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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Be there.

Amid audience shouts of “Shame on you!” and “Merry Christmas, Invenergy!” the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) voted unanimously to grant Invenergy a 90 day suspension on their application to build a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville, effectively quadrupling Invenergy’s previous 30 day extension.

Once Pascoag voted to terminate their letter of intent with Invenergy to provide water to cool Invenergy’s proposed power plant, and Harrisville also declined to provide water, the company asked for 30 days to find an alternative source. They were granted a 30 day extension 30 days ago and despite negotiating with Woonsocket for the water needed to oil the power plant, nothing concrete was presented at today’s hearing.

Instead we heard Invenergy lawyer Alan Shoer claim that Pascog’s termination of their letter of intent came “very late in the process, after almost a year of working with Invenergy.” This made it impossible for Invenergy to come up with an alternative plan, complained Shoer. Attorney Jerry Elmer with the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) later countered that “Invenergy made a careful, conscious, deliberate decision to file an application with the EFSB that had very tight, strict, statutory deadlines for things happening, before they had a secure water source… That was Invenergy’s sole election.”

In other words, continued Elmer, Invenergy knew that their non-binding letter of intent “may not result in a water source.”

The 90 day suspension comes with the minor caveat that Invenergy provide a status update in 60 days. The update must show concrete progress in securing a water source, though it is unclear what penalty Invenergy may face if they do not deliver an update that is satisfactory to the board. Criteria for the update seemed sketchy.

In 90 days, Invenergy must be able to present a water source to the board, along with a plan to transport the water to the location of the power plant. Burrillville recently provided a list of criteria that board member Janet Coit suggested would need to be satisfied for the suspension to be lifted. The criteria includes the source of the water, the means of transmission of the water, and the disposal of waste water, among other concerns.

In the event that Invenergy is unable to come up with a water supply, Coit suggested that the EFSB might be open to further suspensions at that time, effectively suggesting unlimited time for Invenergy to get their application in order, unless the board decides to dismiss the application per the motions from the Conservation Law Foundation and the Town of Burrillville.

Lawyer Michael McElroy gave a stellar speech to the board in support of dismissing Invenergy’s application, even going so far as to quote Marvel Comics’ Stan Lee. McElroy also directly confronted Chair Margaret Curran and board members Parag Agrawal and Janet Coit about concerns that the EFSB’s process “may be dictated by” Governor Gina Raimondo.

“The Town of Burrillville does not want this plant,” said McElroy, “I think that’s been made clear to this board. This plant would be a polluting monster that violates the town’s comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances and would negatively impact impact the quality of life for all Burrillville residents.

The EFSB, continued McElroy, “has been given extraordinary legal powers to grant permits that would otherwise be granted by my client, the Town of Burrillville. You have in essence become, among other things, the town’s planning board, its zoning board and its building inspector. But with such great power comes great responsibility. Your most important power and responsibility is to fully, fairly and impartially evaluate all of the issues that come before you after hearing from all of the parties on those issues.”

“The residents of the town and my clients have become concerned that throughout this process that the board’s votes on this process may be dictated by the governor, who has repeatedly and publicly expressed her support for this project despite the town’s overwhelming opposition. This board’s ill-advised and illegal previous attempts to silence the town and prevent it from being heard today only reinforces that concern.

McElroy urged the board to dismiss the docket, not suspend it. “Suspending the docket instead of dismissing it would give Invenergy what amounts to a gift of an indefinite suspension,” said McElroy. “The town has been fighting this battle now for almost a year at great monetary and emotional expense.”

McElroy’s fiery comments stand in sharp contrast to those of Jerry Elmer, who added that though the lack of water was a major issue that precipitated the motion to suspend, there was also the issue of a lack of information from Invenergy that caused six of the twelve advisory opinions to the board to be submitted incomplete.

After the board rendered its decision those watching the proceedings left the room singing “We shall overcome.”

Those from Burrillville I talked to were angry and disappointed by the ruling. They feel the process is corrupt and stacked against them. They feel that they are being forced to attend yet more town and city council meetings throughout the state in an effort to garner support and prevent the sale of water to Invenergy. Their holidays will now be filled with research, activism, environmental reports and endless meetings in towns and cities throughout the state and beyond to garner support for their cause and to prevent Invenergy from securing a source of water.

Yet though the process seems corrupt and Invenergy seems intent on grinding away their resolve, the people I talked to were adamant that they would not give up or stop fighting.

During a Woonsocket City Council meeting Monday evening it was revealed that the City of Woonsocket is in some kind of negotiations with Invenergy regarding its proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. When the question was brought up, City Solicitor Michael Marcello answered only that the city council had been briefed in closed session and would not directly answer the question. As to the question of a power plant being built in the city, Marcello gave a direct answer: No.

City Councillor Daniel Gendron put an item on the city council’s agenda because of the number of calls he had received based on the rumors that such a deal was in the works. He also said that he prepared his question carefully, “so that I could read the question and give the administration [of Mayor Lisa Baldelli-Hunt] the opportunity to answer that question definitively. So what I would like to ask, and I’m asking this of the administration and of my fellow councilors, but specifically the administration. I was hoping the Mayor would be here to respond but, in her absence, somebody in the administration could answer.”

Gendron asked two questions. The first concerned rumors that Invenergy was in negotiations to locate the power plant in Woonsocket, as an alternative to locating the plant in Burrillville, where there has been fierce local and statewide opposition. The second concerned the possible sale of water to Invenergy, for the plant planned for Burrillville.

“My question is a simple question,” said Gendron, “Has the administration had any discussion or communication with Invenergy or anyone else with respect to either siting a power plant in the city or about acquiring water from the city to be used in connection with a power plant?”

Council President Robert Moreau suggested City Solicitor Michael Marcello answer the question. Gendron repeated once more that he was going to address it to the mayor, but would be satisfied with an answer from Marcello.

“Councilor,” answered Marcello, “as you know you are a member of the council and you were briefed by the administration in closed session.” The closed session Marcello refered to took place at 5:30pm, shortly before the 7pm city council meeting. “The reason that we have a closed session,” said Marcello, “is to keep communication closed until such time as the law requires us to disclose it. I will say that emphatically, that there have been no discussions with the administration, that we’re aware of, that I’m aware of, to relocate the power plant within the City of Woonsocket.

“But with regard to your second question,” said Marcello, “you received a briefing in closed session, and that’s where that information must lay right now. In closed session.”

To the residents of Burrillville who had filled the city council chambers, this was confirmation of weeks of rumors.

“At the direction of our council I will not taint the sanctity, if you will, of the executive session meeting and I will not pursue this any further at your direction Mr. Marcello,” said Gendron.

“In summary,” said Council President Moreau, “that was pretty much what you’re going to hear about it tonight from this council because we had an executive session and the City Solicitor explained that we need to abide by that forum.”

“I put this item on the agenda tonight,” said Gendron, “for discussion purposes… that is what precipitated the executive session that took place prior to this meeting.” The item was “an effort to bring out the truth,” said Gendron. “I think that we needed to start this talk, we needed to squelch some of the rumors.” The solicitor denied completely that there was a power plant coming to Woonsocket, said Gendron. Before today, “none of [the city council] knew what was going on, and that was the benefit of the executive session.”

To the dozens of Burrillville residents and anti-fossil fuel activists from around the state, the city council meeting confirmed the existence of the “third option” ominously hinted at by Attorney Richard Sinapi at a meeting of the Harrisville Fire District and Water Board back in August. At that time Harrisville voted not to sell water to Invenergy, and it was known at that time that Pascoag was also going to vote against selling the power plant water.

Rumors had been swirling for weeks that Woonsocket was in negotiations with Invenergy regarding water. RI Future had put in an Access to Public Records Act request with the city on September 23rd regarding this issue. BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), took to Facebook to ask people to call the office of Mayor Lisa Baldelli-Hunt “and urge her to stop negotiating a water deal with Invenergy.”

The time frame on any potential deal between Invenergy and Woonsocket is difficult to determine. Yesterday Invenergy was given ten days to prepare for a “show cause” hearing with the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB). EFSB board member Janet Coit, who noted that Invenergy lacks a water plan said that, “from the perspective of the board, we have a big gap.” As part of the show cause hearing, Invenergy will have to submit their new water plan. Though Councillor Roger Jalette, (who is running for Mayor of Woonsocket) said that Invenergy might be making their case before a new city council after the elections in four weeks, Invenergy might not have that much time to wait until after an election.

There was also the hint that this issue may have implications for Woonsocket’s mayoral race between Jalette and Baldelli-Hunt, as Jalette said he is sympathetic to Burrillville’s cause.

During the public commentary period, the Woonsocket City Council was given a taste of what the Burrillville Town Council has been experiencing for nearly a year, that is, speaker after speaker objecting to new fossil fuel infrastructure being built in our state at a time when climate change threatens us all. “We don’t want it in our backyard,” said Ray Trinque of Burrillville, “and we don’t want it in your backyard and we don’t want it in anyone’s backyard…”

Burrillville resident Denise Potvin was born in Woonsocket and has family there still. Potvin said that Alan Shoer of Adler Pollock & Sheehan, one of Invenergy’s attorneys, “conveniently happens to be an attorney for the City of Woonsocket’s water department.” She mentioned that attorney Richard Sinapi is an attorney for Harrisville and large labor union with an interest in seeing the power plant built. “A lot happens behind the curtain,” said Potvin. She ended by suggesting the council educate itself by reading articles like this one on RI Future.

City Council Vice President Albert Brien interrupted public testimony and explained that right now, there was no proposal before the council.

Councillor Roger Jalette is leaving the city council as he runs against Lisa Baldelli-Hunt for Mayor of Woonsocket. “I want you to know that I am very very sensitive to your plight,” said Jalette. Jalette warned that there will be a new city council in four weeks, after the election, as neither he nor Council President Moreau will be on the council.

Burillville resident Jeremy Bailey pointed out that City Solicitor Michael Marcello is also a Ste Representative. Rep Marcello voted against a bill in May that would have allowed Burrillville residents to vote on any proposed tax treaty the town made with Invenergy. Rep Marcello was one of two representatives to attend the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce’s Eggs & Issues Breakfast Thursday morning where Invenergy‘s director of development John Niland was the guest speaker.

The lawsuit argues that city officials violated plaintiff David Alves’s “statutory and constitutional rights by unlawfully arresting and detaining him, charging him with violating an unconstitutional City criminal ordinance, subjecting him to discrimination on account of his disability, and failing to accommodate his disability.”

The arrest took place late one night last July, when Alves and some friends were at the City Side Club in Woonsocket to celebrate a friend’s birthday. After a verbal altercation between the bouncer and members of the group, police were called. On his way out of the bar, Alves gestured toward the bouncer with the American Sign Language sign for “b*llsh*t,” which police who had arrived at the scene interpreted as giving them the middle finger. Immediately after making the gesture, Alves was arrested by the police for violating a city ordinance banning “obscene language or mak[ing] an obscene gesture.”

While being booked and held at the station overnight, Alves’s requests for a sign language interpreter were ignored. When a deaf friend came to the station to check up on him, a police officer handed the friend a note saying that Alves would “be out in the morning no problem . . . These things happen, he just needs to take it as a learning experience.” In the morning, he was released from custody and issued a summons to appear at court on the ordinance violation. A few months later, a Municipal Court judge dismissed the criminal charge.

Today’s lawsuit, filed by ACLU volunteer attorneys V. Edward Formisano, Michael Pushee and Alyse Galoski, and RI Disability Law Center attorney Katherine Bowden, raises a host of constitutional and statutory claims, including that:

• The City’s “obscene gesture” ordinance is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague in violation of the First Amendment
• The arrest and overnight detention of Alves without cause violated his rights to due process of law and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and
• The police officers’ failure to procure an interpreter or provide other means to effectively communicate with Alves violated a number of federal and state laws barring discrimination by municipal agencies on the basis of disability.

Among other remedies sought, the lawsuit asks the court to rule the “obscene gesture” ordinance unconstitutional, declare Alves’ arrest and detention unlawful, order the City to implement policies to prohibit future discrimination against deaf or hard of hearing individuals, and award Alves unspecified monetary damages for violating his rights.

Below are quotes from the participants in today’s lawsuit:

Plaintiff David Alves: “I need to fight this case so that other people don’t have to go through the same thing I went through.  Deaf and hard of hearing people deserve the same dignity anyone else deserves.  If they violate my civil rights, then they might feel they can violate other people’s civil rights. I want to do what I can to prevent that.”

ACLU of RI attorney V. Edward Formisano: “Mr. Alves was unlawfully arrested and detained under an unconstitutional law. To add insult to injury, he was not provided with the accommodations he needed for his obvious disability. We are confident that a court will vindicate the rights that were so unfairly denied Mr. Alves.”

RIDLC attorney Katherine Bowden: “Municipal compliance with federal and state laws prohibiting disability discrimination is mandatory, not optional. People who are deaf and hard of hearing have a right to equal access to city services, including the right to effective communication with the police and other city officials.”

ACLU of RI executive director Steven Brown: “In this country, people cannot be locked up simply in order to give them a ‘learning experience.’ We are hopeful this lawsuit will send a clear message to all law enforcement agencies that there are basic constitutional limits on the use of their formidable police powers, and that they cannot ignore their obligations under anti-discrimination laws to treat people with disabilities fairly.”

A copy of the complaint can be found here.

On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, the Woonsocket Call published an article titled “Freedom still rings for city’s Laotian refugees.” The article highlights an event held at Woonsocket city hall celebrating “Lao Heritage and Freedom Day” on the anniversary of the end of the Lao civil war. Usually, I don’t care much for articles that highlight dog and pony shows orchestrated by politicians—but this time, it was different.

In the article, it states “the inspiration for the event came from Vanmala Phongsavan, a prominent member of the city’s Laotian community and father of Vimala Phongsavanh, a former member of the School Committee and the assistant director of Common Cause.” The problem is that “Vanmala Phongsavan,” who up until last year was known as “Thongsavan Phongsavan,” is not my father. Besides being really bizarre, it was extremely offensive to my family and I for many, many, different reasons.

As I continued to read, it just became very clear to me that it was bigger than an ignorant error by a newspaper, I realized that Woonsocket doesn’t get it.

Dispelling the “model minority myth”

The article mentions the city’s “sizable Laotian community.” To be exact, according to the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau, there are 36,763 Asians living in Rhode Island, approximately 16,787 of them are Southeast Asians (Burmese, Cambodian, Filipino, Hmong, Laotian, Thai, and Vietnamese), 3,380 Laotians live in Rhode Island, and 1,430 live in Woonsocket.

It continues to write, “Southeast Asians who resettled in America after the war have been able to rebuild prosperous new lives and raise children who are now adults working in all kinds of high-skilled jobs.”

Where are they getting their facts?

According to the Southeast Asian Resource Action Center (SEARAC) “Southeast Asian American Education Needs in Rhode Island” report, Southeast Asian Americans have lower rates of education attainment when compared to the Asian population and the total population in Rhode Island. For instance, 4.6% of Cambodian and 10.4% of Laotian Americans over the ages of 25 had a bachelor’s degree compared to 18.5% of the total population and 23.2% of Asian respondents.

The majority of Southeast Asian Americans in Rhode Island live in poverty. 21.1% of Cambodian and 19.4% of Hmong American families lived in poverty in Rhode Island compared to 8.4% of total families in Rhode Island.

Asian Americans as a whole have statistically been seen as overachievers, and the “model minority.” But when data are disaggregated, it tells a different story for Southeast Asians. This is why we need better data; we need to know our smaller communities better—to truly meet their needs and help them prosper.

Of course the Laotian community has had our opportunities and successes, and some have been able to seize their own version of the American dream—but not enough.

“Culture day” does not make you culturally competent

From the article, it seems like the city of Woonsocket tried really hard to celebrate its own version of “culture day,” but failed. It interjected itself into the middle of something that it didn’t understand. It made a global political statement by celebrating the country’s old flag, but not its current flag. There are some of us, who would actually like to see our Laotian community in Rhode Island united, these types of events only add to the tension.

“From 1964 to 1973, the U.S. dropped more than two million tons of ordnance on Laos during 580,000 bombing missions—equal to a planeload of bombs every 8 minutes, 24-hours a day, for 9 years – making Laos the most heavily bombed country per capita in history,” according to one account. “The bombings were part of the U.S. Secret War in Laos to support the Royal Lao Government against the Pathet Lao and to interdict traffic along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The bombings destroyed many villages and displaced hundreds of thousands of Lao civilians during the nine-year period. Up to a third of the bombs dropped did not explode, leaving Laos contaminated with vast quantities of unexploded ordnance (UXO). Over 20,000 people have been killed or injured by UXO in Laos since the bombing ceased. The wounds of war are not only felt in Laos. When the Americans withdrew from Laos in 1973, hundreds of thousands of refugees fled the country, and many of them ultimately resettled in the United States.”

Did the city of Woonsocket know that by celebrating “Lao Heritage and Freedom Day” that they might have offended some people who still suffer the trauma of what the U.S. did to their country and their entire refugee experience? Our community is still at war and there will never be any winners. We are all still healing from the results of war, death, and loss. There are also those who still communicate with their families in Laos, who want to travel to Laos, and others who are trying to work on solving global issues together with the country of Laos with ambassadors and other global leaders. Celebrating “Lao Peace” day would have been at least a little less offensive.

How can we expect any type of world peace if we make global political statements without understanding the bigger implications? I think we all agree that our democracy is great, the best in the world. But in order to accomplish anything, we must be tolerant of other values, beliefs, and political ideologies—as different as they may be from ours.

There’s Hope

I am one of Woonsocket’s biggest fans, and I believe that one day it can get out of its own way so that progress can happen. It’s not just about the Laotian community; it’s about all communities of color. If the city of Woonsocket wants to really change outcomes for people of color, it needs to stop celebrating “culture day” and begin to take apart its systematic racism; it ultimately needs a democracy that is truly representative of the people it serves.

There’s a lot to do in Woonsocket, but here are just some initial thoughts for engaging more people of color:

• Hiring people of color: Woonsocket’s administration is very white, it can start by hiring people of color to its administration, and being more transparent about hiring and appointing processes;
• Civic engagement: Woonsocket needs civic engagement initiatives to get more people of color engaged in our American democracy;
• People of color in local leadership: Woonsocket needs to elect people of color, and more people of color need to run; currently, all elected officials representing Woonsocket are white;
• Task force on Diversity: Woonsocket needs a task force on diversity with the single mission of hiring and engaging more people of color in Woonsocket;
• Disaggregate data: let data drive decision and policy making;
• Cultural competency training for the city’s administration: this should be obvious.

Blaming organized labor for getting rid of Gist is like blaming vaccines for getting rid of the measles. There’s always a few that think the solution to a problem is a bigger problem than the problem.

As Brien, a Woonsocket native, a lawyer and a parent, blames teachers and their unions, his hometown school district sued Gist and the state for not ensuring an adequate education. Meanwhile, during Gist’s tenure in Rhode Island, the graduation rate in Woonsocket dropped 6 percent – from 64 percent of high school seniors in 2009 to 58 percent of high school seniors in 2013.

News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England

Nearly 160 teachers in five urban school districts are getting more resources for classroom innovation thanks to $148,000 in grants from the Rhode Island Foundation.

Full-time third-grade teachers in any public or charter school in Central Falls, Newport, Pawtucket, Providence and Woonsocket were eligible to for Spark Grants of up to $1,000 to fund programs that will engage students through unique experiences and creative learning methods in order to stimulate their interest in academics.

At Francis Varieur School in Pawtucket , third-grade teachers Mary Bergeron and Donna Sawyer will pool their $1,000 grants to purchase 25 cameras to support learning activities related to a social studies unit on urban, suburban and rural communities. The cameras will enable teachers to weave art into their lesson plans and foster the development of 21st-century skills through the use of digital technology.

In Providence, the proposals range from recruiting an artist to help Pleasant View Elementary students write a narrative version of Cinderella to a year-long character education program at William D’Abate Elementary, including field trips to the Providence Police and Fire Departments.

Conceived by philanthropists Letitia and John Carter, the Spark Grants program was launched last year with $75,000 in awards to Providence third-grade teachers. Based on the results, the initiative was expanded this year to include the four new communities.

“We were impressed by the creativity and impact of last year’s proposals. Third grade is a crucial period in the academic development of children. Widening the reach of the program will put more youngsters on the road to a lifetime of academic achievement,” says Letitia Carter.

I was just having a coffee cabinet and some dynamites, thinking about yesterday’s SCORI decision in the Woonsocket and Pawtucket School Committee’s case to alter and accelerate school funding for these two cities, when it occurred to me that I should reach out to you all because, who knows better what’s good for a city than the city itself? Am I right?

So, my  good friend, Dave Fisher has allowed my the use of his mind and body to pen this missive, as it were. (For the record, this guy drinks way too much coffee, and is absolutely the worst typist in the world.) So here goes. I know you don’t get a constituent request from an actual community every day, so take a minute. Have  a seat. Drink some water. Continue when you’ve regained your senses.

Scratch that. That might take forever for some of you.

I think I should get a bonus for exceeding state affordable housing guidelines. Frankly, so should my brothers Providence, Central Falls, Newport, New Shoreham – or Block Island to the natives, and…oh, right, that’s it. That’s right. Only 5 communities in Rhode Island meet and exceed state minimum housing requirements.

Notice that last word.

Requirements.

As in required.

You see, my four stalwart brothers and I have, in good faith, not only met – but exceeded – your requirements, leaving my remaining 31 brothers seemingly remiss in their dedication to a diversified Rhode Island; a place where people of all colors, creeds, orientations, and tax brackets can live peacefully. I would suggest the carrot and the stick. Those communities who fail to make efforts and progress toward the just goal of a mere 10 percent of their housing stock qualifying as affordable, shall have a proportional reduction in any state education and human services assistance. The withheld assistance shall be proportionally distributed to towns that exceed the state’s requirements.  There’s that pesky word again!

While we’re on housing, can you do something about all the old mills around. I’ve lost count of how many mill fires have happened on my soil. How about a tax incentive for developers who refurbish existing commercial structures and land into mixed use developments, provided that the development meets LEED standards.  Those old structures aren’t typically very good when it comes to energy efficiency. I think the building trades would love this!

Dave has assured me, that I could use his corporeal form as a vessel whenever I choose, so until next time.

Love,

Woonsocket