County News

Quiet nights

Posted: February 21, 2014 at 9:31 am   /   by   /   comments (7)
Wolfe-Island-Small

Industrial wind turbines on Wolfe Island.
PHOTO: HENRI GARAND

Coalition of municipalities seek to protect health and safety of residents near industrial wind turbines

It’s a simple plan. But it may be just the thing to slow down the epidemic of industrial wind turbines spreading across rural Ontario. Warren Howard is a councillor in the municipality of North Perth and lives in Listowel. He is a retired banker and understands bureaucratic processes better than most. He thinks he has come up with a way to thwart the provinces heavy handed Green Energy Act (GEA).

Howard’s plan is to create a bulletproof municipal bylaw that prohibits industrial noise in a rural area at night. That’s it. It sounds simple—and it is—but Howard has done his homework.

He has been working with municipal lawyer Kristi Ross. Together they have discovered that while the Green Energy Act took away virtually all the municipality’s tools to manage, control and oversee the construction of these massive structures in its community—it left intact provisions municipalities use to govern nuisance noise.

Howard believes any municipality may be able use these provisions to stop industrial wind development in its jurisdiction. He is looking to form a coalition of like-minded municipalities to jointly fund the crafting of a noise bylaw that will be enforceable and effective in discouraging industrial wind energy development, but won’t capture and impede other activities that may generate noise—such as agricultural operations.

It’s a fine line. Howard knows it. But he believes it can work.

Municipal bylaws can’t overtly defy or block provincial initiatives. So the Quiet Nights plan doesn’t seek to prevent turbines from making noise—it wouldn’t withstand a legal challenge. Instead the bylaw would only prohibit the machines from making noise at night. Further, the Municipal Act states that such a bylaw, if enacted in good faith by council, is not subject to a review by a court.

Warren-Howard

Warren Howard Municipal councillor in North Perth in Southwest Ontario

Howard points to a decision in Wainfleet in the Niagara region. There, the municipality was seeking twokilometre setbacks rather than the 500-metre setbacks prescribed in the GEA.

The wind energy developer had argued that the municipality’s efforts to protect the health and safety of residents should have no force because they frustrate the purpose of the province’s GEA. But while the Superior Court justice disallowed Wainfleet’s desired setbacks, it confirmed that municipalities retain the right to regulate noise nuisance in the Municipal Act.

It is through this narrow opening that Howard is hoping to lead municipalities seeking to control or limit the industrialization of their rural communities.

To do this, he is looking to raise about $250,000—$50,000 to write an airtight bylaw and about $200,000 for a court decision. Rather than wait for a challenge that is sure to come, the coalition would refer the issue to the court for a ruling.

Howard has already received a $30,000 pledge from the municipality of Kincardine. He is expecting contributions too from the municipalities of Bluewater, Saugeen Shores and Lambton Shores. He was in the County last week looking for a pledge from this council.

He got a rather cool response.

Councillor Brian Marisett, a proponent of industrial wind energy, said crafting a workable noise bylaw would be controversial. He doubted agricultural noise could effectively be exempted.

“If you say noise harms, how do you allow any noise?” said Marisett.

Councillor Terry Shortt, too, expressed misgivings that an effective noise bylaw could be crafted that wouldn’t impede other activities.

“It could come back to haunt us,” said Shortt.

Howard urged the council committee that this was an opportunity to get out in front of the issue, rather than complaining after the fact.

But there seemed little enthusiasm for his plan or urgency for action. The committee asked for a report on the implications of a contribution to the coalition. That report is expected in May.

 

 

Comments (7)

write a comment

Comment
Name E-mail Website

  • May 22, 2014 at 1:25 pm Mike Jankowski

    My Family and I wholeheartedly support this initiative and think it should be in place in any case where people are within 10km of an IWT 400′-700′ high to the top of the rotor..

    IWTs have hurt people and as they are created larger and sited closer to people, over time. This is why some projects hurt people and some do not – there are variables and no one knows the precise formula yet, but we do know IWT is the main part.

    Thank you.

    Reply
  • February 26, 2014 at 6:51 pm Richard Mann

    Wind proponents still have not addressed the health impacts:

    *Canadian Family Physician (2013) “Adverse health effects of industrial wind turbines”,
    *British Medical Journal (2012). “Wind turbine noise”.
    *Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine (2014). “Industrial wind turbines and adverse health effects”.

    Our government (Environment, Health ministries) are ignoring this evidence.

    Lawyers call this “Willful Blindness”.

    Def’n (Wikipedia) Willful blindness (sometimes called ignorance of law, willful ignorance or contrived ignorance or Nelsonian knowledge) is a term used in law to describe a situation where an individual seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts that would render him liable.

    Reply
  • February 25, 2014 at 10:07 pm Louis Brant

    Very sad that a media outlet has sunk to this level. The photo of Wolfe Island was provided by a NIMBY protester and was taken during construction and does not reflect Wolfe Island AT ALL.

    There are NO issues on Wolfe Island other than those which the NIMBYs brought to the table. The reality of which is that the NIMBYs cause the harm .

    Just google NIMBYs cause Harm!

    Reply
    • May 22, 2014 at 1:30 pm Mike Jankowski

      My perspective is NIABY – Not In Anyone’s Back Yard – to protect their health as we know there is a chance over time giant IWTs can and in many cases do hurt people’s health.

      Would you want the ear drums of your children rattled constantly in the pattern of an alarm while they try to sleep? That is what happens when Giant IWTs are sited too close to people. The issues appear when certain conditions are present and over time, not immediately.

      Why wish it upon anyone else? The deck has been stacked against rural Ontarians, but they are fighting back.

      Reply
  • February 25, 2014 at 8:39 pm Craig McMillan

    This sounds like a great initiative!

    Reply
  • February 25, 2014 at 11:55 am Bob Lewis

    Loud Cheer for Warren Howard – a man who looks for ways around problems and puts time and energy into researching it and trying to put it into action in the most effective way possible.

    Then there are councils who are willing to step up to the plate and support it – this is very encouraging.

    Marisett and Shortt – showing true lack of leadership: It might be difficult… It could come back to haunt us… it might be controversial…
    The old school politicians – the reason the country is in the mess it’s in.
    If you have concillors like Marisett and Shortt, just call them up and remind them there’s an election coming. Then make sure someone runs against them.

    Reply
  • February 25, 2014 at 10:25 am Sarie Jenkins

    I seem to recall councillors not permitting certain businesses to open for fear of possible night noise…wasn’t there a submission to open an inn that was denied for fear of possible noise? Wind turbines are certain noise. I do not see how our council could possibly be worried about impeding possible activities when they do it themselves already with impunity and unreasonable trepidation. A decision not to support this initiative is haunting me already!

    Reply