Updated: No LNG in PVD demands National Grid halt construction at Fields Point


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Fields Point Construction 04

The No LNG in PVD coalition is demanding that National Grid immediately halt construction and excavation work at 642 Allens Ave, the site of the proposed liquefaction facility in Fields Point. The proposed facility, which is opposed by Mayor Jorge Elorza and nine state legislators, is currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). National Grid has requested that FERC not hold any public hearings or grant fast tracked approval for the project. No LNG in PVD, a coalition of residents, organizations, and elected officials opposed to National Grid’s LNG facility, calls on the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) to revoke a recently granted permit which authorized soil excavation at the site, which is contaminated with numerous toxins hazardous to human health.

Fields Point Construction 03A group of concerned Providence community members submitted a petition to RIDEM on August 31st which requested that RIDEM revoke the soil management permit until concerns are addressed and a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) is put in place. RIDEM site remediation regulations, amended in 2011, require a PIP – a formal process for public participation and community oversight of the cleanup plan for activities that occur on contaminated sites. RIDEM formally initiated the PIP on September 6th, notifying National Grid “to initiate the process of developing an approvable PIP associated with the planned environmental cleanup of the Providence Gas Company site, and any other site redevelopment activities requiring remedial actions that fall under the jurisdiction of the Remediation Regulations.”

National Grid was required to respond to RIDEM within seven days with proposed plans and a schedule for developing a PIP with the community, writes No LNG in PVD, but says National Grid has ignored this requirement. In addition to violating this regulatory request, says No LNG in PVD, National Grid has begun excavating soil in a large portion of the site along Allens Ave and Terminal Road. Community members have observed uncovered piles of dirt with visible airborne dust.

Fields Point Construction 02The project’s location, 642 Allens Ave, has a long history of industrial contamination dating back to the earliest days of the gas industry. Providence Gas Company operated a “manufactured gas plant” from 1910 to 1954 which resulted in the release of many toxic substances which polluted the soil and groundwater. The site has also been host to an ammonia plant, a toluene facility, a propane works, and most recently an LNG storage facility. Numerous substances which pose a risk to public health, safety, and the environment have been recorded at the site, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), phenolic compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and naphthalene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), ferri­ and ferro cyanide compounds, asbestos, and metals including lead and arsenic. Many locations in the site contain multiple hazardous substances at levels that far exceed allowed standards, and while some specific areas have been remediated since 1994, the majority of the land has not been remediated.

The petition submitted to to RIDEM articulated a number of community concerns about construction at the LNG site exposing workers or community members to toxins.

Fields Point Construction 01“This is our community, people live here and kids go to school here, why does National Grid think it’s okay to put our lives and our health at risk? It’s our legal right to be involved in these decisions,” said Gina Rodríguez, a community resident and leader in the No LNG in PVD coalition. Monica Huertas, another coalition leader said, “It’s outrageous that there’s a known toxic site this close to my house, and we can go down Allens Ave and see clouds of dust blowing off from the piles that National Grid is digging up. The whole point of this Public Involvement Plan law is to address things like that, but National Grid is just ignoring our concerns and DEM isn’t doing anything to stop them.”

A growing number of elected officials are working with the No LNG in PVD coalition and have declared opposition to National Grid’s unnecessary, expensive, and dangerous LNG proposal. The coalition denounces National Grid’s rush to begin work at the site before any public oversight is put in place. “This is exactly what RIDEM’s site remediation regulations are for,” said Representative Joseph Almeida. “In cases like this, where a project could release extremely dangerous contaminants, it is vital that the affected community have a role in overseeing remediation activities. Members of my district are already overburdened by environmental and health hazards. It is vital that DEM stop National Grid from kicking up a new load of previously buried poisons and toxics without giving this community any say.”

David Graves, spokesperson for National Grid, responded. “Construction work now underway on the property is not related to the liquefaction project. All of the work has been properly permitted. As part of our normal procedures, the earth excavated from the site is being covered.

“There are or will soon be two projects underway in the immediate area. One is construction of an access road to accommodate equipment that will come on site to make improvements to containment dyke wall that surrounds the LNG tank. The other is to cap approximately five acres of land at 642 Allens Ave that is part of a remediation project that was started several years ago. Both have been approved by DEM.”

No LNG in PVD coalition member Aaron Jaehnig responded to Graves’ statement. “The petition to DEM for a Public Involvement Plan related to that property clearly requested a halt to any construction or remediation projects until a Plan was in place. DEM’s request to National Grid, for that plan did not alter our request or sepcify that prior permits were exempt. The PIP process exists so the concerned residents, potentially effected by the disruption of toxic materials, are legally granted oversight to such projects. Its great that that National Grid believes they are above participation in this process, it just confirms our suspicions that their actions do not take the public’s well being into consideration. They have already shown a blatant disregard for the community by ignoring DEM’s request for response to the PIP order within seven days. All construction and remediation activity should be halted immediately until that process is completed.”

National Grid has responded a second time, denying some of the allegations made by the N o LNG in PVD coalition: “The work underway at our property at 642 Allens Ave. property, which has been properly permitted, is unrelated to the liquefaction project. One element of the work is environmental remediation. It is enhancing public safety not endangering it as claimed by one group. Also, at no time have we requested to FERC that they not hold public hearings and we responded to DEM on the matter of the Public Involvement Plan (which is unrelated to the current work on the property) within the required time. Every project we undertake is planned and executed under rigid safety and environmental standards and the work currently underway is no exception.”

Burrillville Town Council opposes power plant, but proposed tax treaty undercuts their message


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

20160922_185651Even as the Burrillville Town Council approved a resolution to oppose the siting and construction of Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in their town, the next battle, over a proposed tax treaty between the town and the power plant company, was heating up.

The town council approved the resolution 7-0. The resolution also included a provision that Council President John Pacheco III will testify against the power plant before the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) and ask other municipalities to join the town in opposition.

The vote in opposition breaks a long period of “neutrality” on the part of the town council, which the council maintained was necessary so as to not give the appearance of trying to politically affect the outcomes of advisory opinions from the town planning and zoning boards.

“The siting board and Invenergy can certainly never say we did not follow the process,” said Council President Pacheco.

But in the audience, townspeople were holding bright yellow signs that said, NO TAX TREATY, a preview of Monday night’s town council meeting to vote on an agreement with Invenergy to collect $94 million or more from Invenergy if the power plant is ultimately approved. Townspeople say that approving this tax treaty undercuts the council’s statement of opposition.

One by one the town council members explained their opposition to the project. Councillor Kimberly Brissette-Brown, who was absent, had her statement read by the town clerk. There was no public comment allowed, but the bright signs held by audience members spoke volumes.

On a personal note, I was extremely touched by the comments made by Councillor David Place and the reactions of the townspeople to the mention about RI Future and the work we’ve done on Burrillville. Thank you.

To be continued on Monday night. Here’s the full video:

20160922_190423

EFSB Public Hearing in Warwick a time for reflection on the process


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

20160921_180702The Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) public hearing in Warwick Wednesday evening, coming near the end of the process to decide the fate of Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, was filled with almost philosophical reflection, with many speakers, who have sat through dozens of EFSB, town council, zoning and department meetings and honed their public speaking skills, commenting with a battle weary determination and steely resolve.

Perhaps no one summed up the emotional toll of the process better than Kerri Fagan, who reminded the board of the promises made regarding the fairness of the process by elected officials such as Governor Gina Raimondo and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse as well as by the board members themselves, then launched into a long list of irregularities and seeming violations of the process that tend to favor Invenergy and disfavor the towns people.

Six of the twelve advisory opinions, said Fagan, maintain that, “Invenergy did not provide enough information before the deadline for them to submit an appropriate advisory opinion.”

Fagan explained that the process allows for the RI Public Utilities Commission advisory opinion, “to be completed by a single person, [Herbert DeSimone Jr]” after one of the other members recused themselves because they “previously expressed support for the project.” The process of having one person make that decision was questioned, said Fagan, but was ruled appropriate by the single board member, DeSimone Jr.

“The process allows Invenergy representatives to falsely testify at open meetings,” said Fagan. “Did the process require them to acknowledge their misinformation? No. There are probably people who still believe they will receive great rate savings,” if the power plant is built. Fagan says the process also allowed Invenergy to falsely advertise meeting locations and times.

The process, said Fagan, requires that the Burrillville Town Council remain neutral throughout the process, yet Governor Raimondo and Senator Whitehouse can express their support for the project.

The process allows attorney Richard Sinapi to represent the Harrisville Water Board, but also lobby against Burrillville Representative Cale Keable‘s EFSB bill on behalf of labor unions, while also allowing his law firm to write a position opposing the Town of Burrillville’s Motion to Dismiss. “The question of conflict of interest was raised, but [Sinapi] continues to represent parties on both sides of this proposal.”

The process allows the Governor and labor unions to advocate for the process based on the jobs it will create, but the EFSB is not charged with creating jobs, but with determining energy needs and judging environmental impacts. “I don’t believe the EFSB has a responsibility to create jobs,” said Fagan,” and I don’t believe it is an appropriate outcome to consider in this setting. Yet the process has allowed this to be a major rallying cry for those that support the process.”

“It is very hard for the residents to respect the process,” said Fagan, “as it seems to be flawed in all areas. The EFSB board works for the Governor. The Governor supports the project. Companies such as Goldman Sachs and General Electric appear to be partners in both this proposed project as well as working with the Governor on statewide initiatives.

“Why has there not been a comprehensive environmental impact statement completed?”

“We can only hope that [the EFSB] will truly listen and read through why this is the wrong project and in the wrong location,” said Fagan, wrapping up, “We hope that you have the strength to fight the state wide politics and make a decision on the merits of the project and truly consider the negative, long lasting detrimental impacts  that this project will bring to the Town of Burrillville.”

Other speakers that leaped out at me include Paul Roselli of the Burrillville Land Trust, who praised the RI Department of Enviornmental Management‘s advisory opinion.

Cranston native Rhoda Northup said that this was “not just a Burrillville issue, but a statewide issue. It’s also a Connecticut and Massachusetts issue. “Do we go thirsty and the power plant gets the water?” asked Northup.

Suzanne Dumas

Sally Mendzela spoke about the reality of climate change, and how plants like the one proposed by Invenergy will doom our planet.

Lynn Clark

Mary Gauvin

Smart energy conservation could easily absorb the 10,000 megawatts going offline, the power plant is not needed said Vito Buonomano.

Lisa Petrie explained her concerns as a mother, and explained why she chose to be arrested outside Governor Raimondo’s office.

Donna Woods told the EFSB members, “You do know better” than to approve this plant.

Denise Potvin

This public comment meeting was scheduled for after the last of a dozen advisory opinions were filed with the EFSB. Many who spoke at the hearing pointed out that at least six of the advisory opinions are incomplete, because Invenergy could not supply required information.

The testimony and hearing was also colored by the fact that the Burrillville Town Council will be voting tonight on whether or not to oppose the power plant in a meeting at the Burrillville High School Thursday night, and will be voting on whether to approve or reject a proposed tax treaty between the town and Invenergy on Monday evening. The groups in opposition to the power plant from Burrillville do not want the town council to approve the tax treaty, which may characterized as selling the town for a measly $92 million.

There will be one more public comment meeting, originally to be held on October 3 but not postponed, date to be determined due to Invenergy’s request for a thirty day extension as they work to secure a water source for their plant. In the meantime, the EFSB board will hold a meeting to decide on two motions to dismiss Invenergy’s application, one from the Town of Burrillville and the other from the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) based on Invenergy’s incomplete application and failure to provide adequate or timely information when requested.

Here is the video of all the speakers:

Richard Dionne said that Invenergy should be required to submit all requested information.

Doug Geblinske of TEC-RI spoke in favor of the power plant.

Eugenia Marks, noted environmentalist former head of the RI Audubon Society, spoke against the plant.

David Brunetti questioned Invenergy’s “cicular logic” in determining that Burrillville was the location for this plant.

Kathryn Scaramella questioned the “small but meaningful savings” ratepayers will receive if the plant is built. She pointed out that the extension Invenergy requested was a violation of terms EFSB Chair Meg Curran set out in May, when she said “all deadlines are set in law.”

Mary Jane Bailey said the location chosen for the power plant was rejected when the Ocean State Power Plant was built in the 1980’s. “If it wasn’t right in the ’80s it’s not right now,” said Bailey.

Ben Weilerstein, of the Toxic Action Center said that the same kind of action taking place in Burrillville is what helped defeat the pipeline project in Massachusetts.

Meg Kerr, senior policy director for the RI Audubon Society spoke against the plant.

John McMullen, business agent for the Plumbers and Pipefitters union spoke in favor of the plant, saying there was a need for the energy and the jobs. He said that RI Building Trades supported Deepwater Wind and that a life of temporary jobs allowed him to raise his daughters and send them to college.

Irene Watson noted that her community’s public speaking skills have improved because of the countless meetings they’ve been to.

Kenneth Putnam Jr spoke from the heart. He’s 76 and 1 day old.

Betty Mancucci

John Anthony Scott

Jeremy Bailey

Roy Coloumbe said he represents two dozen iron workers from Burrillville who support the project.

Attorney Greg Mancini is Richard Sinapi’s law partner and represents the RI Building Trades.

“The power plant will be around 30-40 years from now, says Stephanie Sloman. “”I’ll be dead, you’ll be dead,” she told the EFSB members, “75 percent of the people here will be dead. I’m not trying to be funny.” It’s about the future.

Sloman gave each member of the EFSB this picture, to remind them of the species they will either help to save or destroy, depending on how they decide on the power plant.

20160921_200358

Cynthia Crook-Pick compared the power plant to 38 Studios, both are being pushed forward with inadequate information.

Karen Palmer

Jason Olkowski

Scratch the Energy Facility Siting Board process and find naked capitalism


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

This Wednesday, September 21 at 6pm, the Energy Facility Siting Board will conduct its next public hearing about Invenergy’s proposed fossil-fuel-fired power plant in Burrillville.  The hearing will be held in the Toll Gate High School Auditorium, 575 Centerville Road, Warwick.

The last couple of weeks produced a flurry of advisory opinions on Invenergy’s power plant proposal.  The list is here in the Public Utility Commission docket.  I should have read all of these documents, but I have not and may never.  Why should we keep critiquing the emperor’s clothes knowing full well that he has none?

Expansion of the fossil fuel infrastructure
Expansion of the fossil fuel infrastructure: jobs, jobs, jobs!
“Sure it’s retro, but you have to go where the business is.”

I did start reading the advisory opinion of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management.  I keep getting distracted, as I am reminded of sections of Mary Wood’s Nature’s Trust.  Take this:

Bureaucratic acronyms and techno-jargon give a ready-made veil to ongoing political manipulation, operating to ward off oversight from judges, journalists, environmental groups, and citizens. Every environmental agency uses dozens or even hundreds of acronyms that blather an alphabetic mix meaningless to the public. Clean Air Act regulations, for example, display the acronyms BACT, BART, MACT, RACT, SIP, NSPS, NSR, CEMS, HAPS, LAER, NESHAPS, PPM, NAAQS, PSD, TAMS, VOC, and dozens of others. Regulations under the Resource Conservation Recovery Act use UST, TSDF, TCLP, SQG, MCL, LQG, HSWA, CAMU, CAS, CESQG, and many more. Encasing agency decisions in an impenetrable vocabulary, this mumbo jumbo goes far in shielding bureaucrats from outside scrutiny.

In the opinion I struggle with I read about API, AST, COA, MDNR, MTBE, NSA, OPC, PUD, PW-3A, RIRPP, RIWAP, ROW, SAS, SDM, SGCN, ULSD, …   There is no excuse for this kind of writing: word processors for decades have given users the ability to expand their abbreviations.

Collectively, we have spent countless hours exposing the science missing in these opinions. Unfortunately, very little of what is relevant is consistent with the statutes that govern the process.  As Mary Wood puts it:

Despite its original goals, environmental law now institutionalizes a marriage of power and wealth behind the veil of bureaucratic formality.

Indeed, the evidence gushes off the page in the documents of our hallowed process.  The problem is not that the professionals of the various departments do not understand the science.  The problem is that they are—undoubtedly much to their chagrin—subordinate to politically appointed masters.  They are subject to statutes that reflect decades of industry insider subversion of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.

Government as a whole is failing. The short version of the story is that the White House serves at the pleasure of the fossil fuel industry.  The same applies to our state leadership, the majority of  Congress, and our state legislature.

Two government branches down, one to go.  Mary Wood explains what happened to the third, the judiciary.  It has largely excused abandoned its fiduciary duty to preserve Nature’s Trust for present and future generations.  Mary Wood lists the following problems:

  1. Closing the gates: the standing doctrine—To win a law suit you must have standing: you have to show that you have a personal stake in the outcome of the suit you bring.  Apparently, in the world of our revered American law schools, we’re all from outer space and have no stake in the health of this planet.
  2. The judicial deference syndrome—Supposedly, regulatory agencies have technical expertise and objective scientific facts on their side.  Thus, the courts shy away from “micro-managing” these bureaucracies.  Of course, the courts disregard that many decisions that are presented as scientific are products of political pressure and a process captured by industry.
  3. Narrow (often procedural)  grounds—Ecological matters are rarely the issue in court.  What counts is whether the process followed its often ambiguous and arbitrary rules and regulations.  The courts end up dealing with form rather than substance.
  4. The ineffectual remedy—When a court case is occasionally won, the winner must, once again, spend limitless resources to implement the often inadequate remedies.
  5. The remote public—by the time the chainsaws, bulldozers, and dynamite arrive, people are still trying to master the acronyms, but the process has already ended.  It’s too late. 

The Rhode Island process puts our politically appointed Director of the Department of Environmental Management in an impossible position, inaccessible behind a firewall on the Energy Facility Siting Board.  Corrupted statutes silence the experts in the various departments, but the statutes have done their dirty work and the upshot is clear and all we have is:

  • A process inconsistent with the “duty of the general assembly to provide for the conservation of the air, land, water.”
  • A process designed to clothe the villainy of naked capitalism.

CLF files motion to dismiss in power plant case


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-07-19 Burrillville MTBE Site Visit 025The Conservation Law Foundation‘s (CLF) senior attorney Jerry Elmer filed a Motion to Dismiss today with the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) in the case of Invenergy’s $700 fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant planned for Burrillville. CLF’s motion is broader than the one filed by the Town of Burrillville, which concentrated on the fact that Invenergy to date has supplied no information on where the water to cool the power plant will come from, making it impossible to assess the project.

In addition to the water issue, CLF’s motion is based on the lack of advisory opinions from multiple agencies, due to Invenergy’s lack of providing needed information. This is CLF’s second motion to dismiss. As this new Motion to Dismiss says in its conclusion, “Back in January, CLF argued that this docket should be closed due to inadequate information from Invenergy.

“Invenergy’s Application lacked enough details for the parties, including CLF, to assess and respond to its proposal. The EFSB voted to let the process take its course. The Board noted that ‘further information’ might at some point be ‘necessary to conduct a thorough review and make an informed decision…’ It added that discovery would be available as part of the process.

“In the intervening eight months, twelve agencies and subdivisions have attempted to conduct the thorough reviews and make the informed decisions demanded of them by the Energy Facility Siting Act and the Board. Discovery has occurred. And Invenergy has failed to provide enough information for the agencies and subdivisions to issue fully informed advisory opinions. The process has taken its course, statutory deadlines have passed, and there still is not enough information for the Board to do its job. Invenergy’s failure to provide adequate information violated the Energy Facility Siting Act, it precluded the agencies and subdivisions from doing their jobs, and it precludes the EFSB from fulfilling its statutory mandates, Enough is enough: Invenergy’s application must be dismissed.”

UPDATE: See Jerry Elmer’s blog post about the motion here.

Disruption and evolution at energy meeting


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 003The Consumer Liaison Group (CLG) Meeting happens four times a year and its a chance for ISO-NE to exchange information with electricity consumers in New England. ISO-NE is the group that regulates our electricity markets and keeps the lights on by coordinating electricity generation and transmission. They run billion dollar markets and interact with companies like Spectra Energy, Invenergy, National Grid and Deepwater Wind. Pretty much every aspect of the process of getting electricity to your television is touched upon by ISO-NE in some way.

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 002The latest meeting of the CLG, in Providence on Thursday, featured a panel discussion with representatives from the four companies mentioned above. The panel was pulled together with the help of Douglas Gablinske, executive director of The Energy Council of Rhode Island (TEC-RI) an advocacy group for energy company concerns. Readers of RI Future may remember that Gablinske was a vocal opponent of Cale Keable’s bill to reform the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB).  He was also the only speaker at the RI Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) to speak in favor of the pipeline tariff.

Gablinske surprised me by asking if I knew about any planned protests or disruptions. I said I didn’t. He asked me specifically about the FANG Collective. I had no idea of what plans they have, if any, I said. Then Gablinske said that he noticed Mary Pendergast on the list of people who had signed up to attend. Pendergast was sitting in the room, and he soon went over to introduce himself to her.

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 001
As the meeting ended, protesters unfurled a banner

During the course of the presentation there was a disruption. As Invenergy’s John Niland gave his presentation to the room, Mary Pendergast stood and display a small sign that said, “No fracked gas Power plant.” Her protest was silent but it did seem to throw Niland off a bit, as his delivery seemed somewhat distracted.

It was during the third presentation that the disruptions became more pronounced. As Richard Kruse, vice president at Spectra Energy spoke glowingly about the need for bigger and better pipelines in our fracked gas infrastructure future, Kathy Martley of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), Keith Clougherty of the FANG Collective and Sally Mendzela stood up.

“Spectra Energy, Energy for Death,” said Martley as I headed for my camera. “Say no to Invenergy and tell Invenergy to go home,” Martley continued.

As the protest continued, Gablinske took the podium and said, “You have a right to be here but not be disruptive” as Clougherty continued to speak.

Lennette Boiselle, an ally of Geblinske and a lobbyist for the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce got up and left the room, presumably in search of security. Readers might remember Boiselle as the person arguing against democracy at the public comment hearing concerning Cale Keable’s EFSB bill.

“The political correctness, of not allowing other people to talk is sweeping through this country,” said Geblinske, “It’s an incorrect assumption, this gentlemen has the right to speak…”

“We’ve been listening to you our whole lives, Pal,” interrupted Sally Mendzela.

Gablinske ultimately offered to set up a forum where “both sides” could be heard but it is unknown if this will actually happen. The protesters took their seats, no one was ejected from the forum, and Kruse finished his talk.

Amazingly, though, that wasn’t the end. During a brief question and answer period at the end of the presentations, Gablinske called on Clougherty to ask a question!

“I would ask for a question, not a speech or a statement,” said Gablinske, when he realized who he had called upon.

Clougherty then asked Niland, Kruse and Bill Malee, a National Grid VP, “Do your companies have any money set aside for restitution for the millions of people who are going to be displaced and killed by the infrastructure projects you all are proposing?”

There is no good answer representatives from these companies can give, yet Niland attempted one. As expected, it was not good.

I found the most interesting talk of the day came from Mary LouiseWeezieNuara, External Affairs Representative for ISO-NE.

“The region’s competitive wholesale electricity markets are really designed to maintain reliability through the selection of the most economically efficient set of resources,” said Nuara, but the states “have environmental and renewable energy goals that are beyond the objectives of the wholesale electricity markets.”

What’s happening is that states are setting goals to increase renewables and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (like the goals set out in ResilientRI, but all the New England states have some version of this idea.) ISO-NE is designed to deliver energy as reliably and cheaply as possible. As a market, it cannot deliver renewables or reduce emissions unless those options are cheaper and cleaner. In August, NEPOOL (which represents the interest of the New England states when dealing with ISO-NE)  began looking into how to adjust wholesale electricity markets to accommodate the goals of the states. It is NEPOOL’s goal to develop a “framework document” by December 2 to provide guidance to ISO-NE regarding potential changes. (A kind of advisory opinion, if you will.)

What makes this interesting, to my mind, is that if ISO-NE starts taking the climate change concerns of the states into account, plants like the one Invenergy is planning for Burrillville will have a harder time selling their energy into the markets.

ISO-NE is a little over a decade old, but already it’s finding that its systems are in need of being updated over concerns of climate change. By contrast, the EFSB here in Rhode Island was established thirty years ago, in 1986. The RI General Assembly has shown little inclination towards revising the EFSB’s mandate in lieu of climate change.

Below please find all the video from the CLg meeting except for the closing comments.

Rebecca Tepper, chair of the CLG Coordinating Committee and chief of the Energy & Telecommunications Division of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office introduced keynote speaker Rhode Island General Treasurer Seth Magaziner.

Douglas Gablinske, executive director, The Energy Council of Rhode Island

Jeffrey Grybowski, chief executive officer, Deepwater Wind

John Niland, director of business development, Invenergy

Richard Kruse, vice president and regulatory & FERC compliance officer for Spectra Energy

Bill Malee, vice president of regulatory affairs, for National Grid

ISO-NE Q&A

Patreon

Workers to receive unpaid wages after second action


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
2016-09-15 Fuerza 006
Fabian calls David Civetti

After workers and activists from Fuerza Laboral gave David Civetti a 6am wake up call last August, he agreed to meet with the 8 workers who claim that his company owes them for work they completed but were never paid for. Civetti, the CEO of  Dependable and Affordable Cleaning Inc, met the workers at the Fuerza Laboral offices, said organizer Raul Figueroa, but maintained he owed the workers nothing, became frustrated, and left. Hence the need for a second action, this timed aimed at Civetti’s offices in the neighborhood next to Providence College.

2016-09-15 Fuerza 005Fuerza maintains that on May 26-29, Civetti’s company “assigned a group of workers to clean apartments located in the area surrounding Providence College. The workers say that Civetti assigned workers to the houses that needed cleaning and supplied them with company tee shirts and cleaning supplies. After the job was completed, 8 workers were not compensated for those 4 days, 11 hours a day.” Civetti claimed that the people who cleaned his apartments were hired by subcontractors, and that the the subcontractors owe the money, not him.

2016-09-15 Fuerza 002On Thursday about a dozen workers and activists showed up at Civetti’s offices near Providence College, and began leafleting houses and passing students. Organizer Raul Figueroa carried a megaphone and broadcast the workers’ complaints to the neighborhood. Once the workers arrived at Civetti’s offices, Fabian, one of the workers, called Civetti on the phone and asked him to come down and pay him the money he is owed. When Civetti would not commit to do so, the protest continued.

Eventually, as can be seen towards the end of the third video below, Civetti agreed by phone to meet with the workers at the Fuerza Laboral offices for a second time. According to Fuerza organizer Raoul Figueroa and Mike Araujo of RI Jobs with Justice, Civetti agreed that he did owe the workers their unpaid wages at this meeting. He has agreed to pay the workers on Friday.

This story will be updated.

UPDATE: Raoul Figueroa has informed me that the employees have been paid.

2016-09-15 Fuerza 001

2016-09-15 Fuerza 003

2016-09-15 Fuerza 004

2016-09-15 Fuerza 005

2016-09-15 Fuerza 007

2016-09-15 Fuerza 008

2016-09-15 Fuerza 009

2016-09-15 Fuerza 010

2016-09-15 Fuerza 011

Patreon

TD Bank finances the Dakota Access Pipeline, activists respond


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-09-15 TD Bank 025TD Bank in downtown Providence became the target of local environmental and indigenous American activists Thursday in response to calls for solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux as they continue to battle the $3.78 billion Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). TD Bank is one of many financial institutions funding the pipeline. Similar actions have been popping up across the country and around the world.

At issue is the Dakota Access Pipeline currently under construction from the Bakken shale fields of North Dakota to Peoria, Illinois. DAPL is slated to cross Lakota Treaty Territory at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation where it would be laid underneath the Missouri River, the longest river on the continent.

2016-09-15 TD Bank 024Organizers contend that construction of the DAPL “would engender a renewed fracking-frenzy in the Bakken shale region, as well as endanger a source of fresh water for the Standing Rock Sioux and 8 million people living downstream. DAPL would also impact many sites that are sacred to the Standing Rock Sioux and other indigenous nations.”

Thousands have gathered to stand against the pipeline in North Dakota, and President Obama has temporarily halted construction, but the fight will continue.

Democracy Now! has provided excellent, in depth coverage of the resistance for those who want to catch up on this important and developing story.

The protest outside TD Bank, organized by the FANG Collective, was entirely peaceful, with dozens of environmental and indigenous American activists bearing signs and leafleting passersby. The crowd grew to take over all four corners at Westminster and Dorrance.

Below is the full video of those who spoke at the event, followed by photos:

2016-09-15 TD Bank 001

2016-09-15 TD Bank 002

2016-09-15 TD Bank 003

2016-09-15 TD Bank 004

2016-09-15 TD Bank 005

2016-09-15 TD Bank 006

2016-09-15 TD Bank 007

2016-09-15 TD Bank 008

2016-09-15 TD Bank 009

2016-09-15 TD Bank 010

2016-09-15 TD Bank 011

2016-09-15 TD Bank 012

2016-09-15 TD Bank 013

2016-09-15 TD Bank 014

2016-09-15 TD Bank 015

2016-09-15 TD Bank 016

2016-09-15 TD Bank 017

2016-09-15 TD Bank 018

2016-09-15 TD Bank 019

2016-09-15 TD Bank 020

2016-09-15 TD Bank 021

2016-09-15 TD Bank 022

2016-09-15 TD Bank 023

2016-09-15 TD Bank 026

2016-09-15 TD Bank 027

2016-09-15 TD Bank 028

2016-09-15 TD Bank 029

2016-09-15 TD Bank 030

Patreon

RI says ‘no’ to excessive executive pay


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Seth Magaziner
Seth Magaziner

In 2016, Treasurer Seth Magaziner has voted “no” on executive compensation plans at 75 companies, including Facebook, eBay, and the parent company of Google, “due to a misalignment between CEO pay and company performance or because the compensation plans were deemed excessive or otherwise inappropriate.”

“My job as Treasurer is to deliver strong financial performance for the state’s pension fund. When the companies we invest in award excessive pay packages to executives, it comes at the expense of the pension fund and the public employees we serve,” Magaziner said. “Our say-on-pay effort reflects our position that executive compensation should be transparent and based on performance.”

Earlier this year Magaziner announced that he will use the power of the Treasurer’s office to “vote against appointing white men to corporate boards of directors that are already comprised of mostly white men.” This latest announcement can be seen as a continuation of Magaziner’s belief that corporate reform can come through ethical voting from progressive investors.

Magaziner says that since the 1970s, inflation-adjusted CEO pay in the U.S. increased by almost 1,000 percent, according to a study last year from the Economic Policy Institute. Six of the highest paid U.S. CEOs make more than 300 times the salary of their typical employee, according to the compensation analysis firm PayScale.

Facing increasing shareholder advocacy amid a volatile market and slower growth rates, many of America’s biggest corporations are under an intense spotlight to link chief executive pay to company performance, according to the Korn Ferry Hay Group 2015 CEO Compensation Study.

Magaziner has sent a letter to all companies that received “no” votes to inform them of Rhode Island’s opposition to their executive pay packages, and offer to open a dialogue about how they can make progress on this important issue.

Elorza calls for ‘unequivocal denial’ from FERC on Fields Point LNG project


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2015-11-30-World-AIDS-Day-006-Jorge-Elorza-600x507 (1)Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza sent a strongly worded letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last week, expressing his opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point Liquefaction Project.

Saying that approval of the project “would have a detrimental impact to the City of Providence and its residents,” Elorza went on to frame the issue in global terms.

“The entire world is threatened due to climate change and we must move away from fossil fuels,” wrote Elorza, “The City of Providence has continually expressed a commitment to reducing its carbon footprint, promoting an equitable environment, and creating a more sustainable future for our City’s posterity. Providence does not want to perpetuate the global climate crisis, nor do we want to be burdened by the risks associated with a liquefaction plant in Providence.”

Elorza also touched on the issues of air quality in the area of Fields Point.

“The proposed facility would generate harmful pollutants that impact the surrounding community’s air quality and ecosystem. The proposed location for this project is surrounded by dense, lower-income neighborhoods and should not be subjected to the environmental and health burdens associated with the proposed facility.”

Elorza also says that “The proposed plant would also increase greenhouse gas emissions, particularly indirect emissions due to the hydraulic fracking process by which the natural gas is extracted from the ground, as well as the facility’s high electrical consumption (13 megawatts) for the liquefaction process.”

Elorza urged FERC to conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement, rather than an Environmental Assessment and to heed the final guidelines presented by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which instructed Federal agencies to include “direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and the effect of climate change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews.

Elorza ends his letter asking for and “unequivocal denial” of the project.

 

Burrillville files motion to dismiss Invenergy application


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-07-19 Burrillville MTBE Site Visit 004Because Invenergy “has either refused or is unable to provide timely information regarding its proposed water supply… its Application should… be dismissed” writes Attorney Michael McElroy, representing the Town of Burrillville, in a motion filed with the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) today.

Invenergy is proposing to build a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville, a project that has the support of both Governor Gina Raimondo and the Providence Journal. The residents of Burrillville and every environmental group in Rhode Island oppose the plan.

Invenergy’s original plan was to pump water from a well contaminated with MTBE, but on Aug 19 the Pascoag Utility District voted unanimously to deny Invenergy access to that water. Under EFSB rules and the Act that established the EFSB, “Applications must include information regarding all required support facilities, including water resources.” Without such information, writes McElroy, “The Application cannot be evaluated in a meaningful way.”

McElroy’s motion to dismiss also notes that the Town of Burrillville, the Burrillville Planning Board and the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review “have formally requested information regarding Invenergy’s water source on multiple occasions” and that “Invenergy repeatedly promised to provide such information, but to date has failed to do so.”

“In fact,” writes McElroy, “in a Motion for Extension filed by Invenergy last Friday, Invenergy stated that its ‘expects’ to have a water source ‘within the coming weeks.’ This is uselessly vague.

Jerry Elmer, Senior Attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), “supports the Town of Burrillville’s Motion to Dismiss the Invenergy case, which was filed today. In fact, CLF has been preparing its own Motion to Dismiss on the same grounds as the Town’s Motion:  The Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) process cannot go forward without the required Advisory Opinions from the Town; and the Town cannot prepare the required Advisory Opinions because Invenergy has failed to provide legally required information.

“Invenergy’s application to build a new fossil fuel power plant in Burrillville is incomplete, and the EFSB must dismiss the application.  CLF argued its first Motion to Dismiss last January because Invenergy’s application was incomplete then; and CLF will continue to  argue the same point now:  Invenergy’s application remains incomplete.  It is past time for the EFSB to dismiss this case.”

Terrence Hassett cancels meeting on LNG facility resolution


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

14264907_10153933030393364_5765016217329190190_n (1)The Providence City Council Ordinance Committee meeting scheduled for 5pm on Monday was cancelled at 4:30pm, what one City Hall worker called, “at the last minute,” by Committee Chair Terrence Hassett. The cancellation effectively stalls the discussion of Councillor Seth Yurdin’s resolution opposing the construction of National Grid’s proposed liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence.

More than a dozen people showed up for the event, only to learn from the hastily printed signs that the meeting was cancelled. People told me that they had made great efforts to be at this meeting. One man brought his six year old daughter with him, others arranged to leave work early. A nurse handed off a patient to her co-worker, and lost out a couple of hours of pay.

Several people, expecting a long meeting, paid for two hours of parking, as the on street parking, which used to be free at 6pm, is now free after 9pm. In all I talked to six people who paid for parking, including Sister Mary Pendergast, who said she’s “on a very limited budget.”

Representative Aaron Regunberg showed up. But even he, when asking various City Hall workers, including the Council President Chief of Staff Cyd McKenna, couldn’t get an adequate answer as to why the meeting suffered a last minute cancellation.

Seth Yurdin Sherrie AndradeCouncillor Seth Yurdin arrived ten minutes before the meeting was due to start. He had received a text ten minutes before arriving telling him the meeting was cancelled. He said he didn’t know why the meeting was cancelled. He had no more insight, it seems, than anyone else.

The people who arrived for the meeting were all prepared to give testimony on the resolution concerning the project at Fields Point, a center of toxic industry located in one of the poorest neighborhoods of color in New England. This was Councillor Seth Yurdin’s second resolution in opposition to the facility, and it was a much stronger statement.

Though Yurdin’s resolution was co-sponsored by half the City Council, passage of the resolution was prevented when Councilors Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett flipped their votes.

The resolution was sent to the Ordinance Committee which Hassett chairs. Hassett said at the time that, “I co-sponsored it but a committee review is necessary for a proper vetting and discussion before it is transmitted to the full Council.”

When I asked about why he cancelled the Monday evening meeting that would have allowed for “proper vetting and discussion,” Hassett said, in a written statement:

“The LNG ban, as proposed by Councilman Yurdin, has merit. I co-sponsored it on the floor of the City Council Session.

“However, we have not heard sufficient testimony from the energy developers on the plan itself – the productive results, the environmental impact – what is good versus bad. I’m an environmentally sensitive citizen and public servant, as most of us are. A new and productive proposal, as promised, is certainly worthy of discussion.”

Note that the “energy developers” Hassett is referring to is National Grid, a company that had just as much time and notice to make it to this meeting as the environmental advocates who made the effort to show up for the meeting did. In fact, National Grid has more time, if you take into account the fact that the company employs a full time legal staff.

“My difficulty,” continued Hassett, “is simply approving a resolution banning it until proper testimony is presented. Its akin to a court case. We cannot indict until and unless proper and verified evidence is presented and the jury agrees. Legislative language presents an argument.

“In this case I co-sponsored it on the floor of the City Council. My concern or our general concern is this….we need discussions in an open forum from those proposing the LNG and receive any counter testimony on the plan or proposal.

“Many have advocated transparency in government. I believe in it. It’s how the best decisions are made. So we will carefully review this proposal, a $40 million effort  should it meet our needs, our environmental protections and city economy.

“That’s my assessment based on your inquiry. It will be heard. Just better prepared for our decision makers and the public.”

Many who arrived at the City Hall to find the meeting cancelled are convinced that there were some backroom shenanigans involved. But no proof of these speculations will ever materialize. Instead, the blame for cancelling this meeting rests solely on Hassett and his decision, as he explains above.

I asked Hassett a follow up.

“The meeting was cancelled at 4:30. When meetings are scheduled on Friday afternoon and cancelled moments before they are to start on Monday, many people feel that there are shenanigans going on behind the scenes. At the very least, it shows a lack of concern for those who make the effort to attend. Do you have a comment on this?”

I received no answer.

I’ve experienced something like this before. Back in May 2014 a Providence City Council Ordinance Committee meeting that was to discuss the proposed $15 minimum wage for hotel workers was cancelled at the last minute, leaving dozens of working women in the lurch. At the time I wrote, “Working women secured childcare or brought their kids with them. They skipped meals, skipped overtime and traveled to the City Hall on foot, on buses or in carpools, only to find out that the Ordinance Committee meeting had been abruptly cancelled.”

The cancellation of this meeting allowed the General Assembly the time it needed to include an amendment in the State Budget to prevent municipalities like Providence from setting their own minimum wages, frustrating months of activism on the part of the hotel workers. The chair of the Ordinance Committee then was Seth Yurdin.

Ordinance committee to hear testimony on Fields Point LNG today


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-07-13 NoLNGinPVD 003Tonight at 5pm the Providence City Council Ordinance Committee will be considering Councilor Seth Yurdin‘s second, stronger resolution opposing National Grid‘s fracked gas LNG liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence.

The resolution was referred to the Ordinance Committee last week, despite a near majority of City Councilors signing on as co-sponsors. At the time Councilor Jo-Ann Ryan said “I voted to send it to committee to provide an opportunity for community input at an open public meeting of the council. You can and should attend and voice your concerns. And encourage others to attend and participate in the process.

Unfortunately, the meeting was filed on Friday, at 2:48pm, so it did not come to the attention of activists until Sunday afternoon. The timing might dampen “community input” especially given the last minute scrambling ahead of Tuesday’s primary elections.

There will be an opportunity for public comment at this meeting, so feel free to come out and speak your mind about fossil fuels and the future of the world.

Here’s the info:

Providence City Council: Ordinance Committee Hearing
Monday September 12th at 5pm
3rd floor, Providence City Hall (25 Dorrance St.)

And here’s the Facebook event page from NoLNGinPVD

Buy American-made Oreos and save American jobs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Nabisco 600
Anthony Jackson and Nate Zeff

Nabisco made the announcement in January.

“They said, ‘we’re laying off 600 people, we’re sending the production down to Mexico, you can basically deal with it,’” explained Nate Zeff, of the BCTGM International Union. Zeff was in Rhode Island to explain the plight of the Nabisco 600, workers who once made products such as Oreos, Honey Grams, Fig Newtons, Animal Crackers and Ritz Crackers in Chicago, who watched as their good paying jobs were sent to Monterrey and Salinas Mexico.

The workers were told that they could prevent the company moving to Mexico, said Zeff, if they would agree to a staggering $46 million a year in concessions, in perpetuity; an impossible demand to make of working class families.

Mexican workers are paid a tiny fraction of what United States workers earn, allowing Nabisco to pay starvation wages in one country while wiping out an entire community of workers in another. And lest you think these savings might be passed along to consumers, think again. The money ‘saved’ is funneled directly into the pockets of overpaid corporate executives like Irene Rosenfeld, CEO of Nabisco parent company Mondelez International, who made a shame worthy $21 million in 2015.

To counter Nabisco’s move, and to bring these jobs back to the United States, the BCTGM has announced an audacious plan: A targeted boycott of Nabisco products made in Mexico. There are two ways to determine if a product on the shelf is made in Mexico, as seen in the video and picture below. One, the package may simply have the words “Made in Mexico” in the fine print near the ingredients label. Otherwise, check out the “plant identification code.” MM and MS stand for Monterrey and Salinas, Mexico, respectively.

ChecktheLabel-1-620x802

There are a couple of things to note about this boycott. One is that there are still plants in the United States making Nabisco products. This boycott is not against all Oreos, it’s a targeted boycott against Oreos made in Mexico. Note also that it’s not enough to simply not buy the Mexican made products. Take the product to the store manager and tell them why you are not buying.

Sure, the manager will say that they are not responsible for ordering the product, or that they have no control over where the product comes from, but if enough people complain, the complaints will start their way up the chain of command.

Irene Rosenfeld
Irene Rosenfeld

Anthony Jackson, a disabled veteran, was also in Rhode Island as part of the tour. He had a job paying him $26 an hour, now that job has gone across the border to a worker who makes less than $100 per week. “This is a $35 billion corporation,” said Jackson, “the Oreo alone made $2.9 billion last year.”

Jackson was at a shareholder’s meeting and asked CEO Rosenfeld why the company couldn’t treat Chicago workers fairly. Rosenfeld said the workers received “fair-market value.”

“To this day we’ve received zero dollars and zero cents,” said Jackson, “So what [Rosenfeld] said to us is that we are nothing.”

Jackson had five requests for those who want to support this effort.

1. Go to fightforamericanjobs.org and learn more about the boycott and the Nabisco 600.

2. Like their Facebook page.

3. Call the number on Oreo packages and complain about the fact that American jobs are being lost even as Mexican labor is being unfairly exploited.

4. Check the label (as seen above) for the country of origin and don’t buy made in Mexico products

5. Tell somebody. Spread the word. “We want to be the first company to bring production back from Mexico,” said Jackson.

 

ProtectJobsLogo_web-1-300x276

Providence holds solidarity march for National Prison Strike


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 04A march from Kennedy Plaza to the Providence Public Safety Complex, with a brief, tense stop in front of the Providence Place Mall was held in Providence Friday evening in solidarity with a National Prison Strike, on the 45th anniversary of the Attica Uprising.

After gathering in Kennedy Plaza, across from Providence City Hall, the march headed for the Providence Place Mall, where it came to a stop, blocking one direction of traffic. Providence Police, lead by Lt. Oscar Perez, had until this time been clearing traffic ahead of the march, but here, with traffic stopped, there was a tense five minutes where a threat of arrest seemed imminent. No arrests took place.

Still, many of the participants felt the police showed their hand in front of the mall. At the Providence Public Safety Complex, after the march, a speaker maintained that though the police were saying that they were “trying to keep us all safe… the second we stopped at the mall… we were threatened with arrest… Safety goes out the window when it comes to capital. They’re here to protect and serve, just not us. They’re here to protect fucking capital.”

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 02On my way back to Kennedy Plaza after the event Lt. Perez told me, half jokingly, that “those kids kind of hurt my feelings.”

The problems with capitalism, though, is one of the points this strike and the supportve march is trying to make. As the march organizers say on their event page, “Slavery is legal in America. Written into the 13th Amendment, it is legal to work someone that is incarcerated for free or almost free. Since the Civil War, tens of millions of people – most arrested for non-violent offenses – have been used as slaves for the sake of generating massive profits for multi-national corporations and the US government. Today, prison labor is a multi-billion dollar industry which helps generate enormous wealth for key industries such as fossil fuels, fast food, telecommunications, technology, the US military, and everyday house hold products…

“This is not just a prison strike for better wages or conditions, it is a strike against white supremacy, capitalism, and slavery itself.”

This is the context for the stop at the mall. The mall sells products made by prison labor. Not paying prisoners wages for the work they do, or paying them a fraction of what workers outside prisons make, depress the wages of everyone. The slavery system of prison labor has real consequences for everyone, especially the poor and marginalized, who are often only one bad day away from being in prison themselves.

Nationally, the strike is being led by groups such as the Free Alabama Movement, Free Texas Movement, Free Ohio Movement, Free Virginia Movement, Free Mississippi Movement, and many more. Locally, the march was organized by the Providence chapter of the IWW Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee [IWOC].

The strike is certainly not a one day event. Today, at the Adult Correctional Institute (ACI), at 40 Howard Ave in Cranston, there will be “Noise Demo in Solidarity with National Prison Strike” at 2pm. The event asks that participants “Bring banners, signs, noise makers, friends, co-workers, neighbors, family members, and more!” and suggest that if you are traveling by car that you park at the DMV parking lot at 600 New London Ave.

For more information:

Strike Against Prison Slavery

Let the Crops Rot in the Field

Incarcerated Workers Take the Lead

End Prison Slavery

Here’s video from the speak out:

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 10

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 08

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 07

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 06

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 05

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 03

2016-09-10 Prison Strike Support Rally and March 01

Patreon

Senator Whitehouse is fighting ‘dark money’ in Washington


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-09-06 Dark Money 006Saying that fighting dark money in politics is his “patriotic duty,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse sat next to Congressmembers David Cicilline and James Langevin in a “roundtable discussion” to highlight his work on the DISCLOSE Act, introduced by the Senator in June, which would “require disclosure of donations greater than $10,000 to organizations spending at least $10,000 in an election.”

“The American people want and deserve accountability in their elections,” said Whitehouse, “Unchecked secret corporate spending has tipped the scales of power away from ordinary Americans and in favor of big special interests. If Congress is going to make meaningful progress in the months and years ahead on important issues that matter to Rhode Islanders like addressing climate change, reforming our broken campaign finance system is the first step.”

Whitehouse’s DISCLOSE Act, which has been supported by Langevin and Cicilline in the U.S. House of Representatives, is part of the “We the People” legislative package to deal with secret corporate political spending, lobbyist influence, the revolving door, and other facets of the campaign finance system. Whitehouse touted the suite of legislation as a solution to the corporate spending blocking meaningful legislative action on issues like ensuring economic security for the middle class and addressing climate change.

It seems that Whitehouse mentioned climate change and chose Save the Bay’s headquarters in Providence as the location of his round table discussion because, as the Senator said in response to Meghan Kallman, chair of the RI Sierra Club, “I think it’s pretty safe to say, that at a national level, the climate battle is the campaign finance battle. They’re totally married together into one thing.”

2016-09-06 Dark Money 003Notably, there were protesters outside Save the Bay holding signs reminding their elected representatives about both Invenergy’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant and National Grid’s proposed LNG liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence, a stone’s throw away. They were there to remind elected officials that their jobs in Washington do not absolve them from taking positions on local issues. None of the elected leaders in the room, aside from State Senator Juan Pichardo, who has publicly taken a stand against the LNG plant in Providence, have thrown their considerable political weight behind the opposition to these projects.

“This is a national package, [but] many many many issues are local,” said Kallman, “We’re watching Dakota. We’re watching Burrillville. We’re watching Fields Point… We have something of a disconnect between what’s happening on the national level and where the front line battles are being fought.”

2016-09-06 Dark Money 004The influence of corporate spending on elections since the 2010 Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court is a major concern to all who attended the event. Citizens United unleashed a previously restricted torrent of special interest money into the political system.  More than $1.5 billion in unlimited contributions, including more than $500 million in secret contributions, have been poured into federal elections since the decision was issued.

“It didn’t take long after Citizens United for secret money has find its way to the shores of Rhode Island,” said John Marion, Executive Director of Common Cause Rhode Island. “We know that Rhode Islanders don’t want unlimited undisclosed money in our elections. We are fortunate to have a congressional delegation that has taken this issue seriously and has offered real solutions for the problems posed by big money in our politics.”

“Senator Whitehouse is a national leader fighting to make our elections and government work for everyday people again through the We the People Act,” said Aquene Freechild, campaign co-director of Public Citizen‘s Democracy Is For People Campaign. “He’s pushing the current congressional majority to snap out of their campaign cash-induced paralysis and stand up to the tiny but influential donor class: by overturning Citizens United, disclosing all spending in elections, and slamming shut the revolving door that transforms public servants into corporate shills.”

Also in attendance at the roundtable discussion were RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea, RI State Representative Art Handy, state director of Clean Water Action Jonathan Berard, Save the Bay’s Topher Hamblett and Dean Michael J. Yelnosky of the Roger Williams University School of Law. You can watch the rest of the video from the event below.

2016-09-06 Dark Money 0052016-09-06 Dark Money 001

Patreon

PVD City Council fails to pass 2nd resolution opposing LNG


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
20160901_192938
Seth Yurdin, standing

Providence City Councillor Seth Yurdin introduced a resolution Thursday evening that would strengthen the City Council’s opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility. Immediately after introducing his resolution Councillor Sam Zurier rose to co-sponsor, as did councilors David Salvatore, Carmen Castillo, Wilbur Jennings, Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett.

Noting that it seemed as if a majority of the council was co-sponsoring the resolution, Yurdin moved that the resolution be voted on immediately. This caused councilors Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett to suddenly flip their support. Yurdin’s move for passage failed, and the resolution was passed onto the Ordinances committee.

Reached for comment, Hassett wrote, “I voted no to have an immediate passage on the floor without a Council committee review. I co-sponsored it but a committee review is necessary for a proper vetting and discussion before it is transmitted to the full Council.”

Ryan wrote, “I requested to be a sponsor of the resolution last night. It was sent to ordinance committee by a majority vote. I voted to send it to committee to provide an opportunity for community input at an open public meeting of the council. You can and should attend and voice your concerns. And encourage others to attend and participate in the process.

There are no ordinance committee hearings on the current schedule. Hassett is the chair of ordinance and Ryan is a member of the committee.

National Grid wants to expand its LNG footprint in the Port of Providence with the new liquefaction plant. Environmental groups such as the RI Sierra Club and the Environmental Justice League of RI oppose the plan. Curiously, Save the Bay, whose offices are not too far from the proposed site, have not come out against it.

Mayor Jorge Elorza and a large group of state level Providence legislators have recently publicly come out in opposition to the project.

The City Council unanimously approved Yurdin’s previous resolution opposing the site in March. That resolution called for public meetings to be scheduled to address environmental and health concerns of the project. “Unfortunately,” said Yurdin, here we are in the Summer and no such meetings have been held… This resolution is stronger than the previous resolution.”

The previous resolution called for studies and review. The new resolution is a call to strong action.

The new resolution says, in part, “That the City shall take all necessary actions to oppose the proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility, including ceasing to act as a cooperating agency with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and shall not grant any tax stabilizations, subsidies, or any other forms of support to the project.”

 

Whitehouse not the climate champion Burrillville needs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
2016-02-01 FANG Whitehouse PVD City Hall 09
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

United States Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has a national, and even international, reputation as a climate champion, noted Rhode Island Senate President M Teresa Paiva-Weed as she introduced him to to the nearly 150 people gathered in Newport for a community dinner and Q&A. Paiva-Weed talked up Whitehouse’s concern for his constituents, saying, “Someone like Sheldon makes it a point to be home and to have a focus on the issues at home.”

But to the residents of Burrillville who drove for over an hour through rush hour traffic to attend the dinner, Whitehouse hardly seems focused on “the issues at home” and in fact, his own words belie that. His international reputation as an environmental champion is of small comfort to the townspeople fighting Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant.

Whitehouse touted his environmental concerns in his opening remarks, saying, “The good news is that… the [climate] denial operation really is collapsing. You can feel it visibly. We’re at the stage where the CEO of Exxon has had to admit, ‘Okay, climate change is real, and we’re doing it and we want to get something done.’”

Climate change, says Whitehouse, “is going to hit home for Rhode Island in a really big way and I want to make sure that I’ve done everything that I possibly can to make sure that we are as prepared for it as we can be in the Ocean State.”

Richard Dionne, vice president of the Burrillville Conservation Commission was called on by Whitehouse to ask the first question.

“When discussing the most influential senators from Rhode Island on environmental quality issues, your name is often brought up in the same sentence as our former Senator John H Chafee,” said Dione, “Not bad company to be in if I do say so myself.”

“Really good company,” agreed Whitehouse.

Dione continued, “However, our Senator Chafee would be rolling over in his grave if he knew that a 900 megawatt fracked gas power plant being proposed by Governor Raimondo was to be sited smack dab in the middle of the John H Chafee Heritage Corridor in the northwest corner of Rhode Island, on the shared border with neighboring states Connecticut and Massachusetts.

“This area has been recently designated as part of the National Park Service. The approximately 13,000 acres of protected forests, recreational areas, wetlands and conservation areas is absolutely the most inappropriate area for this type of project.

“Every environmental organization in the state of Rhode Island has come out against the project,” continued Dione, “including the Environmental Council of Rhode Island, the Audubon Society, the Nature Conservancy, Blackstone Heritage Corridor, the list goes on and on, I have a list right here…”

“I know the list,” said Whitehouse.

“At many of the public hearings I attend, invariably the question gets posed to me, ‘Where is our environmental Senator on this issue and what is he doing for his constituents in Burrillville?’ A town which, by the way, has supported your election in 2006 and 2012.

“So my question is Senator Whitehouse,” said Dione, winding up, “What answer can I bring back to the people of Burrillville, and can you commit this evening to opposing this power plant?”

“The short answer is,” said Whitehouse after a short pause, “There is a process…”

“Here we go,” said a woman at my table with open disdain.

If there was a wrong answer to give, this was it. Everyone who attended Governor Gina Raimondo’s appearance at the Burrillville High School has heard this answer before. No one takes “trust the process” seriously. It’s political dodge ball.

Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) attorney Jerry Elmer has spoken eloquently about the process. “Remember that the reason – the raison d’etre – that the General Assembly created the EFSB (Energy Facility Siting Board) was precisely to take these energy siting decisions away from the Town Councils and town planning boards,” wrote Elmer.

RI Senator Victoria Lederberg, who got the EFSB legislation through the General Assembly 30 years ago, called the siting board concept “one-stop shopping” for power plant developers. Climate change, environmental concerns and the health and safety of residents didn’t seem to be high on the General Assembly’s priorities when the EFSB was formed.

The process renders the opinion of ordinary townsfolk essentially meaningless, said Burrillville Planning Board attorney Michael McElroy. “The EFSB can take [our opinion], they can take it in part, or they can reject it.”

“There is a process,” said Whitehouse, “taking place for [the power plant] through the state Energy Facility Siting Board. They take sworn testimony, as I think you know. There are a whole bunch of local environmental groups that are intervened into that proceeding. The Conservation Law Foundation has come down from Boston to intervene in that proceeding. They have witnesses.”

Senator Whitehouse is incorrect here. The only environmental group certified as an intervenor in the EFSB proceedings is the CLF. The Burrillville Land Trust, Fighting Against Natural Gas (FANG), Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion (BASE) and Fossil Free Rhode Island were denied intervenor status, as it was felt that their interests would be seen to by the CLF.

“It’s essentially an administrative trial that is taking place,” continued Whitehouse, “I have confidence in that process. I have confidence in Janet Coit at DEM (Department of Environmental Management) who by virtue of being the DEM director is on the Energy Facility Siting Board. I have confidence in Meg Curran, chairman of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) who by virtue of being chairman chairs that Siting Board, and there’s going to be somebody from the Department of Administration…”

Associate Director of the Division of Planning, Parag Agrawal, is the third member of the EFSB.

“It’s a process I’ve worked with from my earliest days,” said Whitehouse, “when I first came as a young lawyer to Rhode Island I worked in the Attorney General’s office and I practiced representing the people before the Public Utilities Commission.

“So I have confidence in the process.

“Congratulations,” added Whithouse, “The opposition to Invenergy, I think, has won every round. Burrillville said ’No’ on planning, Burrillville said ‘No’ on zoning, the water board said ‘No’ on water, so I think you’re, yeah, it’s a process and I know it would be easier to just yell about it but it’s a process that I think is honorable and will come to the right result.

“So I want to focus my efforts on where it will make the biggest difference. I know we’ve had some conversation, repeatedly, but I still am of the view that, with the force and strength that I have available to me, I want to apply every bit of that force and strength to the battle in Washington, which if we win it, will be immensely significant, not just to Burrillville but to all of Rhode Island and to the country and the world.

“So, sorry that I don’t have more to give than that, but I do think that I give pretty well at the office with what I do on this issue. Thank you for bringing it up though, I appreciate it.”

Burrillville resident Lynn Clark was called on to ask the next question. This seemed like a coincidence, but in fact, half the questions asked concerned the power plant in Burrillville, in one way or another.

Clark rose and with only the slightest hint of nervousness in her voice, said, “My name is Lynn and I come from the northwest corner of the state of Rhode Island. It has been my home all my life. I applaud you and I love the work you’re doing on the environmental front.

“In Burrillville, our little town has come together and we have come out strong against this giant plan. We have a lot of environmental groups [on our side], 23 currently, and we are working hard.

“I wish I could say that I am as confident in this process as you are, sir. It has been a scary process. We have been consumed by this process. I have been at every meeting, for hours, two or three meetings per week. Sir, this is a scary, scary process.

“We need a champion in Burrillville and we are asking you to please come see us. Please, come talk to us. If this Invenergy [power plant] gets built, the detriments to our little state will be just horrifying.”

Clark’s appeal to Whitehouse was raw and emotional. It’s the kind of speech people give in movies to roust tired champions into battle one final time.

But this wasn’t a movie and Whitehouse wasn’t willing to be the hero.

“I hear you,” said Whitehouse, once again echoing words Governor Raimondo used in Burrillville when she visited, “I can’t add much to what I’ve said to Richard. Thank you for taking the trouble to come down and share your passion.

Eagle Scout James Lawless with Whitehouse
Eagle Scout James Lawless with Whitehouse

“It is the National Heritage Corridor,” said Clark, not giving up, “We also have a boy scout camp up there, camp grounds… Have you been up to Burrillville?”

“Oh yeah,” said Whitehouse.

“Okay,” said Clark, “I hope you come visit us soon, sir. Thank you.”

Other questions came and went. Whitehouse was asked about the Supreme Court vacancy, grid security and the opioid epidemic. When Newport resident Claudia Gorman asked Whitehouse  about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), he admitted that on the federal level, at least, he isn’t as certain about the integrity of the process.

“There have been several problems, at the federal level, with the approvals,” said Whitehouse, “They haven’t baked into their decision making what is called the social cost of carbon.” Whitehouse added that we don’t take seriously the problem of methane gas leaks, and that he held the first hearings on the issue of gas leaks and that we still don’t know the full extent of that particular problem…

The last question of the evening came from Cranston resident Rhoda Northrup. She rose as Whitehouse tried to bring the discussion to an end, and would not allow the dinner to end without asking her question.

“I do not live in Burrillville I live in Cranston,” said Northrup, “and what’s going on in Burrillville should not be completely on their backs. This is a global issue for all of us and if that power plant comes to our state of Rhode Island, it will set us back forty years. We will be committed for another forty years to a fossil fuel.

“That’s wrong.

“We need to move forward with wind and solar. And with all of that said, I would like to ask the senator if he has an opinion. With everything that’s been said tonight, ‘Do you have an opinion?’

“I know it’s a process,” said Northrup, “but that’s not an answer. Everybody’s telling us it’s a process. We know that. We’re walking the process. But we’re asking our leaders if they have an opinion. You must have an opinion.”

There was a short pause before Whitehouse answered.

“My opinion is that we must get off fossil fuels,” said Whitehouse.

“Thank you for that,” said Northrup.

But Whitehouse was’t finished. Lest anyone believe that by that statement Whitehouse was taking a stance against the power plant in Burrillville and matching action to his words, Whitehouse switched to his familiar political talking points.

“My opinion is that the best way to do that,” continued Whitehouse, “is to balance the pricing of fossil fuels, so that they are treated fairly in the marketplace. Right now they have a huge, unfair advantage because they don’t have to pay for the cost of the harm that they cause…”

Burrillville Zoning Board votes ‘No’ on Invenergy


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Ray Cloutier
Ray Cloutier

Ray Cloutier, chair of the Burrillville Zoning Board, ripped Invenergy‘s plans for a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant to shreds Tuesday evening as he lead the board in a unanimous decision to reject the company’s application in their advisory opinion to the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB). Cloutier called Invenergy’s plans to use “up to a million gallons of water” per day “totally irresponsible” saying that future growth and development in the town would be curtailed. “That’s totally irresponsible,” he said.

Elizabeth Noonan
Elizabeth Noonan

The Burrillville Zoning Board has been tasked by the EFSB to deliver an advisory opinion. The Zoning Board based much of their decision on the work done by the Burrillville Planning Board. The EFSB can give the advisory opinion as much or as little weight as they choose. They can adopt the opinion in whole or in part, modify the opinion or simply ignore it.

But the opinion, based on strong research and hours upon hours of expert and community testimony, should not be considered lightly. Cloutier maintained that Invenergy has avoided providing the board with requested answers.

“Due to… a lack of concrete information, we, the board, have asked in several different ways, several different times,  for concrete information from this company, and they’ve either ignored our questions, or evaded them, or answered in a very vague manner,” said Cloutier, “We’ve gotten no definite answers, as far as I can tell, on anything.

“We have no plans. Nothing that we can read.”

One big stumbling block is the water. Cloutier said:

The big question, and we’ve asked this over and over again, available water supply. There is no water supply. As a matter of fact, they’ve been denied any water from anybody in this town. And if they were to attempt to drill a well, and draw from the ground water, it would seriously deplete the aquifer in the whole town.

“It would stop any further development. It would cripple the town from developing anything further after this. There’s no guarantee that there’s enough water for [Invenergy]. I’ve heard that there’s up to a million gallons of water  per day demand at times for this plant. That’s totally irresponsible.

“This town would be facing a public water moratorium on future village growth if this is approved. It’s unbelievable that we’d consider that.”

The meeting started off contentiously. Burrillville residents, worried about the outcome of the opinion, quickly hijacked the meeting, demanding the opportunity to speak publicly. Cloutier appeared frustrated at times and admonished the crowd to be respectful. But in the end Cloutier thanked residents for their patience during the difficult process.

Invenergy’s lawyer Elizabeth Noonan actually lost her cool as members of the audience interrupted her, saying, “People, really, I’m trying to address the board member, could you give me a- little quiet?” One woman in the audience shouted, “No!” Noonan countered, “I don’t speak when you speak.” She then gave up trying to speak and put down her microphone.

With the decision of the Burrillville Zoning Board made, this part of the EFSB process has come to a close. The EFSB is still waiting on final advisory opinions from the Department of Health and the Department of Environmental Management.

Here’s Stephanie Sloman‘s testimony on low octave noise, which Cloutier found very compelling:

Here’s the full meeting:

 

EFSB established as ‘one-stop shopping’ for power companies


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Ocean State Power Plant
Ocean State Power Plant

On the day the Rhode Island Senate Finance committee passed the legislation that would establish the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB), Robert L Bendick Jr, the director of the RI Department of Environmental Management (DEM) asked, “I just wonder what’s going on here. What’s the driving force behind this?” [Providence Journal, April 11, 1986; pg A-15]

The question Bendick asked on April 9, 1986 strongly resonates today. Jerry Elmer, of the Conservation Law Foundation, said the EFSB “was designed to take the power to stop a proposal like Invenergy’s out of the hands of the local people… and put it into the hands of the EFSB.”

Governor Gina Raimondo refers to EFSB decision making as “the process” and asks us all to trust in it, but how are we to trust if we can’t tell if the intent of the process is to serve Rhode Islanders or to serve the energy industry?

What is going on here? Here’s some historical context.

Back in 1986, Ward Pimley, writing for the ProJo, wrote, “Sen. Victoria Lederberg, D-Providence, the sponsor, said the [EFSB] bill streamlines the approval process required for obtaining licenses to build major energy facilities for generation of electricity, treatment of liquefied natural gas, oil refineries and the like…”

2003_Lederberg
Victoria Lederberg

Victoria Lederberg was an impressive woman and public servant. A judge, she “served as state representative from 1975-1983 ,representing the East Side of Providence, and state senator from 1985-1991… Lederberg was a trailblazer, becoming the first woman of Italian heritage to serve in the Rhode Island legislature.”

Pimley continues, “In previous testimony, Lederberg called the siting board concept ‘one-stop shopping,’ where interested developers could learn what they must do to obtain licenses and fulfill obligations to build. She said it removes jurisdictional overlapping among regulatory agencies.

“She said the bill recognizes the state’s need for ‘reasonably priced, reliable sources of energy’ and balances that with issues affecting public health and environmental impact.”

Nine years earlier, in his January 1977 inaugural address, Governor J Joseph Garahy outlined his ideas for the state’s energy objectives. Siting of energy projects heretofore had been haphazard, and based solely on the whims of industry. Garahy had a vision “to site energy facilities in light of state plans, rather than private industry decisions.” He was governor of a Rhode Island that was suffering from environmental mismanagement, and the new governor was hoping for a different approach. The EFSB, at its best, would be a realization of Garahy’s vision, but in an effort to please industry rather than regulate it, Garahy’s vision may have been compromised.

Public Utilities Commission] Chairman Edward F Burke, Pimley wrote, “testified earlier that the legislation is important because there are eight or nine potential applications for energy-generating facilities that could be built in some other state unless the licensing procedure were streamlined.

“He cited a $300-million facility proposed for Burrillville that should provide electricity by 1989 on property owned by Narragansett Electric as an example of the type of facility that can be built.”

This $300-million facility is the Ocean State Power plant, which currently uses 4 million gallons of water a day to cool its turbines.

Recognizing that the EFSB would allow industry to override the environmental concerns of the state, Sen. William C. O’Neill, today more famous as a South County bike path than a Democratic senator from Narragansett, objected. Here’s Pimley’s play-by-play of what he called a ‘hot debate’:

“You feel DEM is an obstacle,” O’Neill said. “You removed that obstacle, and you know it.”

“You’re absolutely incorrect,” Lederberg shot back.

“I’m concerned that you’re allowing other agencies to override DEM,” O’Neill said.

“I totally disagree,” Lederberg said. “This shares decision-making. DEM has an important role. That’s why we’ve made them one of the board members. It does not weaken the permit-granting power by DEM.”

Lederberg said DEM does not have veto authority to stop any project it wants, but it still is involved in the planning process.

Then Sen. David R. Carlin Jr, D-Newport, said the siting board can overrule decisions of other agencies.

“It seems it’s clearly overriding DEM,” he said.

O’Neill, seeing DEM Director Robert L Bendick Jr watching the proceedings, said he would vote for the bill if Bendick agreed that DEM’s interests would not be jeopardized by it, but committee chairman Donald R. Hickey, D-Providence, called for a vote.

“The bill was approved, 8 to 4.”

This is what prompted Bendick to ask, “What’s going on here?” adding, “If what they’re doing is overriding the department’s authority, I’m opposed to it.”

Months earlier, in an editorial, the ProJo had endorsed Lederberg’s proposal writing, “As a House member in 1979, Mrs. Lederberg sponsored a similar bill that died in the Senate. Former Gov. J. Joseph Garrahy, who supported the bill, issued an executive order embodying many of its details, but that wasn’t an adequate substitute for statutory enactment…

“Mrs. Lederberg says energy installations must be reviewed in terms of regional need and cost-effectiveness, not on the basis that Rhode Island must be totally self-sufficient in energy.” [Providence Journal February 17, 1986; page A-10] Note that Lederberg is not quoted as mentioning, and that the ProJo editorial seems uninterested in, environmental issues.

Pimley noted that the bill, as originally introduced by Lederberg, allowed the General Assembly to override an EFSB decision, but that provision was removed before passage because “it was no longer needed.”

Pimley also noted that “support for the legislation came from the Governor’s Office of Energy Assistance, the PUC and Narragansett Electric Co.”

Narragansett Electric is today a wholly owned sub-entity of National Grid.

Of special concern to all involved with the establishment of the EFSB was a proposal “to build twin natural-gas-fired plants in Burrillville. According to a plan disclosed Tuesday, the plants would be supplied by a new, 25-mile gas pipeline that would run from Sutton, Mass., to the Burrillville site and on to Cranston.” [Providence Journal, February 13, 1986; page A-14]

The very first application the EFSB took up was the Ocean State Power Plant in Burrillville.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387