"For the people"

As we all wait to see how the permitting process for the Laidlaw project is handled by the Site Evaluation Committee, I believe that it’s worth considering the role different parties will play. I believe that it’s easy to understand the position different individuals and organizations will take, pro and con, but understanding the role that public officials take or have taken is not quite as evident. Public officials have a fiduciary responsibility to represent those who voted them into office and the legal responsibility to act in the best interest of the citizens and communities that they represent. I believe that this is a very special and unique role and not one where special interest should influence.  In my mind, public officials should not be agents of corporate or special interests.  There’s a strong belief among some people (I’m one of them) that, we no longer have a Democracy as envisioned by the founding fathers. The old axiom that we have a government “of the people, by the people and for the people” is a joke!  In reality what we have is a “Corporate Democracy” where corporations through their lobbyist, campaign contributions and other questionable acts are buying our politicians and high jacking our political system. Who then is supposed to represent the best interest of the average citizen? It was always assumed that the political process would police itself through the electoral process, that the citizens would vote out of office those who didn’t represent their best interest. What the founding fathers never envisioned was the apathy of “we” the citizens, to the point where we are now electing officials by minority votes and these elected officials are not being made accountable to the majority. So as we sit back and watch the SEC hearings unfold before our eyes, pay attention to our elected officials such as the County Commissioners and Mayor, see if they represent the best interest of the citizens of the County. See if they question the credibility of Laidlaw and the claims the company will make, or act as agents for the company. Laidlaw will have their lawyers and hired guns speaking on their behalf, who will the citizens living at St. Regis or Northern Lights have? Who will advocate for the homeowners whose properties will continue to be devalued by the monster boiler and stack? Who will make the case that the project will close the door to Berlin becoming something other and better than its former self? Will our elected officials represent us and our well being or the financial goals of Laidlaw investors and ambition of Michael Bartoszek?

Comments

[jon]

Rocky, From what I've heard, both owners of St. Regis and Northern Lights seem to think the city will represent their interests as the city is intervening.

[Wing Nut]

Nice post Rocky. Keep in mind that Mayor Grenier supported Laidlaw during the election, an election that he won in a landslide. Thus, as you've said, he's obligated to support Laidlaw during the EFSEC hearings. I have to tell you that I hear very few people on the "streets" who are opposed to the project. And, if they are opposed it is not a very strong opposition. Most people say that the biomass plant will be much better than the old pulp mill (with respect to noise & odor) so they don't seem to take issue with it. I'm not saying that they understand the full implication of the plant but I am saying that besides myself, Jon Edwards and former Mayor Bertrand I don't really know anybody else who is openly opposed to the plant. If there are others out there they are being awfully quiet. Without any major local opposition and the support of PNSH which will allow LLEG to pay $80/ton chip prices (to be passed through the rate payers) Bartoszek has hit the jack pot on this one. Add to that the fact that his wood study now shows enough available biomass in a 100 mile radius. Add it up folks. The chances of the LLEG permit now being denied by the State are slim to none in my opinion.

The train is leaving the station, and it looks like we are the last few people in Berlin who are being left behind at the ticket counter..........WN.

[Rocky]

WN, I know of others who are against the Laidlaw project, but their apathy and lack of....involvement is consistent with the overall political malaise in the country. Too many people have "given up" on the system and I'm not sure what will bring us back to our senses. We're close to a major economic and social collapse yet we vote self serving individuals who continue to.... serve themselves of course!

[Wing Nut]

Rocky,

The fact of the matter remains that this plant will bring tax revenue and jobs to the Berlin area. That alone is enough to convince most people to side with the current Mayor about this issue. I must also say that the local Laidlaw advisory committee produced a very nice document with suggested recommendations for the plant. At a minimum let's hope that Laidlaw adheres to recommendations contained within this document. I honestly believe that permit approval is just a matter of time. I guess I'll have to buy some Laidlaw stock to take advantage of the inevitable.

Take care.............WN.

[Rocky]

WN, you remind me of the intelligent person who goes to the casino in spite of knowing the odds are against him.

[Bea]

When was the last time you went to a Council meeting WN?

[Tony Robbins]

Wing Nut,

I like the positivity. Let's all hope for an open and productive dialogue tomorrow. IMO the the citizens will work with Laidlaw for the betterment of Berlin's future.

Cheers.

[jon]

A divided council had Mayor Grenier's speech for tonight's Laidlaw hearing the subject of debate and significant change last night. It was a thin veiled attempt by the mayor to bring a speech before the public that would have convinced all in attendance that the city's mayor and council unanimously support the Laidlaw project which is utter nonsense. It was also clear that the city's attorney is concerned about the city saying anything negative about Laidlaw most certainly due to Laidlaw's proven track record in lawsuits albeit all attempts in Ellicotteville failed. Almost half of the mayor's prepared speech needed to be scratched from what the mayor prepared in order for all councilors to endorse the speech. It was rather pathetic to watch the mayor lower to a level where his actions before the public were akin to pitcher blaming a lost game on the umpire, as if he were going to claim he won anyhow. If it wasn't for the perseverance of Poulin, Landry, and a few other council members everyone would have seen a mayor and council in disarray and embarrassment before the NH Site Evaluation Committee tonight. As it stands, the mayor will speak for the whole body, and aside from the mayor and council stating they look forward to working with Laidlaw, the speech that Grenier makes had better be neutral or you will hear from other council members that feel they need to represent a significant opposition from their wards.

[jon]

Tonight's meeting should be attended by all of Berlin's citizens but it won't. That will be pointed out. This area depends on organizations, groups, and elected officials to speak their mind. In this day and age where larger towns and cities operate via mayor and city council, much of the citizens vote, sit back and let those in office fight their fights. I wasn't one of those elected ones, and I figure the race was close enough to convince me of a sizable opposition to this plant at least in my ward. I can only assume the opposition exists in all other wards.

Fortunately for this area coos county has sizable groups (in the thousands) that coos county citizens belong to and support. You will either see some the leaders of these organizations or hear about these organizations tonight and you will also see these organizations in the news on a regular basis from this point forward as they protect this area's quality of life.

The NHSEC cautioned the other day that their job does not include dealing with sustainability issues or transmission issues; fortunately it is no longer just about sustainability of the northern forest and grid issues; it's now about the threat those who risk sustainability have on the quality of life. Where 2000 jobs once gave attempted reason for high cancer rates, health issues, and quality of life issues, only so many logging jobs will be supported in this north country by the forest, and 40 jobs on the Burgess mill site will be weighed heavily against the Clean Power project on the outskirts of the city. Both plants will not operate in Berlin NH.

[Voice of reason]

Wing - I agree you can probably count the vocal opposition to the LLEG plant on your hands. Lets see there is Rocky, Jon, Poulin, Landry and some other council dudes.

VOR - Good luck with your stock purchase.

[jon]

...and thousands of supporters for the northern forest. You might want to read up on some of the intervenors and check out what the fish and game is concerned about this morning...Good luck on your stock purchase...you may need it.

[Voice of reason]

Hey what happened to the fat bald guy I kind of miss him LOL.

VOR - Gotta love it!

[Wing Nut]

I spoke to Councilor McCue yesterday. It was a very good discussion. Councilor McCue was very knowledgeable about the whole Laidlaw issue and he is obviously watching this very closely. I was very appreciative of him taking the time to talk to me. One thing that came up was the State EFSEC responsibility with respect to reviewing wood availability and sustainable harvesting practices. In my personal opinion Laidlaw's proposed plant and its affect on the Northern Forest must be part of their review because of the fact that wood is our most important natural resource here in Coos County. And, if this plant could possibly negatively impact this important natural resource then from a "regional development" perspective alone they have a responsibility to investigate this further (that was my take, not necessarily Councilor McCue's). I reiterated my desire to see the State hire an independent firm to evaluate this issue and provide the EFSEC with a report (at Laidlaw's expense, of course). I'm not sure where he'll go with this request but I honestly do believe it is a reasonable one.

Furthermore, wood sustainability goes to the heart of Laidlaw's ability to operate this plant for the long term. If there isn't enough wood available locally on a sustainable basis then in theory this lack of wood supply jeopardizes the plants ability to operate and as such its financial viability. Financial viability is supposed to be part of the EFSEC review process from what I understand.

For the EFSEC to say that wood supply is not part of their review is baffling to say the least. This plant is not like a coal or natural gas fired plant where local fuel supply is not critical to operations. That is what makes biomass plants unique and unless the State is completely ignorant they should recognize that fact. The only way local fuel supply is not critical to Laidlaw is if the PPA with PSNH is so lucrative that freight costs (from long distances) don't matter. And, if that is the case then the PUC needs to reject the PPA because it would be an unfair burden for electric rate payers. Why should rate payers be asked to subsidize a biomass plant that is not sized appropriately to take advantage of locally available fuel supply? Biomass plants are supposed to be designed to take into consideration local supply (if they are designed responsibly). I would argue that Bartoszek's blind ambition has caused him to design a plant that takes advantage of the size of the boiler, not the locally available wood supply. And, that is the completely wrong approach to biomass plant design in my personal opinion.

The PPA is obviously a critical component of this discussion and the EFSEC needs to see it and investigate its implications. The State has a lot of work to do here and they better do it because people are watching very closely.

On another note, I also did not agree with the EFSEC's comments that grid capacity is not part of their review. At the most basic level they need to at least independently verify that ISO NE has confirmed that the grid can handle Laidlaw's output in addition to Clean Power & Noble (both ahead of Laidlaw on the queue). If Laidlaw cannot export their power to the grid then their plant is not financially viable. Again, that makes this grid capacity issue (at least at this basic level) part of their review responsibility.

Some things that have already been stated by the State EFSEC smell of politics and I don't like it. They are supposed to review the merits of the project, not succumb to political pressure. I pray that the EFSEC does their job or the people of Berlin & Coos County will suffer the consequences long term.

Take care...........WN.

[jon]

Right on Wing Nut! Fantastic post that shows you truly know whats going on and have weeded your way through to the facts of the matter.

[Jon Edwards (the fat bald guy)]

I thought the Laidlaw hearing went pretty well last night and certainly showed Berlin is mixed on the project.The actions of mayor grenier, councilor danderson and rosek were appalling but no surprise during the hearing in light of an agreement in council session Monday night that none of them would speak for themselves but as a united voice in a prepared speech unanimously approved that our mayor was to deliver. Not only did our newly elected toyota salesman bury the content of that speech as a snake in the grass with his coos commissioner speech immediately following it, but these three stooges took to the stage in back stage tactics in complete defiance and lied to their fellow councilors by speaking their mind anyway. In light of today's issues, one might expect that of a toyota salesmen, septic pumper who most often speaks of "pooh", and a utility employee that can't wait to sell his house and move to Florida. I guess they've all decided that it doesn't really matter to follow Robert's rules and that they prefer a dictatorship. Good luck to the three musketeers with that one.

[Bob Kare]

Jon,

I love how you forget that in a free democratic election, the town of Berlin, voted in Grenier. You are so pathetic with your personal attacks on how the man makes a living. Grow up.

You, Jon, are a real estate agent in a town that has cheaper houses than the ghettos of North Philadelphia. Is it really worth it working for 3% on a house that sells for $35,000? Seems like youwould be losing money. And how are all those section 8 renters working out for you?

[jon]

Bob,

I love how you think that because a man is voted in to office, he can take it upon himself to completely ignore the rules pertinent to his position. Additionally, he can exclaim that the 40% or so that don't represent his cause don't count within his city.

As to real estate in this area, everything is relative. In areas where prices are higher more real estate agencies exist, more agents share the pie. Here, I can't complain about the living we derive in sales, the average selling price and commission a little over twice that of what you mention.

[Jon Edwards (the fat bald guy)]

I love the way Barb accounts for the turn out at the Laidlaw hearing conveniently leaving out the likes of the Sierra Club who represents 4000 members statewide who share the same concerns with the NH Fish and Game representing tens of thousands of sportsmen state wide who all share grave concerns due to recent liquidation harvesting in the north country. Two to One? Sure...o.k. In light of the recent petition drive by the NH Fish and Game and the Sierra Club in attendance, it's laughable that the steward for the infamous Sun would opt to focus primarily on Barry Kelly who continues his same old voice recording about pulp wood being the same as biomass...I suppose with pass through costs Barry can chip up his lumber and sell it to Laidlaw though...perhaps he's counting on that based on the lumber industry right now...

[Wing Nut]

A good question to ask Milan Lumber Company is why they don't support the Laidlaw project. Rumor has it that they haven't issued a memo of support because they are concerned about the Laidlaw plant's impact upon wood availability here in the North Country. I've been told they are already having trouble with supply. I sure hope the State is listening to the concerns of other currently operating businesses (besides White Mountain Lumber) that have concerns about wood supply. All the more reason for the State to conduct its own independent wood study (at Laidlaw's expense) to determine the validity of the Landvest study. THIS IS A MAJOR ISSUE THAT THE STATE EFSEC HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO INVESTIGATE. Are you listening EFSEC?

[Rocky]

I have a friend who is an independent logger who is very concerned about the impact of the Laidlaw project if it ever becomes reality. He's also of the opinion that there isn't enough biomass and that the demand will drive some timberland owners to sell pulp grade and higher grade fiber as biomass. (To help pay taxes etc.)

[jon]

I do think it is only proper to ask the Daily Sun for a retraction of their erroneous reporting once again on statistical data pertinent to their claims as to a 2 to 1 margin in favor of the Laidlaw biomass plant based on speakers at the the assembly.

So here's more on the 2:1 in support comment

Speaking in Support = 12

Ray Burton
Larry Guay - Gorham
Joe Casey - Rochester union worker
Paul Grenier - Berlin
Michael Duran - Ossipee union worker
Bob Danderson - Berlin
Bob Looser - Berlin union worker
Max Makitis - Hales Location
Juanita Collins - Berlin
Sean Cleary - Manchester union worker
Michael Rozek - Berlin
Barry Kelly - Berlin

Speaking in Opposition = 8

Larry Kelly - Berlin
David Bertrand - Berlin
Robb Rodrigue - Berlin
Cathy Corkery - Concord, representing 400 local residents
Dick Poulin - Berlin
Jon Edwards - Berlin
Roland Olbie - Berlin
Katie Paine - Berlin

To begin with this equates to 1.5:1 not 2:1

If you just count Berlin residents - the count is 7 opposed and 6 supporting
If you discount the "staged union worker" support - the count is 8 opposed and
8 supporting

If you discount the politicians - the count is 8 opposed and 8 supporting

If you take out both the union workers and the politicians (count only the
real people) - the count is 8 opposed and 3 supporting

[Wing Nut]

Good observation Jon. Bartozek stacked the deck with his out of town union representatives. He likes to play dirty, that is for sure. Would we expect anything less from our good old snake oil salesman?

[Rocky]

What's the old saying about "figures don't lie, but liars figure". It's the same kind of "feel good" math Grenier uses when he claims he was elected by a 60% margin. Yeah, 60% of those who voted, but the majority either did not vote or voted for Dave Bertrand. I heard today that the owner of Northern Lights Housing was refused admittance to the Laidlaw dog and pony show. The reason given was that it was by invitation only. I would hope that he would now better understand the type of people who make up the Laidlaw organization and the challenge Berlin faces.

[Jon Edwards (the fat bald guy)]

I wasn't allowed in initially either, Rocky. I had a personal conversation with Ray Kusche who informed me I wasn't alllowed because it was private property. Attny Needleman apologized for Laidlaw afterwards.

[wood burner]

Jon,Wingnut and Rocky The only people on here who keep bashing laidlaw are you guy's.You really need to get a life.I was at that meeting lastnight and know there was a lot more support for this project then you say. I was out side during break and talked to many. And I talked to many more on my way back in and there was at least 9 to 1 that was in support of this project.Jon at least be honest in your posts.As far as the sierra club go's she did not make any sense could not even understand her speech!You are telling me that the union reps are bought and paid for? Come on guys.Another thing Jon your ward supports this project 3 to one, I know I have also done research!! Jon you LOST the election by a landslide and your going to lose this too!Mark this post in your notes!