Rhode Island – Page 4

August 9, 2016

Not enough water for proposed power plant and future growth

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

On August 9, the Harrisville Fire District in its monthly meeting will discuss how to respond to Invenergy’s request for the supply of water for its proposed power plant in Burrillville, the Clear River Energy Center (CREC). For time and place follow this link.

Future water shortages caused by CREC have been a topic of discussion and speculation for many months. That indeed there is a serious risk is clear from information contained in documents obtained from several Rhode Island departments in response to Fossil Free RI‘s request made under the Access to Public Records Act.

As a reminder, the following is worth quoting from a previous post based on documents supplied by the RI Department of Health:

According to a presentation at a meeting about CREC attended by several state agencies, 0.18 MGD (million of gallons of water per day) will be left for growth if the power plant is built. June Swallow of the Center for Drinking Water Quality at the Rhode Island Department of Health attended the meeting. Her longhand notes show that Harrisville and Pascoag each are expected to need 0.12 MGD for growth. This suggests a deficit of 0.24 MGD – 0.18 MGD = 0.06 MGD.

Also documents supplied by the RI Department of Environmental Management raise concern. There is, for example, the following email exchange between Alisa Richardson of RIDEM and Ken Burke formerly of the Rhode Island Water Resources Board:

Thanks Alisa,
I think we should talk about having the Town acknowledge that with low flow conditions and high energy demands, that the Town is effectively pledging most (if not all) of its available water to this development. This local decision is theirs to make. Will someone from the Town also be at this meeting?
Thank you,
Kenneth J. Burke, P.E.MBA
General Manager/Treasurer

This email (my emphasis) appears on page 50 of this document. There is more of interest, but the conclusion is the same; search the document for “Alisa” and “Ken.”

Also Stephanie Sloman, a retired environmental engineer who worked for a large electroplating plant in Massachusetts, weighed in. She submitted a thorough and detailed testimony to the Invenergy docket of the Energy Facility Siting Board.

Her conclusion is that, no matter how you look at it, there is not enough water for future growth in Burrillville and the other towns that draw from the same source.

Clearly, the RI departments of Environmental Management and Health, and the Water Resources Board are aware of the looming water supply problem. As Stephanie Sloman explains, anyone capable of elementary arithmetic can check this. As she points out, Invenergy is apparently is not one of those.

Recently, Gina Raimondo mentioned that she would withdraw her support for the CREC project if there were any issues. Of course, trouble with the water supply is only one of a myriad of issues each single one of which should suffice for her to make good on that promise.

August 8, 2016August 26, 2016

Invenergy power plant facing water problems

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

Invenergy’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville is running into some water problems. The Pascoag Utility District, at a special meeting called by board chair Al Palmisciano for August 19, will decide for or against allowing Invenergy to access well 3A, which is closed by court order due to MTBE contamination.

A decision in Invenergy’s favor is by no means certain. In fact, Invenergy already seems to be searching for other options. On August 9 the Harrisville Fire District is taking up Invenergy’s, “inquiry as to whether and under what conditions Harrisville would be willing to consider developing and constructing a well and distribution means to supply water to the power plant at Invenergy’s expense.” Invenergy is also asking Harrisville to “authorize such additional pump and water testing and legal research as is necessary to determine the yield, viability and estimated cost of developing a well on the Victory Highway site and constructing an appropriate means of distribution at Invenergy’s expense.”

The Harrisville meeting is taking place at a time that overlaps with the RI Department of Health (RIDOH)’s public commentary hearing at the Burrillville High School, part of the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB)’s process of determining the fate of the power plant. This will have the effect of dividing the potential audience, but over the last few weeks water has become a very big issue in northern Rhode Island because the area is experiencing a severe drought, with rainfall five inches below average.

Aquifers and wells are feeling the effect of the lack of rainfall. Invenergy plans to use an average of 100,000 gallons of water a day to cool their plant, and almost a million gallons a day when burning oil. This is in addition to the 4 million gallons of water used to cool Burillville’s existing power plant, Ocean State Power. This strain on the area’s water supply may be lead to even more severe water shortages in the area. At the very least, it will forestall the possibility of future growth in the area.

Even if both Harrisville and Pascoag deny Invenergy their water, it doesn’t necessarily put an end to the company’s plans. Water could be imported from over state lines, and of course there is always the option used by Ocean State Power. According to a video by Paul Roselli of the Burrillville Land Trust and Burrillville resident Norman Derjarlais, the company seems to be trucking in the water from Western Sand & Gravel, a nearby superfund site, in leaking trucks. From 1975-1979 about 12 acres of this area was used for the disposal of liquid waste, including chemicals and septic waste.

You can watch the video below.

August 8, 2016

Sierra Club statement on National Grid LNG proposal

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

The Rhode Island Sierra Club strongly praises the bold climate leadership of the nine Providence legislators who publicly expressed their opposition to National Grid’s proposal for a $180 million fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in the Port of Providence.

Last week, Providence State Representatives Aaron Regunberg, Joe Almeida, Grace Diaz, John Lombardi, Chris Blazejewski and Edie Ajello, along with Providence State Senators Juan Pichardo, Gayle Goldin and Harold Metts submitted a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) describing their deep concerns with National Grid’s proposal. We wholeheartedly agree with their statement that this project represents a boondoggle for ratepayers, an unjustifiable safety risk for the local community, and the kind of unacceptable doubling down on fossil fuel infrastructure that will guarantee we blow past our legally mandated emission reduction goals. And we are proud to see so many legislative leaders refusing to condemn our beautiful state to a future of climate catastrophe.

Unfortunately, the same can not be said of Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza. Rather than making any effort to live up to his rhetoric on climate change, Mayor Elorza has chosen to partner with National Grid and help them advance their proposal with tacit support and active negotiations for a Tax Stabilization Agreement to smooth out the utility’s tax payments over time.

Stopping climate change is the moral crisis of our time – and it will only be possible if we end these vast investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure that guarantee our addiction to fossil fuels continues past our planet’s point of no return. We all need to join in this fight. Rhode Island Sierra Club pledges our support for elected officials who take this moral imperative seriously, like the nine Providence legislators who came out in opposition to the LNG proposal last week. And we condemn in the strongest possible terms the cowardice of self-proclaimed climate leaders who choose to give in to the fossil fuel industry. Mayor Elorza, your actions speak much louder than your words – please, do the right thing and join your legislative delegation in standing up for Providence’s current and future citizens.

August 5, 2016August 26, 2016

National Grid says cost of proposed ratepayer fee is a trade secret

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

National Grid will not reveal the amount of money they hope to charge customers in their proposed pipeline tariff. That information is a trade secret, and will not be revealed until after the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) decides on the proposal.

On Tuesday evening RIPUC heard public testimony against National Grid’s plan to charge customers for its efforts in building fracked gas pipelines and infrastructure in our state. National Grid also wants ratepayers to guarantee their profits for the venture as well. After the hearing I searched in vain through National Grid’s 572 page application for anything that would indicate how much this plan would cost. Finally I wrote Todd Bianco, principal policy associate at RIPUC for clarification.

“I do not believe there are any costs or rates in the filing that have not been redacted and marked as confidential. You should contact National Grid’s attorney or their spokesperson to confirm that,” said Bianco.

Following Bianco’s advice, I wrote to David Graves, National Grid’s Rhode Island Director of Strategic Communications.

“Portions of the filing are redacted because the document includes confidential information,” wrote Graves in an email, “which if revealed, would give competitors an unfair advantage in building their bids. The same procedure is in place in commodity rate setting. The information is shared with the regulators and is used in their assessment of our proposed rates, but the hard numbers in the estimates are not shared publicly until after the contract has been awarded.”

Graves did note that ratepayer impacts are discussed in the application starting on page 545. All the important numbers for determining actual impacts have been redacted.

August 4, 2016September 16, 2016

Workers demand pay in early morning action

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

2016-08-04 Fuerza Laboral 011 — David Civetti

David Civetti, CEO of Dependable and Affordable Cleaning Inc, got a wake up call early Thursday morning about the importance of paying employees for work done.

At about 6am over a dozen people from Fuerza Laboral arrived at Civetti’s Johnston home and knocked on his door, waking him from his sleep. Fuerza maintains that on May 26-29, Civetti’s company “assigned a group of workers to clean apartments located in the area surrounding Providence College. After the job was completed, 8 workers were not compensated for those 4 days, 11 hours a day.”

The excuse given at the time was that Civetti was not satisfied with the work that had been done, say the workers.

“What’s the problem?” asked Civetti answering the door after protesters rang his bell and yelled for him to come outside and talk with them. “I have no idea who anybody is. I have no idea who you are.”

“No?” asked a woman incredulously, “Do you know her? Do you know him?”

“No,” said Civetti, before eventually admitting that he recognized one of the workers present.

“You need to pay your workers,” said Heiny Maldonado, executive director of Fuerza Laboral.

Civetti shrugged. “Everybody who works for me gets paid.”

“Let me ask you a question,” said Civetti, “Did I hire you? Or did someone else bring you to work with them?”

“We worked for you.”

“Did I hire you?” asked Civetti again. “Rosa hired you. Did Rosa bring them? Rosa and Chris brought them to a job. I didn’t hire them.”

“We know the game,” said Raul Figueroa, organizer for Fuerza, “we deal with it every day.”

The game Figueroa was referring to is the practice of classifying some workers as subcontractors in an attempt to circumvent labor laws. By hiring people on as subcontractors, some companies try to avoid the costs associated with properly hiring workers and sometimes manage to not pay workers at all.

“We use sub-contractors from time to time,” admitted Civetti. “Rosa and Chris are sub-contractors. They are responsible for paying [their employees].”

Claiming that the workers were hired as subcontractors doesn’t let Civetti off the hook says Marissa Janton, a lawyer with the Rhode Island Center for Justice, a public interest law office that has teamed up with Fuerza Laboral. Under the law, an employer is defined by what he does, she said.

According to Janson, Civetti “directly employed” her clients. Civetti met them at a house on Eaton St. near Providence College where he keeps his cleaning supplies. He set their $10 an hour pay rate and assigned them to the houses they needed to clean. After they finished a house, the workers called Civetti who told them which house they needed to clean next, said Janson.

This all adds up to being an employee, maintains Janson, not a sub-contractor.

Workers at the early morning action reminded Civetti that they were given tee shirts emblazoned with the company logo to wear while they worked. Civetti said that he gives out lots of tee shirts, and asked if wearing a Dunkin Donuts tee shirt means he works there.

“It does if you’re pouring coffee,” said Justin Kelley, who assisted Fuerza as the police liaison for the morning’s action.

Ultimately, after nearly a quarter hour of contentious conversation, Civetti agreed to meet with the aggrieved workers to settle the issue next week.

Driving to Civetti’s home, the group passed many campaign signs advertising a Civetti running for the Johnston City Council. When asked about the signs Civetti replied that the signs were for his brother, Robert Civetti, a longtime Johnston resident and accountant

Not getting paid for work is something few of us can afford, but this practice seriously impacts low wage workers. Everyone needs to eat and pay rent after all, and a week working without pay is a serious injustice.

“It’s sad and disappointing to work so hard for someone who ends up stealing your wages, after working for over 40 hours,” said Maria Hoyos, one of the affected workers. She was involved with a direct action several years ago, demanding lost wages for other workers. She never thought this would happen to her. “Being told that your work was not done properly, just to use it as an excuse to not pay you is not only wrong but immoral.”

Below is the full interaction between Civetti and Fuerza Laboral.

August 3, 2016August 4, 2016

It takes a village to clean Woonasquatucket River

When the Providence Police Department, the Woonasquatucket River Greenway Project, the Olneyville Housing Corporation, and the community joined forces, it was all for the love of a river. The banks of the Woonasquatucket were strewn with trash, the soil was toxic from the mill industry of a bygone era, the underused and overgrown area was a perfect invitation for drug deals and other nefarious activity.

And the children of this community, which is rich with diversity and hardworking folks trying to provide safe recreational opportunities for youth, were getting the short end of the environmental stick. It isn’t an unusual situation. But truth be told, kids and adults everywhere love nature whether in cities, suburbs or the country, whether poor or well-to-do if given an opportunity to revel in its beauty.

When the Woonasquatucket restoration began, everyone knew it was not going to be an easy job. But the benefits of the eventual payoff provided a strong incentive.

The scene then wasn’t pretty, and the work ahead was hard. The area needed to be rid of highly contaminated soil, a toxic legacy of the industrial past, new soil put in, and old soil capped to prevent exposure to lingering pollutants. The area was strewn with trash and debris that required removal by heavy manual labor.

Plantings of trees, shrubs and gardens went on unnoticed at first, until a local community group took root and started a bike shop next to a blooming community garden. All of these were small but critical steps to returning health to the river and the surrounding community.

These actions were informed by the broken window theory, which proposes that lower levels of disorder in a community lead to higher and higher levels of disorder.

Trash signals a lack of concern for residents and leads to degraded care for property, which leads to greater levels of devaluing the community and higher-level crimes. Olneyville was an example of this theory in action. Through it all ran the Woonasquatucket River, a forgotten treasure that once attracted the Huck Finn in all of us.

Once community-minded partners got together and restored the riverbanks as a haven for recreation, there arrived a burgeoning volunteer force ready to maintain it. Over 1,300 volunteers many of them local residents lent a helping hand last year alone. Today, there are bike programs, educational activities, art competitions, and Riverside Park. The area once buried beneath pollution and crime is an intergenerational gathering point for healthy play, conversation and relaxation. Criminal activity has dropped sharply and the community, its housing and environmental agencies, and the police are partners in an urban success story where a winding river now flows past peaceful banks on its way to Narragansett Bay.

The success of the Woonasquatucket River and neighborhood restoration project was featured in the recently released 2016 Watershed Counts Report, an annual update on the health of the bi-state Narragansett Bay Watershed that guides future actions. This case study focused on how the collaborative work of individuals, communities, private organizations, and state and federal authorities is critical to the protection of Narragansett Bay, one of New England’s greatest natural and economic resources.

Clean environments that support the love of nature are ubiquitous among people of every background, and should be central to uplifting efforts as dedicated citizens, advocacy groups and local governments work with communities seeking to calm troubled waters throughout the nation.

August 3, 2016

People’s Power and Light opposes National Grid plan

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

On the evening of Tuesday, August 2nd People’s Power & Light testified at the Public Utilities Commission, on behalf of Rhode Island consumers and electric ratepayers, against National Grid’s proposal to recover costs from the proposed Access Northeast natural gas pipeline through an electricity ratepayer tariff.

People’s Power & Light expressed several reasons why the Commission should reject National Grid’s Request for Approval of a Gas Capacity Contract and Cost Recovery, Docket 4627, and instead seek alternative resources to meet the region’s energy demand during peak winter times, such as renewable energy, energy efficiency, storage, and demand response. We expressed disagreement with the unprecedented proposal that electric customers pay for additional natural gas infrastructure. Why should consumers take on the long-term risk of a new, unnecessary natural gas pipeline?

People’s Power & Light’s public and written comments:

As a pro-consumer and pro-environment nonprofit organization, we at People’s Power & Light encourage the Commission to reject National Grid’s Request for Approval of a Gas Capacity Contract and Cost Recovery.

The pipeline tax is an outdated approach that conflicts with the widespread sustainability efforts that Rhode Island is already implementing across sectors.

The 2014 Resilient RI Act sets specific greenhouse gas reduction targets at 80% by 2050, with interim targets of 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 45 percent by 2035. Energy planners have an obligation to implement policies and projects that keep Rhode Island on track to meet those goals. As the Ocean State, we are especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change; building additional natural gas infrastructure sets us back in the wrong direction and will only serve to increase polluting emissions.

When more consumers learn that they could be on the hook for the pipeline expenses, we can expect to hear more voices of opposition. In our neighboring state Massachusetts, legislation was submitted to prohibit the imposition of a pipeline tax on electricity ratepayers; the measure passed the Senate and a strong majority of the House signed a letter expressing support for the prohibition. We anticipate that a similar measure would see success here in Rhode Island if put to a vote in the General Assembly. Local constituents want to see our state reduce fossil fuel consumption cost-effectively and diversify our local energy mix with more efficiency and renewable sources. A new natural gas pipeline puts the long-term risk on ratepayers who do not want the pipeline in the first place. A recent poll conducted by our sister organization Mass Energy Consumers Alliance demonstrated overwhelming support to ban ratepayer financing of the Access Northeast pipeline. By a margin of over two to one (70%-30%), participants preferred alternatives to natural gas pipelines.

We must protect electric customers from being charged for a natural gas pipeline. Thank you for your time and for the opportunity to submit comments.

August 3, 2016August 26, 2016

Providence legislators oppose ‘dangerous’ new LNG development

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

A group of Providence elected officials announced their strong opposition to a proposal by National Grid to develop a new fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in South Providence. Citing concerns ranging from costs to ratepayers, safety risks and climate impact, the legislators — including Representatives Joseph S. Almeida (D-Dist. 12, Providence), Grace Diaz (D-Dist. 11, Providence), Aaron Regunberg (D-Dist. 4, Providence), Chris Blazejewski (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Edith H. Ajello (D-Dist. 1, Providence) and John J. Lombardi (D-Dist. 8, Providence) and Senators Juan Pichardo (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Gayle Goldin (D-Dist. 3, Providence) and Sen. Harold M. Metts (D-Dist. 6, Providence) — called on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reject National Grid’s application, and warned the City of Providence against signing a tax stabilization agreement with the utility to facilitate the project.

Last summer, National Grid submitted a proposal to FERC to develop a $180 million facility to produce Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) directly from a Spectra Energy pipeline that delivers fracked gas from Marcellus Shale to Providence. LNG is produced by cooling natural gas to -260°F, which reduces its volume by 600 times and puts it into liquid form. As described in its application, National Grid would then utilize tanker trucks to export the LNG produced in Providence, primarily to locations in Massachusetts.

“No matter how you look at it, this project is a money-maker for the utility at the expense of our community and our state,” said Representative Almeida. “National Grid is asking us, the ratepayers, to foot the $180 million bill for this project, for what? So they can increase their own profits by exporting LNG out of the state! This does nothing to benefit our constituents, and it does nothing to benefit my neighbors on the South Side. All this proposal will do is transfer money from ratepayers’ pockets to National Grid’s coffers, and we’re not going to accept it.”

Legislators also expressed concerns about the safety risks of the proposed project.

“LNG is a dangerous substance,” said Representative Diaz. “Just two years ago, an LNG facility in Washington state exploded, causing an evacuation of everyone within a two-mile area. If that were to happen at this site, all of my constituents would be in danger. Why is it always our community that must shoulder the collateral damage and safety risks from these toxic projects?”

LNG is stable in liquid form, and without air it is not flammable. However, at any temperature over -260°F it converts to methane gas and expands by 600 times, rapidly pressurizing any sealed container. If LNG spills and mixes with airs, it becomes highly flammable and potentially explosive.

“I remember when Keyspan, which has since been bought by National Grid, applied to FERC with a similar proposal to build an LNG import facility at Fields Point in 2005,” said Senator Pichardo. “That application was denied due to the very real safety concerns of this kind of development. In fact, FERC Commissioner Nora Brownell cited the risks of accidents and explosions when turning down the proposal, stating that the project would not meet current federal safety standards. If doubling down on this dangerous fuel was unsafe ten years ago, it is unsafe for our neighborhood today, and I urge FERC to once again listen to the community’s opposition to this harmful development.”

Finally, the elected officials demanded that the climate consequences of the expanded fossil fuel infrastructure be taken into account.

“The science on climate change is clear. If my generation is to have any chance of inheriting an Ocean State with any state left in it, we need to transition to a clean energy economy as quickly as possible. This proposal would sink millions of ratepayer dollars into unnecessary new fossil fuel infrastructure that would be used for decades past our climate’s point of no return, and that is a betrayal of our children,” said Representative Regunberg. “Mayor Jorge Elorza and the Providence City Council have taken credit for being leaders on climate and environmental issues. But if the city awards a tax stabilization agreement to National Grid to support this project, then it is our belief that the mayor and council can no longer claim this kind of climate leadership. We hope they will do the right thing and tell National Grid that Providence will not facilitate this wasteful, ratepayer-funded, environmentally catastrophic scheme.”

The Providence legislators reported that they are submitting letters detailing their concerns to FERC, joining a growing list of community members and neighborhood organizations opposing National Grid’s application.

[From a press release]

August 3, 2016August 3, 2016

National Grid wants RI ratepayers to guarantee its profits

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

National Grid is requesting that the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) approve a 20-year gas capacity contract” with Algonquin Gas Transmission Company LLC (Algonquin) for natural gas transportation capacity and storage services on Algonquin’s Access Northeast Project (ANE Project).”

The multinational energy conglomerate not only wants Rhode Island ratepayers to subsidize the construction of fracked gas infrastructure, they want consumers to ensure that the project is profitable for the company.

Part of National Grid’s 572 page application includes “a Capacity Cost Recovery Provision tariff, which allows the Company to recover all incremental costs associated with the ANE Agreement, as well as the Company’s proposed financial incentive.” Understand that when National Grid says “financial incentives” they are talking about company profits.

The logic that National Grid is using to claim the right to tariffs is that the RIPUC has allowed such charges when it comes to “long-term renewable electricity for retail customers from wholesale power providers.” [emphasis added] In other words, because the government has taken an interest in expanding renewable energy sources like wind and solar, and allowed tariffs to support these efforts, National Grid argues that it should be allowed similar considerations for fossil fuels such as fracked gas.

National Grid owns a 20 percent stake in the ANE Project, so Rhode Islanders will be ensuring that the company generates a profit as they buy fracked gas from themselves if the RIPUC approves this request.

A similar tariff stalled in the Massachusetts legislature, where the state Senate unanimously rejected the idea but the session ended before a House vote. The Massachusetts Supreme Court is deciding on the validity of the tariff, since the Massachusetts PUC approved the idea.

National Grid also asked that their request be approved “as expeditiously as possible,” meaning that they want the decision fast tracked. As a result, the public comment meeting held last night at the RIPUC offices in Warwick was the first and last opportunity for public comment, unless RIPUC commissioners Margaret Curran and Herbert DeSimone III decide to hold another public comment meeting. (The third member of the RIPUC board, Marion Gold, has recused herself.) Written comment can be sent to thomas.kogut@dpuc.ri.gov. Mention that you are commenting on Docket No. 4627.

The first speaker of the night, Doug Gablinske of The Energy Council of New England (TEC-RI), was also the only speaker in favor of the idea. Gablinske called the project “a novel approach” and said that “it’s good for ratepayers, for employees, for employers and for business.”

From there, things went downhill pretty quickly.

Calling the tariff an “unprecedented charge” Priscilla De La Cruz of the People’s Power and Light called on the RIPUC to reject National Grid’s request. “Why should consumers take on the risk of a new, unnecessary gas pipeline?” De La Cruz maintained that the entire idea conflicts with the goals of the 2014 Resilient Rhode Island Act. (You can read De La Cruz’s full testimony here.)

Lynn Clark came down from Burrillville, wearing her “No New Power Plant” tee shirt to argue against the proposal. She said that allowing National Grid to pass the costs of their LNG project onto consumers adds “insult to injury” to everyone living in her part of the state.

Other states did comprehensive studies before considering pipeline tariffs, said Nick Katkevich of the FANG Collective, who has been fighting pipeline projects in and around Rhode Island for three years. Massachusetts and Maine have both produced studies that concluded that pipeline tariffs are a bad idea, said Katkevich. “It’s shameful that National Grid wants to have guaranteed profits as part of this,” said Katkevich. “They don’t care about people. They don’t care about people’s utility rates… if they did they wouldn’t put guaranteed profits in there.”

“No one wants these pipelines,” said Katkevich, “across the region people are resisting the first of the three Spectra expansions… There have been 240 people arrested as part of direct action in New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.”

If you have an opinion on this project, you can send it to Luly.massaro@puc.ri.gov. Mention that you are commenting on Docket No. 4627.

Below find all the testimony from the hearing.

August 2, 2016August 2, 2016

If you want change, don’t vote for the star

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

Rhode Island is one of the most progressive states in the country, at least when it comes to the views of its citizens. Its residents vote Democrat by large margins and generally hold views that are in agreement with—or to the left of—the national Democratic Party. So why is our government so conservative? In my opinion, a big part of the problem is the structure of the state Democratic Party and its cynical endorsement process.

Many RI voters seem not to be aware of this, but the state Democratic Party’s formal endorsement process provides substantial resources to the officially endorsed candidates at all levels of the election. Unendorsed candidates are frozen out of a wide variety of party resources and can only obtain them at significant extra expense, if they can get them at all. In addition, “endorsed” candidates automatically get top billing on the ballot, and a star appears next to their name, as if to suggest that they are the clearly superior choice (even though, as a rule, the opposite is far more likely).

So how does one become an endorsed candidate, you may ask? Well, there are a vast number of local, district, and ward committees who typically award these endorsements (but not always—see below!). In theory, these various ward, town, and district committees serve as a way of ensuring that people who live in an area have the opportunity to endorse the candidate who is most in touch with the needs of their neighborhoods. In practice, however, these ward and district committees are invariably stuffed with the friends, relatives, and even employees of the incumbents. As a result, they serve as little more than a rubber stamp that inevitably endorses the incumbent or their hand-picked successor—even when evidence of their corruption is overwhelming. And if by some chance a new voice manages to impress their local committees and gain their support, the RI Democratic Party chair—a person who is not elected to fill this role, but is merely appointed by prominent insiders such as Speaker Mattiello—can simply overrule the local committees and impose his will on them by fiat, as he recently did to Linda Finn, who earned the endorsements of her local town committees but whose opponent has secured the official party endorsement as well as all the corrupt resources that come with it.

When my fellow Democratic primary voters show up at the ballot box in September, I hope they will remember that a vote for the star is a vote to maintain the status quo. It’s a vote for Speaker Mattiello, and for the anti-democratic, cynical, corrupt, and above all elitist political machine from which he and his ilk draw their power. If you want change from your state and local elected officials next year, the choice is clear: Vote for anyone who doesn’t have Mattiello’s star of approval.

August 2, 2016August 2, 2016

With little notice, PVD City Council voting on controversial TSA Tuesday

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

The Providence City Council has called a special meeting for Tuesday night and among the agenda items is tax stabilization agreements (TSAs) for 60 Valley Street, LLC and 166 Valley Street, LLC on behalf of the Rising Sun Mills Project. The ordinance is sponsored by Council President Luis Aponte. The details of the TSA can be found here.

The City Council unanimously rejected a similar TSA, for 100 Fountain St, in February, under intense public pressure. Aponte then said, given the city’s precarious economic situation, “It’s the right signal that the [Finance] Committee is sending to the public and to the [City] Council.”

The TSA being considered by the council notes that the “projects been suffered serious financial setbacks and hardships as a result of the collapse of the real estate and financial markets over the past several years” and hence a five year extension of TSAs granted in 2003 and 2006 is needed. In return, “the Project Owners of 166 Valley Street will make an additional investment of approximately $5 million which shall be used to convert approximately 85,000 square feet of the building from a single tenant space to multiple commercial spaces. This will assist in the Project Owners in attracting new tenants to the Project and will create new construction and potential permanent jobs at the Project Site.”

The amount of revenue Providence will lose in this deal is unclear.

Stop Tax Evasion in Providence (STEP) released a press release Monday claiming that that the Providence City Council leadership is failing taxpayers.

“You would think that the Council would be in no rush to go handing out more of these questionable extensions to projects that have already been paying very little taxes for 15 years, but you would be wrong,” says the STEP press release. “While the… promise of new spending and jobs from Rising Sun Mill owners would seem welcome, there are absolutely no safeguards to ensure they will invest what they say. Thus the city can be certain of neither jobs nor permitting revenue.”

The special city council meeting was announced on Friday, July 29, as big news stories broke, such as Representative John Carnevale deciding not to appeal the Providence Board of Canvassers decision that ended his re-election campaign and Attorney General Peter Kilmartin announcing the non-results of his 38 Studios investigation. Technically, the City Council went on break for August and was not due to reconvene until September 1.

As a result, this important meeting was almost missed.

The city council will also be awarding hundreds of thousands of dollars in contracts at this meeting, according to the agenda.

July 29, 2016July 30, 2016

Malala Yousafzai comes to Providence, talks education and Pokémon

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

To her fans and supporters all over the world, she is Malala. She is a superstar. But when she arrived in Providence the night before her appearance at the Dunkin Donuts Center, no one recognized her.

On her first night in our city, Malala Yousafzai, youngest ever recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, ate at the restaurant India on the East Side. In her telling, she ate too much and decided to go for a walk in the park with her father. In the park, she says, “Nobody was even looking at me.” Everyone was too busy playing Pokémon Go. Nineteen year old Malala knew about the game, her brothers play it, but her father did not know about it. They talked to a couple of players, asking them to explain the game. Her father still doesn’t understand the game. Malala doesn’t play but she is happy that the game gets her brothers out of the house, instead of keeping them indoors playing games on the television.

It’s such an ordinary story, yet Malala Yousafzai has not had an ordinary life.

2016-07-29 Malala in PVD 005 — A young Malala fan holds a sign for the crowd

On October 12, 2012, Malala Yousafzai, already an outspoken education advocate, was 15 years old when two members of the Taliban, no older than she, got on her school bus in Pakistan and shot her in the head. As Malala spoke about that day before an audience of 6,000 in Providence Thursday evening, she said, “It was the longest bus ride. I still haven’t arrived at my home in Swat Valley.”

Malala doesn’t remember the day of her attack. She was taken from hospital to hospital before ending up in Birmingham, England. After multiple operations and procedures she says is well and nearly fully recovered. About the men who shot her, Malala said, “The two boys who attacked me are about the same age as me. They were brainwashed. I blame the ideology. Islam doesn’t allow anyone to kill another person. Forgiveness is the best revenge.”

“The terrorists tried their best,” said Malala, “and I realized that even God is supporting me. Even Death is supporting me. Death doesn’t want me.”

When Malala was 11 the Taliban took over her homeland in Swat Valley, Pakistan. The Taliban stopped her education. “Women’s rights and dignity were taken away… That was a very hard time.” On her last day of school, Malala says she “decided to speak out for [her]self and all the girls in [her] community.”

She wrote about life under Taliban control and the need for education for women for the BBC and was profiled and wrote for the NY Times. When her name and the name of her father, Ziauddin Yousafzai, a school principal, was revealed on the radio, she became a target.

Since her recovery Malala has become an outspoken advocate against terrorism and for women’s rights. She has spoken out against child labor and child trafficking. She became the youngest recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2014, sharing the honor with Kailash Satyarthi, a children’s rights activist from India. Malala, ever humble, doesn’t see the Nobel Prize as something she received. She sees it as an award recognizing the importance of children.

Malala doesn’t see herself as special. “There are amazing girls in Swat Valley better than me,” she said, “but their parents did not allow them an education.” Malala’s father supported his daughter’s right to an education. When people ask her father what he did to raise such a daughter, says Malala, her father answers that it’s what he didn’t do that is important.

“I didn’t clip the wings of my daughter,” says her father.

Channel 10’s Patrice Wood conducted Malala’s interview, but at one point, Wood handed over the questioning to Hilde Lysiak, a nine year old reporter who publishes The Orange Street News. Lysiak’s reporting came under fire earlier this year when she covered a murder that took place near her home. Many were outraged that a cute nine-year old girl was covering a terrible murder. Lysiak struck back with a masterful video telling people who didn’t like her reporting, “If you want me to stop covering news, then you get off your computers and do something about the news. There, is that cute enough for you?”

Lysiak’s short, on-stage interview with Malala demonstrates Malala’s commitment to women’s rights and the power of young girls. She was excited to answer Lysiak’s questions. To Malala education means allowing children the right to question and giving them access to critical thinking skills.

“Believe in yourself,” said Malala several times.

Malala is a devout Muslim. She wears a headscarf but balks at covering her face, as is the tradition for many. She believes that women should make their own choices. “Freedom means I wear the headscarf, as is my right,” said Malala. “I don’t feel comfortable covering my face, because that is who I am.”

As for being a young woman meeting with presidents and prime ministers, Malala says she is not afraid of powerful world leaders. “Am I afraid of presidents?” she asked, “Presidents should be scared of me because I’m speaking for the people.” It is the government’s responsibility to provide “complete, quality education for every child.” And Malala intends to hold governments and leaders to this obligation.

“Terrorists,” said Malala, “understand how important education is.”

In the video below, a choir sings a song written to honor Malala, and she joins them on stage.

July 28, 2016July 28, 2016

Raimondo: Clinton nomination ‘a historic moment’

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

It’s too easy to make a mountain over Mika Brzezinski‘s mistake in referring to Governor Gina Raimondo as a Republican. (I engaged in this myself on Twitter when I first heard the news, learning the hard way that @MorningMika is a woman.) But far more should be made of Raimondo’s statement regarding her rushing home so that she can watch Hillary Clinton‘s acceptance speech with her daughter.

“I’m racing home tonight to watch [Clinton’s] speech with my 12-year old daughter because I want to be there with my daughter. This is real. This is an historic moment,” said Raimondo.

Love Hillary Clinton or hate her, Governor Raimondo is right, this is a historic moment. The first woman presidential nominee from a major party in the history of the United States is accepting the nomination this evening. As the father who attempted to instill a confidence about their full equality in his two daughters, I can’t help but feel this historic moment intensely.

The election will play out as it must, and the politics will be dark and dirty and full of terrible reveals. I don’t expect a Clinton campaign to solve the problems of misogyny any more than Obama’s presidency solved the problem of racism. Should Hillary Clinton become president, I don’t expect her to be a great progressive leader any more than Governor Gina Raimondo, the first woman governor of Rhode Island, is. I’m not naive about the politics, or the stakes in this election.

But let’s pause a moment on this historical day and reflect.

Here’s Gina Raimondo’s full appearance on Morning Joe.

July 28, 2016July 28, 2016

Nuns on the Bus visit RI

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

The Nuns on the Bus came to Providence Saturday night as part of a 13 state tour that ended at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. At each stop, the Nuns held meetings where concerned residents could share their concerns about a range of topics – including tax justice, living wages, family-friendly workplaces, access to democracy, healthcare, citizenship and housing. These meetings were held under the general title of “Mending the Gaps” and the discussion points and concerns from each meeting are to be delivered in Philadelphia.

The Nuns arrived at St. Michael’s Church in South Providence to the music of the Extraordinary Rendition Band and St. Michael’s own drummers.

During the discussions the Nuns learned about the obscene child poverty rates in Rhode Island, the criminality and disconnect of many of our elected leaders and our state’s support for the fossil fuel industry and the environmental racism such support entails. The meeting filled the basement of St. Michael’s.

From Providence the Nuns headed to Hartford, Scranton and Newark before arriving in Philly on July 26. You can follow their progress here.

July 27, 2016

LNG as bad as coal, or worse says new report

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

A new report released by Toxics Action Center, Frontier Group, Environment America and more than a dozen community groups across New England finds that burning gas for electricity is as bad for the climate as coal, or worse.

The report, titled “Natural Gas and Global Warming: A Review of Evidence Finds that Methane Leaks Undercut the Climate Benefits of Gas,” shows that older claims that gas has a modest impact on the climate are wrong, as they fail to account for the greenhouse gas effect of methane and high rates of methane leaks from gas infrastructure.

Ben Weilerstein, eastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island organizer with the Toxics Action Center, held a press conference outside the RI State House with Kathy Martley of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion). Martley has been fighting the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure in Burrillville for years, and was the woman responsible for getting Governor Gina Raimondo to visit the town to discuss Invenergy‘s planned $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant.

“For years, communities on the frontlines of proposed pipelines, power plants, compressor stations, and LNG terminals have been told by the fossil fuel lobby and politicians that gas is a low-carbon bridge to a clean energy future,” said Weilerstein. “Today, it’s clearer than ever that this is not the case. New fracked gas infrastructure proposed across the region threatens our climate future, our health, and our neighborhoods. It’s time to double down on clean local renewable energy sources right here in New England.

“Methane can leak during every stage of natural gas production – during drilling, processing, and even from the pipeline,” said Elizabeth Ridlington of Frontier Group in a statement. Ridlington wrote the report, saying, “Our review of the evidence suggests that these leaks may have an annual global warming impact equivalent of up to 250 coal-fired power plants, enough to nearly or completely offset any other climate benefits of natural gas.”

Released simultaneously in seven New England cities and towns today, the report emphasizes that methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, trapping 86 to 105 times as much heat as CO2 over a 20-year period. Making these findings even more concerning, the report authors found flaws in studies that reported very low rates of methane leakage, finding evidence instead of high rates of methane leaks from gas infrastructure.

Kathy Martley noted that reports like this have been coming out for years, and that it’s time for the Governor Gina Raimondo and Rhode Island Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed to read these reports and act. “For health and environmental reasons we need to stop LNG now,” said Martley.

July 27, 2016July 28, 2016

Save The Bay wants Invenergy to prove consistency with Resilient RI

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

In a carefully worded press release, Save The Bay, one of Rhode Island’s premiere environmental advocacy groups, said, “it would be premature for the RI Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) to make a decision on a proposed natural gas-fired power plant in Burrillville before the state adopts a greenhouse gas reduction strategy.”

“Under the Resilient RI Act of 2014, the Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4) is required to submit to the Governor and General Assembly a strategy for achieving greenhouse gas emission (GHG) targets set forth in the Act. The deadline for this report is December 31, 2016. Until this strategy has been developed and adopted and the Invenergy proposal is shown to be consistent with the GHG reduction goals of the Resilient RI Act, it is premature for the RI Energy Facility Siting Board to issue a decision on Invenergy’s proposed power plant,” said Save the Bay Executive Director Jonathan Stone.

“Save The Bay expects the EC4 to consider carefully and thoughtfully a number of important questions in charting the state’s energy course. Among them: benefits and impacts of investments in renewable energy generation and energy conservation on energy system supply, distribution and reliability; the role of hydroelectric power in replacing nuclear power as part of the region’s energy mix; and whether or not the power generation capacity of the proposed facility is needed.

“Climate change is caused by the burning of fossil fuels and poses profound threats to the health and resilience of Narragansett Bay,” said Stone. “The pace of climate change is expected to accelerate. Already, rising sea levels are degrading the health of coastal wetlands, worsening coastal erosion and threatening public access along the shore. Warming temperatures contribute to harmful algal blooms, low oxygen levels in the Bay, and the loss of native species.”

If the Invenergy project moves forward and specific site plans and required permit applications are submitted to the RI Department of Environmental Management, Save The Bay will evaluate the proposed plant’s impacts on water quality, wetlands, and habitat conditions, in keeping with its role as steward of Narragansett Bay.

[Note: an earlier version of this piece was released with an incorrect Save the Bay logo.]

July 27, 2016

CLF makes its case against need for Burrillville power plant at RIPUC hearing

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

2016-07-26 PUC Burrillville 3026 — Robert Fagan

On the second day of the RI Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC)’s evidentiary hearing concerning Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, to be located in Burrillville, Jerry Elmer of the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) presented his witnesses who argued that the power plant is not needed and that it’s effect on ratepayers would be negligible.

The CLF’s case is one of nuance, and much depends on the views of Commissioner Herbert DeSimone Jr. DeSimone is the one commissioner on the PUC board that did not recuse themself, and the one commissioner who will write the RIPUC’s advisory opinion to the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB), the body ultimately responsible for deciding on the plant. Invenergy is making the case that since the proposed plant has already sold half its capacity in an energy futures market run by ISO-NE, the plant is by definition needed. This is the default position not only of Invenergy, but also of the RI Office of Energy Resources (OER) and the RIPUC, if the questioning from their attorneys at the hearing are any indication.

The CLF is maintaining that what ISO-NE did was purchase extra power, and if Invenergy’s plant is taken out, there will still be more than enough electricity on the grid to power all of New England. Also, going forward, as more and more renewables come on line, the need for the plant will go down, not increase. Unfortunately, ISO-NE is somewhat of a black box. Though they publish thousands of pages on how their energy auctions are run, figuring out why one plant’s energy was purchased and another was not is virtually impossible, and no one from ISO-NE was at the hearing to answer questions.

As for ratepayer savings, on the first day of the hearing Invenergy’s attorney Alan Shoer called his witnesses and made his case that the savings to ratepayers would be significant. On the stand, John Niland, director of development for Invenergy admitted that the $280 million number he gave to Burrillville residents earlier in the year was false, and that he knew it was false when he presented it. The true number was closer to $36 million in rate payer savings.

2016-07-26 PUC Burrillville 3031 — All lawyers at the bench for a huddle

The CLF’s witness, Christopher Stix, also ruled out the $280 million number, saying it took him one week after the ISO-NE auction results were published to perform his calculations that the actual savings ranged from between zero and $36 million. John Niland testified that Invenergy did not know this number when he falsely gave the $280 million figure to the audience in Burrillville seven weeks after the auction published its results.

It is up to DeSimone to decide whether or not a savings of between zero and $36 million to rate payers is worth the additional pollution, the despoilment of Burrillville’s pristine habitats and the continued dependency on fracked gas for our energy needs in New England for decades to come. It is worth noting that $280 million was a number too big to ignore, from an economic standpoint, where as zero to $36 million (which is a bell curve, the actual number may be closer to $20 million) is not nearly as tantalizing.

The CLF’s first witness, Robert Fagan, testified for a marathon five hours.

“We know now is that the Invenergy plant is not needed for electrical needs in New England,” said Fagan, and under cross examination he did not falter.

Getting through Fagan’s testimony required defining a host of terms and acronyms. ICR, LOLE, NERC, sloping versus vertical demand curves etc. were defined and discussed. It was very technical, but it served two functions. One, it established Fagan’s expertise, something Invenergy tried to call into question in pre-filed testimony, and two, it helped prove Fagan’s case that the proposed power plant was not necessary.

Though high-powered attorneys Alan Shoer and Jerry Elmer set the tone for the meeting, it’s most likely that RIPUC attorney Cynthia Wilson-Frias will have the most impact on Commissioner DeSimone’s advisory opinion, given that she will likely help author it and DeSimone can be expected to lean heavily on RIPUC’s in house legal expertise. Wilson-Frias asked pointed questions about the fact that Invenergy already sold some of its expected output to ISO-NE. She indicated that since the energy sold, it is by definition needed. Fagan countered this logic well, his entire testimony was in fact a rebuttal of sorts to this idea, so it comes down to how much weight Wilson-Frias gives Fagan’s views versus the more mainstream “free” market ideas favored by Invenergy.

The last day of the hearing is today, and unfortunately I will not be in attendance. I hope to get an update from Jerry Elmer after the hearing.

You can view the entire days proceedings below:

July 27, 2016July 27, 2016

Audubon Society and Nature Conservancy oppose Burrillville power plant

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

The Audubon Society of Rhode Island and the Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island have released statements in opposition to Invenergy‘s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant proposed for Burrillville.

Saying that its “mission is to protect birds, other wildlife and their habitat through conservation, education and advocacy for the benefit of people and all living things, the Audubon Society of Rhode Island has come out in opposition to “the proposed 900MW power plant in Burrillville, Rhode Island because it will disturb the integrity of western Rhode Island’s forested habitats and wildlife corridors and because the plant undermines Rhode Island’s ability to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals set in the 2014 Resilient Rhode Island Act.”

“Rhode Island’s Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4) is charged with developing a plan for achieving the Resilient Rhode Island Act’s greenhouse gas reduction goals,” says the press release, “Audubon requests that the plan examine opportunities for meeting energy demand through efficiency and expanded renewable energy. This analysis should be completed before the state builds the new Invenrgy facility.”

Meanwhile, the Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island has also issued a statement in opposition to the power plant, saying, “Invenergy’s proposed 900MW power plant for Burrillville will make it more difficult for Rhode Island to achieve its newly enacted greenhouse gas reduction targets; it has not been proven necessary to meet energy needs; and it will pose unacceptable environmental risks to habitats and plant and animal species.”

“The Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island supports a comprehensive approach to energy development that considers energy conservation, renewable energy, and other alternatives to fossil fuels,” says their press release, “The Conservancy urges the state to undertake an independent assessment of its projected energy needs, within the context of the larger region’s energy needs, and to develop a strategy to meet those projections before committing to a new large-scale power plant.”

July 23, 2016July 24, 2016

Wikileaks dump shows DNC had concerns about RI primary

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

[Edit: 5pm: This story has been updated with additional information and a statement from the Secretary of State.]

When Rhode Island Board of elections chose to open only 144 of the state’s 419 polling stations for the April 26 primary, some cried foul. The move was seen by some as an attempt to stifle voters who might turn out for Bernie Sanders instead of Hillary Clinton. (On the Republican side, a Donald Trump victory was never in question.) RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea, vice chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Platform Committee, was cast as a political insider working for the Clinton campaign, though all polling locations were and are determined by local municipalities and the RI Board of Elections.

With the release of a giant crop of leaked DNC emails from Wikileaks, Gorbea appears to be exonerated from the charge of electioneering. However, the emails do seem to indicate that operatives within the Democratic National Committee were interfering in the election on a national level, placing more than a thumb on the scales in Clinton’s favor, even as they attempted to manage the public’s perception of their interference. Favoring one candidate over another is a violation of DNC rules.

The Wikileak emails show that ahead of Bernie Sanders’ big win in the Rhode Island primary, highly placed operatives in the Democratic National Committee were worried about the optics of the RI Board of Election’s decision to not open more than a third of the polling places, mistakenly believing that Gorbea was the one who made the decision.

On April 25 DNC Deputy Communications Director Eric Walker wrote to his boss, Luis Miranda, “Bernie leads Hillary by 4 in the latest poll. If [Clinton] outperforms this polling, the Bernie camp will go nuts and allege misconduct. They’ll probably complain regardless, actually. We might want to get out in front of this one with an inquiry to [Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo], even though she’s one of ours.”

By “one of ours” let’s assume Walker simply meant, “a Democratic governor”.

The next day was April 26, the day of the actual primary. Having been informed by DNC Northeast Regional Political Director Erin Wilson that, “We’ve got a pretty close relationship with Nellie,” Walker suggested contacting Gorbea directly.

“Was thinking a letter so that if press asks us about it, we can show we are responsive and active,” wrote Walker, “If we’re crying foul in AZ, we might need to do the same – at least nominally – in RI so we don’t look like hypocrites.”

This prompted DNC National Political Director Raul Alvillar to write, “I am fine with that. Before we do that we should talk to [Gorbea] to get all of the details.”

Walker responded, “I would like to be on this call, but first, I don’t think we even need a statement. We just need something to cover ourselves.

“I think when we start getting inquiries, if we have a letter to the [Secretary of State] that we can point to, it will show that we are engaged and that we don’t just pipe up when it’s a Republican administration closing poll locations.

“We can make the point to reporters individually off the record that it’s not apples and oranges: Arizona more serious because the state was covered under [Voting Rights Act] and has had a history of problems – Rhode Island doesn’t have those same historical issues.”

The primary in Rhode Island was in full swing just before 1pm when Erin Wilson came back with more information. “[Pratt Wiley, DNC National Director of Voter Protection] and I were reminded that in RI, the Secretary of State doesn’t manage elections, but they’re run by the Board of Elections that are appointed by the Governor. Apparently the number of polling locations they’ve opened are consistent with the numbers opened in 2008 and 2012, and they’ve also increased the number of poll workers, ballots and booths to accommodate any unexpected surges. For example they’re telling us that they printed 300K ballots for an expected turnout of 180K. Again, these decisions are made by the Board of Elections.

“The Secretary has been traveling to polling locations all morning/afternoon and they haven’t seen any issues. Apparently the longest wait they’re seeing is 25 minutes.

“So, if we do write a letter, it would need to be to the Board of Elections. I’d be a little cautious about pulling the trigger on it too soon. Can we give some of this info on background to show we’ve made inquiries to the state if we start getting calls and then punt it back to RI?”

Eric Walker, now having been in contact with Gorbea, writes, “To be clear – no inquiries yet, but RNC will be pushing it.

“Pratt just swung by my desk – [Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea is] ready to go on record with these points defending their approach, which is good.

“I think that if DNC press office gets inquiries about hypocrisy between AZ / RI then we can direct them to RI [Secretary of State] comment, and explain on background that it’s not as dire as AZ and that RI doesn’t have the same VRA baggage.”

The final email on Wikileaks regarding the issue came from DNC National Political Director Raul Alvillar, who wrote, “Perfect. This is good.”

Of course, the entire issue of whether or not the Board of Elections declined to open more polling stations to favor Clinton in the primary went away when Sanders clobbered Clinton, taking 55 percent of the vote. This upset caught local machine Democrats completely off guard and surprised national pundits.

From reading the emails, it seems clear that Gorbea answered concerns from the DNC and coordinated a response to criticisms of the Board of Election’s decision as to the number of polls to open, but no evidence of outright collusion for the purpose of electioneering can be seen in them.

According to Nicole Lagace, Senior Advisor and Communications Director to the Secretary of State, “The DNC reached out to Secretary Gorbea on April 26 to inquire about the decreased number of polling locations in Rhode Island for the Presidential primary. We explained that we do not oversee polling locations and that was the end of that correspondence.”

[Andrew Stewart contributed to this reporting.]

July 22, 2016July 22, 2016

PVD Black Lives Matter Day of Action calls for passage of Community Safety Act

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

The Providence City Hall Council Chamber was packed over capacity. The crowd was so raucous and loud it was hard to hear the speakers on their microphones.

“I Sabina Matos, would like to pass the Community Safety Act.”

“Seconded.”

Voice after voice pledged their support for the Community Safety Act.

“I, Seth Yurdin, would like to pass the Community Safety Act.”

“I, Sam Zurier, would like to pass the Community Safety Act.”

The Community Safety Act (CSA) passed unanimously. Not a single voice spoke against it. The City Council Chamber erupted in cheers and applause.

It was a brilliant moment.

But the Providence City Council never actually voted. Minutes before the City Council was to begin their meeting, their last meeting before taking a break for vacation, hundreds of protesters in support of Black Lives Matter had crossed the street from Kennedy Plaza and entered the chamber en masse. They took the seats of city councillors and acted out what passing the CSA might look like.

The CSA never passed. It has only recently been scheduled for consideration, when the City Council comes back in September.

As the crowd filed out of the chamber, Nick Katkevich of the FANG Collective asked a just arriving City Councillor Seth Yurdin if he would really support the CSA when the time came.

“I don’t support the CSA,” said Yurdin.

Neither does Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza or Public Safety Commissioner Steven Paré.

Fifteen minutes earlier crowds gathered at Kennedy Plaza, across the street from City Hall. The Movement for Black Lives had called a nationwide, July 21 Collective Action for Freedom, in response to the recent slew of high profile police killings. In Providence, the action was organized by the Step Up Coalition to Pass the Community Safety Act and the White Noise Collective RI around the idea of supporting the CSA.

2016-07-21 Pass the CSA 034 — Vanessa Flores-Maldonado

The proposed Providence ordinance has 12 key points pertaining to police interactions with community members, including providing interpretation, documenting traffic stops in a standardized manner, and limiting police collaboration with other law enforcement agencies such as ICE. The CSA would also reestablish the Providence External Review Authority (PERA) with the power to recommend that Public Safety and Police Department budgets be reapportioned to youth recreation and job training programs.

“We don’t want to compromise on the safety of our community. When you have women dying in jail because they didn’t use a turn signal or youth being shot in cold blood for having toy guns in an open carry state, we can’t compromise,” said Community Safety Act Campaign Coordinator, Vanessa Flores-Maldonado. “We need police accountability now because no one feels safe in our community.”

The campaign recently scored a win when organizers secured a public hearing for the CSA at the beginning of September. The “mock hearing” was organized to put additional pressure on the City Council to pass the CSA.

At the mock hearing, Flores -Maldonado spoke directly to the city council members present, including Council President Luis Aponte, saying that the city council should listen to what the people had to say.

The protest left city hall and marched up Washington St towards the Providence Public Safety Complex, where people gave a series of speeches in support of the CSA, hiring more teachers of color, community defense, and abolishing the police. Here the speeches were in turn thoughtful and emotional. I would recommend them to those seeking a better understanding of these issues.

After leaving the public safety complex the march continued on to Cathedral Square, where there was some last words before the march disbanded.

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