Ocean State Power Plant

September 22, 2016

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suzanne Dumas

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

Lynn Clark

Mary Gauvin

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

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

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

Denise Potvin

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

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

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

Here is the video of all the speakers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Betty Mancucci

John Anthony Scott

Jeremy Bailey

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

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

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

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

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

Karen Palmer

Jason Olkowski

August 30, 2016August 30, 2016

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“The bill was approved, 8 to 4.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

June 6, 2016

On Burrillville power plant, Janet Coit shows concern for the environment and/or future lawsuits

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

The June 2 open meeting of the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) was a rare opportunity to hear board members Margaret Curran, Janet Coit and Parag Agrawal talk openly about their thoughts regarding the process of the board in approving or denying Invenergy‘s proposed fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville. That said, it’s also a bad idea to draw too many inferences about board members thoughts based on their words.

One example of this came near the end of the 45 minute meeting. Janet Coit, who directs the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) when she’s not on the EFSB, suggested directing RIDEM to expand their advisory opinions on the environmental impact to include impact on wetlands, impact on state conservation areas and the cumulative impact of all fossil fuel development in the area, including pipeline compressors and the Ocean State Power Plant.

It would be easy to see Coit’s suggestion, which was approved unanimously by the board, as indicative of a concern about environmental impacts and as a response to the concerns of community members who have spoken at one or more of the open comment hearings held in Burrillville. But Coit’s suggestion may be no more than an attempt to make sure all the bases are covered. Getting advisory impact statements does not take away the EFSB’s ability to rubber stamp the power plant. It just provides the board with appropriate legal cover.

Chair Curran was on board with the suggestion that the cumulative effects the fossil fuel infrastructure in Burrillville might have on wildlife, saying, “I’m partial to the bats.” But again, her concern for the bats might dissipate in the light of Invenergy’s desire to build a new power plant where it is not wanted.

Coit also suggested that the EFSB take “official notice” of the court order that closed the MTBE contaminated well in Pascoag, the same well that Invenergy hopes to use to cool their turbines on the promise of cleaning up the contamination. The well was sealed after many families became due to the MTBE in their water. As a result of Coit’s suggestion the court order has become part of the official record.

There were no public comments allowed at this meeting, and no lawyers from any of the intervenors were allowed to ask questions or comment. The meeting was for the three board members to “discuss, deliberate and decide” on various aspects of the hearing process. They started by denying one “late intervention” of an abutting property owner and approving another. The difference between the two applicants seemed to be that one applicant was zoned for residential and business, a special case that may require a separate lawyer.

Todd Bianco, coordinator of the EFSB, ran through the current status of the advisory opinions the board has requested. Most of the opinions seem to be roughly on schedule. Surprisingly, Invenergy has yet to apply for the proper permits from the RI Department of Transportation (RIDOT). Under current rules, it would take RIDOT three months to process the applications, and Bianco said RIDOT was “unable to determine if the applications will be on time.”

The meeting ended with a discussion of how to do better outreach with the public. Bianco said that he continues to run advertisements for meetings in the ProJo and in two local Burrillville publications. This lead to a discussion of whether or not to have a Twitter account for the EFSB.

“It would be my first,” said Bianco, “I could learn how to tweet, and hashtags are a thing…”

April 17, 2016April 29, 2016

Burrillville Town Council knew about power plant plans in February 2015

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

At the most recent Burrillville Town Council meeting, Council President John Pacheco said that “As a town council, we did not know this plant was actually going to happen until the Governor announced it.”

Pacheco was not quite telling the truth.

Videos from February and March 2015 town council meetings show that local elected officials – both the council and legislators – have been paving the way for the controversial Invenergy power plant for months before Governor Gina Raimondo officially announced the project, contrary to recent statements by the Council President.

Governor Gina Raimondo announced Invenergy’s plans to build another power plant in Burrillville on August 4, 2015. The town council met with local legislators Paul Fogarty, Cale Keable and Brian Newberry to discuss the idea seven months earlier.

On February 23, 2015 Burrillville Town Manager Michael C Wood, at a “special meeting” of the town council, said, “We’ve had some conversation. There’s the potential for a new power plant to come to Burrillville.” Present at this meeting was the entire Town Council except for Stephen Rawson and Donald Fox.

This special meeting was between the town council and state Senator Paul Fogarty, Representative Cale Keable, and Representative Brian Newberry. The meeting was held to discuss state level legislation of interest to the town council with their state representatives.

Wood told the council and legislators he wanted to “make sure that the existing [state level] legislation we have will allow for the siting and construction of the new power plant in the town.” The legislation concerns Burrillville’s ability to enter into tax agreements with power companies and can be seen here.

“It would be appreciated, Cale,” said Wood, talking to Rep Keable directly, “making sure that that legislation, as written, will allow the town to potentially entertain the possibility of a new power plant.”

“Okay,” said Keable, “We’ll look at that.”

As can be seen from this screen shot from earlier in the video, this meeting was poorly attended.

At another “special meeting” on March 18, 2015, Town Councilor Stephen Rawson talked about Burrillville water contaminated with MTBE. Several years ago some of the well water in Burrillville was contaminated with MTBE, a virulent carcinogen that some residents say sparked a cancer cluster in the town. The water that Invenergy wants to use for its cooling system will come from this MTBE contaminated well water.

Though Invenergy claims the water will be filtered and the water will be pure enough to dump in the Clear River when they are done, no one seems quite sure if the science adds up. Note also that as far as I have been able to tell, no one has attempted to use MTBE contaminated water to cool a power plant before.

In the clip below, Rawson says that, “Years ago Mike [Town Manager Michael Wood] had tried to make a proposal, and it was a good one, to run that water up to the [Ocean State] power plant as cooling water so the wells would be flushed and probably get rid of the MTBE that’s in the ground water.”

Rawson notes that Harrisville, which has authority over this situation, blocked this proposal.

Town Councillor David Place then says to Wood, “you and I had that discussion with that new power plant going in, of bringing back that idea of running a line to the new power plant and doing the exact same thing when that new power plant comes in. I think you said that that discussion had come up.”

“They have already reached out to Mike Kirkwood [General Manager of the Pascoag Utility District],” said Wood, “I don’t know about Harrisville…”

“They shouldn’t be involved at all,” said Place, because the wells and siting of the power plant will be entirely inside Burrillville, and Harrisville will have no control over the decision.

“To get to your point, Steve,” continued Wood, addressing Rawson, “that probably will happen, and that will help the well situation…”

Later in the same meeting Town Manager Wood says, “We need to set up something, maybe not right now, to deal with the new power plant… some professional help… to negotiate a deal with them.”

“How soon is that going to be done?” asks Council President John Pacheco.

“Not right away,” answers Wood, “But it should be on our radar screen. Probably within a year.”

“I’m sorry,” says a female town councilor (either Kimberly Brissette Brown or Michelle Bouchard), “What power plant are you talking about?”

“Invenergy,” answers Wood, spelling it out for clarification. “I-N-V-E-N-E-R-G-Y.”

The discussion then turns to the protesters who walked 28 miles, from Burrillville to Providence, in protest of the expansion of the compressor station in Burrillville. Wood laughs when he is asked, “Did those protesters ever make it to Providence?”

Contrary to Council President John Pacheco’s statement last week, the videos make clear that not only was the town council, as a whole, aware that Invenergy was planning to build a power plant in Burrillville, they have been actively involved with the project for months prior to its public announcement.

It also appears that Town Manager Michael Wood suggested the idea of using the MTBE contaminated water to cool the plant, one of the most controversial and potentially dangerous aspects of the plan. If the water isn’t filtered properly or cannot be filtered, dangerous levels of MTBE water will be dumped into the Clear River or released as airborne steam, potentially threatening the health and safety of thousands of Rhode Islanders.

At no time is the idea of not bringing the new power plant to Burrillville discussed by the Town Council. The idea of opposing the plant never seems to have occurred to them.

Many voters in Burrillville are aware of these videos and their faith in their Town Council and state representatives has been severely challenged or even shattered.

April 1, 2016May 3, 2016

Public comment on Burrillville power plant: Video

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

Here’s the full video from the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) public comment hearing held in the Burrillville High School auditorium last night. You can read the report and see pictures from the hearing here:

Labor, citizens clash over power plant in Burrillville

Labor, citizens clash over power plant in Burrillville

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

For full video of all public commentary, see here.

It has been a long wait, but the people of Burrillville finally got their chance to speak out on the Clear River Energy Center (CREC), Invenergy’s proposed $700 million gas and oil burning electrical plant last night. The Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) held the first public comment hearing in the Burrillville High School auditorium, which holds 600 people. More than 100 people were outside, unable to get in. Hundreds of people signed up to speak, only 48 people got to do so.

The EFSB board is made up of Margaret Curran, chair of the RI Public Utilities Commission and Janet Coit, director of the Department of Environmental Management. The third seat on the board has recently been filled, since Parag Agrawal has been hired as the associate director of the Rhode Island Division of Planning. He begins his new job on April 18, so should be at the next EFSB hearing.

Tensions were high in the auditorium. Michael Sabitoni, president of the Rhode Island Building and Construction Trades Council and over a hundred union members arrived early, and many Burrillville natives resented their presence. One speaker from Burrillville claimed that the union members were “intimidating.” A union speaker objected to this, calling the accusation of intimidation, “B.S.”

As near as I can tell, the eight speakers in favor of the power plant were all union members. They made their case based on the 300 construction and 24 permanent jobs that would be created. Sabitoni said that he’s run into meetings like this before, where a community shows up to complain about a large project to be built in their town. He dismissed the concerns of Burrillville citizens as NIMBYism.

Donna Woods was the first speaker, and she was set the tone for the evening. She said that there is a fear that the decision to approve the power plant has already been made, despite Curran and Coit’s insistence to the contrary. During Wood’s testimony, Curran broke protocol and addressed Wood directly, insisting that no decision has been made.

“Many of us feel that we’ve been screaming underwater,” said Woods, “This is real life stuff and we’re really afraid.”

2016-03-31 Burrillville EFSB 021 — Janet Coit and Margaret Curran

Residents of Burrillville and the surrounding communities are worried about the noise, air pollution, water pollution, the destruction of a pristine environment to make room for the power plant and their property values, which are already dropping. But many speakers spoke of the environmental dangers of fracking, about helping to prevent global warming and sea level rise, and about our greater duty to future generations.

Burrillville has experienced environmental disaster first hand. Well water was contaminated years ago with MBTE from a leaking gas station gas tank. MBTE causes cancer, and many in the auditorium last night have friends and relatives who suffered and died. Between the gas pipeline compressor stations, the Ocean State Power Plant and the MBTE disaster, many residents feel, in the words of one speaker, that, “Burrillville has given enough.”

Invenergy began the public comment hearing with a presentation. I wrote about this 30-60 minute long presentation and questioned the need for it here. Curran introduced the presentation saying it would last 20 minutes, but in fact it lasted longer, much closer to the originally estimated 30 minutes. After cutting the presentation short for time, Curran said that the full report was on the EFSB website, which is a point I made in my piece. An additional six members of the public could have spoken had Invenergy not been needlessly granted that time.

The frustration that the citizens of Burrillville feel about the proposed Invenergy power plant and the EFSB process is only expected to magnify over the next weeks and months. Frustration with their elected leaders in the Town Council, General Assembly and state wide offices is widespread and no one should be surprised if Burrillville seeks change in the upcoming elections.

The next public comment meeting is scheduled for 6pm, Monday, May 23.