CCA weighs in on contract to allow local water to be used by fossil fuel plant developers
By Will
Collette
Photo by Bob Plain, RI's Future on protest by tribal members |
It included draft testimony (read below) that is to be presented tonight (October 10) to the state Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) by Charlestown’s redoubtable Planning Commissar Ruth Platner.
The
testimony is against an apparent agreement between some leaders of the Narragansett Indian
Tribe and Invenergy Thermal Development, developer of the
controversial proposed Burrillville fossil fuel power plant, to serve as a back-up
water source.
Invenergy must show it has access to adequate water sources to meet permitting requirements.
Burrillville
and other northern RI municipalities declined to provide Invenergy that
back-up water guarantee, except Johnston. Johnston wants to offer Invenergy Providence water
from the Scituate Reservoir as the source, much to the dismay of everyone fighting the plant and in face of a
challenge from Providence.
Since Johnston's water deal may not work out, Invenergy needed someone
else to sign up as a back-up provider and that’s where the
Narragansetts come in.
They have water rights on their land to draw from the aquifers from which we ALL draw our water.
The Providence Journal was the first to go public on September 28 that the Tribal Government had done the deal and we covered it that night.
Then our colleague Tim Faulkner at EcoRI confirmed the deal and got Tribal Medicine Man John Brown to go on the record giving his reasons why the Tribe took an undisclosed amount of money from the company. In a nutshell: “What else would you have us do?”
Bill
Plain, our colleague at Rhode Island’s Future, covered a protest against the water deal and spoke
to prominent Narragansett leaders who characterize the deal as illegitimate.
From the remarks recorded by Bob at the protest, it looks like the Tribe is
about to undergo another round of internal struggle.
It’s
taken more than a week since the first public reports for the normally quick-draw opposition to emerge from the
Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA Party) who own every elected official in
Charlestown.
Here is
Virginia Lee’s e-mail:
From: Virginia Lee <virginia.lee@charlestownri.org>
Date: Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 2:49 PM
Subject: Please speak out at the Energy Facilities Siting Board meeting Tuesday night 10/10.
To: Jean Gagnier <jgagnier@westerlyri.gov>, Frank Landolfi <ftlandolfi@cox.net>, Gary Wright <gdwright60@verizon.net>, Paul Machaud <pm55919cm@cox.net>, Dinalyn Spears <dspears@nitribe.org>
Cc: Derrik Kennedy <dkennedy@westerlyri.gov>, Ken Burke <kenny_burke@uri.edu>, Kathy Crawley <kathleen.crawley@wrb.ri.gov>, Karen Jarret <kljarret153@gmail.com>, Julia Landstreet <julia.landstreet@sklt.org>, Kelly Presley <execdir@westerlylandtrust.org>
The
Narragansett Indian Tribe has evidently signed a contract with Invenergy to
provide water to the power plant the company is proposing to build in
Burrillville RI. We just heard about the water withdrawal in the press last
Friday but have not seen any documents nor the contract and the public hearing
is this Tuesday night, the same night as our Charlestown Town Council monthly
meeting. The Town of Charlestown was not notified in advance, still has not
been notified, yet the water is coming from wells in our town that may draw
down the water table and potentially affect the sole source aquifer designated
by EPA for all of our towns. The EFSB should now hold a public hearing in
Charlestown, as an effected party; probably in your town too.
Have
you been notified? Do you have any policy or regulation regarding inter-basin
transfer of water?
Attached,
FYI, is a rough draft of a statement that the head of our planning commission
will be making. I urge you to attend.
Best
regards,
Virginia
Virginia
The
style and content of the draft statement (below) closely resemble other documents I
have seen produced by Planning Commissar Platner. I can almost hear her
fingernails-on-chalkboard delivery of the words as I read them.
The
statement leads with the claim that the water in question belongs to the town
of Charlestown, an assertion that may not gain agreement from the Narragansett Indian Tribe which views their land as sovereign tribal land.
In no part of the Invenergy materials released to date is there any statement the water would be drawn from any location other than tribal lands.
In no part of the Invenergy materials released to date is there any statement the water would be drawn from any location other than tribal lands.
Of
course, that means the water will come from the underground aquifer that supplies all drinking water wells Charlestown residents use.
The
draft is also filled with pique over process and notification. In that respect,
it resembles Charlestown’s early
statements in
opposition to the now-dead Amtrak plan to cut a new Old Saybrook to Kenyon
Bypass through the northern part of Charlestown. Now as then, Charlestown
claims to have been blind-sided though that is not quite the whole story.
In the
case of the Bypass, to cover for the fact that Charlestown town officials
weren’t paying attention to material sent to them, we blamed Amtrak for not giving us a hand-delivered
copy of their plans on a golden pillow.
In this
instance, we pay attorney Joe Larisa $25,000 a year to watch the
Narragansett Tribe’s every movement but clearly he missed this one.
His latest bills to the town show he put in more
time monitoring the Tribe’s internal conflicts than most other matters.
But if we want to get picky about process and notice, it seems odd that Virginia Lee waited to send her e-mail about the October 10 EFSB hearing until later afternoon, Friday October 6.
I'd say that also is a pretty good example of inadequate notice.
But if we want to get picky about process and notice, it seems odd that Virginia Lee waited to send her e-mail about the October 10 EFSB hearing until later afternoon, Friday October 6.
I'd say that also is a pretty good example of inadequate notice.
Anyway,
here’s the draft. After you have read it, let’s see what other ways we can make
a stronger case for Charlestown.
Copy of the draft:
The Energy Facilities Siting Board
should not allow the developers of the Invenergy power plant to use an
agreement to withdraw groundwater from the Town of Charlestown to satisfy any
requirement for a backup water supply.
Narragansett
Tribal Settlement Land and some other parcels owned by the tribe are entirely
within the municipal boundaries of the Town of Charlestown.
On
the date Invenergy Thermal Development signed a contract with the government of
the Narragansett Tribe to supply water to Invenergy’s power plant, the Town of
Charlestown became an affected town.
Despite being an affected town,
Charlestown has not yet received any notice from Invenergy or from the Energy Facilities Siting Board that
they have an interest in these proceedings. In fact the timing of the knowledge
of the potential water withdrawal and the date of this hearing have worked to
exclude the Town of Charlestown from participating in any official way.
Individual
members of the community and town government first had an opportunity to learn
a little about this when news media reported the agreement to withdraw water
from Charlestown on September 29.
Rhode
Island’s Open Meetings Act does not allow Town Council members to talk to each
other outside of advertised public meetings. The first opportunity for all the
members of the Charlestown Town Council to learn the details of this proposal,
receive legal advice, and discuss this issue with each other is tonight at
their Town Council meeting where the issue of Invenergy’s plan to use water
from Charlestown is on their agenda for discussion and vote and possible
action.
Their
first opportunity for a Town Council discussion is tonight, your meeting is
tonight, the extremely short time frame between awareness of this issue and
tonight’s meeting has made their participation here impossible.
There
has never been any formal notice to Charlestown by the Siting Board that we are
a stake-holder in these proceedings. As an affected community the Siting Board
is required not just to notice us, but to hold a public hearing in Charlestown
before you close your hearings and make a decision. Pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-98-9.1(b), the Board is required to
“have at least one public hearing in each town or city affected prior to
holding its own hearings and prior to taking final action on the application.
When the Energy Facilities Siting Board holds
that hearing in Charlestown you will learn in detail the importance of our
aquifers, ground, and surface waters. Tribal land in Charlestown is in both the
Coastal Ponds watershed and in the watershed of the Pawcatuck River. The
Pawcatuck River is nominated by Congress as Wild and Scenic River and the
Coastal Ponds are considered to have global significance and are home to a
National Wildlife Refuge. Wherever this water is withdrawn in Charlestown it
has the potential to impact natural resources of national significance. These
are resources important to wildlife, recreation, and Rhode Island’s tourism
economy.
Charlestown
does not have a public water system. All residents and businesses get their
water from private wells that depend on the high quality and quantity of groundwater.
In Charlestown, water withdrawn from the ground is returned to the same basin.
Charlestown has objected in the past to any transfer of water out of town or
from one basin to another. CRMC rules do not allow the transfer of water from
one coastal pond’s watershed to another. Charlestown, RIDEM, US Fish and
Wildlife Service, The Nature Conservancy and others have spent millions of
dollars to permanently protect thousands of acres of land in Charlestown. Much
of the basis for that protection has been to protect ground and surface waters.
Water
is very important in Charlestown. Before withdrawing water from Charlestown you
need to hear from our Town Council, from our legal council [SIC – it’s “counsel”], from our
Planning Commission, from our Conservation Commission, from CRMC, from US Fish
and Wildlife Service, from large landowners like The Nature Conservancy, from
the Charlestown land trust, and certainly from the members of the Narragansett.
But without notice and proper engagement all of those stake holders have been
excluded from this process.
I agree it is important to detail Charlestown’s complex environment and the central role of groundwater in our town. However, these points can and probably will be easily rebutted by noting the deal only calls for a transfer of around 15,000 gallons per day on an as needed basis.
That’s not enough to put much of dent in local water supplies, except perhaps very near the well that might be used.
Every summer, Cathy and I deal with what we call the Burlingame Effect where our well water has more sediment than the rest of the year. We blame water draw from the campgrounds a short distance north of us for a recurring phenomenon that coincides with camping season. It costs us an extra water sediment filter.
Though
this plan to draw water shared by all of us in Charlestown could be our “ticket
of admission” to official standing in the fight against the
Burrillville power plant, I hope we also voice our strong opposition to the
plant itself for what it is.
The
Invenergy project takes Rhode Island in the wrong direction. We need to stop relying on
fossil fuel and switch to green energy. It is our best, perhaps only, hope to
slow down climate change. Blocking Invenergy is part of that process.
Charlestown
is far more threatened by loss of land and water from climate-change driven sea
level rise and from more frequent and intense storms than we are from the draw
of 15,000 gallons of groundwater.
We need
to stop the Invenergy plant itself, not just because of those 15,000 gallons, but
because of more profound Big Picture problems.
This is
not some radical fringe, lefty-pinko position. In fact, the Town Council adopted a resolution on December 12, 2016 to oppose the Invenergy power plant proposal.
TOWN OF
CHARLESTOWN, RI
RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE SITING OF THE
CLEAR RIVER ENERGY CENTER IN BURRILLVILLE, RI
WHEREAS, on
October 29, 2015 Invenergy Thermal Development LLC filed an application to
Construct the Clear River Energy Center Power Plant in Burrillville, RI with
the Rhode Island Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB); and
WHEREAS, in the
months since the filing of that application, the Town of Burrillville has
conducted extensive study of the application with and through credentialed
professionals, including studies of noise, water, traffic and air quality,
among others; and
WHEREAS, after
considering expert testimony and conducting thorough public hearing the
Burrillville Planning Board and Zoning Board of Review have advised the EFSB
that Burrillville, RI is not a suitable site for the Clear River Energy Center;
and
WHEREAS, the
Burrillville Building Inspector and Burrillville Tax Assessor, have also
submitted advisory opinions to the EFSB expressing the impact the proposed
Clear River Energy Center would have on the Town of Burrillville; and
WHEREAS, during
the past eleven months, many citizens of the Rhode Island, as well as our
neighboring communities in Massachusetts and Connecticut, have expressed clear
opposition to the siting of the Clear River Energy Center for reasons including
the impacts on property, environment, water and traffic; and
WHEREAS, the
Charlestown Town Council joins with the citizens and officials of the Town of
Burrillville as well as residents throughout the State of Rhode expressing
concerns and objections to the siting of the Clear River Energy Center in
Burrillville, RI.
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED that we, the Town Council of the Town of Charlestown, RI, do
hereby oppose the siting of the Clear River Energy Center in Burrillville, RI.
BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that this resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Charlestown,
RI, be submitted to the Rhode Island Energy Facility Siting Board for
consideration during their hearings on Invenergy Thermal Development LLC’s
application to construct the Clear River Energy Center power plant in
Burrillville, RI.
By resolution of the Charlestown Town Council
At
a meeting duly held on December 12, 2016.
If
it was my statement to give, I would lead with the town’s complete opposition
to the power plant and to any deal by anybody that enables that project to
proceed.
The commitment of our water, in any amount, to this project should give us official standing in the proceedings, but it is our very existence as a coastal community that is at stake unless we draw the line against further fossil fuel development.
The commitment of our water, in any amount, to this project should give us official standing in the proceedings, but it is our very existence as a coastal community that is at stake unless we draw the line against further fossil fuel development.
That's the Big Picture and I
believe that is why we must fight.