I read with a great deal of interest the article covering the proceedings of the Hammond Wind Committee. Iberdrola threatening to leave caught my eye, but really did not come as a big surprise to me.
Apparently, some Hammond wind committee members would like a guarantee that their residents are not harmed by property value loss by living next to a farm of 75 500-foot-tall spinning structures. Wind developers across the country (including Iberdrola) have been touting their own financed findings of no impact on property values.
If Iberdrola were genuine in their claim that a wind project has no negative economic consequences for adjacent property owners, then any guarantee to make them whole costs Iberdrola nothing but still allows adjacent property owners to sleep comfortably in the knowledge that they can and will be made whole, if the development in Hammond results in significant loss in property values.
Why can't Iberdrola put their money where their mouth is? Number one, living next to a wind turbine farm does decrease the desirability and will decrease values. There are numerous studies that have shown that, which have been swept under the rug.
Number two, CNBC Financials in a report characterized Iberdrola as a troubled Spanish business desperate to raise cash and reported that they are selling off assets. This company is in financial trouble and wants to use unknowing landowners for their profit and wants to dismiss any responsibility for any damage they do.
The very approach of the developer saying to the community "we're going to take our money and go away if you don't do things our way" should be enough to convince anyone that Hammond has no business doing any business with these people.
Brooke Stark
Hammond
No comments:
Post a Comment