Letter: Minuteman Will Be Winner, Savoy Loser in Wind Profits

Letters to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

I am following the Savoy wind development story with great interest because a developer tried to build turbines in my town of Peru.

Just like Savoy, the developer tried to change our bylaws to make the requirements and limitations more suitable for his project, and of course for his bottom line. But what about Savoy's bottom line?

My understanding is there is no financial agreement as of yet between the developer and the town. Having no agreement in place is a risky financial move. To add insult to injury, it is predictable that real estate values within a two-mile radius of the turbines will decrease, the likelihood of selling those properties will drastically be affected in a negative way, and the overall assessment of Savoy will feel the impact if other parts of the country provide an indicator of what Savoy can expect.

But I also wonder if voters in Savoy are aware of what a cash cow this will be for Minuteman Wind. The company already received $224,781 of state public money to pursue the project. With an average output capacity of about 30 percent, and the price of Renewable Energy Credits (paid for by us, rolled into our electric bills) of $60 a credit, Minuteman is looking at $1.8 million a year in subsidies paid for by all the rest of us. That's on top of selling electricity to the grid. The guesstimate of income to Savoy would only be about $100,000-$200,000, or a $5 a week benefit to everyone in town. And, I am guessing the developer is trying to pay as little as possible while acting like they are doing Savoy a big favor.

Minuteman will be the winner. Savoy will lose real estate value, suffer nuisances and likely health effects, and provide a vehicle for yet another wind developer to take advantage of rate payers and tax payers, all in the name of green energy.

Savoy's special town meeting to amend their wind bylaw is Wednesday, Sept. 27, at 6 p.m. at the Savoy Fire Station. If you don't want this rip-off taking place in your town, doing you no good but only harm, please do what we did in Peru, vote "NO" on the developer's bylaw change. Please visit www.savoywind.com.

Kimberly Wetherell
Peru, Mass.

 

 

 

 


Tags: letters to the editor,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Pittsfield Reviews Financial Condition Before FY27 Budget

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The average single-family home in Pittsfield has increased by more than 40 percent since 2022. 

This was reported during a joint meeting of the City Council and School Committee on March 19, when the city's financial condition was reviewed ahead of the fiscal year 2027 budget process.

Mayor Peter Marchetti said the administration is getting "granular" with line items to find cost savings in the budget.  At the time, they had spoken to a handful of departments, asking tough questions and identifying vacancies and retirements. 

Last fiscal year’s $226,246,942 spending plan was a nearly 4.8 percent increase from FY24. 

In the last five years, the average single-family home in Pittsfield has increased 42 percent, from $222,073 in 2022 to $315,335 in 2026. 

"Your tax bill is your property value times the tax rate," the mayor explained. 

"When the tax rate goes up, it's usually because property values have gone down. When the property values go up, the tax rate comes down." 

Tax bills have increased on average by $280 per year over the last five years; the average home costs $5,518 annually in 2026. In 2022, the residential tax rate was $18.56 per thousand dollars of valuation, and the tax rate is $17.50 in 2026. 

View Full Story

More Peru Stories