March 29, 2024
BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE

Bucksport schedules referendum on AES plant

BUCKSPORT — Residents of Bucksport will have an opportunity in November to vote in a non-binding referendum aimed at gauging public sentiment about the proposed construction of a coal-fired cogeneration plant in the community.

Applied Energy Services, which proposed construction of the 180,000-megawatt facility, has an application pending before the Planning Board for a shoreland zoning permit to construct and operate the facility at Harriman Cove on the Penobscot River. Hearings are being conducted by the board at this time. Several state and federal permits also must be obtained by the company.

The Bucksport Town Council approved the language of the referendum Thursday evening. According to the ballot, the referendum question “is non-binding, but will serve to identify the position of the majority of those citizens voting on the proposed construction of the AES facility.”

Although he favored the “straightforward” language of the referendum, Councilor Don White objected to the explanations to be given on the ballot which are added to clarify a yes or no vote.

In a discussion about the ballot at the council meeting, White said that the explanations “are not needed and could possibly confuse some people.”

As approved by a majority of the council members Thursday evening, the referendum question will ask: “Do you favor construction of the AES proposed coal-fired cogeneration plant in Bucksport?”

Voters can respond by checking either a box marked yes or one marked no. On the ballot, a yes vote is defined as one which “indicates support for the construction of the plant, but only if all local, state and federal permits are obtained.”

A no vote, the ballot states, “indicates opposition to the construction of the plant.”

White said that the yes explanation is merely an echo of statements made by the “pro-AES groups.

“We’re not interested in state and federal OKs or not-OKs,” he added. “This explanation also seems to disenfranchise people who want this thing built no matter what. The explanations muddy up the question,” he said.

A Bucksport resident objected to White’s assertion that some residents would be in favor of the plant’s construction regardless of state and federal permits. Another resident supported the removal of the explanations, calling them “unnecessary, exclusionary and prejudicial.”

Councilor Henry Bourgon pointed to the wording of the yes explanation as being similar to the advice given to AES by the council more than a year ago. “We told them then that if all local, state and federal permits were obtained, we’d be in favor.”

White responded that the referendum is not intended to elicit a council opinion but rather the opinion of residents.

The referendum question and the explanations were approved by the majority of the council. Opposing votes were cast by councilors White and Arthur Adams.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like