Wind: 10 mph
To The Editor:
As members of the Warren Energy Committee, we have attended the majority of the Warren Planning Commission meetings regarding the update of Warren's 2011 Town Plan, a process mandated every five years.
Because of our interest in Warren's potential to become less dependent on fossil fuels and to do our part in helping Vermont reach its goal of 90 percent renewable energy by 2050, our committee was invited to participate in the twice-monthly planning committee meetings and help write the Energy Plan. It is unfortunate that last week, a My View op-ed, "Considerations for a Divisive Issue," contains a great many mistaken assumptions and just plain wrong statements.
There isn't room in a Letter to the Editor to refute all the errors in the My View piece, so we'll just note a few.
1. The Warren PC has decidedly not "worked to further an agenda of increased wind produced energy." It simply recognizes that we must all accept the fact that we are entering a new energy era and move to wean ourselves from reliance on fossil fuels. How that will be accomplished is evolving as new technologies arise and as citizens become better educated about the necessity of conservation and lifestyle changes. A mix of renewable energy sources, locally produced, is a pragmatic, common-sense approach. An important part of the wind energy discussion centered around the necessity of maintaining Warren's historic character and iconic views.
2. Divisiveness emanates from misinformation. It could easily be allayed by more citizen involvement. Very few people show up at planning commission meetings, all of which are warned in advance. Stirring up the populace with theories of nefarious agendas does nothing to advance the development of a sound, forward-looking Town Plan.
3. The Wind section of the Energy Chapter for the Warren Town Plan is just that – a portion of the total Energy Plan in the process of being written with the help of the Energy Committee. None of it is cast in stone, yet.
Citizens have the duty to become informed firsthand, not through rumor and conjecture.
Dotty Kyle and Eric Brattstrom