Articles in this series

Like this?

Consider supporting Steve's efforts by clicking the Patreon button above, or send a donation through PayPal to the email below:

atomicsteve@gmail.com
Twitter: @SteveAhlquist

Steve Ahlquist is an award-winning journalist, writer, artist and founding member of the Humanists of Rhode Island, a non-profit group dedicated to reason, compassion, optimism, courage and action. The views expressed are his own and not necessarily those of any organization of which he is a member.

His photos and video are usable under the Creative Commons license. Free to share with credit.

"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” - Elie Weisel

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." - Desmond Tutu

"There comes a time when neutrality and laying low become dishonorable. If you’re not in revolt, you’re in cahoots. When this period and your name are mentioned, decades hence, your grandkids will look away in shame." - David Brooks

4 responses to “Secret meeting about Burrillville power plant excludes press”

  1. salgal

    I love the fact that a high school intern was found suitable to attend but not the free press.

    Why the PUC and EFSB continue to be browbeaten and/or possibly “mentored” in the ways of the law by Alan Schoer is worthy of a movie. Get Erin Brockovich on the phone. Make sure and tell her about the intern.

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  2. Deforest

    The RI Secretary of State’s website doesn’t show a meeting notice for today, either open or closed to the public. It might not have been a “meeting” under the OMA. If there wasn’t at least a quorum EFSB members present, it probably wasn’t a meeting of the EFSB, just a scheduling get-together for the parties.

    But whether a “pre-hearing conference” is required to be open to the public is a different question than whether there was anything to be gained by kicking you out. Seems short-sighted, just garnering bad PR for Invenergy for no apparent reason.

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  3. wchet

    Deforest is right. The question is whether at least 2 members of the board were present. If they were, I think the open meetings law is pretty clear and this would be a violation. Even if they were going to discuss confidential information, the meeting would still have to be advertised and then they would have to vote to go into executive session.

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.