Wednesday night’s Burrillville Town Council meeting hearkened back to the early days of public opposition against Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant planned for the town. Back then, we saw a public that was distrustful of the town council, and a town council that was not receptive to the idea of opposing the power plant, early on claiming to be powerless against the combined might of Invenergy, Governor Gina Raimondo’s office and regulators.

The town council then took the position, contrary to the Open Meetings Act, that people in the town were only allowed to talk about issues and subjects that were specifically listed on the town council’s agenda, cutting off discussion about the Algonquin pipeline if the power plant was on the agenda, or vice versa.  In December of last year, calls from the town council to trust them elicited groans of dismay from the audience.

Then, in April of this year, it was learned that the town council had been in secret negotiations for a tax treaty with Invenergy for months. The town council was still forcing residents to only speak about “agenda items” and working hard to curtail public discussion, contrary to the Open Meetings Act.  The growing resistance in Burrillville to the power plant felt disempowered. Not only were they fighting a multi-billion dollar power plant company funded by a Russian oligarch, they were fighting both the state and local governments. The fight seemed impossible and trust between the town council and residents couldn’t be worse. Or so they thought.

At an April 14 town council meeting Council President John Pacheco said that the town council learned about Invenergy’s plans when everyone else did, during a press conference held by Governor Raimondo announcing the plant, saying, “As a town council, we did not know this plant was actually going to happen until the Governor announced it.”

This turned out to be inaccurate. Videos of town council meetings from February and March of 2015, on the town council’s own website, showed the town council and state legislators paving the way for the controversial Invenergy power plant months before the governor officially announced the project. Over time some of the details about how Invenergy approached the town came to light, but the complete story, and who opened what doors to the power plant, has yet to be revealed.

The town council eventually came to a public position regarding the power plant: The town council would put on a public display of strict neutrality, taking no position for or against the power plant, until after all the advisory opinions from various town boards had been completed. This was so as to appear to not influence the outcomes of the various advisory opinions and give the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) a reason to suspect that the opinions might be slanted in some way.

State legislators Cale Keable and Paul Fogarty went a different route. They entered legislation at the state level that if passed, would give voters in Burrillville the ability to approve or reject any tax treaty negotiated between the town council and Invenergy.

The bill passed the House and was due for consideration and a vote in the Senate when the town council passed a resolution in opposition to the Keable Bill at the 11th hour, giving the Senate Judiciary Committee enough of a reason to vote down the bill. The relationship between the town council and residents was now overtly acrimonious. There were tears from Town Councilor Kimberly Brissette Brown and anger and accusations from Town Councilor Donald Fox. Residents spoke of feeling “humiliated” at the State House as the press release announcing the resolution was sprung on them by Senators Frank Lombardi and Steven Archambeault, who treated the residents with risible condescension.

Since that low point, the town council and residents worked to rebuild trust. Residents by this time were long past being held to arbitrary and incorrect readings of the Open Meetings Act. They spoke their minds, expressed their concerns and the town council, to their credit, finally seemed to be listening. They seemed to come together as a town when Governor Gina Raimondo visited to hear resident concerns about the power plant.

After the lengthy process of creating the advisory opinions concluded, the town council passed an extremely robust resolution opposing the power plant and asked other city and town councils in and around Rhode Island to join them in opposition. Many already have and many more are considering joining Burrillville in opposition to the plant. But the Burrillville Town Council’s opposition came with a caveat: They still planned to sign a tax treaty with Invenergy, a tax treaty that the town residents want to hold off on signing.

At issue is the timing. The town council maintains that they have negotiated a solid tax treaty that will protect the town in the event the power plant is built, and guarantee a steady stream of income to the town. The residents want to wait until after the EFSB decides on Invenergy’s application before signing any treaty. Right now, the power plant’s application is suspended, pending Invenergy’s search for a new source of water. Signing the tax treaty, say residents, gives Invenergy extra leverage in negotiating a deal with another municipality, like, let’s say, Woonsocket, to purchase water. The town’s opposition to the power plant must be unified and consistent. Opposing the power plant with a resolution sends one message, signing a tax treaty with Invenergy sends another.

At Wednesday night’s hearing, Attorney Michael McElroy, who negotiated the tax treaty, said that the opposing the power plant and signing a tax treaty were not inconsistent actions and would not be seen that way. “I want to make it… clear that I see no inconsistency between entering into these agreements and dead set opposition to the plant,” said McElroy.

But McElroy is a lawyer. He is not a business man trying to buy water to cool a power plant. What businessman wouldn’t mention the tax treaty as proof that the town council is actually okay with having the power plant sited in their town? The resolution in opposition will be described behind closed doors as merely political theater, something to satisfy the rubes while the real business of government is imposed by the movers and shakers in secret meetings paid for with political contributions.

McElroy did his best to sell the tax treaty to the residents. He spent 45 minutes outlining the deal, expressing the need for a treaty. One reason McElroy gave, that didn’t sit well with residents, was that, “I want to get paid.” The money generated by this tax treaty will give the Town of Burrillville the money it needs to fight the siting of the power plant all the way to the Supreme Court, if need be. The lawyers and experts needed to fight such a case cost money, said McElroy, who included himself in those expenses.

McElroy suggested that if the town council did not pass the tax treaty, Invenergy might pull it off the table. He assured the audience that contrary to what Conservation Law Foundation senior attorney Jerry Elmer says, the plant will be built without a tax treaty in place.

Residents weren’t buying it. Towards the end of what turned out to be a five hours plus meeting, it was obvious that the town’s people were not willing to drink the tax treaty Kool-Aid. Forty people spoke against passing the tax treaty. Two spoke in favor of trusting the town council and McElroy’s advice.

Ultimately the town council recessed without doing anything on the tax treaty. There is a plan to take up the issue again next week.

“So fucking recall me,” said Burrillville Town Councillor Donald Fox, then, turning to the Burrillville residents who had stopped to watch the argument, continued, “and that’s going for all you guys listening. Recall me. It’s okay.”

After Wednesday night’s record breaking Burrillville Town Council meeting, which lasted until twenty minutes past midnight and resolved nothing regarding the tax treaty between the town and Invenergy, the company that wants to bring a $700 fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant to the town, Burrillville Town Councillor Donald Fox was heard having a loud conversation with candidate for town council Ray Trinque, who also serves on the town’s sewer commission.

The discussion was in the parking lot of the Burrillville High School, after the town council finished its business. Several people were in the parking lot watching and listening to the conversation, including Jeremy Bailey, a Burrillville resident and a Democratic candidate for town council.

The conversation between Fox and Trinque is “about the sewer commission’s role with Invenergy’s application,” but it quickly dovetailed into events that happened earlier in the year, when Burrillville residents were considering initiating a recall petition against members of the town council. Trinque claims to have interceded on behalf of Fox.

Here’s the transcript, as best as I could hear:

“So why are you trying to make people think that we can stop it, that if the sewers are…” says Fox in the video.

“I didn’t say that…” interrupts Trinque.

“But that’s what everyone in that fucking theater thinks,” exclaims Fox, gesturing towards the high school auditorium.

“I asked a question,” counters Trinque, “But this is why I’ve avoided these town council meetings…”

“Well you should if you’re going to bring up shit like that because you know we can’t do anything about it!”

“Yeah but the whole point is, the first one I get to, I mean [garbled] because I’m not loyal enough…”

“I don’t give a shit!” says Fox.

[crosstalk]

“I’m as loyal as they get!” says Trinque.

“I don’t care about that at all,” says Fox.

[crosstalk]

“Ray, that has nothing to do with this process.”

“This has to do with this process,” says Trinque, “because when these guys were going to recall all of you and wanted you number one…”

“Fucking recall me!” exclaims Fox, “It’s okay!”

“Let me tell you, I talked them into not doing it…” Trinque tries to say.

“It’s okay!” exclaims Fox again, “You know me…”

“Because it would have been ultimately unsuccessful and it would have…”

“You know I don’t care,” says Fox, exasperated, “I’ve got better things to do.”

“I understand that,” says Trinque.

“So fucking recall me,” says Fox, then, turning to the Burrillville residents who had stopped to watch the argument, “and that’s going for all you guys listening. Recall me. It’s okay.”

It’s at this point in the video that Fox notices Bailey recording the conversation.

“You’re going to film it? You’re filming it?” Fox asks.

“Yup,” says Bailey.

“You are such an unbelievable,” says Fox.

“Listen,” says Fox, turning his attention back to Trinque, “It doesn’t matter. You know that we can do nothing about the sewer commission… We’re doing what’s right and you know that. We’re doing everything by the book and to throw stuff out like that is…”

At this point the pair are interrupted by a person in a car.

“Can I help out?” asks the motorist.

“No, this is two Republicans going at it,” says Fox.

“You know,” says Trinque, “Good Republican discourse.”

“We got the Hollywood guy over here filming,” says Fox, gesturing towards Bailey.

In an email, Fox wrote a lengthy reply to the video, which I am including in it’s entirety below:

Ray and I were arguing about the sewer commission’s role with Invenergy’s application.  I took exception to him making public comments about the sewer commission’s capacity when he knows very well that the Town Council cannot control what the Sewer Commission does.  Plus, if the power plant company gets their DEM permitting and all is in order according to State regulations, the Sewer Commission cannot stop them from using the system.  But to bring that up in that manner, when the residents were there to talk about the proposed tax treaty agreements, can lead people to incorrectly believe that the TC can do something about it.  We cannot.  I repeat that we cannot stop Invenergy from using the sewer plant for discharge.

“I have known Ray Trinque for years and appreciate the service he has done for this town through is efforts on the School Committee.  We have often talked about the town, the role of the TC, the role of the School Committee.  It was this Council that appointed Ray to the Sewer Commission.  We have attended many events together and I am proud to call him my friend for the wonderful work that he does with the veterans groups.  So we feel very easy talking about any issue, whether we agree or not.  Ray mentioned a recall effort and I told him that I do not care if I am recalled for doing what is right.  I have never done public service for anything but that – public service.  I will always do what is correct for the Town, not what is correct for politics.  I hate how the power plant issue has been used as a political tool by some in town.  And I am proud of the efforts made by this Town Council to stay away from that and not make it a political issue.  If Council members wanted to use this as a political tool that effort would have been made 2 years ago when Rep. Cale Keable brought the plant to town.

“I have heard about the recall rumors for months and my stance has not changed or been influenced by that.  Let me give you some background on myself.  I never did military service when I was younger and am so very proud of the men and women that I know in my life who have done such service.  One of my best friends has done multiple tours overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan, in horrific conditions.  I feel that serving on boards, commission and Council has been my small way of doing something worthwhile for the greater good of my community.  While it can in no way be compared to the sacrifices that our armed forces make, I take a page from my friend’s book – I do not back down to pressure and will always do what is right.  Recall rumors do not affect me and I do not care about them.  That is political garbage and it will not sway me on how I conduct myself as a Council member.

“Let me repeat that, I do not care about such things.  If the constituents of this town feel that I should be recalled for executing, to the best of my abilities, the responsibilities of a Council Member then that is their legal  right.  My voting record is clear.  My actions are clear.  My stances are clear.  I believe in Burrillville.  I want to protect it as much as anyone.  I am raising my 3 children and family here.  I invested $1.1 million of my own money in a new building in Burrillville, when there were cheaper options to build or lease elsewhere in RI and in MA..  I put my money where my mouth is because I believe in this town.

“So when someone like Jeremy Bailey wants to film me and Ray Trinque having a passionate argument about what is good for Burrillville, I do not care.  As I said, Ray and I are friends who have both long served the town, supported the town and care about this town.  According to this week’s Bargain Buyer, Mr. Bailey is a one topic candidate and does not deserve votes in this community due to potential conflict of interest that he has.  The ad questions how he can vote on power plant related issues when he is listed on the abutter list  in the PVGA.  I have to agree with whoever placed that ad.  Mr. Bailey not only has his facts wrong, but he has been a pawn of the Democratic Town Committee in its effort to make the power plant a political issue.  Mr. Bailey’s actions as a sneaky filmmaker do not concern me.  What concerns me is doing what is right for this town.  What concerns me is being part of a Council that has done things the right way since the plant came to town in December of 2014.  What concerns me is that our Council has worked and continues to work for the good of this town and has put aside political aspirations and goals while doing work on the power plant issue.  No one can accuse this Council of not doing what if feels is best for the town as a whole.

“You in your blog very early on questioned this Council for its neutrality so that our boards’ advisory opinions would not be tainted.  Turned out that we did the right thing for the town as a whole.  Yet we were attacked repeatedly by you and others for making this difficult stance.  If people want to recall me for taking such actions, then recall me.  No one will ever accuse me or anyone on this very sound and professional Council of doing anything but what is best for the town.  If you are going to write about this, please include my complete reply herein.”

The revelation prompted one Burrillville resident to quip,”Maybe we should be giving the mayor some money.”

On September 7, according to information gleaned via an Access to Public Records Act (APRA) request, representatives from Mayor Baldelli-Hunt’s office met with representatives from Invenergy. City councilors, who were briefed after the fact, confirmed the meeting pertained to selling water to the power plant to cool its turbines.

This meeting lasted 30 minutes. City Solicitor Michael Marcello, who is also a state representative from District 41 representing Scituate and Cranston, would release no further information about this meeting, saying that the details are secret at this time. Marcello served with Baldelli-Hunt when she was a state rep from 2006-2013.

On September 15, at a fundraising event held at Trattoria Romana, three lawyers from the company Adler, Pollock and Sheehan (APS), the law firm representing Invenergy before the state’s Energy Facilities Siting Board, donated a total of $1,000 to Baldelli-Hunt’s campaign, according to the Mayor’s campaign finance reports – including a $250 donation from a lobbyist for Invenergy.

Robert Brooks, Managing Partner and Chairman of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law Group, donated $250. This is the first time Brooks, a prolific political donor, has given Baldelli-Hunt any money.

Stephen Ucci, who is also a state representative for District 42, representing Cranston and Johnston, and who sits on the House’s Labor and Rules committees, donated $500. Ucci, who served with Baldelli-Hunt and Woonsocket City Solicitor Marcello while they both served in the House, has given a total of $750 to the mayor in the past.

Richard Beretta Jr, is not only listed on the APS website as “currently engaged in the permitting process for a 1000 MW power plant” (the one Invenergy plans for Burrillville) but is also listed  by the Rhode Island Secretary of State as a registered lobbyist for Invenergy. Beretta gave $250 on September 15. He previously gave Baldelli-Hunt $200 in February of 2015.

Four days after this fundraiser, in which employees of APS gave Baldelli-Hunt at least $1000, Invenergy had a second meeting with Baldelli-Hunt’s office. This meeting was also about procuring water and lasted an hour.

Mayor Baldelli-Hunt, who is running on a “pro-business” platform, has another fundraiser planned for November 3 at River Falls Restaurant, from 6-9pm.

Invenergy was recently granted a 90-day extension on their application because the company has failed to come up a with a water source to cool the plant. The Woonsocket Call reported yesterday that City Councillor Daniel Gendron knew nothing about the two meetings, saying, “Really? That’s more than I knew. And that in itself is concerning.”

According to The Call, Gendron and Council Vice President Albert Brien Jr “sent Baldelli-Hunt an e-mail Monday advising her that the City Charter requires the administration to keep members of the council in the loop about the status of business negotiations.” They have requested that the mayor, “expeditiously communicate with the council and provide ALL pertinent emails and other relevant communications between the city and representatives of Invenergy together with any other information that may enlighten all of us as to what exactly is being negotiated at this time.”

Baldelli-Hunt has refused frequent calls for comment from RI Future for weeks now. At a candidate forum in Chan’s Restaurant in Woonsocket last night, Woonsocket Public’s Safety Director Eugene Jalette refused to let residents of Burrillville, Nick Katkevich of the FANG Collective or this reporter approach the mayor to ask questions.

“With yet another state abandoning proposals for more natural gas pipeline capacity, these efforts to expand fossil fuel infrastructure in New England have hit a virtually unsurpassable roadblock,” said Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) president Bradley Campbell in a statement. “Without Massachusetts, New Hampshire or Connecticut in the mix, Spectra has lost a whopping 84 percent of the customer base needed to finance this ill-conceived proposal. It’s time to kill this project altogether and look forward to opportunities for the clean, renewable alternatives that our families demand, our markets expect and our laws require.”

It is unknown when the RIPUC will act to reject the proposal here.

The city has been extremely transparent and open, taking the public’s input into consideration while drafting their design for the future of the 6/10 Connector. It is reassuring to know that the mayor and the planning department are actively listening to the needs and wants of the community. By taking a bottom-up approach, the City of Providence is conveying that its interests align with that of its communities, and appreciates the ideas and solutions that its residents bring to the table. Who else knows what’s best for the City of Providence other than the residents that live, work, and thrive here.

On Monday, October 3, the City released their draft plans for the future of the 6/10 Corridor at a public forum held at the Doorley Jr. Municipal Building in downtown Providence. While the City’s plans do not call for a surface boulevard that I and other community members would have liked to see presented, I can tolerate the parkway design. The parkway concept addresses the concerns of both sides about the looming question, “What should the future of the 6/10 Connector look like?” The plan addresses the need to fast-track the reconstruction of the structurally deficient Huntington Viaduct, out of concern that the structure might collapse. The plan appeases auto-interests as well as those citizens who want to see a concept that is more pedestrian and bike friendly, although we would much prefer a pure boulevard instead of a parkway.

The proposed parkway plan frees up land for development (approximately 50 acres), expands the footprint of DePasquale Square, adds two new off-street bike paths, creates a new exit to West Exchange Street, adds additional connections to the existing street grid, and reconnects parts of Olneyville to the urban fabric of Providence, among other things as well. The proposed “halo” elevated rotary where Route 6 merges with Route 10 allows for the potential to incorporate boulevard elements into sections of the route further down the line. While the entire length of the 6/10 Connector isn’t the pure boulevard that many of us had envisioned, the two-phased parkway plan allows the City and State to revisit the compelling arguments made in favor of an intermodal boulevard.

The most important aspect of the plan isn’t the plan itself. Rather, it is culmination of everything that has led to the plan being drafted in the first place. It is the countless hours spent by engaged citizens, who took it upon themselves to get involved, speak out, and voice their opinions about the project; citizens who persevered even when things weren’t going their way because they knew that this is a critical, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to turn the 6/10 Connector into something truly special. Without vocal citizens and lots of vigorous discussions, RIDOT would probably have elected to refurbish the highway a long time ago, and that wouldn’t have worked for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and city residents alike.

The future of the 6/10 Connector will single-handedly change the physical, social, and economic makeup of the city for generations to come. It is up to us as citizens to decide whether or not we want to make Providence a more livable community for our children, our children’s children, and ourselves. Or, if we want to sit idle, content with the current economic conditions in our Capital City. The choice is ours. RIDOT has the final say about the project’s design, and I strongly encourage my fellow Rhode Islanders to continue to be actively involved in the process, and vocal about the future we envision for a livable, thriving city for decades to come.

Governor Gina Raimondo was the introductory speaker Tuesday morning at the AWEA Offshore WindPower 2016 conference in Warwick. Raimondo spoke to the conference attendees, mostly representatives of various wind power companies and allied industries, with some federal and state government employees on hand as well. Raimondo was keen on selling Rhode Island as a place for the growth and development of renewable energy such as solar and wind.”

“I am an advocate for the environment,” said Raimondo, “and I usually begin my comments in audiences such as these talking about the reality of climate change… Climate change is real, caused by human activity and not going to go away on it’s own. It’s up to us, policy makers, business leaders, entrepreneurs to meet the challenge of climate change.”

Comparing the problem of climate change to her work on pension reform, Raimondo said, “Climate change isn’t that different from big, thorny fiscal issues, which is to say it’s not going to go away unless we take action and it’s only going to get harder the longer we wait. So we have to meet the challenges of climate change with urgency and a seriousness of purpose, in the same way we would with other fiscal challenges.”

The governor then made her pitch for creating jobs in the state. “As Governor of Rhode Island I want my state to be a leader. Number one, it’s the right thing to do, number two, I want our state to be known as the state that solves problems and meets challenges. But number three, the silver lining in meeting the challenge of climate change is that we can create jobs.

“The good news here is that we can create jobs in solar, in wind, in energy efficiency, and those are the kind of jobs that I want to have here in Rhode Island.

“My message is that all the things about Rhode Island that enabled us to be first, with Deepwater Wind, are the reason you ought to think about doing business in Rhode Island,” said Raimondo, before making a very questionable claim that, “we have no fossil fuel industry here in Rhode Island. We’re not ‘as attached’ to [the] ‘good old’ fossil fuel industry. That’s a big deal. That means we have a culture embracing of this industry [wind energy].”

The governor’s press secretary, David Ortiz, later clarified what Governor Raimondo meant by this statement, saying that, “her point was that the state has no fossil fuel deposits and does not extract natural gas, crude oil or coal.”

Though this is true, it does not follow that Rhode Island has a “culture” embracing alternative energy. The fossil fuel industry has a giant economic, political and environmental presence in the state.

Putting aside the proposed Burrillville power plant, or any other of the proposed LNG infrastructure expansions in various stages of being approved, “Rhode Island’s Port of Providence,” according to the US Energy Information Administration (USEIA), “is a key regional transportation and heating fuel products hub” and “natural gas fueled 95 percent of Rhode Island’s net electricity generation in 2015.”

The USEIA goes on to say that Rhode Island “does not produce or refine petroleum,” as Raimondo’s office clarified, but, “Almost all of the transportation and heating fuel products consumed in Rhode Island, eastern Connecticut, and parts of Massachusetts are supplied via marine shipments through the Port of Providence. The port area has petroleum storage tanks, and a small-capacity petroleum product pipeline runs from the port to central Massachusetts.”

Rhode Island is heavily dependent on LNG imports. “Electric power generators and the residential sector are Rhode Island’s largest natural gas consumers. More than half of the natural gas consumed in the state goes to the electric power sector and almost all in-state electricity generation is fueled with natural gas,” says the USEIA, “Historically, natural gas has arrived in Rhode Island from producing areas in Canada and from the U.S. Gulf Coast and Mid-Continent regions, but increasing amounts of natural gas are coming from Appalachian Shales, particularly the Marcellus Shale of Pennsylvania.” This makes Rhode Island heavily dependent on fracked gas for its power generation.

And finally, as far as the dirtiest fossil fuel, coal, goes, “Providence is one of the leading coal import centers in the northeast, receiving one-tenth of the imported coal delivered to eastern customs districts in 2015. The state is part of the six-state Independent System Operator-New England (ISO-NE) regional grid. And, although Rhode Island and Vermont are the only two states in the nation with no coal-fired electricity generation, the ISO-NE grid remains dependent on coal-fired facilities during periods of peak electricity demand.”

So, although Rhode Island has no industry producing or refining fossil fuels, Rhode Island is heavily burdened and intertwined with the fossil fuel industry. We are soaking in fossil fuels as an importer and exporter. We fund the fracking of America with our energy choices, and even as we are economically and politically dictated to by companies like National Grid, Spectra, Invenergy and Motiva (a subsidiary of Saudi Aramco and Shell Oil Company, we bear the environmental scars of their abuse of our habitats and our health.

This is the fossil fuel industry in Rhode Island.

It is massive and it is killing us.

Also speaking at the AWEA Offshore WindPower 2016 conference was Deepwater Wind’s Jeff Grybowski, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative David Cicilline.

]]> http://www.rifuture.org/no-fossil-fuel-industry-ri/feed/ 0 http://www.rifuture.org/bville-town-council-gaspee/ http://www.rifuture.org/bville-town-council-gaspee/#respond Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:49:12 +0000 http://www.rifuture.org/?p=68800 On Wednesday the Burrillville Town Council will be discussing the proposed tax treaty with Invenergy, the company that wants to build a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in the town. The timing of this discussion could not be worse. Invenergy just successfully petitioned the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB), the governmental body tasked with with approving or rejecting the plant, for a 90 day extension on their application. Because Invenergy can’t find the water it needs to cool the plant, for the first time the company is on the ropes. Approving a tax treaty at this time will give the company a much needed win, and might turn the tide in their favor.

Invenergy is searching for the water they need. An Access to Public Records Act (APRA) request from RI Future has revealed that Woonsocket Mayor Lisa Badelli-Hunt’s office has had two meetings with Invenergy officials. On September 7 there was a 30 minute meeting and on September 20 there was a 60 minute meeting. Other meetings may have occurred since then. We know from statements made at the October 3 Woonsocket Town Council meeting that these discussions were not about siting the plant in Woonsocket. These discussions, assumed to be ongoing, are about water. Whatever bargaining position Invenergy has in their discussions with Woonsocket, or any other entity contemplating providing the water Invenergy needs, will be enhanced by the existence of an approved tax treaty.

Passing a tax treaty will send mixed signals to the rest of the state. On September 22 the Burrillville Town Council issued a strong statement in opposition to the proposed power plant. They sent out missives to cities and towns through Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts asking for other town and city councils to pass resolutions in solidarity with Burrillville. So far at least four municipalities have done so, Lincoln, Glocester, North Smithfield and Middletown. How foolish will these councils feel if Burrillville proceeds to negotiate with the company they’ve asked for support in opposing? How eager will other municipalities be to pass their own resolutions going forward?

Jerry Elmer, senior attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) believes that the Town of Burrillville “is under zero obligation to enter into a tax treaty,” adding, “By ‘zero obligation,’ I mean: zero legal obligation, zero ethical obligation, zero political obligation. The Town has tax laws on the books, and those existing tax laws will determine Invenergy’s tax obligation if there is no tax treaty.

“Invenergy can (and likely will) make all kinds of threats about what will or will not happen in the absence of a tax treaty, but the threats are empty,” continues Elmer, “The bottom line is that: (a) The Town can simply choose not to enter into a tax treaty. (b) If the Town chooses not to enter into a tax treaty there is nothing that Invenergy can do. (c) If the Town chooses not to enter into a tax treaty, it is virtually certain that Invenergy will go away.

“But can’t Invenergy sue the Town of Burrillville to try to force the Town to enter a tax treaty?” asks Elmer, before answering, “Technically, the answer is “yes,” Invenergy can sue the town – and, yes, the town would have to spend some money to defend such a lawsuit. But Invenergy could not win such a lawsuit.  Remember what law school professors like to say: ‘You can always sue.’ I can sue you for wearing a blue suit (or for your taste in movies). But just because one can bring such a stupid, frivolous lawsuit does not mean that one can win such a stupid lawsuit.

“So, too, with Invenergy and a tax treaty.  The Town of Burrillville can decline to enter into a tax treaty with Invenergy, and there is nothing Invenergy can do to force the issue.

“The message to each and every member of the Town Council is simple, so simple it can be put into a single sentence: ‘Vote down any tax treaty.’ Or: ‘Don’t even vote on a tax treaty.’ Or: ‘Don’t vote on a tax treaty, and don’t approve a tax treaty.’ None of those sentences is complicated; none of those involves weird, technical legal mumbo-jumbo.  Everyone can understand the point.”

Attorney Alan Shoer, of Adler Pollock & Sheehan, has been representing Invenergy during their application process in front of the EFSB. A look at Shoer’s bio page on his law firm’s website runs down his skills and accomplishments. Shoer is presented as an expert in “all aspects of energy, environmental, and public utility law.” He has “experience in wind, solar, hydro and other renewable energy matters,” and “has represented developers, investors, contractors, utilities, and municipalities in several successful and innovative sustainable energy projects.”

Note what Shoer does not include in his online resumé: Anything at all to do with his strong advocacy for companies that want to expand Rhode Island’s dependence on fracked gas.

Like Governor Gina Raimondo, who never misses an opportunity to publicly champion wind and solar power but downplays her support of fracked gas, and like Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who humbly accepts the laurels heaped upon him for his environmental activism in the Senate but can’t find the time to publicly oppose fracked gas infrastructure in his own state, Alan Shoer seems to want his paid advocacy for fossil fuels companies like Invenergy to go unnoticed.

And this is for a good reason: Twenty years from now, no one will want their name to be attached to the moldering LNG monstrosities, brown fields and contaminated properties left in the wake of the coming fossil fuel collapse. Who wants to tell their children and their grandchildren that they helped destroy the environment when they knew the world was under threat and they knew that they were championing a dying and deadly industry? Carefully shaping their public image today is a way, hopes Raimondo, Whitehouse and Shoer, of shaping the way history will judge them.

But we won’t let the world forget their part in this, will we?

This is why Invenergy would be foolish in suing Burrillville. Not only can they not win, as Jerry Elmer points out above, but in doing so they will be exposing themselves as the villains they are. Burrillville may have to spend money defending themselves against such a lawsuit, but I will bet that most or all of the money Burrillville needs to defend themselves could come from something like an online GoFundMe effort. Fracked gas is enormously unpopular in New England, and becoming more unpopular by the day. Only those who continue to believe the lies of the fossil fuel companies, (and they’ve been lying for decades about climate change, as it turns out) that is, the most gullible or ideologically pathological, believe that fossil fuels are the future.

About 244 years ago, a group of Rhode Islanders in Warwick stood up against British tyranny and torched the Gaspee, starting a series of events that led to the American Revolution. Today, in Burrillville, a group of Rhode Islanders is standing up to the fossil fuel oligarchy and when they win, it will mark a turning point in the climate change battle, and the effects could be as significant as those at Gaspee Point in 1772. Rhode will become, in the words of Timmons Roberts, writing for the Brookings Institute, “a leader of a new energy age for the U.S.,” instead of “a middling actor locked into fossil fuel infrastructure for decades.”

The Burrillville Town Council has an opportunity Wednesday night to save the town, the state, and the world.

Be there.

Only the ATM was available to bank customers for about a half hour. Laura Borth and Steve Davis, both Fang Collective activists, were arrested and will be charged with disrupting a business, a misdemeanor.

TD Bank was targeted because it provides major financing to the Dakota Access Pipeline project that is being vociferously protested by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and others.

“Let The FANG Collective’s action serve as an example of what an ally group should look like,” said Krystal Two Bulls, a Sioux activist protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. “If you live on this land, breathe the air and drink water… this is your fight too. Divest. Take action. Stand with us at Red Warrior Camp and Standing Rock. We call on all ally groups to take action and hold the banks who finance the Dakota Access Pipeline accountable.”

The Dakota Access Pipeline, or DAPL, is a $3.8 billion fracked-oil pipeline being constructed in the Bakken shale fields of North Dakota to Peoria, Illinois. It would cross Lakota Treaty Territory at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation and traverse underneath the Missouri River. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe is leading an effort to stop the pipeline from being built.

“TD Bank is an active participant in the violence and oppression facing indigenous people in North Dakota,” said Laura Borth, in a statement prepared before her arrest. “I cannot remain idle as corporations and financial institutions aggressively put forth their greed for profit over the safety and wellbeing of people and the climate.”

Said Steve Davis, “TD Bank still has an opportunity to do the right thing and cut its line of credit for the Dakota Access Pipeline. We will keep coming back until they do just that.”

National Grid’s proposed pipeline tariff, now under an indefinite stay per the Public Utilities Commission here in Rhode Island, was rejected in New Hampshire last week. The controversial and complicated plan, which would make electricity ratepayers in New England financially responsible for the creation and profitability of a new fracked gas pipeline, involves multiple companies working together across multiple states. Here’s a description from the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission:

“Eversource is a public utility headquartered in Manchester, operating under the laws of the State of New Hampshire as an electric distribution company (EDC). Algonquin is an owner-operator of an interstate gas pipeline located in New England. Algonquin is owned by a parent company, Spectra Energy Corp (Spectra), a publicly-traded corporation headquartered in Houston, Texas. Algonquin has partnered with Eversource’s corporate parent, Eversource Energy, headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, and Hartford, Connecticut, and with National Grid, the parent company of EDC subsidiaries in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, to develop the Access Northeast pipeline. In general terms, Eversource Energy’s EDC subsidiaries in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire and National Grid’s EDC subsidiaries in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, are each individually seeking regulatory approval of gas capacity on the Access Northeast pipeline.”

When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled against National Grid’s pipeline tariff in Massachusetts, the Conservation Law Foundation brought a motion to dismiss the proposal here in Rhode Island. Instead, the PUC issued an indefinite stay in the proceedings, with the caveat that National Grid file a progress report on January 13, 2017.

Last week the New Hampshire PUC ruled against their state’s involvement in the plan, writing,

“The proposal before us would have Eversource purchase long-term gas pipeline capacity to be used by gas-fired electric generators, and include the net costs of its purchases and sales in its electric distribution rates. That proposal, however, goes against the overriding principle of restructuring, which is to harness the power of competitive markets to reduce costs to consumers by separating unregulated generation from fully regulated distribution. It would allow Eversource to reenter the generation market for an extended period, placing the risk of that decision on its customers. We cannot approve such an arrangement under existing laws. Accordingly, we dismiss Eversource’s petition.

“We acknowledge that the increased dependence on natural gas-fueled generation plants within the region and the constraints on gas capacity during peak periods of demand have resulted in electric price volatility. Eversource’s proposal is an interesting one, with the potential to reduce that volatility; but it is an approach that, in practice, would violate New Hampshire law following the restructuring of the electric industry. If the General Court believes EDCs should be allowed to make long-term commitments to purchase gas capacity and include the costs in distribution rates, the statutes can be amended to permit such activities.”

The Maine Public Utilities commission has voted in favor of the pipeline tariff.

Smaller than the power plant proposed for neighboring Burrillville, the “Killingly Energy Center” is slated to produce 550 MW of unneeded energy. It will produced nearly 2 million tons of emissions per year, adding to the emissions of the Lake Road Generating Facility, an 840 MW power plant already located in Killingly. Emissions, of course, know no political boundaries, so large parts of Rhode Island will be subjected to this increase in pollutants.

The Killingly power plant is to be built in a residential neighborhood within a mile of 460 Killingly housing units. At least five schools and day cares, over 5,000 students, are within three miles of the proposed plant. Wyndham County, where Killingly is located, has asthma rates 18 percent higher than the rest of Connecticut.

To power the plant, a pipeline connection to the main AIM pipeline will be built, crossing the Quinebaug River, Wyndham Land Trust, the Airline Trail, Pomfret Audubon Society and Bafflin Sanctuary. Each area a precious resource.

Like Burrillville, the proposed power plant needs water. There is a concern that the aquifers will be strained and that residents will suffer a lack of water given that the power plant needs 90,000 gallons a day when burning fracked gas and as much as 400,000 gallons a day when burning diesel oil. Also, like Burrillville, there are safety and and noise issues to consider when a plant like this is built in a residential area.

The Town of Killingly is categorized as a distressed community. Like other areas where these types of facilities are targeted, there are environmental justice issues to be considered. Very often the facilities are like these are aimed at low income communities that lack the financial means to either fight the power plant or resist the financial carrots dangled by the company building the plant.

NTE Energy, the prospective builder, has never completed a power plant. Formed in 2009 as a private equity funded company, there is a worry that the company will build the plant and sell it off for a quick profit. Currently the company has six power plants in development, two of which are under construction. The company has no experience in operating or maintaining a power plant.

Also, like in Rhode Island, the residents most impacted by the siting of a power plant in their community have no say in whether or not the plant will be built. The Connecticut Siting Council, the equivalent of Rhode Island’s Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) makes the final decision regarding the power plant in Killingly. The Siting Council has already determined that Connecticut has an excess of electricity generation into 2020, yet is still considering the power plant in Killingly.

Opposition to the power plant has begun in Killingly. The group is called Not Another Power Plant, and I found that they were very knowledgeable about the situation in Burrillville. I went there Monday afternoon to talk with residents who were holding signs and a press conference to get the word out. Below I speak to Connecticut State Senator Mae Flexer and Connecticut State Representative Danny Rovero about their opposition.

On Thursday October 20th beginning at 3:30 pm there will be a public field review of the proposed NTE/KEC site on Lake Road, Dayville. This will be an opportunity to see the area where NTE hopes to build the power plant. Afterwards there will be a Public Hearing with the Connecticut Siting Council at 6:30 pm at the Killingly High School Auditorium. Public comment will be heard at this meeting.