Friday June 3, 2011
Editor’s note: The following article is reprinted verbatim from Better Plan, Wisconsin, with appreciation. WTS.com recommends Better Plan as one of the best, most up-to-date websites on the matter of wind energy. All praise to Lynda Barry for running the site!
Question: “What’s black and white and you can’t talk about it for the rest of your life?”
Answer: “Sorry. I signed a wind lease. I can’t discuss it.”
Better Plan, Wisconsin has been collecting copies of wind leases for the last few years and has yet to find one that didn’t contain a confidentiality agreement—also known as a “gag order.”
Landowners who share wind leases are taking a clear risk, but more are coming forward anyway. One farmer who shared his contract said, “I don’t care anymore. I just don’t want this to happen to anyone else.”
The section below is copied from a wind lease contract recently sent to us. The landowner who signed it agreed to allow noise, vibration, shadow flicker and any other disruption the turbines might cause to take place on his property. If he has problems with these things, he can’t talk about it because the gag order requires that he:
» Not to talk about the contents of lease to anyone.
» Not to talk about the construction or operation of the turbines.
» Not speak to reporters or anyone in the media or issue statements or press releases unless the wind company gives the landowner its written permission.
The landowner also had to agree that the gag order would still apply long after the turbines are gone, because this line, “This section shall survive the termination of expiration of this lease,” means this gag order is forever.
The landowner can talk to his lawyer or accountant and certain others about the contract, but only after they agree to a gag order too.
Straight from the Contract:
(Landowner) shall maintain in strictest confidence, for the sole benefit of (wind developer), all information pertaining to the terms and conditions of this lease, including, without limitation, the construction and power production of the wind farm.
Without first obtaining written permission from the (wind developer), (the landowner) shall not issue any statements or press releases or respond to any inquires from news media regarding such matters.
(Landowner) shall maintain the strictest confidence, for the sole benefit of the (wind developer), all information pertaining to the terms and conditions of this lease, including, without limitation, the financial terms hereof.
This section shall survive the termination of expiration of this lease.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit sharing or disclosing information with any party’s (lawyer), accountants, or current or prospective investors, purchases, lenders, or as required by law, provided that the party sharing or disclosing such information requires the recipient to maintain the confidentiality of such disclosed information.
Wind turbines hammer property & health (USA)
Thursday July 7, 2011
“People will be either trapped within or flee (abandon or sell at huge discounts) their family homes”
Editor’s note: The following was written by Michael McCann, a seasoned Chicago real estate appraiser who for several years has been examining the property value impacts of wind turbines. Mr. McCann has made numerous, peer-reviewed reports to town boards faced with wind energy projects.
His letter is addressed to Kenneth Kimmell, Commissioner of the Mass. Dept. of Environmental Protection, and John Auerbach, Commissioner of Mass. Dept. of Public Health, in response to the State of Massachusetts holding an inquiry into Wind Turbine Syndrome.
Kenneth Kimmell, Commissioner, DEP
John Auerbach, Commissioner, DPH
MassDEP Wind Turbine Docket
1 Winter Street 4th Floor Mailroom
Boston, MA 02108
I am responding to your inquiry into health effects from industrial wind turbines. Since there is a noticeable correlation between reported health impacts and significant impacts on real estate values, as well as the real estate rights issue of peaceful use and enjoyment of one’s home, I believe the documented diminution of property values caused by improper turbine siting is an objective measure of this secondary impact.
I do not write as a medical expert; however, in 6 years of reviewing industry funded and independent reports, inspecting project locations, researching empirical prima facie sale price evidence and interviewing residents, I have found that there is a tremendous market aversion of the “market” to buying homes within visible and audible (or sub-audible) proximity to industrial scale turbines.
My value studies have included submissions to Massachusetts Towns of Wareham and Brewster, and have been written to address zoning compliance evaluation of proposed projects in those locales. (I am sure either Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals would be able to provide a copy of my submitted report or presentation, but if interested in reviewing these documents, feel free to contact me directly for a copy.)
I would note for your consideration that wind project developers in Massachusetts typically seek to obtain setback permissions that have proven to be unhealthy and so disturbing to some existing residents near other wind energy projects worldwide, that dozens of people have abandoned their family homes rather than continue to try to cope with an untenable level of impact. Impacts from noise, shadow flicker and the unhealthy physical and/or physiological reactions to same.
Industry prefers to couch their applications for approval with their self defined limits of how many hours of shadow flicker are acceptable, or with “modeled” rather than measured noise studies. They also prefer to discuss setbacks in terms of feet and meters, when projects broadcast their impacts on a scale measured in miles and kilometers. I have personally seen more official scrutiny of public officials hearing zoning requests for fast-food drive through lanes or lighted parking lots than what is often rubber stamped approval of wind applications, with no serious consideration of the multitude of actual impacts from wind turbines.
By THOMAS CONTENT , Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Last update: January 20, 2011
In the battle between property owners and clean energy advocates, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has proposed new requirements for wind farms that could essentially halt new wind development in the state.
Real Estate Center - Property Rights: Obstruction of View, Light or Air
Flawed Methodologies Used in U.S. DOE Study on Property Values and Wind Power Projects: Serious questions raised concerning the credibility of the results
Property values blowing in the wind: REALTOR'S REPORT: Proposed turbine projects put damper on residential property sales in Cape Vincent
By NANCY MADSEN, TIMES STAFF WRITER
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 2010
Michael McCain's letter to Mr. Ben Hoen at Berkley. It pertains to misrepresentation of the data he submitted for the Berkley study on land values near Turbines. If you choose to read the Berkley study, then keep an open mind and read the facts behind the study.
The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis
WIND FARMS, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES, AND RUBBER RULERS©
by Albert R. Wilson
Comments to Hoen/Wiser regarding property value study
September 11, 2009 by Windaction.org
Ben Hoen, Dr. Ryan Wiser, and others conducted a national study to determine the impact of industrial-scale wind turbines on nearby property values. The preliminary conclusions of the report were announced in 2007, however, no report has been released. Windaction.org had an opportunity to review the study's methodology and provide comments to Hoen and Wiser. Our comments can be accessed by downloading this file.
Wind and Property Values: Relation Unknown
By Kennedy Maize
Living with the Impact of WindMills by Chris Luxemburger
Whether or not wind farms adversely affect property values is a highly debated issue. The most well-known study was conducted by the Renewable Energy Policy Project (REPP); it claims that there has been no significant impact on property values from the Fenner or Madison wind farms (REPP 2003).
If you go to REPP's website and look at the report (.pdf file), which allegedly found that "property values... actually performed better than in the comparable community", you'll see that "the comparable community" was a simulated model, and the report made just one reference to noise from wind turbines in 81 pages, which was this one referring to a previous study; "However, the study concluded that while properties with wind turbines on them may increase in value, other properties may be adversely affected if within sight or audible distance of the wind turbines."
It's no wonder they put that big disclaimer at the top, absolving the government of any responsibilty for accuracy or usefullness of the report. Read the full report: http://www.savewesternny.org/property.html
Chris Luxemburger is a real estate broker, director of the Brampton Real Estate Board and the Chairperson of the Real Estate By-Laws Committee in Ontario, Canada. In his survey of the three-year sales records for the Melancthon Wind Plant and surrounding area, Luxemburger found significant differences among 600 properties within and beyond three nautical miles of the plant. Those in proximity to wind turbines had either a higher rate of non-sale (11% vs. 3%) or took twice as long to sell. He summarizes his findings in this presentation.
Impact of Wind Turbines on market value of Texas rural land
This report was prepared for a presentation given at the South Plains Agriculture Wind & Wildlife Conference in Lubbock, Texas on February 13, 2009. The findings and conclusions contained herein are the exclusive property of Gardner Appraisal Group, Inc., and cannot be re-produced without the express written permission of Gardner Appraisal Group, Inc.
Denmark has acknowledged property value loss!
Comments to Hoen/Wiser regarding property value study
From windaction.org, They do a fine job of dismissing this study