Wind power exec accused of defamation against expert witness

October 28, 2017

Citizens of Dutton Dunwich oppose the Invenergy wind power project: is the company engaging in slander in the U.S.?

A qualified professional real estate appraiser in Illinois alleges that an executive with U.S. wind power developer Invenergy is conducting a campaign of defamation and slander against him, in an effort to have him disqualified from testifying as an expert witness on wind turbines and property values.
Michael McCann wrote a letter on October 20th to the County Supervisors in Palo Alto, Iowa, to counter statements made about him by the Invenergy employee, Michael Blazer, who is both a company vice-president and chief legal officer.
Apparently, Blazer filed an online complaint with the Illinois licensing board that governs the practice of real estate appraisers in that state, then took a screenshot of his complaint and filed that as proof that Mr McCann was “under investigation” by the licensing board. There was no public documentation of any complaint.
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation did process the online submission but found it to be without merit, and dismissed any complaint against Mr. McCann. His license is not in fact under review.
Nevertheless, McCann alleges in his letter, months later Invenergy and Blazer continue to repeat the story that McCann is under suspicion, in an attempt to prevent McCann’s testimony about “injurious” effects of the presence of wind turbines on property values.
“This was a blatant attempt by an Invenergy officer and attorney acting as complainant, judge, jury and firing squad to advance his corporate interests by sullying my reputation, and apparently to try to prevent me from testifying regarding my well documented findings regarding the significant impact of wind turbines on neighboring values.”
Read the letter by Michael McCann to the Palo Alto County government here. McCann letter to Palo Alto County Iowa October 20 2017  Mr. McCann is currently seeking legal advice on future actions.
“This attempt to discredit an expert witness by a wind power developer is very worrying,” says Wind Concerns Ontario president Jane Wilson. “It is hard enough for ordinary citizens and community groups to achieve any kind of justice against these huge, wealthy power developers, without active campaigns to slander and discredit witnesses.”

What's your reaction?


  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted October 28, 2017 8:21 pm 0Likes
    • Sommer
      Posted October 30, 2017 8:25 am 0Likes

      From the Council of Canadians statement:
      “It is outrageous that the Ontario government is refusing to halt construction in the face of such overwhelming evidence,” said Barlow. “The Wynne government must order the construction to stop now. If Samsung can’t do this project without damaging people’s water then they should not do it at all.”
      We need a Maude Barlow to speak firmly to this government about people being harmed. For those who are directly experiencing the harm, there is “overwhelming evidence” that the turbines surrounding their homes are the cause.

  • Stan Thayer
    Posted October 29, 2017 6:21 pm 0Likes

    All be advised!
    I make sure that any information I present can be readily verified by non-professionals and is open to the public without Access To Information filing.
    Many years ago my lawyer and I reviewed some of the legal ramifications we might have to deal with.
    We came to the conclusion that my experiences in the electrical industry since I was fifteen years old, (pay stubs available), plus my non-graduate high school education with no connection or affiliation with any corporation gives me the unique opportunity to provide truthful, factual information at no charge. Next April will be my forty-fith year as an electrician and electrical technician both provincial and federal.
    Most of the threats I have received have been by phone with blocked numbers and when I ask for their name and address so I can go visit them,,,they hang up.
    Newspapers have refused to print my articles even when I offer to pay. Internet site censors have removed my information with no explanation.
    I owe nothing to any political party or corporation.
    My reputation is solid!
    Now, having admitted that, I do also understand why media people and government officials fear me when they are spreading Bullshit.
    Stan the power man.
    Stan Thayer

    • Wind Concerns Ontario
      Posted October 30, 2017 7:41 am 0Likes

      In this case, the wind power developer did not try to argue the facts, but rather try to destroy Mr McCann’s reputation. Imagine, filing a “complaint” yourself, taking a screenshot of it, then using THAT as “proof” there was a problem?

  • Richard Mann
    Posted October 30, 2017 7:20 pm 0Likes

    Here is the latest from the OSPE.
    Note that instead of curtailing the turbines, they are proposing more (as yet unproven) infrastructure to deal with the excess electricity.
    ‘The Good, the Bad & the Ugly:’ Ontario’s Engineers Respond to the Province’s 2017 Long-Term Energy Plan. OSPE. October 30, 2017.

    • Sommer
      Posted November 3, 2017 12:38 pm 0Likes

      “The 2017 LTEP includes the following improvements that OSPE has called for:
      More Realistic Load Forecasting
      Conservation plans and rising electricity prices have reduced demand for electricity in Ontario. OSPE was the first organization to identify this trend and signaled to government that the 2010 and 2013 LTEPs had load forecasts that were too high. Actual demand later confirmed that OSPE’s concern about an excessive load forecast was correct. The 2010 and 2013 plans resulted in the procurement of too much generation that is difficult and expensive to integrate into Ontario’s grid.”
      This part of the report begs the questions: Why did this government not heed the “excessive load forecast”? Why is this government not ordering curtailment of the turbines known to be harming residents in Huron County or in any county where complaints have been addressed to all who are responsible for the harm?
      Is this actually a ‘forced relocation’ agenda and are these turbines the tools being used to bring about the evacuation of rural Ontario?

      • Sommer
        Posted November 3, 2017 12:45 pm 0Likes

        If this is not a ‘forced relocation’ agenda, intended to harm, kill and /or get rid of residents, then why are the offending turbines sited in clusters surrounding peoples’ homes not being turned off/’parked’ during weather episodes where wind speeds and barometric pressure fluctuations are such that they turbines cause harm from excessive noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation. After all of the reports that the MOECC and all who are responsible collectively within this government, have received from residents, including weather conditions, it ought to be quite obvious when the turbines should be seriously curtailed in order not to cause harm.

    • Wind Concerns Ontario
      Posted November 3, 2017 4:00 pm 0Likes

      This posting is about the attempt by a power developer to discredit a witness, not the electricity system or wind turbine noise. Did you perhaps mean to post elsewhere?

  • Barbara
    Posted October 30, 2017 9:38 pm 0Likes

    Energy Regulation Quarterly (ERQ), September 2017
    ‘Premiers’ Bane: A folk history of electricity policy in Ontario’

  • Barbara
    Posted November 3, 2017 1:07 pm 0Likes

    CA.Gov, c. 2010
    Scroll down to:
    “To help reduce staff costs, leaders agreed to utilize non-government (NGO) organizations such as …”

  • Barbara
    Posted November 3, 2017 3:27 pm 0Likes

    For general interest?
    ‘The Green Publicity State: Constructing the Green Economy in Ontario, Canada and Michigan, USA, 2007-2012’

Add Comment

© Copyright 2022 | WCO | Wind Concerns Ontario

to top