To The Daily Sun,
New Hampshire's wind power industry is poised to see its biggest period of growth and Newfound Lake is the epicenter of it all. The surge brought on by unprecedented demand for renewable energy by southern states.
Massachusetts has chosen to outsource much of its renewable energy tax credits to New Hampshire — worth an estimated $500 million. Combining the GrotonWind Farm, Wild Meadows Wind Farm, Spruce Ridge Wind Farm and the Alpine Ridge Wind Farm, it will total more the 100 turbines in a 15 mile corridor.
The Wild Meadows project was announced in November 2012 — yet their plans quickly changed late last week. We are not sure as to why their plans changed, because they refuse to openly communicate with anyone at Town Hall meetings. One thing we do know is that developers are under extreme time pressure to start work before the end of the year, when a critical federal tax credit expires.
We also know that New Hampshire is in the middle of a renewable energy construction boom — for electricity it doesn't need. And we know the out-of-state energy contracts being signed won't help New Hampshire's rate payers with their already high electric bills.
N.H. Wind Watch has complained, since the start, that New Hampshire residents will see very few benefits for having destroyed their mountain ridges and erecting 500 foot tall wind turbines. New Hampshire is outsourcing renewable tax credits to serve the needs of southern states.
New Hampshire wind projects will only serve developers and leasing land owners not rate payers in N.H. That's why last week's announcements of power contracts in Massachusetts came as no surprise. While developers kept their details confidential, state officials merely bent over and N.H. rate payers are now held accountable.
"Taller is better" that's the new strategy for N.H. wind developers. Why? Because it's rumored that the Groton Wind Farm is a failure - meaning they're not capturing enough wind to earn high profits - investors are looking for on Wall Street. The taller turbine trend will continue for each additional proposed wind site.
Massachusetts agreed to buy it - no one ever doubted that. Soon EDPR & JEWI Wind will start their own dog & pony show. Opponents have stated many times that the turbines, transmission lines and the transmission stations will increase your monthly electricity invoices - not lower them.
Utilities recognize Newfound Lake as a renewable energy corridor. My personal scare with these industrial projects are - they are gaining traction and soon more wind developers will likely come or current ones will expand or both.
Southern New England's renewable power goals are being outsourced in your backyard - like cheap labor to China. Southern state are in a "win-win-win-win" situation. The first "win" is they don't have to develop their land, the second "win" is they don't have to see them, the third is they don't have to maintain them, the fourth "win" is they don't have to decommission them.
Look for more renewable wind projects to come New Hampshire - it's a "win-win-win-win" for them. Write the Governor now and tell her why you don't want them - before it's too late.
Last Updated on Saturday, 12 October 2013 12:09
To The Daily Sun,
Congratulations to the Gilmanton Cub Scouts Pack 242 who raised nearly 250 nonperishable food items in less than a week for the Gilmanton Community Church's Food Pantry walk on Sunday, October 6. The boys walked more than four miles in the rain and enjoyed a spaghetti dinner courtesy of the church.
Last Updated on Friday, 11 October 2013 11:51
To The Daily Sun,
I'm an average married middle-aged woman who has worked hard since the early age of 14. We pay our bills on time, pay our taxes, raised our sons and live on needs rather than wants. We don't have a lot of money, but what we do have we earn and have managed to stay afloat even in today's economy.
I was fortunate to be able to work full-time for a municipality for the past year and enjoy the benefits that come with that. The benefits were affordable health insurance, life insurance and mandatory contribution to a pension plan maintained by the N.H. Retirement System (NHRS). The mandatory contribution is set at 7 percent of an employee's gross income
Recently I was reduced to part-time hours with the loss of benefits. In defense of this action, I was initially hired part-time and due to circumstances beyond my control I was
returned back to this. I filled out paperwork to get my portion of the contributions to the pension plan controlled by NHRS back. For some people this wouldn't seem like a lot of money but
for me it is a lot of money. My plan was to open an IRA with my local bank and continue to make contributions as I could.
Then I find out that I cannot get my money back! I cannot have my money back until I retire or if I lose my job.
I also cannot make contributions to this pension plan. It'll just sit there being controlled by the NHRS.
Putting money into the pension plan controlled by NHRS is mandatory, having my hours reduced to part-time was not by my choice, I can no longer put money into this pension plan due to being part-time yet I also cannot have my money back. I am only expecting to have the back the 7 percent of my last year's pay returned to me.
I quote: "As you might expect, we have seen an increase in these inquiries as more employers transition full-time workers to part-time status. Our handling of these requests are governed by Internal Revenue Code requirements, RSA 100-A and applicable administrative rules."
Am I wrong? This is money I earned over the past year and now I am being denied the return of it. Yes it will earn interest sitting there. I won't lie about that. But I would prefer to have control over the money I earn.
Last Updated on Friday, 11 October 2013 11:18
To The Daily Sun,
The general counsel for the Archdiocese for Military Services stated that it would be illegal for any furloughed or contract priest to minister on base, and if they were to do so, they might be subject to arrest. This so outraged members of both political parties, that the House of Representatives, on Oct. 5, passed a resolution asking that the chaplains be permitted to perform their duties on a volunteer, non-paid basis. The resolution passed with a 400 to 1 vote; the lone dissenting vote coming from Democrat Bill Enyart, of Illinois.
The above is only one of many examples that show the government cares little if "the people" get punished, as long as politicians gain some hoped for political advantage. For example, it was absolutely outrageous that World War II veterans had no memorial to honor their service. A hero of that war, a man who was severely wounded in battle and spent years recovering from his wounds, former Senator Bob Dole, led the effort to raise the funds from private sources in order to erect a fitting memorial. No government funding was used in its building, and it is an open area — no gates or other limitations. "Honor Flights" bring WW II veterans from all over the country to visit the memorial where they pay their respects to their fallen comrades. Who in the government decided that this memorial should be barricaded, and guarded, so that veterans who have traveled from across the country could be denied access? Who in this administration decided to spend more money to keep the veterans locked out than it would cost to let them in? And who in this administration decided to lock the gates to the resting places of our fallen heroes who lie in foreign lands? Who is so insensitive to the desires of those family and fellow military veterans who spent substantial amounts of time and money to visit their heroes, only to be turned away? Who thinks it's all a political game, and the desires of the people be damned?
In another case, the "Claude Moore Colonial Farm" in Virginia, was ordered to close by the National Park Service (NPS). This farm, which is akin to Sturbridge Village in Massachusetts, has been operating independently, without any government funding, since 1980, when the NPS stopped funding them. Repeated requests to stay open by the Farms Board of Directors have been denied. Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm stated, "In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service ... I have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group representing the NPS." Again, this is a case of the government spending money to deny access to citizens, whereas if they let it simply stay open, it would cost the government nothing. More political gamesmanship.
Somehow this administration needs to learn about how to run a business. It just doesn't seem to understand that you don't save money by spending money to pay guards to cover the sites that you closed, that didn't require guards in the first place. But even more than that, the administration doesn't seem to recognize the impact its decisions have on not only the citizenry their punishing, but on the commerce of the country. On average, our National Parks receive about 750,000 visitors each day. There are national parks spread across the country. Immigrants from the early 1900s take their grandchildren to see the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island in New York, where they landed and began their life in America. Others take a ride up to Mount Desert Island in Maine to visit Acadia National Park, and some fly out west to see the Grand Canyon, or Yosemite, or Yellowstone, or any one of the 400 + national parks. The money the government supposedly "saves" is a pittance compared to the negative impact on the business community . . . you know, those entities from whom all tax revenues emanate.
Consider the average number of visitors each day who rent hotel or motel rooms, or rent space for their camper at a campsite, or rent a tent facility or room at the parks. How many thousands take an airplane, or board a train or a bus? Many will rent an automobile, while others put gas in their vehicles and drive their families to a park. Everyone eats, most often in local restaurants. And thousands purchase some mementos to remember the experience. Those 750,000 daily visitors are putting money into the economy every single day of their visits. That money goes to pay salaries and those salaries pay taxes. That money spent by the visitors also goes (in most cases) into company profits and that also contributes more income taxes (at the highest business tax rate in the world), and matching contributions to Social Security and Medicare, and local and state taxes. So, when the government denies the citizens access to a national park, it is essentially denying businesses and their employees, the ability to make a living and pay all those taxes to the local, state, and federal governments.
Punishing the people and businesses for some political gain. . . well, it's just plain dumb.
Last Updated on Friday, 11 October 2013 11:13
To The Daily Sun,
It is time to take back America from the fools running the country. Veterans and senior citizens, banded together, can make it work by not letting your children vote as they do not teach them PAD (problems in American democracy) in the schools any more. If they did, then the children know nothing and do not listen, which is typical of children not trusting anyone over 30. So I ask you, why do the people running for office go after the young voters? Because they know that the simpletons will vote for them if they are promised a free ride into the future.
If the senior citizens and veterans get out and vote then we defiantly outnumber the no-nothings and could get this country to be number one again and not the laughing stock of the world.
Last Updated on Friday, 11 October 2013 11:07