Official Letters of Support

Protect Sudbury is grateful for the support from the following local, state, and federal officials, and state and federal agencies:

Members of United States Congress Lori Trahan and Katherine Clark, Letter to Surface Transportation Board, July 15, 2022
“We fully support grid expansion, and we are particularly happy Eversource is working to expand and stabilize the grid for our districts. That being said, our understanding is that there is another viable proposed route for the Eversource project which would not carry with it the environmental nor the public health impacts associated with the current proposal and concerns of our constituents.”

Sudbury Valley Trustees, Comments to Sudbury Conservation Commission regarding Eversource NOI, July 8, 2020
“I have observed even the most responsible contractors do the wrong thing because their bottom line is to get the job done and get paid. So no matter how good all of these best management practices are on paper, we are putting miles and acres of important habitat and wetland and water resources at great risk with such an intrusive industrial project. Eversource’s bottom line is to generate income. The DCR’s bottom line should be about conservation first, recreation second. The DCR Commissioner’s support of this projects was clearly misguided. ”

State Representatives Jamie Eldridge, Kate Hogan, and Carmine Gentile, Letter to James Montgomery, Commissioner of the Dept of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), May 14, 2020
The proposed high voltage transmission line would be constructed 10-15 feet below ground into the contaminated railbed and into the groundwater, and would run through five Zone 2 aquifers that supply drinking water to the towns of Sudbury and Hudson, and would damage conservation lands owned by the Sudbury Valley Trustees, the local municipalities, and the state and federal government.

Bolton Conservation Commission, Letter to Governor Baker, June 10, 2019
“The proposed high voltage transmission line would have widespread environmental costs. These costs are not offset by the need associated with the Eversource proposal.”

US Senator Ed MarkeyLetter to Protect Sudbury Member, Nick Pernice., April 6, 2018
“Continuing to strengthen our regional grid is important, but should be done in a way that does not harm the environment and conservation land and is respectful of local communities.”

State Representatives Kate HoganLetter to Matthew Beaton, MA State Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, regarding Eversource MEPA filing , June 29, 2017
“As MEPA reviews this project through the Environmental Impact Report process, I implore you to consider the Noticed Alternative Route, comprised of an entirely underground route within public roads in the towns of Hudson, Stow and Sudbury. This clear and reasonable alternative would remove the threat to our much-loved protected lands by avoiding the railroad corridor altogether.”

Town of Sudbury Press Release, Developments Continue in Sudbury’s Fight Against Eversource, April 13, 2017
“The Town of Sudbury continues to oppose any project along the MBTA right of way. We will not accept any project in our Town, which comes with a power line running through our conservation land, along back yards and endangering our way of life.”

US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastern Massachusetts National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Letter to Bev Schultz, January 11, 2017
“We sincerely hope that Eversource more fully develops an alternative proposal that would route electrical transmission cables underground through local streets, thus avoiding… environmental impacts including potential impacts to endangered species.”

Environmental League of Massachusetts, Letter to Governor Baker, December 15, 2016
“Eversource did not accurately consider the environmental impacts of its Preferred Routes … and the Environmental League of Massachusetts believes that the permanent damage to topography, wildlife, and vegetation in this unique area cannot be understated.”

Clean Water Action, Letter to Governor Baker, December 15, 2016
“The construction of the transmission corridor would diminish shade cover and would result in warmer and inhospitable river temperatures and potential pollution due to herbicide usage will negatively impact vulnerable brook trout populations.”

Sudbury Valley Trustees, Letter to Governor Baker, December 7, 2016
“SVT strongly supports a street-based route which Eversource has acknowledged to have minimal environmental impacts.”

Senator Markey, Letter to Governor Baker, October 21, 2016
“Continuing to strengthen our regional electric grid is important but should be done in a way that does not harm the environment and conservation land and is respectful of local communities.”

Senator Warren, Representative Tsongas, Representative Clark, Letter to Governor Baker, October 18, 2016
“The Hudson and Sudbury Selectboards have raised concerns we would like to reiterate regarding the subsequent impact the project could have on the towns’ equalized value and levy ceiling, combined with the potential costs associated with remediation to mitigate environmental damage from the project, could negatively impact town budgets, resulting in decreased funding for needed programs, services, and infrastructure. Additionally, potential health concerns for residents, specific to the contamination of the drinking water supply resulting from the required spraying of chemicals, have also been raised.”

Massachusetts Sierra Club, Letter to Jim Hunt, Vice President for Regulatory Affairs & Community Relations, and Bev Schultz, Eversource Project Manager, September 27, 2016
“Any siting of a transmission line – either above or below ground – will have significant and permanent deleterious effects on protected lands, threaten the town water supply and dealue residential neighborhoods and historic districts along the path which you call the “preferred” route.”

Mass Audubon Advocacy Department, Letter to Bev Schultz, Eversource Project Manager, September 12, 2016
“…the full costs of overhead vs. underground lines should be considered in lifecycle terms. Underground lines, including lines constructed within roadways, are more expensive initially. However, they are more reliable, especially in the context of increasingly frequent extreme weather events associated with climate change. Over the many-decades-long service life of the lines, the costs associated with maintaining overhead lines and associated ROW are significant and should be taken into account.”

OARS for the Assabet, Sudbury, and Concord Rivers, Letter to Bev Shultz, Eversource Project Manager, September 6, 2016
“Alternatives to this ecologically-damaging route must be considered. Putting the transmission line under already-existing streets would result in far less ecological damage. Some commenters have suggested burying the transmission lines beside the existing railroad bed. Unless great care can be taken to protect the streams during construction and suitable stream crossings designed, burying the transmission lines risks permanently damaging the natural courses and connectivity of the streams. The need to maintain a cleared corridor would still, presumably, necessitate the use of herbicides.”

Friends of the Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge, Letter to Bev Shultz, Eversource Project Manager, August 14, 2016
“The Refuge is a remarkably prized resource to Eastern Massachusetts, and in particular to the surrounding communities of Maynard, Hudson, Marlborough, Stow and Sudbury.”

Sudbury Board of Selectmen: Eversource Project Financial Impact Press Release, August 2, 2016
“Proposed Eversource Project would be an ‘Exorbitant” Financial Burden for Town of Sudbury”

US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastern Massachusetts National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Letter to Bev Schultz, Eversource Project Manager, June 28, 2016
“…it cannot occur at the expense of the few remaining undeveloped open spaces with premier wildlife habitats in this part of Massachusetts.”

State Senator Jamie Eldridge, letter of support for H.4357 to the Chairs of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, June 21, 2016
“This bill would… restrict… projects to those with “minimal impact on the environment, public health… and the overall wellbeing of residents abutting the project.” These factors are cruial to the health and safety of, not just Sudbury residents, but all residents of the Commonwealth.”

State Representative Carmine Gentile, letter of support for H.4357 to the Chairs of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, June 20, 2016
“Cities and towns in the path of new transmission lines should not have to bear the overwhelming brunt of the burdens imposed by projects that bolster regional infrastruction without due consideration of environmental and safety concerns.”

Sudbury Board of Selectmen: Eversource Herbicides Press Release, June 16, 2016
“Sudbury Board of Selectmen ‘Deeply Concerned’ About Serious Health and Environmental Risks from Dangerous Herbicides used by Eversource.”

Sudbury Board of Selectmen: Letter to Matthew Beaton, MA State Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, May 24, 2016
“The entire [Eversource Project] is fundamentally flawed due to its environmental, health and safety risks, significant visual pollution, and adverse financial and safety impacts on residents and businesses.”

Sudbury Water District, Letter to Energy Facilities Siting Board, May 11, 2016
“…the Sudbury Water District is still very concerned with a proposal for wide scale herbicide use in any manner…”

Sudbury Board of Selectmen: Press Release, April 7, 2016
“the Board of Selectmen has voted unanimously to oppose the Eversource Sudbury to Hudson Transmission Reliability Project.”

Marlboro Conservation Commission: Letter to Bev Schultz, Eversource Project Manager, March 30, 2016
“Our main concern… is that it will bisect a large area which has contiguous open space and harbors diverse wildlife with several different habitat types within its boundaries. It is home to several threatened and endangered species of animals and plants which we have worked hard to protect over the years..”

Official Statement from Mass Audubon, March 30, 2016
Mass Audubon generally supports a rigorous alternatives analysis for any project proposing to impact conservation lands protected by Article 97 of the State Constitution, mapped habitat of state- or federally-listed rare species, and/or wetlands. We commend Protect Sudbury and local residents for calling for consideration of alternatives to the routing of this utility line through several protected and sensitive areas. We are hopeful that with your involvement, a revised plan will be developed that meets the needs for electric grid reliability without the extensive impacts initially proposed.
Christina Wiseman on behalf of Jack Clarke
Director of Public Policy & Government Relations

Sudbury Valley Trustees: Letter to Bev Schultz, Eversource Project Manager, March 28 2016
“…impacts would likely include the wholesale destruction or alteration of key natural features in or along the right of way.”

Governor’s Councillor Marilyn M. Petitto Devaney, Letter to Governor Baker, March 2016
“Your intervention is extremely needed. This plan would completely destroy the conservation areas.”

Town Manager, Melissa Murphy-Rodrigues, on behalf of Sudbury Board of Selectmen:Letter to Beverly Shultz, Project Manager, Eversource, March 25, 2016
“The board continues to have concerns about this project and is acutely aware of concerns raised by our residents.”

State Senator Jamie Eldridge & State Representatives Kate Hogan and Carmine Gentile: Letter to State Office of Energy Affairs and Dept. of Public Utilities
“…what price do you put on the clear-cutting and despoiling of precious conservation land, beautiful views, ecological diversity, and taxpayer-funded open space?”

State Representative Carmine Gentile: E-mail to Protect Sudbury, Inc., March 21, 2016
I have urged the Selectmen to demand that Eversource use one of their already developed plans to place the line under the streets.

Sudbury Historical Society: Letter to Sudbury Board of Selectmen, March 18, 2016
“It will destroy the view, the environment, the historic essence, and the town will gain nothing from this intrusion on the landscape.”

Sudbury Conservation Commission: Letter to Eversource, March 17, 2016
“We believe that the preferred alternative within the MBTA rail line property is a significantly flawed alternative regardless of whether or not the transmission line is above or below ground.”

Sudbury Board of Selectmen: Letter to Governor Baker, March 17, 2016
“This project creates an unfair burden to our community. It would decimate our environment, destroy our land and cause irreparable harm to our community. We have a duty to protect our town.”

Sudbury Town Manager, Melissa Murphy-Rodrigues: Letter to Governor Baker, March 14, 2016
“The burden on Sudbury is unacceptable, the plan is unacceptable and I urge Eversource, our legislators and the State to stand with Sudbury to demand better for our town.”

Sudbury Historic Districts Commission: Letter to Eversource, March 14, 2016
“The proposed route would irreparably damage or destroy protected and unprotected historic Sudbury.”

Protect Sudbury, Inc. Official Letters

Bill Schineller, Directory and Government Liason: Letter to Senator Markey, September 5, 2016
“… we need your leadership from Washington to steer decision-making… towards solutions that are more forward looking and consider the cost to the environment and communities as well as build cost.”

Bill Schineller, Directory and Government Liason: Letter to Governor Baker, March 18, 2016
“In just 3 weeks, over 3000 citizens have united to form a 501 (c) (4) organization to fight this proposed project.”

Sudbury residents packed the house at the Eversource presentation, March 16, 2016