Since National Grid’s plan required the consent of all New England states, CLF moved to dismiss the docket here in Rhode Island, yet Meg Curran, chair of the RIPUC, didn’t agree that the project was necessarily dead, saying she still had questions about the project. Curran felt that National Grid’s offer to withdraw their application and refile at a later date or accept a ruling that the docket be put on hold were better options.
RIPUC board member Herbert DeSimone Jr agreed. He said that dismissal would not be appropriate, and withdrawing the application would create “unnecessary redundancies” upon refiling, as all the evidence heard to date would have to be heard again and all motions re-decided. DeSimone suggested that the RIPUC issue an indefinite stay in the proceedings, with the caveat that National Grid file a progress report on January 13, 2017.
Curran and DeSimone then unanimously voted in favor of the plan. Marion Gold, the third member of the RIPUC, had recused herself.
The meeting was attended by representatives from and members of People’s Power and Light, the FANG Collective, Food and Water Watch, Toxics Action Center, Fossil Free RI, NoLNGinPVD and the RI Sierra Club.
“The Commission’s decision to delay this proceeding is a step toward the inevitable death of the pipeline tax. Forcing Rhode Island electric customers to foot the bill for a gas pipeline we don’t need defies our best interest and our laws,” Megan Herzog with the Conservation Law Foundation said. “Both Massachusetts and the federal government have rejected the project, and we will keep fighting until Rhode Island follows suit.”
“Rhode Island consumers should not have to take on the long-term risk of a new, unnecessary natural gas pipeline. We must protect electric customers from being charged for a natural gas pipeline, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has already done this by deciding that the unprecedented cost-recovery scheme proposed by utilities is illegal, according to Mass. law,” said Priscilla De La Cruz of People’s Power and Light, also in attendance.
]]>The American people want and deserve accountability in their elections, said Whitehouse, Unchecked secret corporate spending has tipped the scales of power away from ordinary Americans and in favor of big special interests. If Congress is going to make meaningful progress in the months and years ahead on important issues that matter to Rhode Islanders like addressing climate change, reforming our broken campaign finance system is the first step.
Whitehouses DISCLOSE Act, which has been supported by Langevin and Cicilline in the U.S. House of Representatives, is part of the We the People legislative package to deal with secret corporate political spending, lobbyist influence, the revolving door, and other facets of the campaign finance system. Whitehouse touted the suite of legislation as a solution to the corporate spending blocking meaningful legislative action on issues like ensuring economic security for the middle class and addressing climate change.
It seems that Whitehouse mentioned climate change and chose Save the Bays headquarters in Providence as the location of his round table discussion because, as the Senator said in response to Meghan Kallman, chair of the RI Sierra Club, I think its pretty safe to say, that at a national level, the climate battle is the campaign finance battle. Theyre totally married together into one thing.
Notably, there were protesters outside Save the Bay holding signs reminding their elected representatives about both Invenergys proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant and National Grids proposed LNG liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence, a stones throw away. They were there to remind elected officials that their jobs in Washington do not absolve them from taking positions on local issues. None of the elected leaders in the room, aside from State Senator Juan Pichardo, who has publicly taken a stand against the LNG plant in Providence, have thrown their considerable political weight behind the opposition to these projects.
This is a national package, [but] many many many issues are local, said Kallman, Were watching Dakota. Were watching Burrillville. Were watching Fields Point We have something of a disconnect between whats happening on the national level and where the front line battles are being fought.
The influence of corporate spending on elections since the 2010 Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court is a major concern to all who attended the event. Citizens United unleashed a previously restricted torrent of special interest money into the political system. More than $1.5 billion in unlimited contributions, including more than $500 million in secret contributions, have been poured into federal elections since the decision was issued.
It didn’t take long after Citizens United for secret money has find its way to the shores of Rhode Island, said John Marion, Executive Director of Common Cause Rhode Island. We know that Rhode Islanders don’t want unlimited undisclosed money in our elections. We are fortunate to have a congressional delegation that has taken this issue seriously and has offered real solutions for the problems posed by big money in our politics.
Senator Whitehouse is a national leader fighting to make our elections and government work for everyday people again through the We the People Act, said Aquene Freechild, campaign co-director of Public Citizen‘s Democracy Is For People Campaign. Hes pushing the current congressional majority to snap out of their campaign cash-induced paralysis and stand up to the tiny but influential donor class: by overturning Citizens United, disclosing all spending in elections, and slamming shut the revolving door that transforms public servants into corporate shills.
Also in attendance at the roundtable discussion were RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea, RI State Representative Art Handy, state director of Clean Water Action Jonathan Berard, Save the Bays Topher Hamblett and Dean Michael J. Yelnosky of the Roger Williams University School of Law. You can watch the rest of the video from the event below.
]]>Providence City Councillor Seth Yurdin introduced a resolution Thursday evening that would strengthen the City Council’s opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility. Immediately after introducing his resolution Councillor Sam Zurier rose to co-sponsor, as did councilors David Salvatore, Carmen Castillo, Wilbur Jennings, Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett.
Noting that it seemed as if a majority of the council was co-sponsoring the resolution, Yurdin moved that the resolution be voted on immediately. This caused councilors Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett to suddenly flip their support. Yurdin’s move for passage failed, and the resolution was passed onto the Ordinances committee.
Reached for comment, Hassett wrote, “I voted no to have an immediate passage on the floor without a Council committee review. I co-sponsored it but a committee review is necessary for a proper vetting and discussion before it is transmitted to the full Council.”
Ryan wrote, “I requested to be a sponsor of the resolution last night. It was sent to ordinance committee by a majority vote. I voted to send it to committee to provide an opportunity for community input at an open public meeting of the council. You can and should attend and voice your concerns. And encourage others to attend and participate in the process.”
There are no ordinance committee hearings on the current schedule. Hassett is the chair of ordinance and Ryan is a member of the committee.
National Grid wants to expand its LNG footprint in the Port of Providence with the new liquefaction plant. Environmental groups such as the RI Sierra Club and the Environmental Justice League of RI oppose the plan. Curiously, Save the Bay, whose offices are not too far from the proposed site, have not come out against it.
Mayor Jorge Elorza and a large group of state level Providence legislators have recently publicly come out in opposition to the project.
The City Council unanimously approved Yurdin’s previous resolution opposing the site in March. That resolution called for public meetings to be scheduled to address environmental and health concerns of the project. “Unfortunately,” said Yurdin, here we are in the Summer and no such meetings have been held… This resolution is stronger than the previous resolution.”
The previous resolution called for studies and review. The new resolution is a call to strong action.
The new resolution says, in part, “That the City shall take all necessary actions to oppose the proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility, including ceasing to act as a cooperating agency with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and shall not grant any tax stabilizations, subsidies, or any other forms of support to the project.”
]]>
The EJLRI statement comes in response to Elorza’s announcement that he opposes National Grid‘s proposed LNG liquefaction facility to be located at Fields Point in the Port of Providence.
State Representative Aaron Regunberg, who represents the 4th district in Providence, also hailed the mayor’s announcement. “I am so glad the mayor has joined our opposition to this terrible proposal. It shows the LNG facility is not a done deal. This is a fight we can win, and so it is a fight we must win. Now it’s time for our federal delegation, who I know are all committed to fighting climate change, to put that commitment into practice here in Providence and join our push for #NoLNGinPVD!”
EJLRI echoed Regunberg’s call for more state elected officials to join them in the fight against expanding LNG infrastructure in Rhode Island. “We are very thankful for the support and climate leadership from our mayor and state legislators, and we now call on our federal congressional delegation and Governor Gina Raimondo to join us and stop National Grid’s plans to liquefy and export fracked gas from Providence.”
Monica Huertas, a leader in the #NoLNGinPVD campaign, responded to the news from the mayor’s office by saying “As a resident of the Washington Park neighborhood, I am so thankful for Mayor Elorza to have so willingly come out against ‘LNG.’ We can make a difference in the smallest state and as residents of the capital city we can take the lead on dismantling the old ways of doing things. This shows that he is on the right side of history. After we have won the battle for clean energy, we can look back at this key moment in Providence and be proud that we fought together.”
Meghan Kallman, Chair of the RI Sierra Club said, “The Sierra Club is pleased with Mayor Elorza’s statement of opposition to the proposed LNG facility in Providence. Climate change is one of the gravest threats that our community faces. Infrastructure such as this liquefaction plant, that locks us into further consumption of fossil fuels, is a bad choice for our future. Further, its proposed location would imperil some of the most vulnerable residents of Providence. We are pleased that Mayor Elorza has listened to the concerns of the community and is opposing this wrongheaded proposal.”
“We have to move to renewable energy,” said Sam Bell, executive director of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats (RIPDA). “Certain machine politicians may not believe we need to act to stop climate change, but our state cannot afford not to act. Elorza giving in to the people of Providence and supporting the NO LNG in PVD movement is a big win.”
The EJLRI statement concludes, “The decision to approve or reject National Grid’s proposal is still under fast-track review and likely approval in the Washington DC offices of FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Governor Raimondo, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Congressman David Cicilline, and other elected officials need to join their colleagues in Providence and make it clear that there can be no more dangerous fracked gas expansion projects in Providence, or anywhere in the state. We stand by no fracked gas LNG in Providence, no fracked gas power plant in Burrillville, and no fracked gas Access Northeast expansion of the pipeline, compressor station, and additional LNG production.
“Rhode Island is making international news as a climate change leader, and we need to be clear that real climate leaders reject fracking and support a rapid and Just Transition to a sustainable future that centers the needs of workers and frontline communities.”
]]>I asked Clean Water Action’s Rhode Island State Director Johnathan Berard if his group was willing to revoke their endorsements.
Berard commented that his group is “deeply disappointed” but stopped short of revoking the endorsements Clean Water Action gave out during the last election.
Clean Water Action ardently opposes the construction of any fossil-fuel burning power plants in Rhode Island and we are deeply disappointed that these general assembly members and the governor, who we supported in 2014 based on their promise of environmental leadership, have chosen to ignore the will of the majority of Rhode Islanders, as well as the environmental and public health communities, by forging ahead with the development of new natural gas infrastructure projects across the state.”
Compared to the position taken by the Sierra Club, this is a soft response. Clean Water Action seems to have a process to endorse candidates, but their endorsements lack any teeth when it comes to holding elected officials accountable.
]]>The event, as planned by National Grid, was unusual. Instead of a series of presentations delivered from a stage, the presentations were arranged around the room in the cafeteria of the Juanita Sanchez Educational Complex. At each stop you could learn more about National Grid’s plans for installing a new plant for liquefying natural gas for storage in an existing tank. This had the effect of making each stop along the way a little more personal, as aspects of the project were explained in a one on one manner by National Grid reps.
When I arrived, about an hour before the event started, I noticed the presence of five Providence police officers outside. Inside, the event was being watched over by two additional officers, one a lieutenant. There were some members of the community present, but most of those who attended seemed to be with the RI Sierra Club or Fossil Free Rhode Island and opposed to National Grid’s plan. Members of these groups were content to engage the various National Grid and FERC reps in conversation.
When the young people representing PrYSM, PSU and EJLRI entered the room, they were followed in by the police officers from outside, three of whom were wearing their motorcycle helmets.
“They’re motorcycle officers,” said the Lieutenant when I asked why seven police officers were needed, “That’s not riot gear. I just called them in.”
“So they were outside, directing traffic?” I asked.
“Yes,” he replied, “Once we clear here, they’ll go back to traffic duty.”
“I know from other actions I’ve covered that these are all decent kids,” I said.
“We don’t know that,” said another officer, “We didn’t know who was coming, or how many. We saw a bus pull up and then we saw all the bullhorns and the lieutenant asked, ‘All right, who’s in charge?’ We just wanted to lay down some ground rules, some normal, by the law ground rules, and they just completely ignored us.”
When I asked David Graves, media relations representative for National Grid about the number of police officers present, he said that initially, National Grid had asked for a two officer detail, but, “when those protesters were arrested this morning in Burrillville, the police department called us and we said that they should do what they feel is the right thing to do and assign a larger detail.”
Graves was talking about activists from FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) chaining themselves to the gate at the Spectra Energy Compressor Station. “I don’t think these people are associated with that group,” added Graves.
Still, it was hard not to see the sudden explosion of police on the scene occurring precisely when people of color arrived as anything other than an expression of the kind of institutionalized environmental and economic racism that the groups were protesting. For a primer on environmental racism, you could a lot worse than watching Jesus Holguin below.
The appearance of racialized policing was heightened when the activists from PrYSM, PSU and EJLRI left the room and all seven police officers followed them outside, leaving no police officers in the room. I note here that the two men arrested in Burrilville were white and middle-aged, like the people left in the room without police officers, not young people of color, who conducted themselves fully within the law and left the room in peace. One of the two men arrested in Burrillville, Dr. Curtis Nordgaard, commented on the treatment he experienced as he made his first foray through the criminal justice system, after being released from District Court on personal recognizance earlier the same day. “Part of why we can do this,” said Nordgaard, “is because of our privileged status.”
National Grid’s rep David Graves disagreed with much of what the various protesters said during their speak-out, but he knew the protesters weren’t trouble. “These kids are wonderful,” he said.
As the fight against environmental racism and for a clean energy future intensifies in the years to come, we should expect large corporations such as National Grid to increasingly rely on the government to use the power of the police to intimidate opposition. Billions of dollars are ready to be spent to prevent the transition to a clean energy future, and the billionaires in control of that money will not let go without a fight. As Dr. Noel Healy said, “There is no fixable flaw in fossil fuel industry business plan. We are asking a company to go out of business.”
]]>Robert Malin, on the executive committee of the RI Sierra Club, organized the event. At one point he apologized to the crowd for the seemingly never ending supply of speakers, but as he said, usually he asks a bunch of people, and most can’t come. This time, nearly everyone he asked to speak made time to be at the rally. Perhaps the people closest to the problem understand that time is truly running out?
Penn Johnson supplied some warm up entertainment…
…then Ray “Two Hawks” Watson sang a Native American song.
]]>Twelve nations are negotiating the terms of the TPP, including the United States, Japan, Australia, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, Canada, Mexico, and Brunei Darussalam. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), TPP “is a secretive, multinational trade agreement that threatens to extend restrictive intellectual property laws across the globe and rewrite international rules on its enforcement.”
The EFF has identified two main problems, that “leaked draft texts of the agreement show that the IP chapter would have extensive negative ramifications for users’ freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples’ abilities to innovate” and that the “entire process has shut out multi-stakeholder participation and is shrouded in secrecy.”
According to Pat Fontes, speaking at the protest, “No one has officially read the TPP.” Everything we know about the deal has been leaked to the public. Even our elected representatives, who will be voting on this trade deal, have not read it or understand what’s inside. In Rhode island, only Representative David Cicilline has come out against the TPP.
“Corporate courts,” says Fontes, “will impose fines that we the taxpayers will have to pay.” Corporations will have the ability to sue governments over laws that prevent companies from making “expected profits.”
Susan Walker, a student in Public Health Policy at Brown University says that “corporations will be helping to make policy.” There will be an impact on public health, as “generic drugs may be eliminated” as new rules governing patents are enacted. “Medicine will never become affordable and generic,” says Walker.
Chris Curry, of RI MoveOn, says that TPP “is based on the assumption that corporate profits take priority over everything else.” If ratified, TPP “will threaten our social safety net, including Social Security and Obamacare” as corporations sue the government over profits lost to these programs.
Barry Schiller of the Sierra Club says that TPP may allow corporations to force the repeal of environmental laws when they are deemed unprofitable.
Everette Aubin said that “TPP will make it impossible to move to green energy. If solar panels interfere with corporate profits, you’ll have to shut it down.”
Occupy Providence’s Randall Rose pointed out that “parts of the TPP are classified and not to be seen by the public until four years after passage.”
“They don’t want people to know about this,” said Rose, adding that since the trade deal NAFTA was passed, Rhode Island “lost more than half of our manufacturing jobs.”
TPP has been described as NAFTA on steroids.
Robert Malin, of the Sierra Club, said that TPP places “corporations above the laws that citizens pass.”
Though TPP is far from a done deal, the New York Times said, “key congressional leaders agreed on Thursday on legislation to give President Obama special authority to finish negotiating [TPP], opening a rare battle that aligns the president with Republicans against a broad coalition of Democrats.”
With a Republican controlled congress and President Obama in agreement, preventing the passage of TPP will require a big effort on the part of opponents.
You can download a fact sheet on TPP prepared by Occupy Providence, here.
]]>