portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article announcements oregon & cascadia

corporate dominance | energy & nuclear | environment

CRISIS ON THE COLUMBIA Earth Day Forum, April 23, Warrenton, Oregon

You are invited to CRISIS ON THE COLUMBIA, an Earth Day Forum on the Future of the Columbia River
You are invited to CRISIS ON THE COLUMBIA, an Earth Day Forum on the Future of the Columbia River, on Saturday, April 23, at the Warrenton Community Center, 170 SW 3rd, Warrenton, Oregon.

Speakers include Mike Buettner of Eureka LNG Watch. Mike was insturmental in keeping Calpine Corporation from siting a Liquified Natural Gas terminal on Humboldt Bay, California. Also speaking will be Julian Darley, founder of the Post-Carbon Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia,and author of HIGH NOON FOR NATURAL GAS, Paul Koberstein, editor of Cascadia Times of Portland, Dan Serres of Friends of Living Oregon Waters in Grant's Pass, and Peter Huhtala of Pacific Marine Conservation Council in Astoria.

CRISIS ON THE COLUMBIA Forum aims to empower those who are working in local groups to resist the incursion of transnational corporations into Cascadia communities.

CRISIS ON THE COLUMBIA is sponsored by RiverVsion, People for Responsible Prosperity, and McKenzie Gathering Foundation. Suggested donation $25., includes lunch, but no one turned away for lack of funds.

Bird and plant walk at 8 AM Sunday, April 24, starting at CarruthersPark parking lot in Warrenton, to the Warrenton Nature trail, one of the best birding spots in Oregon, and one of the prosed LNG termianl sites.

KITKA, women's a cappella singing group from Berkeely, singing at The River Theater in Astoria Sunday evening, 7:30.

Please come!

Go to www.columbiarivervision.org, or call 503-325-1935 for more information.
Just a walk in the Park 09.Apr.2005 15:32


A day or two at the beach to find out what the energy industry wants to do to the Warrenton/Astoria Area and the Lower Columbia wouldn't be wasted.

The Port of Astoria secretly dealt with Calpine (enron clone) to lease land. Now that Calpine has the lease they could be "in like Flint". Once they have Property Rights they have "personhood". (the 1886 law)

Warrenton/Ft Stevens Area could be the sight of huge dangerous storage facilities of Liquefied Natural Gas, for the profit of Oil/Gas interests. These holding tanks are GIGANTIC UGLY POTENTIALLY EXPLOSIVE and not worth it to the citizens.

Politicos of all Persuasions are trying to fight these things off.

my humble opinion 09.Apr.2005 19:44


I wonder if the author of this article uses LNG in any way?
Say, for electricity for their computer, or home heating,
or perhaps even their (ecologicaly conscious) LNG powered
vehicle? My beef with this post and with this side of the issue
is precisely the same beef I had with all the anti nuclear people
in the 1980's. I consider myself ecologically minded in that
I do not take lightly disturbance to natural eco systems,
but in the 1980's the wildly anti nuclear stance of many
was basically a means of forcing coal fired and oil fired
electric facilities into many parts of the country, which
further exacerbates the problem because coal is dirty,
creates tons of CO2 to heat the planet, and has to be mined
from somewhere. I'm not saying that coal is worse than nuclear,
but I always felt that done right, properly designed and
constructed nuclear plants could work for us with a minimum
of danger. Because of the anti nuclear stance of so many,
what we have is a countryside dotted with poorly designed
reactors anyway. In truth, if our country had launched on a campaign
to make lots of smaller nuclear plants in the 1980's we'd have
a sizeable chunk less CO2 in the air now, and perhaps even
electric vehicles would have become commmonplace.
So now someone is asking me to consider this issue and take a
stance against the LNG station on the Columbia. THe problem
is, what are they proposing as an alternative? Am I supposed to
blindy be against whatever but no one is going to explain to
me what the alternatives are? Frankly, I'm in favour of this
LNG station despite the risks for this reason:
We need to use LNG. We are OIL dependant whether you say we
are or not. We actually have need for these things, so why
should I be against this particular LNG station? Because it might
explode? That's a risk we have to take sometimes. My car could
explode but I get in it not so much now that gas is so expensive
but you get the point.
Life goes on, and some things we have to make compromises upon.
Your food arrives at the destination via OIL powered trucks,
using oil powered fertilizers (although I don't agree with non-
organic farming methods). It's damn frustrating sometimes but
we have to use common sense as well. You said no nukes back in the
1980's so here we are in 2005 heavily dependant on coal and foreign
oil which will most likely be over $100 a barrel pretty soon.
Never let emotionalism make your decisions for you unless it's an
issue related to reproduction, if you catch my drift.

This has been my humble opinion.

Necessity is the Mother of Invention--not Ken Lay 09.Apr.2005 23:32


It may be convenient and cost effective for Calpine to get sited at the Lower Columbia but how important is that to you? It does feel like the Oil/Gas industry is holding a gun to our head doesn't it? They don't want to give us break. Do you believe in benevolent capitalism when your dealing with Corporate Oil/Gas? Would you want to live within 10 miles of these things, considering the risks?

These things belong far away from a population, where the risk of endangering lives and an ecosystem is absolutely minimal. Doing the right thing may affect the profits of the determined Oil/Gas industry, however it may also speed up the alternative energy industry.

Just say No to LNG in sensitive areas-- And remember, they can always raise taxes on the very wealthy to help these poor fellas out with the added expense of saving lives and the environment. You know, people like Ken Lay.

Search articles here for LNG to bone up.

consider this 09.Apr.2005 23:49


Expert reveals LNG fears

Monday, April 04, 2005


NEW ORLEANS -- In the post 9-11 period, officials need to pay more attention to LNG tanker safety, especially from the risk of terrorist attacks, an expert on predicting atmospheric dispersion of hazardous gases said.

"The LNG industry has a very good record for safety, but they need to be prepared for terrorists' acts," Jerry Havens, a professor of chemical engineering and director of the Chemical Hazards Research Center at the University of Arkansas, said.

Havens discussed tanker safety during a weekend panel discussion on liquefied natural gas at Tulane University's annual Environmental Conference on the school's campus.

LNG tankers carry thousands of cubic feet of LNG, which is methane gas that has been cooled to minus-260 degrees to convert it to a liquid for transportation to terminals that will convert the liquid back to a gas to be moved through gas transmission lines.

The problem with the tankers, Havens said, is that the spills would occur over water, where the cloud of cold gas would sit on the water's surface because it is heavier than air.

If there is no heat source to warm the cloud and convert it to a gas so it can disperse into air, the cloud would remain on the water's surface and could be moved by the wind.

If the methane is "hot," that is, it contains other heavier elements like propane or butane, the cloud could remain on the water's service.

"There are no regulations for exclusion zones like there are with land-based terminals," Havens said.

Federal regulations require land-based LNG terminals to develop exclusion zones to reduce the danger to population areas that might be affected by an LNG spill or release.

The zones cover three situations:

A spill that catches fire and creates a large fire, which could radiate sufficient heat could hurt someone away from the terminal site.

A spill that does not catch fire immediately, but could form a flammable vapor cloud could drift down wind until it did catch fire.

A vapor cloud fire.

The same problems exist from a tanker spill, but unlike a land-based terminal operator, a ship captain has no way to contain or control a vapor cloud over the water.

An exclusion zone allows the terminal operator to contain or control the potential danger; that ability does not exist with an LNG spill on the water. Havens said there has been some discussion on developing ship exclusion zones.

Another problem is the potential loss of insulation on the ship tanks because of exposure to the LNG and the extreme cold.

"The insulation is just melting away," Havens said.

A fire from a leak on an LNG tanker, he said, could envelop the entire ship and lead to the total loss of the ship.

Haven's discussion was part of a panel discussion Saturday that also included information on the potential effect of open circulation systems, which are used by offshore LNG terminals to heat the LNG, on marine life.

The water is drawn from the sea, treated to prevent algae and then discharged into the sea at a much colder temperature.

Gulf Coast environmentalists later met to discuss strategy to oppose both offshore and land-based LNG terminals.

Two of the participants in the strategy sessions were Vera Francis and David Moses Bridges, members of the Passamaquoddy Tribe at Point Pleasant Reservation in Maine, who helped stop a plan to put an LNG terminal on reservation property.

The majority of the tribe had voted on Aug. 17, 2004, to allow the terminal after a meeting that Francis said was hastily called and did not address the concerns of many members.

"We thought we were going to a meeting to discuss LNG and they said we were going to vote," Bridges said.

"There were a lot of questions that we had that weren't answered," Bridges said. "All they (the developers) kept saying, It's non-toxic, safe and not explosive.'"

They said the Passamaquoddys first learned about the proposed Quoddy Bay LLC LNG project, which was being developed by Oklahoma City, Okla.-based Smith Co-generation, on June 8, 2004.

Francis said the opposition of the tribal elders, who pleaded with the tribe's leadership to keep the terminal out influenced her to fight the proposal.

"They pleaded with the leadership," she said. "They were actually crying. They had more knowledge of the past than the younger people."

The opponents formed alliances and pressed their fight, working with residents in Perry, who had the final say on the terminal because of a clause in the agreement that transferred the land to the Passamaquoddy.

The provision gave the Perry residents veto power on any heavy industry proposed for the reservation. They voted 279-214 to reject it.

LNG is not natural gas like in your stove, "me". 10.Apr.2005 00:43

check columbiarivervision.org

This liquified natural gas is a very high-tech, very expensively designed product. It is natural gas, taken from Indodensia, primarily, though the pristine Sakhalin Islands off the coast of Russia are just now being dssimantled to get to it lately. The indigenous Sakhalin Islanders are putting up quite a fuss, but Shell really qwwant s this stuff, and you know how annoying indigenous people can be...The Indonesians have been fighting for 30 years to keep the corporate pirates out of their gas fields, with increasing success--check out Aceh--that's where most of the gas is that gets taken away. LNG economy is not going to reduce "our" energy bills under any circumstances, and it will not quicken our region's conversion to sustainable energy sources. LNG economy might delay the time we have to seriously deal with fossil fuel shortage and continue to live in our land of denial, but I doubt it, since even the most optimistic petrochemical industry hack gives NG supply 30 years, and that's with a lot of shuck and jive and endless war. The stuff is cooled to minus 260 degrees, so that it can be transported in 1000-foot Thermos tanker ships 8,000-10,000 miles across the ocean, then pumped into massive Thermos storage bottles(150'tall x 250' wide), where it is piped into 36-inch pipeline after being regasified. The loss of energy through all these processes is big, and a lot of petroleum is used in taking, moving, storing, and converting , and piping this gas to the highest bidder. It doesn't matter that the energy extracted is less than the energy needed to extract, because we, the fixed rate-payer, will be stuck with the costs. The LNG pirates are desperate for the first West Coast port--the corpos stand to make a lot of money in tax dollars, since all building and infrastructure maintenance and security costs of these behomoth plants and hundreds of miles of vulnerable pipeline are tax-payer subsidized. And the security will be draconian--armored helicopter gunships(Jayhawks are being purchased by the private Coast Guard Integrated Systems Corporation, the amalgamation of Northrupp-Grumman and Lockheed-Martin that now controls the Coast Guard, through the Department of Homeland Security). The promised jobs look to be a ruse. The slick guy from Petroleum Finance Company out of Washington DC, told us that a big way we rubes could make money was by charging renters four times their customary rent while the transient workers are living in town, just like PFC did in Puerto Rico, which Mr. Head persited in calling "The United States". Hmmm--Prs would certainly take exception to that, though the corporations are trying their mightiest to make us all Puerto Rico now--tax-haven for corporations, with no representation, and no vote(whatever that means!). Sorry, Mr. Head, but we just can't wrap around the idea of scalping renters as a way of keeping our economy afloat here in Astoria/Warrenton. Of course, the kids coming home from Iraq and other foriegn wars would likely have first dibs on the security jobs, guarding the twice-weekly ships coming over the bar, parking for 24 hours at the ship channel, pipeing the gas to Longview, 60 miles away. Sharpshooters on the riverbank, JayHawks armed with automatic weapons buzzing the river, DHS thugs all over town(starting to happen). Nice. And for what? So some Fat Cat at Shell/Bechtel can put another notch in his belt? Let's stop being silly and look at these scams for what they are, for pity's sake.

LNG is a major peace, justice, and environmental issue. The incursion of an LNG economy into our area will kill any possibility of local control, and put us into the hands of the federal revenuers/regulators, and the transnational corporations who see the Columbia as an untapped resource for their fiery grand project. The LNG con is getting bigger and uglier every day, and it won't improve the economy of Cascadia, or reduce your energy bills, guaranteed. Think ENRON--they're all over this, just having reemerged from Chapter 11. This boondoggle is about socializing cost, and privatizing profits, at the expense of the River, and everything that lives near it. LNG is not viable anywhere, and developments inthe Middle East will soon show this scam as the dead-end it is, I believe(If they're looking).

Please come to the forum--the discussions will be interesting, and you'll have time to talk with the presenters and learn what's happening in Cascadia in regards to resisting the LNG pirates(and believe me, they are pirates!) For a really interesting slice of life, attend the next Warrenton City Council meeting on Tuesday, April12 at 7 PM, at the Warrenton City Hall. No public testimony will be taken, and the boys will be rubberstamping an illegal zone change so that yet antoher one of these LNG terminals canstart moving through the FERC chain. We rubes are being taken advantage of, and people, it's time to resist! Once these things are here, the mouth of the Columbia River is out of our hands and into the military-industrial-police state.

Guns to our Heads and your "grandma Millie"s head" 10.Apr.2005 09:58


Reliant Energy

Reliant Energy, headquartered in Houston, TX, provides electricity and energy services to retail and wholesale customers in the U.S.

In April 2004, the U.S. Department of Justice obtained an indictment of Reliant for price-gouging California consumers during the energy crisis in 2000-2001; the company is accused of shutting down power plants, causing widespread power "blackouts" that increased energy prices and Reliant's profits. Click here to read the indictment.

In addition to the criminal indictment, Reliant has agreed to pay $125 million thus far to government regulators to settle allegations that the company manipulated energy markets.

On May 19, Reliant received a contract to provide electricity to several military installations, despite being under federal indictment. Public Citizen has repeatedly urged the government to investigate why Reliant continues to receive lucrative contracts even while under indictment.

Want to learn more about Reliant? Read our Got Juice? report from 2001, when Public Citizen first uncovered what Reliant was doing to California consumers. If you can stomach it, read transcripts of conversations by Reliant Energy traders, detailing their role in manipulating California consumers!

Reliant is still in business today. And Public Citizen is still watchdogging them. To read our press releases and letters, please go to:

Feb. 5, 2003: Federal Regulators Let Corporate Criminals Go Free; Reliant Energy Slapped on Wrist for Manipulating California Market; Transcripts Reveal Traders Thought Causing Blackouts Was "Coolest Strategy Ever"

May 26, 2004: Public Citizen Calls for Debarment of Reliant Energy from Federal Contracts Due to Company's Indictment for Role in California Energy Crisis

June 2, 2004: Public Citizen Calls on Baltimore City Officials to Reevaluate Contract with Reliant Energy, Indicted for Its Role in the California Energy Crisis

June 8, 2004: Public Citizen Urges Maryland Officials to Revoke Electricity Contract With Reliant Due to Company's Role in California Energy Crisis

June 29, 2004: Public Citizen Urges Government to Revoke Electricity Contract With Reliant Energy

July 6, 2004: Government Knew of Indictment But Awarded Contract Anyway

July 16, 2004: Baltimore Officials Claim Criminal Indictment Not Grounds to Disqualify $67.3 Million Reliant Energy Contract

July 28, 2004: Public Citizen Urges Maryland to Strengthen Its Licensing Process for Power Providers

August 9, 2004: Maryland's Public Service Commission directs Reliant to respond to Public Citizen's allegations

August 19, 2004: Reliant's answer to Maryland's Public Service Commission responding to Public Citizen's allegations

August 24, 2004: Public Citizen responds to Reliant's answer to allegations

speaking of reliant enegy, rolling blackouts and the boss of YOUR House of Reps 10.Apr.2005 10:06

Give these guys what they want? NO WAY!!! (Jess)

By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor

A Texas energy company being investigated with regards to improper fundraising by those connected with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) held a baby shower for DeLay's daughter Danielle Ferro in May 2002—and the event was attended by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who paid for some of the congressman's overseas travel, RAW STORY has found.

The shower, reported in the Washington, D.C. newspaper Roll Call Jun. 10, 2002 (article posted here), was held at the Washington offices of Reliant Energy Inc., a Texas-based power company that has given heavily to DeLay and his political action committees.

Donations collected from Reliant by a DeLay-linked political action committee are now the subject of a Texas state probe. DeLay's daughter Danielle helped manage that committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, and her records have been subpoenaed by an Austin grand jury.

An energy lobbyist who counted Reliant among her clients set up the May 10, 2002 event which she estimated cost $250.

"Dani and I have been friends a long time," the lobbyist told Roll Call.

Just a few weeks later, DeLay held a two-day golf tournament where Reliant chipped in $25,000 to the committee now being investigated in Texas—a contribution that a group later discovered was not reported in campaign filings. Shortly thereafter, DeLay conferenced on an omnibus energy bill.

DeLay was rebuked in October of last year by the Republican-controlled House ethics committee for creating an appearance of favoritism surrounding the Jun. 2, 2002 golf outing.

Among the shower's guests was Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist found to have paid for at least two DeLay trips that were fronted through a conservative nonprofit. The trips, taken in violated of House rules, ran a tab of more than $130,000.

"Some of the lobbyists who attended the shower include Jack Abramoff and Tony Rudy of the lobbying firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP," Roll Call noted.

Told of the event, one veteran Democratic aide was floored. "It's fairly common for corporations to hold receptions in honor of someone, but I've never heard of anybody having a baby shower," the aide said. "Clearly this shows there was a close relationship and Tom DeLay's efforts to distance himself from Jack Abramoff [are misleading]."

At the time, DeLay's office blasted those who questioned the shower.

"Dani's girlfriend had a baby shower for her and paid for the Costco finger food out of her own pocket," a DeLay spokesman told the Hill paper. "She invited Dani's friends to celebrate one of the happiest times in life, the birth of a child."

"Tom DeLay understands that his activities are going to be parsed with a great deal of attention," the spokesman added, "but extending this level of intrusiveness to his daughter's baby shower—thrown by and paid for by one of her girlfriends—is cheap."

Ferro is now under investigation by a Texas grand jury examining the fund-raising activities of Texans for a Republican Majority, a Texas state political action committee that was modeled on DeLay's highly effective national PAC. Emails obtained in the case show the Reliant appears to have been solicited by DeLay.

The Texas Observer reported, "In early June 2002, DeLay held a two-day golf tournament at the Homestead resort in Hot Springs, Virginia. The cost of attending the event was a corporate contribution of $25,000 to $50,000. Five energy companies were invited by Maloney to attend: El Paso Corp., Mirant, Reliant Energy, Westar Energy, and Williams Companies... The golfing took place just before a House-Senate conference on an omnibus energy bill."

Reliant Energy's director of communications would not comment on the baby shower at the time, but admitted the company allowed the use of its conference room for the event.

"Reliant gave $65,000 in soft money to DeLay's leadership PAC, Americans for a Republican Majority, in 2000 and 2001," Roll Call noted. "Through its own PAC, Reliant has donated $37,000 in hard money to DeLay's re-election campaigns since 1996, and another $6,348 to ARMPAC."

Reliant has run afoul of regulations on several occasions. In 2003, the Houston firm admitted to having violated securities laws to inflate profits by 10 percent; in the same year, they also paid $25 million to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to settle charges of manipulating California's energy markets; in 2002, Reliant paid $10.5 million to settle charges of manipulating Texas' energy markets.

Energy company manipulation of the California energy market allowed the firms to overcharge California consumers by more than $20 billion between 2000 and 2001. Among the largest offender was Texas-based Enron, also a top donor solicited by DeLay. According to the Washington Post, DeLay requested $100,000 from Enron be channeled to the Texas political action committee abetting a Texas redistricting effort.

Reliant gave $2,000 to DeLay's campaign committee in the last election cycle.

DeLay and Ferro could not immediately be reached for comment.

Yikes 10.Apr.2005 11:27

Kenny Lay



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Warrenton Planning Department is currently conducting an administrative review on the below described land use matter. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS MAY SUBMIT written comments for or against the request by mailing letters to t;he Warrenton Planning Department, PO Box 250, Warrenton, OR 97146. Written comments may also be dropped off at Warrenton City Hall, 225 S. Main Ave., during 8:30AM to 5:00PM business hours. All written comments must be received no later than 5:00 PM on April 28, 2005. After the comment period closes, the Warrenton Zoning Administrator shall issue a Type II administrative decision for this matter.

The applicant and any party who requested or received mailed notice or who participated in the proceedings through submission of written evidence may appeal the interpretation to the Planning Commission within 14 days after the interpretation is mailed. The appeal may be initiated by filing a notice of appeal with the zoning administrator pursuant to Section 4.1.4.G of the Warrenton Development Code.

Skipanon Natural Gas, LLC has applied for a code interpretation to determine if a an LNG (liquefied natural gas) terminal is a permitted use in the City's 1-2, Water Dependent Shorelands, zoning district. The applicant has requested a code interpretation to determine if an LNG terminal falls within the scope of a "marine cargo transfer facility" identified as a permitted use in Warrenton Development Code Section 2.11.110(1)(b) of the City's Water-Dependent Industrial Shorelands (1-2) Zoning District. In its request, the applicant explains that the proposed LNG marine cargo transfer facility would consist of: (I) an off-shore industrial dock with moorage facilities to berth one LNG tanker; (2) a pier, placed upon pilings, interconnecting the dock with the shore to carry related pipelines and vehicular and pedestrian traffic; (3) on-shore LNG tanks to equalize the delivery flow of natural gas into the interstate pipeline between tanker deliveries; (4) a pressurized vaporization system to convert the liquefied natural gas to a gaseous state and modify its heating value to meet FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) specifications; and, (5) a combined cycle cogeneration system to generate heat to convert the liquefied natural gas back to gas and dispose of ethane removed from the LNG to modify its heating value.

The subject property is described as all properties inside the City of Warrenton's 1-2, Water Dependent Industrial Shorelands, Zoning District. The purpose of the review is for the Warrenton Zoning Administrator to make a code interpretation to determine if an LNG terminal falls within the scope of a "marine cargo transfer facility" identified as a permitted use in WDC Section 2.11.110(1)(b), Water-Dependent Industrial Shorelands (1-2) Zoning District. The Warrenton Zoning Administrator will also determine if the application satisfies the applicable procedural criteria of WDC Section 4.8.2, Code Interpretation Procedure.
The complete application, all evidence supplied by the applicant, and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost; copies can be provided at reasonable cost. For further information, please contact either Pamela Alegria, Planning Technician, or Patrick Wingard, Planning Director/Zoning Administrator, at the Warrenton Planning Department (225 S. Main Avenue), at (503) 861-0920 during 8:30AM to 5:00PM business hours.

All it takes it some hard work now. 10.Apr.2005 13:25


Now, you know your working with people who like to bitch but don't like to work, don't you? Thats gotta suck. Read someones blog/bulletin board thing in astoria. All ten of you have had each other pretty well convinced for about 5 months now that LNG is a bad idea. Good job. Really impressive when you can convince people that already know its a bad idea that ITS A REAL, REAL, REAL BAD IDEA.

Why don't you try this. Warrenton is SMALL. EVERYONE talks. First, it will delay the process and if they still allow it each and every person writing in has the right to appeal and each of those appeals must be asnwered. If the commissioners find out that the planning office was inundated with letters, well written, unemotional letters, then that will freak them out. They will want to make sure they aren't faced with the same fiasco.

What I want to know is why do you keep trying to convince the same 10 people of something you all agree with in the first place? You get one or two people who question a source of info on the personal bulletin board, that a couple of you pretend is a public forum until the guy wipes the slate clean when someone makes a point he doesn't like, and then you all pounce on the questioner like they don't have a right to breath the same air you breath.

There's a whole lot more than 10 people who are concerned about this 10.Apr.2005 13:47

Texas transplant

Pat Mcgee's website is a good community resource, though it isn't widely read. I'm happy it exists.

Many people from all over Clatsop County are concerned about this LNG thing, for a lot of different reasons. It's interesting how this issue pulls people from differnet ideological perspectives together.

there were at least two hundred people at the last "public meeting" with the slick PR flacks form another petroleum consulting company from Washington, DC, on March 31. Many of them were forbidden from entering the hall, because the fire chief was at the entrance, telling people to leave because the room was "over capacity and unsafe". At least fifty people had signed up to speak, but the meeting was tightly controlled by the heinous mayor of Warrenton, and he hand-picked the eight on each "side" to speak. At least one of the proponenets, one fo the Port of Astoria commisssioners, admitted that he "got caught flat-footed" by the mayor's invitation to address the crowd. Democracy in action, indeed.

Please, if you have some ideas about how we can better orgainze, help us. RiverVsion is not heirarchical--anyone who shows up to the the real public meetings is a member, if s/he wants to be. Pleae come to the forum, please write letters to the Port Commissioners, the City Of Warrenton, the City of Astoria, and the Clatsop County Commssioners. Addresses are available at www.columbiarivervision.org. Thanks--

Who is ---*--- 10.Apr.2005 14:09

Tom tduncan@pacifier.com

Warrenton needs all the help it can get -- as does Portland. Portland has been Enronned, and all the smugness of the likes of the previous poster won't erase that reality. The corporations are simply smarter and more powerful than the "progressives" -- at least for now. That isn't necessarily a permanent state of affairs, however, as power causes pride, and pride goeth before a fall.

Patrick McGee's personal blog doesn't pretend to be anything else. Locally, a few of us use it as a forum for refining ideas. It isn't an organ for proselytising, and we all recognize that it is a private hobbyhorse.

Letters might be helpful, as suggested by ---*---, but in general, they are easy to file, and that is mostly what happens. Attending public meetings is similarly easily dismissed by the authorities. There is no intention whatever on the part of local governments to have anything like a "dialog" with the public. If such a thing ever existed (I personally harbor serious doubts about that, and suspect that "democracy" has always been an unfulfilled expectation) it certainly does not exist now. In the words of the immortal John Birch Society "This is a Republic, not a Democracy-- let's keep it that way." A whole lot of ordinary Americans really don't believe in "democracy" and are unwilling to put in the hard work needed to make it work.

Finally, the only real "democratic" (with no respect to the Democratic Party) is to carry the fight to the streets. This will take patient organizing and courage on the part of a lot of people who are used to priviledge, but are threatened with loss of those priviledges if they defy authority.

This is truly a "crisis" -- in the root meaning of the term. We are at a crossroads with our democracy.

Your ideas are Vague 10.Apr.2005 21:12


If you are so used to one another "refining" ideas why are you so pissy to ...*... 's comments and calling him snug? And exactly what is it you are "taking to the streets"? Posters? Oh, that'll scare a pirate.

The post from "Kenny Lay" said, "ALL INTERESTED PERSONS MAY SUBMIT written comments for or against the request by mailing letters to t;he Warrenton Planning Department, PO Box 250, Warrenton, OR 97146. Written comments may also be dropped off at Warrenton City Hall, 225 S. Main Ave., during 8:30AM to 5:00PM business hours. All written comments must be received no later than 5:00 PM on April 28, 2005. After the comment period closes, the Warrenton Zoning Administrator shall issue a Type II administrative decision for this matter."

Furthermore: "The applicant and any party who requested or received mailed notice or who participated in the proceedings through submission of written evidence may appeal the interpretation to the Planning Commission within 14 days after the interpretation is mailed."

In response ...*... posted the suggestion for people to write in (sumbit comments) to tie the process up. By their own declaration the Planning Department can't just file the letters, they have to read them and if they still go ahead with the approval then every single person who wrote in can appeal. If you really do have 200 people activated then that is 200 appeals that the planning department will have to process. That is A LOT of work, it will take time and money to process that many appeals, and the threat, alone, of processing that many appeals will nake the planning department think twice about approving of the request.

Those of us here might, if we haven't been too "Enronned," have a good suggestion or two. If you didn't think so why did you bother posting here in the first place?

Please come to the Earth Day Forum, "wondering" 10.Apr.2005 22:01

We are busy in Astoria/Warrenton, and need help

A bunch of us, all ages and idealogical persuasions, are really working hard here in Warrenton/Astoria to bring the issues of loss of democracy, loss of local control to transnational corporations and the government, militarization and Enronization to a focus in our communities. A large group of citizens was successful in completely dismantleing the first--and only "Citizen"s Advisory panel" meeting marketing session developed by the Port of Astoria/Calpine in early January. We were successful in hounding the local PR hack for Calpine to quit the job,in late February. We are spending thousands of our own dollars, we are out on the streets canvassing, we go door-to-door in neighborhoods, and ask business owners for support(most people don't want this--remember that). There are posters and yard signs and bumper stickers all over town, and a hundred people turned out ot see the film, The End of Suburbia, a couple of weeks ago.We write letters to the editors of all the local papers, and to the Oregonian(they get published every week in the local papers, but not in the Bore). We writing letters to all of our elected representatives and visitng them at all the "Town Hall meetings" they have. We have visited some of them in Salem. We have gotten the brush-off. Ron Wyden says that LNG siting is not a federal issue. Betsy Johnson(Oregon State Senator) suggest we contact the US Coast Guard--we have, and they refuse to discuss DHS plans for LNG "security"--US Coast Guard is now under the control of the Department of Homeland Security, and is being run by an outfit called Integrated Coast Guard Systems, an amalgamation of weapons manufacturers Northrupp-Grumman and Lockheed-Martin. The US Coast Guard now has five Jayhawk military helicopters, complete with automatic weapons, deployed for use at unspeicfied locations, including LNG receiving facilities(Boston Globe, April 2, 2005). David Wu, in an unguarded moment in Clastkanie at a March 12 meeting, told us , "The only way that LNG can be pencilled out economicallyis for LNG (stored on the Columiba River) to be supplied to California". He said this shortly after he had told us he didn't know anything about LNG. We go to all the public meetings of all the elected bodies in the county, and ask about LNG. The Daily Astorian newspaper was doing a good job covering the LNG scam until after its top-of-the-fold expose, "Calpine: Who Knew What, When?" of early March. Since then, their coverage has decreased noticeably in quality, though the excellent Letters to the Editor continue to be published, several each week. With four proposals now for the mouth of the Columiba, and with overt collusion between the local state, adn federal governments with the transnational petroleum corporations, we fear that the Columbia River is in danger of becoming the US West Coast LNG hub.

Please get involved. As you can see, the LNG economy is way beyond a local issue, and if people in Portland would be willing to help, we could keep this tax-payer subsidized boondoggle out of the Columbia River for sure.