[Update] Protect ridgelines or allow solar?

Posted on by

The Norwich Selectboard will not object before the PUC to a solar facility being built in a ridgeline protected area. That position won the day, notwithstanding the community values against such development articulated in the Town Plan. As noted in my original post, the property owner has made no effort to show that the solar facility will have no impact on views. “They haven’t done the work,” said Planning and Zoning Director Rod Francis at the Selectboard meeting. Nevertheless, the Continue reading [Update] Protect ridgelines or allow solar?→

Protect ridgelines or allow solar? Norwich Selectboard may decide at its 9/23 meeting

Posted on by

In the packet for the Norwich Selectboard meeting on Wednesday, September 23 is a filing with the Vermont PUC seeking approval to build a small (in relative terms), ground-based solar panel farm on Tucker Hill Road. See map above. The Net-Metering Application is in the Selectboard packet for 09-23-2020 under correspondence at page 18. Although not obvious in the PUC application, the project is located in a ridgeline protected area designated in the Town’s zoning regulations. I thought ground-based solar Continue reading Protect ridgelines or allow solar? Norwich Selectboard may decide at its 9/23 meeting→

Sewer Working Group to dissolve?

Posted on by

The Wastewater Working Group established by the Planning Commission in June is apparently going to dissolve. That seems to be approach it will take to cure its violation of the Open Meeting Law. The agenda for the meeting, on August 26 at noon, reads in part: 6. Response to OML violation: a. Suggested Motion: The Wastewater Working Group affirms that an ‘action’ taken in any unnoticed meeting is void b. Suggested motion: The Wastewater Working Group recommends that it be Continue reading Sewer Working Group to dissolve?→

Sewer Working Group violates Open Meeting Law

Posted on by

Whether Norwich constructs a sewer to service the Village and Route 5 South will certainly be a hot button topic, as it has been for years. However, I did not anticipate the first button pushed to be a dispute about the Vermont Open Meeting Law (OML). Sadly, the dispute was easily avoidable, because the Selectboard resolved the same OML question in December 2019. At the end of this post, I think out loud about who decides these public notice issues. Continue reading Sewer Working Group violates Open Meeting Law→

[Update] TRORC dumps Norwich from Regional Energy Coordinator project

Posted on by

In the end, the Norwich Selectboard did not see the regional energy coordinator as an important project. That is my impression from the July 22 Selectboard meeting, as viewed on CATV. Dumped from the project by the Two Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission (TRORC), the Board decided to accept the decision and “move on” from the episode. My original blog post on the topic is here. The decision to move on seems a disservice to Norwich voters who approved a specific Continue reading [Update] TRORC dumps Norwich from Regional Energy Coordinator project→

TRORC dumps Norwich from Regional Energy Coordinator project

Posted on by

Two Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission (TRORC) has unilaterally dumped the Town of Norwich from the Regional Energy Coordinator pilot project. That decision is apparent from the series of emails in the Selectboard packet for the July 22 meeting, starting at page 153. Norwich’s sin: asking that the seven towns funding the project have a say in its administration. My imperfect understanding is that seven towns banded together to hire a regional energy coordinator as a one year pilot project. Voters Continue reading TRORC dumps Norwich from Regional Energy Coordinator project→

[Update] Think Big Norwich: Why Not Community Geothermal?

Posted on by

One of the reasons I plan to vote against Article 8 is that the Town Facilities Working Group gave no consideration to a geothermal heating district. Unbeknownst to me, the Energy Committee backed the idea of a heating district for the Village in a 2010 report. That report, as well as a pilot project in Massachusetts, are the reasons for this update. Time to dust off that 2010 report and do some legwork! Back in February, I wrote a blog Continue reading [Update] Think Big Norwich: Why Not Community Geothermal?→

Article 8 – voting no, as a renovation project

Posted on by

I posted the following on the listserv today regarding the re-vote on the Tracy Hall geothermal project. Thought I would share it here. Following the listserv post, I add below an additional, out-of-box thought about the Tracy Hall cupola. Listserv post Public officials tout the Tracy Hall geothermal project as a renovation project, primarily because approximately $1 million of the cost is dedicated to improving the ventilation system at Tracy Hall. However, viewed in that light, the project proposal strikes Continue reading Article 8 – voting no, as a renovation project→

Transparency? Selectboard approves no-bid contract, without public notice. Selectboard packet ‘revised’ after issuance.

Posted on by

The Selectboard approved a no bid contract for an engineering study related to the replacement of the box culvert on Route 132. Fees paid to Stantec Engineering are not subject to competitive bids. The action, taken on June 10, was not on the agenda. That seems like a violation of the Vermont Open Meeting Law. No materials were in the original Selectboard packet. In addition, the Selectboard packet was “revised” after issuance to include information about the no-bid contract. As Continue reading Transparency? Selectboard approves no-bid contract, without public notice. Selectboard packet ‘revised’ after issuance.→