who are experiencing economic distress from decreasing property values, health effects and violations of democratic rights he continues to try and “shock the hell” out of them.
When the truth, simply by virtue of the reality, becomes more apparent to the general public, forcing politicians to be transparent and forthcoming in this respect, will Barnard acknowledge his complicity? Unlikely, for Barnard has an exit strategy (escape hatch) for his “empirical-peer reviewed” yet unscientific methodology bulwark which he tests periodically when the siege engine of transparency knocks too ominously at his door. He recently demonstrated this when he acquiesced to the poor sitting of the Ostrander, Industrial Wind Turbine development.
It’s a pity that Jean and his wife aren’t interested. The major studies — five of them over a decade in the US and UK covering 46,000 property transactions near wind farms — are clear that operating wind farms don’t harm property values at all.
The studies show that the time to buy in the countryside is before wind farms become operational. Anti-wind campaigners create fear, uncertainty and doubt in the real estate market, temporarily suppressing property price increases.
After wind farms become operational, places near them accrue value faster. This makes sense. The fears evaporate when people realize that they are benign additions to the countryside and in the meantime tax revenues from their are providing more services with not property tax increases or actual property tax decreases, and more people want to live in the area because it has more jobs than areas without wind farms. Everyone wins near wind farms except for the tiny minority that remain obsessed about them and claim all sorts of nonsense impacts.
Have a look at this material for the five major studies as well as the “evidence” for property value impacts. http://barnardonwind.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/property-values-evidence-is-that-if-wind-farms-do-impact-them-its-positively/
And have a look at this for what PEC could be doing instead. http://vtdigger.org/2013/03/08/in-northeast-kingdom-wind-power-brings-in-tax-cuts-and-rising-legal-fees/
I don’t even come here to read articles after not reading a word about the multi million dollar lawsuit being filed against the former PECCAS.I come to read the arguments and the overzealous opinions expressed in these threads.Coming and reading them would sway any potential home buyer in the County after seeing how you treat each other..
@ Frances Loch… I paraphrase and quote Mike Barnard: “You demonize wind energy ‘opponents (NIMBYS, DENIERS etc.)’ to an absurd degree, and then have the temerity to complain when someone suggests that ‘they’ might not be entirely fair? You have a choice: grow thicker skin or stop slanting and distorting reality so much.”
But Frances, you completely overlooked the bit where Jethro first suggested that Doris and I should be “pillared”. Of course that is not bullying is it? Putting people in the stocks because they happen to have a different point of view is courtesy itself. Call it bullying or what you will but Jethro and Donna are mannerless individuals who deserve the verbal reprimands they are receiving here. Their comments were disgraceful.
And be sure to check the Industrial Turbine ghost towns in Australia that sickened the residents and forced them to leave. Might as well have a good insight.
Fed up, I totally agree with your summary of the atmosphere here and in the County now. The only ‘opinion’ that’s allowed is anti-wind. As I expressed elsewhere, the anti-winds are persistent and pervasive. Most pro-winds are tired of being kicked around on this site.
To Jean in Etobicoke, I apologize for sounding brusque. Please do your own research and don’t allow the fear-mongering of the anti-winds to affect your decision. Obviously wind turbines would never be seen from Picton; you could live your whole retirement here and never encounter them if you preferred not to.
Donna and Jethro, your rudeness is a discredit to our great community. If this is any indication of the character of those in opposition to turbines in some areas of The County, Jean and his wife can only be relieved to be looking elsewhere. I am sad to think of the reputation of this beautiful spot being tarred by your comments, which resort to schoolground tatics.
Come on bullying is not a word we use on here and even if we did no one is pushing their opinion on anyone, all we are doing is expressing our opinion, just the same as you are. Try to keep words that are not to be used out of our communication.
Hi, Mark,
Aside from ignoring peer reviewed scientific research papers in favor of wind power, but supporting any research AGAINST wind power?
Aside from claiming wind power is only about money when all power generation is about money?
Aside from claiming any supporter of wind power MUST be in league with corporations?
Here are a few examples of bullying and disproportionately adversarial statements:
From Marnie:
“Go back to your cave Barney Rubble…If Doris and I should be pilloried you should be stoned.”
“Their biggest fans are the greedy folks who stand to profit by leasing their land for them.”
From David Norman:
“…your latest response on this comment thread is truly pathetic…”
“Typical of your puerile rhetoric style…”
“He often engages a puerile rhetoric in his commentary…”
“Stay in their face, never back down, meet them wherever you find them with clenched jaw and closed fist. Mock them, berate them, and spit on their views.”
From Mark:
“You can thank the CSG for a lot of this craziness.”
From Doris Lane:
“The lawyers for MOE and Gilead act like they are on a slow boat to China.”
“You are able to express your ideas here and that is Ok. Just don’t criticize other people for expressing theirs.”
From Chris Keen:
“The glacial pace of the cross-examination so far, not to mention the silliness of some of the questions…”
From Karen Ephringham:
“Threat of wind turbines put my way of life under siege.”
Please provide an example of bullying from the persons opposing Industrial Turbine Zones? I can read two on this thread from people supporting this industry.
After all the bullying some of you have participated in on this site, you haven’t a leg to stand on. Rudeness indeed!
There are not many who are going to risk their life savings to purchase a home in an industrial turbine zone not to mention exposing themselves to health issues. And the chance that a Donna or Jethro could be a neighbour would seal that decision even though they are not typical County folk.
Jean, I apologize sincerely for the rudeness of two County residents, Donna and Jethro. It’s one thing to be rude; quite another to be anonymously rude. Absolutely uncalled for. I’m embarrassed on their behalf.
Donna and Jethro it is people like you that our county does not need, more because of your rudeness than your stand on wind turbines. Who can blame people for thinking twice about moving here now? Jean stated his concerns in a courteous manner. Your responses were uncalled for but not that big a surprise.
Jethro and Donna how rude.
There are many people who have the exact same feelings Jean has, Ask any real estate agent?
Your loss! We certainly don’t need your phobias and misinformation in our community anyway. Enjoy your new home wherever you find a perfect one.
Jean,I am glad you don’t want to move to our beautifill county. We have too many Jean’s hear now. When the wind turbines come I hope you come down and admire them