How sad it is when a company's op ed about how much it cares about your community comes with a "fill-in-the-blank" for the name of your community?
Transource claims to have "listened" to your community, and wants you to know:
Transource claims to have "listened" to your community, and wants you to know:
We heard about the valuable role agriculture plays in this region and our engineers worked to ensure typical farming practices in **INSERT COUNTY NAME HERE** County, from crops to orchards, could continue to exist within the right-of-way.
See York County version here.
See Franklin County version here.
Same op ed, only the county names were changed. It's like getting a "personalized" piece of junk mail in your newspaper.
See Franklin County version here.
Same op ed, only the county names were changed. It's like getting a "personalized" piece of junk mail in your newspaper.
What does an electrical engineer in Columbus, Ohio, know about "typical farming practices" in Pennsylvania? Transource "heard" what it wanted to hear -- that its project could be built without impacting farmland. But that's not what the community was telling Transource. In fact, as a wise person pointed out, if Transource really heard what the community was saying, there would be a few electrical engineers tiptoeing around quite gingerly because they'd have a monopole shoved where the sun doesn't shine.
The communities in York and Franklin counties said "no" to Transource. No, you cannot build that line across our land. No, you cannot build the project without impacting farmland.
Todd Burns is living in some kind of fantasy world, where the communities accept the transmission project and are so happy that Transource "listened" to their opinions and "started a dialogue." Of course, nothing much changed. Todd just wants you to think you had some influence on the process. Transource wants to build its project. It will be very profitable.
The actual "folks" in the community want a "dialogue" about whether to build this project or not. And if it's built, they want to shape how and where it's done. Perhaps the project should be built on existing rights of way owned by other companies, or perhaps it should be buried. The only choices Transource gave the community was to suggest that an aerial line on new right of way could be shifted onto a neighbor's property. That's no choice at all. That's not a "dialogue," it's a monologue. When "folks" objected to the project, Transource tossed out some "responsible construction practices that respect the environment and your property, and the operation and maintenance of the transmission line," and some "practices to fairly compensate landowners when we acquire easements for the new line, including compensation for potential impacts or crop loss during construction and restoration." But the "folks" were not satisfied, and they're still not satisfied.
So, what kind of performance art* was that op ed? The affected "folks" didn't feel that their concerns were addressed. If they did, there wouldn't be any opposition. And yet I found myself in an auditorium filled with staunch opponents of the project last night. And they're not giving up. And they're not giving in.
So, yes, let's get on with this, Transource. Let's get on to the REAL listening to "folks" that happens in the regulatory, political and public relations arena. Let's examine the fragile claims of "need," and let's admit that this project provides no benefit to the "folks" Transource wants to burden with its impacts.
The real listening has only just begun.
*Oh for the love of Christmas cookies, Todd must think the "folks" can't read, so he needs to act it out for them on video. I'm not sure whether to laugh or throw up.
The communities in York and Franklin counties said "no" to Transource. No, you cannot build that line across our land. No, you cannot build the project without impacting farmland.
Todd Burns is living in some kind of fantasy world, where the communities accept the transmission project and are so happy that Transource "listened" to their opinions and "started a dialogue." Of course, nothing much changed. Todd just wants you to think you had some influence on the process. Transource wants to build its project. It will be very profitable.
The actual "folks" in the community want a "dialogue" about whether to build this project or not. And if it's built, they want to shape how and where it's done. Perhaps the project should be built on existing rights of way owned by other companies, or perhaps it should be buried. The only choices Transource gave the community was to suggest that an aerial line on new right of way could be shifted onto a neighbor's property. That's no choice at all. That's not a "dialogue," it's a monologue. When "folks" objected to the project, Transource tossed out some "responsible construction practices that respect the environment and your property, and the operation and maintenance of the transmission line," and some "practices to fairly compensate landowners when we acquire easements for the new line, including compensation for potential impacts or crop loss during construction and restoration." But the "folks" were not satisfied, and they're still not satisfied.
So, what kind of performance art* was that op ed? The affected "folks" didn't feel that their concerns were addressed. If they did, there wouldn't be any opposition. And yet I found myself in an auditorium filled with staunch opponents of the project last night. And they're not giving up. And they're not giving in.
So, yes, let's get on with this, Transource. Let's get on to the REAL listening to "folks" that happens in the regulatory, political and public relations arena. Let's examine the fragile claims of "need," and let's admit that this project provides no benefit to the "folks" Transource wants to burden with its impacts.
The real listening has only just begun.
*Oh for the love of Christmas cookies, Todd must think the "folks" can't read, so he needs to act it out for them on video. I'm not sure whether to laugh or throw up.
RSS Feed