NextEra replies: our actions with municipalities are legal

Source unknown, published by Bon Echo Residents Against Turbines
In the last few weeks, there have been several stories centered around the wind energy proposal our company, NextEra Energy Canada submitted into Ontario’s Request for Proposal for Large Renewable Energy Projects (RFP | LRP). While we certainly understand that the proposal of a large, new project in a community will foster debate, it is important that this debate be undertaken using facts.
BEARAT and their public relations consultant John Laforet have continuously shown a pattern of ignoring several important facts. The first is a complaint issued to the U.S. Department of Justice regarding the community vibrancy fund agreement we entered into with the Township of Addington Highlands. This, and all other similar agreements we have entered into with other municipalities, have been thoroughly reviewed and approved by each municipality’s respective legal counsel as well as ours. In short, these are perfectly legal documents that are compliant with U.S. and Canadian laws.
Mr. Laforet later states that we ran afoul of the Independent Electricity System Operator’s (IESO) prohibited communications rules when negotiating, or attempting to negotiate, a community vibrancy agreement with municipal governments and that such agreements are new to the Province. Neither statement could be further from the truth. The IESO encourages proponents to meet and discuss proposed projects with local municipalities. In fact, the IESO prioritized projects that had entered into agreements with municipalities. Mr. Laforet’s assertion that these agreements are “not legal” in Ontario is simply not accurate.
While we have not been provided with a copy of either of their complaints to the IESO or the Department of Justice, we are confident that our actions are entirely within the bounds of law and the rules of the IESO’s procurement and will stand up to any scrutiny. To imply otherwise is disingenuous.
In last Thursday’s (Oct 1) article, Mr. Laforet makes a variety of inaccurate assertions. He suggests that our original Northpoint II Wind proposal spanned two townships and identified two grid connection points, and that our ultimate submission to the IESO was smaller. While it is true that our proposed project boundary shrunk from our initial proposal, Mr. Laforet is incorrect in noting that this is somehow in contravention of the IESO’s rules. Quite the contrary, the IESO’s rules specifically allow for proponents to reduce the size and scope of the project during the pre-bid process.
We understand that a community will discuss and debate projects like our proposed Northpoint I and Northpoint II wind projects, but it’s important that these discussions are fact based.
Ben Greenhouse
Executive Director, NextEra Energy Canada

What's your reaction?


  • Patti Kellar
    Posted October 12, 2015 7:32 pm 0Likes

    Well that’s that then. With that endorsement we can all just pack our bags and leave. I feel so much better now that Nextera has shared that with everyone, don’t all of you? Psha- we were all thinking something smelled fishy only to find out everything is on the up and up. Silly us – not trusting them. I am so relieved. lol.

  • Gord Schneider
    Posted October 12, 2015 8:51 pm 0Likes

    What they’re doing may be legal (God help us) but what they’re doing is sure not ethical or moral.

  • Richard Mann
    Posted October 12, 2015 11:12 pm 0Likes

    @Gord Schneider. Exactly, “ethical” and “moral”.
    Green energy is supposed to be about ethics and morals, “doing the right thing” for the planet. It has to held to a higher standard than usual business, which we assume is profit driven…

  • Pat Cusack
    Posted October 13, 2015 10:42 am 0Likes

    Think its bad now? How about our Mz Wynne and Justin combined.

  • Tracy
    Posted October 13, 2015 10:55 am 0Likes

    @ Pat..good pairing; take out two birds with one stone.
    Tru-dough-head knows exactly what he’s getting himself into, just as Katy did. Bring him on. This rural folk is sick and not feeling so nice anymore.

  • Barbara
    Posted October 13, 2015 1:09 pm 0Likes

    Has the issue about a U.S. company providing a vibrancy fund/money in a foreign country been resolved?
    Of course, any company would say what they do is legal.

    • Barbara
      Posted October 13, 2015 1:45 pm 0Likes

      The issue of the vibrancy funding will be decided in the U.S. and not in Canada? But check this out again so that people will have a clear understanding of this issue.

      • Wind Concerns Ontario
        Posted October 15, 2015 9:08 am 0Likes

        We have asked BEARAT to keep us informed. The premise here is that this is a U.S. company operating in Canada but is still subject to U.S. laws.

Add Comment

© Copyright 2022 | WCO | Wind Concerns Ontario

to top