Coos County Watchdog


  • Home >>>
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Links
    • Whistle-Blower’s Page
  • Blog >>>
    • Info Blogs
  • Issues >>>
    • Johnson Creek Dam
    • Jury Nullification >
      • Jury Nullification on Facebook
    • More Choices in Bandon
    • NO Bandon Marsh Expansion >
      • Bandon Marsh Expansion on Facebook
    • Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance >
      • S.A.S.O on FB
    • State of Jefferson >
      • State of Jefferson on Facebook
    • The Coos County Charter
    • Urban Renewal Information

Federal Register ~ JCEP Notice of Draft EIS Available for Public Comment

4/5/2019

Comments

 
Picture

​Jordan Cove Energy Project LP, Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Jordan Cove Energy Project

The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) with the participation of the cooperating agencies listed below, has prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Jordan Cove Liquefied Natural Gas Project proposed by Jordan Cove Energy Project LP (Jordan Cove) and the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project proposed by Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline L.P. (Pacific Connector) (collectively referred to as the Jordan Cove Energy Project or Project). Under Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), Jordan Cove requests authorization to liquefy at a terminal in Coos Bay, Oregon up to 1.04 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day for export for to overseas markets. Pacific Connector seeks a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under Section 7 of the NGA to construct and operate an interstate natural gas transmission pipeline providing about 1.2 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas from the Malin hub to the Jordan Cove terminal, crossing portions of Klamath, Jackson, Douglas, and Coos Counties, Oregon.

The draft EIS assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). As described in the draft EIS, the FERC staff concludes that approval of the Project would result in a number of significant environmental impacts; however, the majority of impacts would be less than significant because of the impact avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures proposed by Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector and those recommended by staff in the draft EIS.

The United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM); U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service); Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation); U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service; U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service; U.S. Department of Homeland Security Coast Guard; the Coquille Indian Tribe; and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration within the U.S. Department of Transportation participated as cooperating agencies in preparation of this EIS. Cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA analysis. The cooperating agencies provided input into the conclusions and recommendations presented in the draft EIS. Following issuance of the final EIS, the cooperating agencies will issue subsequent decisions, determinations, permits or authorizations for the Project in accordance with each individual agency's regulatory requirements.

The BLM, with the concurrence of the Forest Service and Reclamation, would adopt and use the EIS to consider issuing a right-of-way grant for the portion of the Project on federal lands. Other cooperating agencies would use this EIS in their regulatory process, and to satisfy compliance with NEPA and other related federal environmental laws (e.g., the National Historic Preservation Act).

The BLM and the Forest Service would also use this EIS to evaluate proposed amendments to their District or National Forest land management plans that would make provision for the Pacific Connector pipeline. In order to consider the Pacific Connector right-of-way grant, the BLM must amend the affected Resource Management Plans (RMPs). The BLM therefore proposes to amend the RMPs to re-allocate all lands within the proposed temporary use area and right-of-way to a District-Designated Reserve, with management direction to manage the lands for the purposes of the Pacific Connector right-of-way. Approximately 885 acres would be re-allocated. District-Designated Reserve allocations establish specific management for a specific use or to protect specific values and resources. In accordance with Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 36 CFR 219.16, the Forest Service gives notice of its intent to consider amendments of Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMP) for the Umpqua, Rogue River and Winema National Forests. Proposed amendments of LRMPs include reallocation of matrix lands to Late Successional Reserves and site-specific exemptions from standards and guidelines and other LRMP requirements to allow construction of the Pacific Connector pipeline. Exemptions from standards and guidelines include requirements to protect known sites of Survey and Manage species, changes in visual quality objectives at specific locations, limitations on detrimental soil conditions, removal of effective shade at perennial stream crossings and the construction of utility corridors in riparian areas. Further information on Forest Service LRMP amendments is included below.

The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability of the draft EIS to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Indian Tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and groups; and newspapers and libraries in the Project area. The draft EIS is only available in electronic format. It may be viewed and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the Environmental Documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/​industries/​gas/​enviro/​eis.asp). In addition, the draft EIS may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click on the eLibrary link (https://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​elibrary.asp), click on General Search, and enter the docket Start Printed Page 13649number in the “Docket Number” field, excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP17-494 or CP17-495). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

Any person wishing to comment on the draft EIS may do so. Your comments should focus on the draft EIS's disclosure and discussion of potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. To ensure consideration of your comments on the proposal in the final EIS, it is important that the Commission receive your comments on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 5, 2019.
​
For your convenience, there are four methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission.[1] The Commission will provide equal consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form or provided verbally. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov. Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

(1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

(2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing” as the filing type; or

(3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the Project docket numbers (CP17-494-000 and CP17-495-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426

​(4) In lieu of sending written or electronic comments, the Commission invites you to attend a public comment session that will be held in the Project area to receive comments on the draft EIS. The dates, locations, and times of these sessions will be provided in a supplemental notice.


Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/​resources/​guides/​how-to/​intervene.asp. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or judicial review of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered. Subsequent decisions, determination, permits, and authorization by the cooperating agencies are subject to the administrative procedures of each respective agency.
​Questions?

Additional information about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​esubscription.asp.

Dated: March 29, 2019.

​Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
Footnotes

1.  The contents of your comment including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information may be made available to the public. While you may request that your personal identifying information be withheld from public view, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Back to Citation [FR Doc. 2019-06715 Filed 4-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

Comments

Opt-Out of the Historical Preservation Designation of Coos Bay

3/1/2019

Comments

 
Opt-Out of the Historical Preservation Designation of Coos Bay

On November 1st 2018, the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians filed an application to place 20 square miles of land surrounding the Coos Bay on the National Register of Historic Places.

The only way to stop the government from listing the area on the National Register of Historic Places is for a majority of affected landowners to file an official Historic District Objection Form with the State of Oregon by May 10, 2019. 

Even though most of the area is submerged, the designation will affect properties inland from the high tide line.  The Tribe is making this proposal for the benefit of keeping the city accountable and to have more authority over their archeological lands. The area includes 158 archaeological and culturally significant sites,

The Parks & Rec Commission forwarded the nomination to the National Register of Historic Places on February 22 at their meeting in The Mill Casino, which the Coquille Indians own.  The people of Coos County have to get the word out for the opt-out. 

The group Coos Concerned Property Owners has opened up an office at 281 South Broadway, in Downtown Coos Bay a few doors down from the Prefontaine mural.  Their hours are Monday thru Friday between 9am to 6pm, or you can go to their website.

 www.coosconcernedpropertyowners.com

Correction:  The Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians have been a Federally Recognized Tribe since October 17th, 1984.  Their homeland includes the estuaries of the Coos Bay, and the Umpqua and Siuslaw Rivers. The Tribes have been operating under a confederated government since the signing of the Treaty of August in 1855.  The Confederated Tribes have continuously maintained an elected governing body from 1916 to present. 
​In 1941, the Bureau of Indian Affairs took a small privately donated parcel (6.12 acres) into trust for the Confederated Tribes in the city of Coos Bay. On this small “reservation”, the BIA also erected a Tribal Hall that included an assembly hall, kitchen, offices and medical clinic. It is still in use today and is on the Register of Historic Places.  However, without their knowledge or consent, they were included in the Western Oregon Termination Act of 1954.
Even though the U.S. government officially terminated them, the Confederated Tribes never sold their small reservation and Tribal Hall, and, instead, maintained it.  On October 17, 1984, President Ronald Reagan restored the Tribes to federal recognition by signing Public Law 98-481. The Tribes’ sovereignty was once again recognized and the US congress restored funding for education, housing and health programs. In 1987, the Tribe approved a constitution and began to lay the groundwork for a self-sufficiency plan.
Picture
Download Objection Form
The form must be notarized before the property owner signs it.  
OPRD ~ State Advisory Committee Meeting Historic Preservation February 22, 2019

Comments

US Senate Expected to Vote on Oregon Wildlands Act a Wyden Bill

2/10/2019

Comments

 
Picture
With the wildfire season approaching, our congressional representatives should be working to accelerate forest management to protect communities throughout Oregon. Yet the U.S. Senate is soon expected to vote on the Oregon Wildlands Act, which creates thousands of acres of new wilderness and land set-asides where thinning and fuels reduction would be restricted.  Click here to tell your representatives and the president that we need more forest management, not less.

One concerning provision in this bill would establish "wild and scenic" designations on dozens of creeks near the Rogue River.  This would greatly restrict fuel reduction activities on these lands, even though many of these creeks don't actually carry water most of the year.  Having lived on the river himself, Curry County Commissioner Court Boice explained why this policy is a bad idea for the river and our economy. 

In a letter to Oregon's congressional delegation, Sen. Herman Baertshiger also raised concerns that restricting the ability of federal land managers to reduce fuels would leave his hometown of Grants Pass and other nearby communities, "vulnerable to catastrophic wildfires similar to those California experienced last year." 

A recent study by the U.S. Forest Service found that thousands of homes in Southwest Oregon are at risk of wildfire.  Merlin, a small community near the Rogue River, was deemed to be at the greatest risk of wildfire of any town or city in the nation. During this unprecedented wildfire and smoke crisis, Congress should make it easier for federal lands to be managed, not more difficult. 

Click here and send an urgent message today that the Oregon Wildlands Act is the wrong solution, at the wrong time, to protect these lands and nearby communities.  ​


Comments

CC Planning Notice of Hearing JCEP 1:30pm Friday February 1, 2019 Owen Building

1/20/2019

Comments

 
Picture
Picture
Picture
Comments

Coos County BOC "Smart Meter" Ordinance Is A Bad Measure ~ Work Session Tues.

1/10/2019

Comments

 
Hello Everyone,
After reading over the new draft of the "Smart Meter" ordinance it became obvious that it did not have an Opt-Out option, so this measure is a useless piece of legislation.  The people of Coos County will have to step up and speak out for the opt-out option for all residents.....Rob T.  

Coos County Commissioners Release Draft of "Smart Meter" Ordinance ​

​BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 250 No. Baxter Street, Coquille, Oregon 9742

 Tuesday, January 15: 6:00 PM Hearing- Amending the Coos County Code to Promulgate Rules & Regulations Protecting County Citizens from Arbitrary and Excessive Utility Charges- Owen Building large conference room
Hello Randal,

Would you please look over the new Smart Meter ordinance from the county BOC.  They don't have it on the agenda, but that is a SM ordinance.  

However, the Board makes it for hardship cases and they get to set the criteria on what is a hardship case.  Please read it thoroughly.   
Sincerely,
Rob Taylor
​Hello Rob,
They removed the No Opt Out Fees completely.  The ordinance only changes the current offerings from Pacific Power to customers by being able to choose a non-computerized analog.

The thing that makes this not a choice is the illegal extortion fees.  The ordinance is titles Choice but is not providing that!  The Illegal fees take away peoples choice!

I already intended to focus on this on the 15th.  This happens because people don't focus their comments and information on the fees being illegal.  I have tried over and over to get ones to stop talking about the RF, to no avail.  This is what happens.  This is so important, for the commissioners and legal to see clearly that this is illegal discrimination and in violation of Oregon Law.  We don't want hardship allowances, we want them gone!  The Josephine county ordinance should never have had any Hardship in it.

I am attaching the 2 items that address this head on.

Randy
Randal Barrett NoSmartMeter.org
Smart Meter OP ED

Smart Meters are data gathering and control endpoints of the Smart Grid. The Smart Grid was kicked into gear when the Federal Government passed the Stimulus Bill in Feb 2009 providing an 11 Billion Dollar financial motivation for what we see happening with Smart Meter Deployment nationwide.

​Propaganda of lowering power costs and improving the environment are false promises to hide the real objective of data collection, surveillance and control. Actually, the US Power Grid becomes more insecure with remote access and our environment is harmed by the substantial increase in RF Microwave transmissions. Smart Meters commonly utilize RF Microwave Frequencies similar to cell phones to provide 2 way communications with the utility. This not only puts individual customers at risk of hacking by Bad Actors, but also puts the whole power grid at risk because now your power can be cut remotely. Utilities tell you it is a good thing that your power can be disconnected remotely.

Smart Meters being remotely reprogrammable, having undisclosed capabilities, and completely out of our control, should scare every American who cares about security and safety for their home & family. Think 4th Amendment!

Smart Meters observe your power usage patterns during the day. This exposes activities like when you are home, when you sleep etc. When you consider that detailed data gathering does not benefit the customer at all; and yet makes tremendous profits for utilities and other agencies through Federal Grants and data sales to third parties, you start to see why the corporate leaning regulatory bodies like Oregon Public Utilities Commission are so dead set on forcing this invasive computerized technology on our homes. They levy completely illegal Opt Out Fees and yet are getting away with it in many US States, including Oregon.

Smart Meters do not save the consumer money! It only costs the consumer more and more! Computerized overbilling cannot be disputed successfully since there is no mechanical proof. Overbilling is common. Utility fees go Up and Up after deployment of Smart Meters. Then they will start Time-Of-Use to gouge you some more to keep your home warm or cool.

New Mexico’s Public Regulation Commission rejected the Smart Meter Deployment with Opt Out Fees because it did not benefit the public in any way and all power company claimed benefits to customers were declared false. Smart Meters only cost the customer more with no benefits.

Why did Oregon Public Utilities Commissioners approve and New Mexico’s Public Regulation Commissioners reject? New Mexico has “Elected” Commissioners which held public “Hearings” in which public comments and submitted evidence is allowed and must be included in the record for consideration. Oregon has “Appointed” Commissioners who did not hold public “Hearings” on Pacific Power’s Smart Meter Deployment Application with Opt Out Fees. Oregon PUC only had “meetings” in which public testimony was not allowed. The lack of contrary evidence on the record makes the Oregon PUC feel emboldened to repeat Pacific Power’s lies as if they were true.

The US Supreme Court is the only way to reverse this travesty of citizens being forced to decide between their health, safety and privacy; or; having to pay Extortion Fees that many just cannot afford. US citizens that have removed their smart meter and replaced it with an analog meter, which is completely within their constitutional rights to protect their home with force if necessary, are being convicted of Tampering Laws. Tampering Laws were never enacted to allow a utility to force an invasive harmful device on our homes, and of which they have total control! This is completely in violation of our 4th Amendment Rights and must be the basis of the appeal to the US Supreme Court. The illegal Opt Out Fees that were used to force this invasion on Americans is plain and simple Mafia style Extortion.

Smart Meter OP ED

Although the Opt Out fees are Double Billing, this argument will not hold up legally because they can pass a new budget removing the double billing. That feeling you get in your gut when you know something is wrong, but you just cannot put your finger on it, is totally justified in this case. Reducing costs by eliminating meter readers is a smoke-screen and a lie! The costs to read Smart Meters many times exceeds the costs to read analog meters! To read customers power usage with a Smart Meter, they must install new meters, new antennas, new infrastructure, hire more new personnel than the meter readers they fired, maintain the smart grid infrastructure, etc.

Customers refusing smart meters are being charged Opt Out fees, Meter Reading Fees and Meter installation fees while customers who accept Smart Meters are not being charged additional costs necessary to read their meters, installation fees or any other smart grid expenses! The Oregon Public Utilities Commissioners are bound by Oregon Statutes to insure fair cost based rates to customers; they have violated the law!

We have covered the 2 main issues so far;
1. Our Constitutional Rights to Choice when it comes to our home and safety, were violated.
2. Illegal Extortionary means were utilized.

Additional risks of Smart Meters not presented into evidence at Oregon Public Utilities Commission meetings are numerous.

Exposure to RF Microwaves 24/7. Despite the thousands of studies clearly showing the harm of non-ionizing RF Microwave exposure, this technology is being forced on our homes without our informed consent, exposing us to high power RF Microwave pulses every few seconds, 10,000 to 190,000 times a day.

Smart Meter Fires due to internal failure. Utilities divert attention away from this extreme risk to life and property by blaming fires on Hot Sockets and faulty wiring, accepting no responsibility and providing no insurance for Smart Meters. Smart Meter fires are well documented and still happening. In the first 6 months of 2018 British Columbia had 60 Smart Meter fires. Analog Meters never catch on fire!

Citizens in the U.S. are supposed to be protected by the constitution. The Right to refuse this fire risk on our homes is being taken away! The financial hardship of Opt Out Fees is just too much for many and people were not informed of the dangers. There is purposeful deception & lying taking place which is depriving the public of critical information that directly affects their family’s safety!

What will they put inside these meters forced onto our homes next? 5G? More advanced spying and control technology? How can we Stop this Invasion on our homes?

Band every County and City in your state together in a class action law suit against your states Utility Commission! Educate your county commissioners and legal counsel. The combining of legal teams means no more running out of money to force this to the US Supreme Court.

Join with Josephine County Oregon in doing ordinances to stop smart meters. Force the US Supreme Court to Rule on Our Right to Refuse Computerized Technology being forced on our homes.

We must stand up and win this or our rights as Americans will be gone forever ! !

Randal Barrett,
​Advocate NoSmartMeter.org
​Laws binding on OPUC Commissioners:
756.040 General powers.
(1) In addition to the powers and duties now or hereafter transferred to or vested in the
Public Utility Commission, the commission shall represent the customers of any public utility or tele-communications utility and the public generally in all controversies respecting rates, valuations, service and all matters of which the commission has jurisdiction. In respect thereof the commission shall make use of the jurisdiction and powers of the office to protect such customers, and the public generally, from unjust and unreasonable exactions and practices and to obtain for them adequate service at fair and reasonable rates.
The commission shall balance the interests of the utility investor and the consumer in establishing fair and reasonable rates. Rates are fair and reasonable for the purposes of this subsection if the rates provide adequate revenue both for operating expenses of the public utility or telecommunications utility and for capital costs of the utility, with a return to the equity holder that is:
Laws Utilities are bound by:
757.020 Duty of utilities to furnish adequate and safe service at reasonable rates. Every public utility is required to furnish adequate and safe service, equipment and facilities, and the charges made by any public utility for any service rendered or to be rendered in connection therewith shall be reasonable and just, and every unjust or unreasonable charge for such service is prohibited.
757.210 Hearing to establish new schedules; alternative regulation plan.
(1)(a) Whenever any public utility files with the Public Utility Commission any rate or schedule of rates stating or establishing a new rate or schedule of rates or increasing an existing rate or schedule of rates, the commission may, either upon written complaint or upon the commission’s own initiative, after reasonable notice, conduct a hearing to determine whether the rate or schedule is fair, just and reasonable. The commission shall conduct the hearing upon written complaint filed by the utility, its customer or customers, or any other proper party within 60 days of the utility’s filing; provided that no hearing need be held if the particular rate change is the result of an automatic adjustment clause. At the hearing the utility shall bear the burden of showing that the rate or schedule of rates proposed to be established or increased or changed is fair, just and reasonable. The commission may not authorize a rate or schedule of rates that is not fair, just and reasonable.
(b) As used in this subsection, “automatic adjustment clause” means a provision of a rate schedule that provides for rate increases or decreases or both, without prior hearing, reflecting increases or decreases or both in costs incurred, taxes paid to units of government or revenues earned by a utility and that is subject to review by the commission at least once every two years. (2)(a) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to rate changes under an approved alternative form of regulation plan, including a resource rate plan under ORS 757.212.
(b) Any alternative form of regulation plan shall include provisions to ensure that the plan
operates in the interests of utility customers and the public generally and results in rates that
are just and reasonable and may include provisions establishing a reasonable range for rate of
return on investment. In approving a plan, the commission shall, at a minimum, consider
whether the plan:
(A)
Promotes increased efficiencies and cost control;
(B) Is consistent with least-cost resources acquisition policies;
(C) Yields rates that are consistent with those that would be obtained following application
of ORS 757.269;
(D) Is consistent with maintenance of safe, adequate and reliable service; and
(E) Is beneficial to utility customers generally, for example, by minimizing utility rates.
(c) As used in this subsection, “alternative form of regulation plan” means a
Plan adopted by the commission upon petition by
a public utility, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, that sets rates and revenues and
a method for changes in rates and revenues using alternatives to cost-of-service rate
regulation.
(d) Prior to implementing a rate change under an alternative form of regulation plan, the
utility shall present a report that demonstrates the calculation of any proposed rate change at
a public meeting of the commission.
(3)
Except as provided in ORS 757.212, the commission, at any time, may order a utility to
appear and establish that any, or all, of its rates in a plan authorized under subsection (2) of
this section are in conformity with the plan and are just and reasonable. Except as provided
in ORS 757.212, such rates, and the alternative form of regulation plan under which the rates
are set, also shall be subject to complaint under ORS 756.500.
(4) Periodically, but not less often thanevery two years after the implementation of a plan
referred to in subsection (2) of this section, the commission shall submit a reportto the
Legislative Assembly that shows the Title 57 Page 28 (2015 Edition)
UTILITY REGULATION GENERALLY
757.212 impact of the plan on rates paid by utility customers.
(5)
The commission and staff may consult at any time with, and provide technical assistance to,
utilities, their customers, and other interested parties on matters relevant to utility rates and
charges. If a hearing is held with respect to a rate change, the commission’s decisions shall
be based on the record made at the hearing.
757.225 Utilities required to collect for their services in accordance with schedules.
No public utility shall charge, demand, collect or receive a greater or less compensation for
any service performed by it within the state, or for any service in connection therewith, than
is specified in printed rates schedules as may at the time be in force, or demand, collect or
receive any rate not specified in such schedule. The rates named therein are the lawful rates
until they are changed as provided in ORS 757.210 to 757.220.
757.227
Rate mitigation for certain electric company rate increases.
(1) As used in this section, “electric company” has the meaning given that term in ORS
757.600.
(2) The Public Utility Commission shall require that an electric company mitigate a rate
increase payable by a class of customers described in subsection (5) of this section if:
(a) The increase results from a transition to an electric company’s generally applicable costbased
rate from the rates established under the contracts described in subsection (5) of this
section; and
(b) The increase in the cost of electricity to that class of customers by reason of the transition
will exceed 50 percent during the first 12 calendar months after the transition occurs.
(3) The commission shall require an electric company to mitigate a rate increase under this
section by means of a schedule of rate credits for the class of customers described in
subsection (5) of this section. The rate credits provided by an electric company under the
schedule shall automatically decrease each year to the lowest credit necessary to avoid a rate
increase that is greater than 50 percent in any subsequent year. Rate credits under this section
may not be provided for more than seven years after the transition occurs.
(4) For the purpose of determining the increase in the cost of electricity to a class of
customers by reason of a transition described in subsection (2)(a) of this section,
the commission shall:
(a) Include the total charges for electricity service, including all special charges and credits
other than the rate credit provided under this section; and
(b) Exclude any local taxes or fees paid by the class of customers.
(5) This section applies only to customers of an electric company that purchase electricity at
metering points that before the transition described in subsection
(2)(a) of this section were eligible for rates that were set under contracts entered into before
1960 and remained unchanged throughout the period of the contract.
(6) The full cost of providing rate credits under this section shall be spread equally among all
other customers of the electric company.
[2005 c.594 §3]
757.355 Costs of property not presently providing utility service excluded from rate base;
exception.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a public utility may not, directly or
indirectly, by any device, charge, demand, collect or receive from any customer rates that
include the costs of construction, building, installation or real or personal property not
presently used for providing utility service to the customer.
(2)
The Public Utility Commission may allow rates for a water utility that include the costs of a
specific capital improvement if the water utility is required to use the additional revenues
solely for the purpose of completing the capital improvement.
757.755 Termination of residential electric or natural gas service prohibited; rules of
commission.
(1) The Public Utility Commission of Oregon shall establish rules to prohibit the termination
of residential electric or natural gas service when such termination would significantly
endanger the physical health of the residential consumer.
(2) The commission shall provide by rule a method for determining when the termination of
residential electric or natural gas service would significantly endanger the physical health of
the residential consumer.
CUB
774.020 Policy. The people of the State of Oregon hereby find that utility consumers need an
effective advocate to assure that public policies affecting the quality and price of utility services
reflect their needs and interests, that utility consumers have the right to form an organization
which will represent their interests before legislative, administrative and judicial bodies, and
that utility consumers need a convenient manner of contributing to the funding of such an
organization so that it can advocate forcefully and vigorously on their behalf concerning all
matters of public policy affecting their health, welfare and economic well-being.
[1985 c.1 §1]
774.030 Citizens’ Utility Board; powers.
(1) The Citizens’ Utility Board is hereby created as an independent nonprofit public corporation
and is authorized to carry out the provisions of this chapter.
(2) The Citizens’ Utility Board has perpetual succession and it may sue and be sued, and may in
its own name purchase and dispose of any interest in real and personal property, and shall have
such other powers as are granted to corporations by ORS 65.077. No part of its net earnings
shall inure to the benefit of any individual or member of the Citizens’ Utility Board.
(3) The Citizens’ Utility Board shall have all rights and powers necessary to represent and
protect the interests of utility consumers, including but not limited to the following powers:
(a) To conduct, fund or contract for research, studies, plans, investigations, demonstration
projects and surveys.
(b) To represent the interests of utility consumers before legislative, administrative and judicial
bodies.
(c) To accept grants, contributions and appropriations from any source, and to contract for
services.
(d) To adopt and modify bylaws governing the activities of the Citizens’ Utility Board.
[1985 c.1 §3; 1989 c.1010 §179]
Related Posts:
Coos County Commissioners Release Draft of "Smart Meter" Ordinance ​
NO Smart Meter Meeting NB Library Thursday November 1, 2018


Comments

North Bend School Board Community Focus Group Meeting Tuesday Jan 8, 2019

1/2/2019

Comments

 

NORTH BEND SD BOARD OF DIRECTORS -
SUPERINTENDENT SEARCH COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP -
JANUARY 8 AT 6:00 P.M.

News Release from North Bend Sch. Dist.

Posted on FlashAlert: January 2nd, 2019 1:47 PM
The North Bend School Board will begin its community outreach regarding the ongoing superintendent search starting with focus groups on January 8th and 9th. In an effort to collect information about what characteristics the community, staff, students and partners desire in the next superintendent of North Bend School District, the search executives will be meeting with multiple groups over a two-day period. 
​
The North Bend Board of Directors is inviting all members of the community to participate in a community forum to be held:
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
from 6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. at the North Bend School District Hall of Champions
which is located in the High School Gym parking lot. 

Please consider attending to share your thoughts to help the Board identify the right individual to lead the District into the next chapter.
​
Contact Info:
Cheri Schreiber,
Board Secretary
541-751-6797
cschreiber@nbend.k12.or.us

Comments

Oregon Dept of State Lands Public Hearings for Jordan Cove Project in January

12/21/2018

Comments

 
Picture

PUBLIC ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND UPCOMING PUBLIC COMMENT HEARINGS FOR JORDAN COVE ENERGY PROJECT REMOVAL-FILL PERMIT APPLICATION

​News Release from Oregon Dept. of State Lands

Posted on FlashAlert: December 21st, 2018 4:03 PM


Five public hearings will be held between Jan. 7 and 15 to hear comment on the removal-fill permit application for the proposed Jordan Cove Energy Project.  

In order to protect Oregon's water resources, the state removal-fill law requires projects that remove or fill material in wetlands or waterways to obtain a permit from the Department of State Lands (DSL). Input received during the permit application public comment period is used to determine what additional information the applicant may be required to provide, what issues the applicant may need to address, and ultimately to inform the Department’s permit decision.  
DSL will hold five public hearings to hear comment on the application: 
•    Klamath Falls: Monday, Jan. 7 from 5:30-8 p.m. at Klamath Falls Community College, Commons Building, 7390 S 6th St.
•    Central Point: Tuesday, Jan. 8 from 5:30-8 p.m. at the Jackson County Expo, Padgham Pavilion, 1 Peninger Rd. 
•    Canyonville: Wednesday, Jan. 9 from 5:30-8 p.m. at Seven Feathers Casino, Cedar Room, 146 Chief Miwaleta Ln.
•    North Bend: Thursday, Jan. 10 from 5:30-8 p.m. at the Mill Casino, Salmon Room West, 3201 Tremont Ave.
•    Salem: Tuesday, Jan. 15 from 5:30-8 p.m. at the Department of Veterans' Affairs, Auditorium, 700 Summer St NE. Please note this is a new location, directly across the street from the original DSL location.  
 
Doors will open at 5:15 p.m. for comment signup to begin. DSL asks that all attendees contribute to a respectful setting and a productive public comment hearing by following the hearing ground rules and comment procedures available on the DSL website: https://www.oregon.gov/dsl/WW/Pages/jordancove.aspx 

Comments may also be submitted to jordancove@dsl.state.or.us, by postal mail, or through a comment form. Full comment submittal information is available on the DSL website. 

The 60-day public review and comment period began Dec. 6, 2018, and ends Feb. 3, 2019, at 5 p.m. All comments must be received by this date and time to be considered. 

The complete application is available for download on the DSL website. Paper copies of the application are also available at the Coos Bay Public Library, the Sutherlin Library, the Winston Branch Library, the Jackson County Library, and the Klamath County Library. 
​
Contact Info:
Ali Ryan Hansen, DSL Communications Manager
ali.r.hansen@state.or.us
503-510-6860 (cell)
Related Posts:
LTE ~ JCEP Expanding its Slick PR Campaign
Community Enhancement Plan Workgroup Meeting Thursday, December 06, 2018
Coos County Commissioners Approve Tax Free Living in Bay Area Enterprise Zone
Coos County Planning Approves Extension Request for LNG Natural Gas Pipeline
Coos County Regular Board Meeting Tues 9:30am Dec. 5, 2017 ~ LNG on Agenda
FERC Notice of EIS for JCEP Public Comments & Meetings ~ Coos Bay June 27, 2017
Coos County Grants One Year Extension Approval for LNG Pipeline for the JCEP
BOC ~ Notice of Deliberation on JCEP Tuesday August 16, 2016
Public Meeting for Coos County April 19 & North Bend April 26, 2016 on JCEP
Open Letter to the Coos County Board of Commissioners Concerning the JCEP
LTE ~ Leshley Don't Know Dick About the JCEP Work Camp
Jody McCaffree Appeals LNG Road Construction Coos County Planning Oct. 9, 2015
Do Enterprise Zones Work? ~ An Ideopolis Policy Paper February 2011
Educational Enterprise Zone Workshop Roseburg OR Thursday, September 17, 2015
Coos County Planning Decisions on LNG & Effected Roads
LTE ~ CEP appears to be great for Canadian Veresen / JCEP
LTE ~ LNG Pipeline Man and His Bag of Money  
LTE ~ Should We Be Worried Dealing with Veresen and the LNG
LTE~ A Package of Rancor for Coos County Commissioner John Sweet
Critique of the BOC Town Hall in Bandon---"PUT IT ON THE BALLOT"
BOC---MGX---Jordon Cove Made Commitment to Pay $30M Annual Taxes Despite EZ  
Public Meetings on South Coast Community Foundation "Put it on the Ballot"
BOC---Public Meeting for Vote on South Coast Community Foundation April 1, 2014
Letter to Editor---South Coast Community Foundation Scam will Top All Past 
MGX---Geddry Slams Koch over Forced Cooperation & Jordon Cove Funding 
League of Oregon Cities Class of Slanted View on History of Urban Renewal in OR 
City of Bandon---Expanding Government Cheese

Comments

Oregon Citizens Lobby ~ Volunteer to be a Bill Analyzer of State Legislation

12/14/2018

Comments

 
Picture
Oregon Citizens Lobby

Legislative Days at the Capitol
December 11th to 14th, 2018

Legislative Organizational Days

January 14th to 17th, 2-192019 Legislative Session

January 22nd to June 30th, 2019
There is no other voice like ours in the Capital. You can be proud to be a part of this movement! 


Check out the updated OCL website.  http://oregoncitizenslobby.org 
The War Room will be every Thursday, Rm 350,  starting February 7, 2019 Come and join us!

Please Volunteer.If you are a returning volunteer please update your profile to improve your experience!

You can Volunteer to:
1.  Adviser (one who may not analyze bills themselves, but lends their expertise in a given area to those who are analyzing bills or writing testimony)
2.  Analyze bills for Track Their Vote website and scoring legislator’s votes
3. Call or legislators on posted bills.
4. Give public testimony at committees.
5.  Participate in War Room efforts (this is literally a room we reserve at the capitol during the legislative session, where we congregate and collaborate on analyzing bills and lobbying)
6.  Write/email legislators
7.  Write letters to the editors
8.  Write testimony for bills
9.  Join the Twitter Brigade @ORcitizen  #orocl

Analyzers and Advisers will be contacted by a Team Leader and receive further instructions and training.


Mission of the Oregon Citizens Lobby
Our mission
 is to help empower Oregonians by monitoring the legislative process in this state. We analyze bills and track them throughout their life cycle. We also track the actions of state representatives and senators as they work through and vote on these bills. The bills and legislators receive a grade based upon the 5 core principles of OCL. If a politician votes in a manner that violates one or more of these principles it is up to them to explain why they did so. We leave the politics to the politicians.

The result of our work is posted at 
Track Their Vote for the public to review.
Our hope is that this information will help citizens better understand proposed legislation which will in turn allow them to give relevant testimony on bills, lobby their legislators, and hold these politicians accountable for their actions.

Five Core Principles
Fiscal Responsibility
Government should have a limited budget that reflects the vitality of the state’s economy.

Local Control
Governmental power and functions should be as close to the citizens as possible for maximum oversight, control, and responsiveness.

Free Markets
Production and prices should be dictated by the laws of supply and demand without the interference of government in the way of subsidies, price controls, or over-burdensome regulation.

Limited Government
Our government should be charged with administering only those functions essential to society and that cannot be performed by private entities.

Personal Choice and Responsibility
Citizens must be free to pursue life, liberty, and property without undue government interference and to reap the rewards or bear the consequences of their decisions.

 
Oregon Citizens lobby
​Communications@oregoncitizenslobby.org

Comments

Community Enhancement Plan Workgroup Meeting Thursday, December 06, 2018

12/3/2018

Comments

 
Picture
AGENDA
Community Enhancement Plan Workgroup

December 6, 2018 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm
Coos Bay City Hall City Council Chambers
2:00 Welcome and Introductions Melissa Cribbins
2:15  Presentation on history of CEP discussions and EZ Agreement
 
2:45 Review of proposed EZ Agreement between Jordan Cove and Sponsors
 
3:00 Review of proposed CEP Agreement between Zone Sponsors
 
3:15 Discussion of EZ Agreement and CEP Agreement
Workgroup Members
 
Public Comment will be taken at the end of the meeting.  Workgroup Members are not approving either agreement, but may make a motion to recommend passing the agreements to their respective governing bodies.  Both Agreements (the EZ Agreement and the CEP) must be approved by all four Zone Sponsors at a duly noticed public meeting.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/569e6f1176d99c4f392858c4/t/5c01abc74fa51ac22714df29/1543613387743/CEP+Presentation+12+06+18.pdf
  • Agenda
  • CEP Overview
  • CEP: Community Advantage
  • Enterprise Zone Agreement
  • Property Tax Example
Related Posts:
Coos County Commissioners Approve Tax Free Living in Bay Area Enterprise Zone
Coos County Planning Approves Extension Request for LNG Natural Gas Pipeline
Coos County Regular Board Meeting Tues 9:30am Dec. 5, 2017 ~ LNG on Agenda
FERC Notice of EIS for JCEP Public Comments & Meetings ~ Coos Bay June 27, 2017
Coos County Grants One Year Extension Approval for LNG Pipeline for the JCEP
BOC ~ Notice of Deliberation on JCEP Tuesday August 16, 2016
Public Meeting for Coos County April 19 & North Bend April 26, 2016 on JCEP
Open Letter to the Coos County Board of Commissioners Concerning the JCEP
LTE ~ Leshley Don't Know Dick About the JCEP Work Camp
Jody McCaffree Appeals LNG Road Construction Coos County Planning Oct. 9, 2015
Do Enterprise Zones Work? ~ An Ideopolis Policy Paper February 2011
Educational Enterprise Zone Workshop Roseburg OR Thursday, September 17, 2015
Coos County Planning Decisions on LNG & Effected Roads
LTE ~ CEP appears to be great for Canadian Veresen / JCEP
LTE ~ LNG Pipeline Man and His Bag of Money  
LTE ~ Should We Be Worried Dealing with Veresen and the LNG
LTE~ A Package of Rancor for Coos County Commissioner John Sweet
Critique of the BOC Town Hall in Bandon---"PUT IT ON THE BALLOT"
BOC---MGX---Jordon Cove Made Commitment to Pay $30M Annual Taxes Despite EZ  
Public Meetings on South Coast Community Foundation "Put it on the Ballot"
BOC---Public Meeting for Vote on South Coast Community Foundation April 1, 2014
Letter to Editor---South Coast Community Foundation Scam will Top All Past 
MGX---Geddry Slams Koch over Forced Cooperation & Jordon Cove Funding 
League of Oregon Cities Class of Slanted View on History of Urban Renewal in OR 
City of Bandon---Expanding Government Cheese
Urban Renewal---King Hales of Portland Master of Government Development
FBI Press Release on Charges Against Local Bandon Developer Michael Drobot
Urban Renewal---Read How Schools suffer to Support Wealthy Foreign Companies
City of Bandon---Local Developer Michael Drobot Admits to Bribery & Conspiracy 
Preserving the American Dream:  Lessons in Beating Boondoggles
Agenda 21---Sustainable Development & Regionalism
City of Bandon---Votes on the renewal of City Manager's Contract

Comments

NO Smart Meter Meeting NB Library Thursday November 1, 2018

10/26/2018

Comments

 
Picture

Comments

Patriot Place Bay Area Chamber of Commerce Ribbon Cutting

8/21/2018

Comments

 
Picture
Come Join the Bay Area Chamber of Commerce, The Campaign to elect Teri Grier to Oregon's House Seat Nine, and the Coos County Republican Central Committee for a ribbon cutting ceremony at our Patriot Place headquarters.
Event catered by Bon Apetit

Comments

Buy a Sign & Support the Right To Keep & Bear Arms! ~ Vote Yes for the SAPO!!!

8/15/2018

Comments

 
Picture
Support the Right To Keep and Bear Arms!
Donate for campaign signs in support of the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance. 
These TEN counties tentatively have a SAPO measure on the November Ballot:

Baker---------- Measure 1-84
Columbia----- Measure 5-270
Douglas------   Measure 10-165
Jackson------   Measure 15-181

Klamath------  Measure 18-110
Lake-----------  Measure 1-84
Linn-----------  Measure 22-174
Lincoln-------  Measure
Umatilla------  Measure
Union---------- Measure 31-96

Put the name of the county on the donation form in the designated space.
The average cost of one 4-foot by 8-foot sign is $35 and a Yard Sign costs $2.75 each. 
The minimum donation is $5.
 

Buy a sign for the campaign so they can put them out.

Disclaimer: These signs will be put out by the campaign and not shipped to any individual donor.
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture

Click the button to donate to
the Campaign to Preserve the Second Amendment

DONATE

OR
​People can send a check or money order old-school style here: 

Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment
PO Box 973
Bandon, OR 97411
Please do not send cash and please provide the name of your employer and employer’s address or indicate if self-employed, unemployed, or retired. The Secretary of State requires this information for all political donations.

Here is our website for more information www.SanctuaryOrdinance.com ​

Sign the Statewide Petition IP8 here: ​www.CommonFirearmsAct.com

Related Posts:
Press Release: Constitutional Measure IP#8 The Common Firearms Act
County Status for the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance July 16, 2018
SOS 2020 Initiative Petition #6 School Gun Safety Act
Douglas County Ballot Question on the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance
SOS ~ 2018 Initiative Petition #43 Withdrawn by Chief Petitioners
Gun Owners of America Requesting Donations for Oregon Firearms Federation
Grant County SAPO Challenged in Court and County Responds to the Challenge
2018 Initiative Petition #44 Certified Ballot Title
Tom McKirgan ~ Man Behind the Douglas County Second Amendment Ordinance
Status of the Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties May 26, 2018
SOS ~ 2018 Initiative Petition #43 Certified Ballot Title ~ I WILL NOT COMPLY
LTE ~ Speaking Loud & Clear One County at a Time

Comments

Press Release ~ Coos Bay Considers Amending Empire Urban Renewal Tax Scheme

7/29/2018

Comments

 
PictureBill Roberts worked for the Cleveland Press and in this 1965 editorial illustration he depicts the backlash against Urban Renewal.
Town Hall Meeting Considers Amending
Empire Urban Renewal Plan


The Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency (Agency) will be hosting a Town Hall Meeting next Tuesday, July 31 at 5:30 p.m. to discuss amending the Empire Urban Renewal Plan (Plan). The City of Coos Bay adopted the Empire URA Plan in 1988. This Plan allows for the expenditure of funds within the Empire Urban Renewal Area (Area). The City (also the Urban Renewal Agency) has completed numerous projects in the Area. These projects include assistance in the renovation of the Dolphin Theater, the Newmark Widening Project, South Empire Improvements, Hollering Place Wayside, Boat Building Center Improvements, Storefront Improvements (Empire Mercantile, Subway, and several others) a bathroom complex at the Empire Boat Ramp and other projects. 
 
The Agency and City Council have been evaluating the Empire Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) over the last year. In 2018, they adopted a minor amendment to update the projects in the Plan. The projects identified for the future are the Hollering Place Development, a Façade Program, street improvements, library assistance, and signage. As part of the minor amendment process, the financial projections were updated, and the City determined they would like to proceed with a substantial amendment to the Plan to increase the maximum indebtedness of the Empire URA District. This increase would allow financial capacity to undertake a number of capital street projects within the Empire URA District. 
 
The Town Hall meeting will be held at the Dolphin Theatre, located at  580 Newmark Avenue. ​

Related Posts:
Registered Sex Offender Who Received UR Money Threatens Legal Action
Coos Bay Gave Urban Renewal Money to a Registered Sex Offender
Coos Bay Pays Around $406,000 to Repair Mingus Park Pool
Coos Bay Considers Eliminating Voter Approval for the Sale of Revenue Bonds
Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal

Comments

Public Comments for Coos County Residents on the Jordan Cove Energy Project

7/8/2018

Comments

 
The following information was submitted by Jody McCaffree and it concerns public comments for government agency. 
-----------------------------------------------------

July 9, 2018:  6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.  Rogue Climate has a Clean Water Joint Permit Application commenting workshop scheduled at the Coos Bay library, Myrtlewood Room (525 Anderson Ave).  See OTHER Commenting Workshops and Guidelines from Rogue Climate here: www.noLNGexports/write-comments


----------------------------------------------------
 
July 13, 2018: 1:30 p.m.  Hearing at the Owen Building, 201 N. Adams Street, Coquille, on the Pacific Connector Extension Applications under Coos County File Nos AP-18-001 and AP-18-002.  This concerns extensions under Coos County File Nos EXT-18-001 and EXT-18-003 for the Pacific Connector OLD Pipeline Route Conditional Land Use Permits.  Find more info on the current extension applications here: http://www.co.coos.or.us/Departments/Planning/PlanningDepartment-Applications2018.aspx


----------------------------------------------------
 
July 21, 2018  5:00 p.m. (unless an extension is granted)  Important Comments are due to U.S. Army Corps and DEQ on Jordan Cove’s Clean Water Joint Permit Application:
 
**Please ask that we are given more than 60 days to review this massive document
 
ARMY CORP PUBLIC NOTICE / INFO:
https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20180522-5077


[I am currently in the process of trying to obtain a current electronic copy of this 401/404 Clean Water Joint Permit Application of the Jordan Cove/Pacific Connector project and also a listing of where people can access hard copies and criteria regulations for the permit.  The North Bend library does not have any copies of this application as of 6-16-2018.]


Hard copies of the Clean Water Joint Permit Application are supposed to be available in the following locations: 
(Do not know if these are current versions of the application or not?)


Coos Bay Public Library: 525 Anderson Avenue, Coos Bay, OR 97420
Sutherlin Library/City Hall: 210 E Central Street, Sutherlin, OR 97479
Jackson County Library Services Central Library: 205 S Central Avenue, Medford, OR 97501
Klamath County Library: 126 South Third Street, Klamath Falls, OR 97601


A December 2017 version of the Jordan Cove Clean Water Joint Permit Application and Supplemental Information was filed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by the Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P. and Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline and can be found here:
https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20171211-5172


The Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P. and Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LP also uploaded their - Applicant Prepared Draft Biological Assessment under CP17-494 here:
https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20171222-5173
 
CLEAN WATER JOINT PERMIT CRITERIA


·       Section 10 of the Rivers & Harbors Act


·       Section 14 of the Rivers & Harbors Act


·       Section 401(State Water Quality Certification) https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/displayDivisionRules.action;JSESSIONID_OARD=JIcFD-wJ44xoPbHoatJS2XTN_KwuJl5WldxTykUjonYyWGJsWIxx!568786841?selectedDivision=1465  and


·       Section 404 (Removal-Fill) which regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/clean-water-laws-regulations-executive-orders#laws


·       Section 408 (Permission) The proposal will be evaluated for impacts of the proposed alteration to flood conveyance, structural integrity, operation and maintenance, NEPA requirements, and flood fighting capabilities as well as meeting Corps policy and criteria.


NOTE:  Despite the above reference to the Clean Water Act it is actually officially titled the FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT  https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/laws_regulations/docs/fedwaterpollutioncontrolact.pdf
 
COMMENTING GUIDELINES:
 
·       Is there an alternative to the project that is less environmentally damaging?
·       Will the nation’s waters be significantly degraded?
·       Will private or public water sources be negatively impacted?
·       Were steps taken to avoid wetland impacts?
·       Did the applicant minimize potential impacts on wetlands?
·       Did the applicant provide compensation for any unavoidable impacts?
·       Is the alteration in the public interest?
·       Will the project violate state water quality standards? (See 401 link above)


·       Link to additional commenting guidelines below from Rogue Climate and Rogue Riverkeeper:


Here is the comment writing guide for organizations and folks who want to write very in-depth comments (10 pages).


Here is the comment writing guide for the general public.


Here is the comment writing guide for impacted landowners.


It's updated on the website too, so please feel free to continue sharing: www.noLNGexports/write-comments


Thanks to Sarah W, Allie R, Stacey D, Robyn J, Maya and Dan S for helping write these guides and companion materials. 


Looking forward to *thousands* of high-quality comments!


Send 404/408 Clean Water Joint Permit application comments to:
 
Corps Email: NWP-2017-41@usace.army.mil
-or-
Corps Postal Mail: 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
North Bend Field Office
2201 North Broadway, Suite C
North Bend, Oregon 97459-2372


Send 401Clean Water Joint Permit application comments to:


·       Link to more info on the Jordan Cove DEQ 401 application here:
http://www.oregon.gov/deq/Programs/Pages/Jordan-Cove.aspx  


DEQ Email: JCEP401PublicComment@deq.state.or.us
-or-
DEQ Postal Mail:
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
165 E. 7th Ave, Suite 100
Eugene, Oregon 97401
Attn: 401 Water Quality Certification Project Manager, Chris Stine


----------------------------------------------------
 
July 25, 2018  Comments due to the FERC under Docket PL18-1-000 concerning their NOI.  (See link below)  FERC is seeking information and stakeholder perspectives to help the Commission explore whether, and if so how, it should revise its approach under its currently effective policy statement on the certification of new natural gas transportation facilities to determine whether a proposed natural gas project is or will be required by the present or future public convenience and necessity, as that standard is established in section 7 of the Natural Gas Act. 


·       Federal Register Notice here:  https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-05-30/pdf/2018-11527.pdf?utm_campaign=subscription%20mailing%20list&utm_source=federalregister.gov&utm_medium=email   


·       Read entire FERC Notice of Inquiry regarding Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Facilities under PL18-1 here:
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20180419-3060  


The Commission seeks input on whether, and if so how, the Commission should adjust:
(1) its methodology for determining whether there is a need for a proposed project, including the Commission’s consideration of precedent agreements and contracts for service as evidence of such need;
(2) its consideration of the potential exercise of eminent domain and of landowner interests related to a proposed project; and
(3) its evaluation of the environmental impact of a proposed project.


The Commission also seeks input on whether there are specific changes the Commission could consider implementing to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its certificate processes including pre-filing, post-filing, and post-order issuance.


PLEASE TAKE A FEW MINUTES AND WEIGH-IN


----------------------------------------------------
 
July 27, 2018  1:30 p.m. Pacific Standard Time Comments due to U.S. Dept of Energy (DOE) on new LNG Export Study: “Macroeconomic Outcomes of Market Determined Levels of U.S. LNG Exports.” Comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time (1:30 Pacific time) See Federal Register Notice here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/12/2018-12621/study-on-macroeconomic-outcomes-of-lng-exports


Of course they are not documenting ALL the costs of exporting LNG.  We need to be flooding these guys with all the data they missed on climate impacts and costs from continuing to use and “increasing” the use of fracking and fossil fuels.  Particularly when we can prove renewable energy is far cheaper, cleaner and in the public interest.  


----------------------------------------------------
https://www.lnglawblog.com/2018/06/doe-releases-2018-lng-export-study/?utm_source=vuture&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=vuture-emails
DOE Releases 2018 LNG Export Study
Posted on Jun 13, 2018

Comments

ODFW ~ Coquille Valley Wildlife Area temporarily closes June 1

5/24/2018

Comments

 

Coquille Valley Wildlife Area temporarily closes June 1

Picture
May 24, 2018
CHARLESTON, Ore – The Coquille Valley Wildlife Area is closed to public access June 1 for construction and restoration activities. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife expects it to reopen sometime in mid-October.

Heavy equipment operators will cut channels in the Winter Lake tract and create raised areas planted with native trees and shrubs for habitat diversity. This project is focused on conservation with wetland function and tidal flow restored to improve overwintering habitat for threatened coho salmon and migratory birds including waterfowl.

The new channels will fill with tidewater once connected to last year’s restoration activities in China Camp Creek giving coho more habitat while also benefitting waterfowl. The raised area will provide habitat for fish and wildlife, many of which are Oregon Conservation Strategy Species such as Pacific lamprey, purple martin, clouded salamander and Western pond turtle.

The Winter Lake project makes overall improvements to 420 acres. The China Camp Creek project improved natural resources and agriculture on 1,700 acres within the Beaver Slough Drainage District.
###
Contact:
Dominic Rocco, 541-888-5515
Meghan Dugan, 541-464-2179


Comments

ODFW ~ Meeting in North Bend April 9th Public Comments Requested on Budget

3/22/2018

Comments

 
The Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife will be holding meetings across the state to find out how the department should spend the taxpayer’s money.  Since the voters of Coos County voted against the Bandon Marsh Expansion those same people would probably be opposed to the ODFW spending more of their money on land acquisitions.   
​

The ODFW will be meeting in North Bend in April and the people need to show up to express their opinion to the Board.   The department is the government agency overseeing the wetland restoration in the new Winter Lake Mosquito Refuge.  Before the agency took over the area, it used to be one of the best grazing grounds for grass fed beef, now it is a sanctuary for bloodsuckers….Rob T.    
Picture
ODFW hosts series of meetings for public input on 2019-21 budget

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

SALEM, Ore.--The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is hosting a series of town hall meetings around the state in April to gather public input on the agency's proposed 2019-21 budget.

The proposed budget, which is being developed by ODFW and an external budget advisory committee, will be presented for review and comment at the meetings listed below taking place in Bend, Klamath Falls, La Grande, Medford, North Bend, Newport, Portland and Tillamook.

“This is a great opportunity for us to meet with our constituents and get their feedback,” said Curt Melcher, ODFW director. “I encourage folks to attend, meet with our staff and learn more about our funding proposals to manage Oregon’s fish and wildlife.”

No major changes to the budget or new fee increases are proposed, though ODFW is discussing the feasibility of eliminating an already planned and approved fee increase set to take effect in 2020.

Public comments will be used to help refine the budget before it is presented to the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission on June 7 in Baker City. Once a proposed budget is approved by the Commission, it will be submitted to the Governor for her consideration. The budget will ultimately be determined by the 2019 Legislature.

All meetings will be held from 7-8:30 p.m.
  • La Grande, Monday, April 2, Blue Mountain Conference Center, 404 12th Street.
  • Bend, Tuesday, April 3, Central Oregon Community College, Boyle Education Bldg, Rm 155, 2600 NW College Way
  • Klamath Falls, Wednesday, April 4, Oregon Institute of Technology, College Union Bldg, Mt Bailey Room, 3201 Campus Drive
  • Medford, Thursday, April 5, Jackson County Library, Medford Branch Adams Room, 205 S Central Ave
  • North Bend, Monday, April 9, North Bend Public Library, 1800 Sherman Ave
  • Newport, Tuesday, April 10, Hallmark Resort, 744 SW Elizabeth St
  • Tillamook, Wednesday, April 11, Tillamook County Library, 1716 3rd Street
  • Portland, Thursday, April 12, Doubletree Inn (Lloyd Center), 1000 NE Multnomah Street

Comments on the agency proposed budget can also be submitted through May 1 by email to ODFW.TownHallComments@state.or.us or by mail to ODFW Director’s Office, 4034 Fairview Industrial Dr. SE, Salem, OR 7302-1142. Public testimony will also be heard at the Commission meeting June 7 in Baker City.

###
Contact:
Roger Fuhrman
(503) 947-6010
Roger.W.Fuhrman@state.or.us


Related Posts:
Press Release - Bill to Limit Regional Closures of Crab Harvest Due to Domoic Acid
ODFW ~ Commercial Crab from South Coast Must be Eviscerated to Protect Public
ODFW ~ Meeting to Discuss Coos Mountain TMA Public Trails November 30, 2017
ODFW ~ Crab Harvesting Reopens on a Portion of Oregon Coast
ODFW ~ Commercial Dungeness crab season delayed
ODFW ~ Entire Oregon Coast Reopened for Mussel Harvesting
ODFW ~ "Pounder" trout stocked in Coos Bay area Lakes
ODFW ~ One Species on the Verge of Causing the Extinction of Another Species
NOAA Antibusiness Plan for Coquille River ~ Public Private Property Partnership
ODFW ~ Commercial Crabbing Closed From Coos Bay North Jetty to Heceta Head
ODFW seeks Landowner Representatives for Access & Habitat Program – by Jan. 30
OR State Land Board Public Meeting December 13, 2016 ~ Sell the Elliot Forest
ODFW ~ Deer virus confirmed in Coos County
ODFW ~ Hosts Town Hall On Proposed 2017-19 budget North Bend May 4, 2016
ODFW ~ Commission Meeting in Bandon Friday April 22, 2016
ODFW ~ Harassing Cormorant to Protect Salman but Still a Crime for the People
ODFW ~ Public Meeting Coquille Valley Wildlife Area Discussion Wed. March 2, 2016


Comments

Coos Bay Considers Eliminating Voter Approval for the Sale of Revenue Bonds

2/20/2018

Comments

 
Picture
On February 20, 2018, the Coos Bay City Council will be voting on a Resolution to put a measure on the May ballot that would add an amendment to change three sections of the city charter.  One of the changes would eliminate the ability of the voter to approve the sale of Revenue Bonds returning that authority to the city councilors to decide. 
 
The city officials are making the argument that the city should not have to ask the voters permission to sell Revenue Bonds because this type of bond has existing revenue sources to repay the debt, so it does not require the enactment of a new tax.  However, the city has to repay the debt with public money, so it is a tax nonetheless.    
 
The voters in 1996 chose to establish voter approval for the sale of certain bonds because the people knew the local politicians would continue to spend public money on wasteful projects with little regard for the concerns of the citizens.
 
The most disturbing thing about this agenda item is that the city recorder has already filled out and predated the SEL802 document that the city has to submit to the county clerk for a ballot measure.  It is almost as if the city officials already know how the council and mayor will vote before the meeting has occurred….Rob T. 

CITY OF COOS BAY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 20, 2018 - 7:00 PM
Council Chambers - 500 Central Avenue, Coos Bay, OR
 
Those changes will affect these sections of the city charter: 
(1) Section 4.1 Meeting requirements of the Council;
(2) Section 9.11 Funds for Police Officers and Firefighters;
(3) Section 9.12 Sales of Bonds and Warrants.
2018-02-23 CB Charter Aamendeent SEL802
File Size: 38 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2018-02-20 CB Resolution 18-06 Charter Amendment
File Size: 176 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2018-02-20 CB Charter Aamendment
File Size: 116 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2018-02-20 CB Agenda Item 15 Proposed Charter Amendment
File Size: 153 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Background:

On February 18, 2017, the Council held a work session to discuss priorities for 2017-2019. The work session was facilitated by consultants from Solid Ground Consulting. Based on a consensus of the Council, priorities were categorized into five areas: (1) Wastewater; (2) Street Maintenance; (3) Library facility; (4) Economic Development; and (5) City Charter. On April 4, 2017, the Council approved the attached goals which included possible amendments to the City Charter. 
  • Section 4.1 of the Charter requires in part that the "...Council shall hold a regular meeting at least twice each month..." Currently the Council meets and has traditionally met on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays evening of each month for their "regular meetings." There have been times when such regular meetings were not necessary and where the business of the Council could have been conducted during one monthly meeting rather than in two. The following is the proposed amended Section 4.1 language in its entirety: Section 4.1 Meetings. The Council shall hold regular meetings as the business of the City requires, at a time and at a place in the City which it designates and may adopt rules for the government of its members and proceedings. The mayor, manager, or three members of the Council may, by giving notice to all members of the Council then in the City, call a special meeting of the Council.
  • The City Charter was amended by the voters in 1988 by adding Section 9.11 Funds for Police Officer and Firefighters. Section 9.11 requires mandatory minimum staffing for public safety personnel. Under Oregon's current taxing structure the City is unable to and has been unable for more than a decade to fund all of the required positions. Section 9.11 was deemed unconstitutional in 2003. As the language is not enforceable and unattainable, it should be deleted from the City Charter.
  •  The Charter was amended in 1996 by adding Section 9.12 of the Charter precludes the City from the selling of all bonds or warrant without an approval of the voters. The intent of the Charter amendment was to stop the Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency from issuing bonds to undertake for a library expansion project. While the voters approved the ballot measure which precluded the City from issuing bonds and warrants, it was not and is not legally binding on the Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency which under Oregon law is a separate corporate political entity.
Most cities find it necessary to borrow money from time to time (e.g., to buy a fire truck or build a new wastewater treatment plant). Oregon cities can borrow money in a wide variety of ways and from a variety of sources. The choices a city makes in how to borrow can have a significant effect on the cost of the borrowing and the speed at which the borrowing can be done. A city might be able to borrow money for a project from a state agency, from a commercial bank, or through an underwriter who will sell the city’s bonds in the public securities markets. That city might be able to use general obligation bonds, full faith and credit loans, notes or revenue bonds to finance the project. Market conditions can change, and a method of financing that was ideal for one city project may be inappropriate for another project.

For many borrowings, an Oregon city can choose to do any of the following kinds of borrowings:

  • GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS pledge the "full faith and credit" of the city, and permit the city to levy an additional property tax that is sufficient to pay the bonds. Because these bonds are secured by this additional property tax, voter approval is required. General obligation bonds are usually the most secure form of borrowing available to a city, and therefore usually have the lowest cost.
  • REVENUE BONDS are secured by a pledge of a specific revenue source or tax source, typically do not require voter approval and are usually subject to referral. The interest rates and other costs of revenue bonds are usually higher than for general obligation bonds, and depend greatly on the type of revenues that are pledged to pay the bonds.
  • Local improvement district or "Bancroft" bonds are bonds that are issued to finance the costs of local improvements that are assessed against neighboring property. Assessed property owners are entitled to pay the assessment, with interest, over at least ten years. Cities use those payments to pay the local improvement district bonds.
  • CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (sometimes referred to as COPs) on which annual debt service payments are subject to annual appropriation. Borrowings that are subject to appropriation usually have higher interest rates than borrowings that are not. Recent changes in Oregon law allow most cities to do general fund obligations, and certificates of participation have become relatively uncommon.
  • GENERAL FUND OBLIGATIONS, OR LIMITED TAX OBLIGATIONS, which are similar to COPs but are a binding obligation payable from all resources of the general fund rather than to annual appropriation. Some city charters do not permit this kind of borrowing.
  • LOAN AGREEMENTS are often used when a city borrows from a bank.
 

Since the inclusion of Section 9.12, the City has secured funding (loans) from federal and state agencies, from banks, and by the sale of bonds (approved by the voters for the building and equipping of the Fire Station). Given that the time process involved in securing voter approval for revenue bonds combined with the reality that the financial market is in constant flux, the City has chosen not to avail itself to this funding possibility. As is stated above, revenue bonds do not typically require approval of the voters as cities have existing revenue sources to repay the debt (doesn't require enactment of a new tax). While revenue bonds generally don't require voter approval, they are generally subject to referral to the voters through the referral process.

As Section 9.12, as currently worded limits financing options, staff recommends amending the language. Financing options, such as GO Bonds and other bonds which require the implementation of an additional tax should require voter approval. Amending the language would provide the City greater flexibility, without the ability to impose additional taxes, for financing the business of the City.

In addition, the City Attorney had reviewed the current City Charter and is suggesting that the Council consider additional amendments which would remove langue referencing consolidation and consolidation continuances.

The follow Section is part of the new amendment giving the councilors of CB the authority to create more debt in the name of the taxpayers.
 
 Section 2.4 Utilities. The City, acting by and through its Council, is authorized and empowered to acquire, construct, purchase, own, lease, operate and maintain, within, without, or partly within and without the corporate limits of the City, public utilities and other public utilities and other public enterprises and properties which may be deemed by the Council to be in the public interest, including, but not limited to, airport, roadway, dock, wharf, sewer, and water system facilities; and the Council may, by ordinance, authorize the issuance and sale of self-liquidating revenue bonds and self-liquidating notes or contracts payable only from the pledged revenues of public utilities, enterprises and properties for the acquisition, purchase, construction, reconstruction, improvement, extension or repair of any such utility, enterprise or property or any part thereof; provided that such obligations, and any part thereof, shall not be payable from taxes or general fund revenues and shall not be deemed general obligations of the City unless specifically authorized at election of the legal voters of the City, nor shall such self-liquidating obligations be debts of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter limitations.
Related Posts:
Coos Bay Pays Around $406,000 to Repair Mingus Park Pool
Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare

Comments

ACTION ALERT: Public Testimony Request for Hearing on Gun Legislation HB4145

2/6/2018

Comments

 

Send in a comment or make the trip to testify for your rights in Salem...

Picture
______________ ACTION ALERT _____________
 Click Tittle to view Bill
2018R1 HB 4145

Public Hearing   
2/7/2018 1:00 PM, HR 50

Please send Testimony to the
 
House Committee On Judiciary

Join the Oregon Citizens Lobby for Limited Government:

http://oregoncitizenslobby.org/

Email: Email:  hjud.exhibits@oregonlegislature.gov
This bill expands the number of people who are prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition, adds reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police (OSP), adds reporting requirements on the attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies receiving the additional reporting from OSP.

Personal Choice and Responsibility
Expands the list of prohibited persons under ORS 166.255 from those who have had a hearing to now include those who were served but did not request a hearing, expands the number of people who can be the target from 'intimate partner' to 'household member' which includes Spouses, Former spouses, Adult persons related by blood or marriage, Persons cohabiting with each other, Persons who have cohabited with each other or who have been involved in a sexually intimate relationship, Unmarried parents of a minor child.

Fiscal Responsibility
The reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police including notifying attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies and publishing written reports, will require increased expenditure. If these measures were effective in making it impossible for prohibited persons to be armed, the expense might be justified. But law enforcement cautions against overconfidence that making something illegal makes it impossible: felons are found to be illegally in possession of weapons all the time. So while well-intentioned, the additional expenditure here is unlikely to be justified.

Limited Government
The reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police including notifying attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies and publishing written reports, will require increase in staff to perform. This bill contains a 24-hour deadline to perform the additional reporting.

______________________
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2018R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB4145/


Related Posts:
OFF ~ The Oregon Firearms Federation urges a "NO" vote on Measure 101
Oregon Firearms Federation ~ Protect Your Rights For Free!
OFF ~ NRA CAVES AGAIN ~ 719 REPEAL EFFORT FALLS SHORT
Information on Several Petitions Currently in Circulation in the State of Oregon
OFF ~ The Gun Confiscation Battle Begins
Teri Grier ~ Bill Post ~ Mike Nearman ~ File Referendum on SB719 Gun Confiscation
The Differences Between SB719A & Connecticut's Gun Confiscation Law
LTE ~ SB719 Into the Oven, Out of the Stack
Oregon Firearms Federation Responds to Senator Brian Boquist on SB 719
OFF Late Session Omnibus Anti-Gun Bill Introduced
Senator Arnie Roblan Votes for SB917A The Gun Confiscation Bill ~ Now in House
OFF ~ CALL TO ACTION ~ Contact Senator Prozanski ~ Time to Fix SB941 
OFF ~ Bad Idea Becomes Bad Bill SB 868

Comments

Bandon Planning Department Informally Platting a Pool that the Voters Rejected

1/22/2018

Comments

 
Picture
Hey Folks,
 
The Bandon Planning Commission is going to discuss the following agenda item about the voter-rejected swimming pool at the regular meeting on Thursday, January 25, 2017, at 7 pm in city hall.  It is a notice on an official discussion on using city property for the site of the pool. 
 
However, the majority of the voters in the city rejected the idea of a public pool back in November of 2012, so any further discussion by the city officials is an insult to the people's decision.  
 
Most people would support a privately owned, privately funded pool located on private land.  A good portion of our community does not believe public tax dollars should pay for these types of luxuries when there are so many other priorities the government should be funding, such as roads and law enforcement.  Otherwise, the money should revert to the people paying the taxes, so they can choose what to do with it.  
 
The new planning director lays out the background on the pool in the agenda without mentioning one word about the election.   The proponents of the pool are alleging this is an informal proposal, but anyone living in the Bandon Marsh expansion zone knows that once the government puts a project on a map, it becomes more of a certainty. 

Also, the planning director receives a very handsome salary, so he should not be wasting OUR time on subjects where the voters made their decision.  The cost of the director’s services drives up the cost of development for everyone.   Remember, the city was recommending raising development fees back in May of 2017, so he should not be working on this issue.  A pool project would only add to those expenses.  

Anyone who voted against the Bandon Swimming Pool back in 2012 should contact the mayor and city councilors and tell them this is a very bad idea. 
 
The Mayor ~ Mary Schamehorn ~ marys@coosnet.com
City Manager ~ Robert J Mawson ~ 541-347-2437 ~ citymanager@cityofbandon.org
 
The pool committee will eventually ask taxpayers to pay for the development of the property once the city has platted the area for this project inside the urban renewal zone.  The UR agency skims money from the property taxes collected for ten other taxing districts.  Those districts provide for schools and police.   The cities of North Bend and Coos Bay constantly have to redirect money from street maintenance due to the cost of overruns for operating their city’s pools.  
 
It comes down to a very simple choice, build the pool, or fill the potholes…Rob T.      

Here are the results from the election where the voters rejected the public pool: 

https://ballotpedia.org/Bandon_Community_Swimming_Pool_Recreation_District_Formation_Measure_(November_2012)
Picture

Here is the background for the Agenda Item: 

Bandon Aquatic Center - Potential Location in City Park
January 25, 2018
Background
The Bandon Community Swimming Pool committee has been working for several years to raisefunds for the construction and operation of an aquatic center. City staff (City Manager and Planning Department) have been looking at options for the location of the aquatic center in City Park.

This is not a formal proposal by the Pool Committee, but rather an effort by Staff to assist in finding a location with appropriate access and infrastructure to successfully support a future aquatic center.

An option has been created to potentially locate the pool near the library, allowing opportunities for access from several points, as well as the possibility of sharing parking with the Barn/Sprague Theater/Library complex. Further, the new pool structure could also serve as a windbreak for the amphitheater stage area.

We are in the very early stages of this discussion, and, in an effort to be very clear and transparent, the staff is sharing these ideas in an informal fashion with both the City Parks and Recreation Commission and Planning Commission for comments prior to more formal discussions with the Pool Committee and the City Council.

The Parks and Recreation Commission viewed the sketches at their January 11 meeting, and found merit in the proposal, but reserved judgement regarding the entire project to a future time when a more fully prepared project would be considered. While the Commission generally found that there are positive attributes associated with a new building near other larger buildings in the City Park complex, concerns were also raised regarding the future financial responsibilities associated with having a pool in the City Park, conflicts between uses, and with the potential loss of passive/active outdoor park space.

These sketches are provided to the Planning Commission for initial discussion and informal comments. There are no binding decisions associated with this item, and the Staff is merely looking to see whether there is enough merit to continue working on design options for the location of an aquatic center in City Park.

Thank you.
John Mclaughlin
Planning Director
City of Bandon
6.2_bandon_community_pool_location.pdf
File Size: 1450 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Related Posts:
Coquille River Water Trail Info Sessions in the Cities of Bandon & Coquille
City of Bandon Considers Marijuana Ordinance & Public Drinking Ordinance
USACE Intends to Dedicate $467,000 in Dredging Funding for Port of Bandon
Bandon Plans to Raise Planning Fees Monday May 1, 2017 7:00pm
Bandon Budget Committee Meeting April 17, 2017 at 7:00 pm
Bandon Initiative Petition I2014002 Failed Due to Not Enough Qualified Signatures
Important Message for People Living in Bandon & the Bandon School District
City of Bandon ~ Asking Voters to Raise the Water Rates Measure 6-157
CELDF ~ Enviro Snuff Film "We the People 2.0" in Bandon Friday July 22, 2016
State Shared Revenues or Sin Tax Tribute for Counties & Cities 2016-17
LTE ~ Anonymous Letter on the Conduct of the Port of Bandon in the 2013 Election 
Bandon Changes the Revered Day of Infamy to Trash Art Day
TNC Benefits from States Loss & $450 Million More from Taxpayers for LWCF
Bandon Cheese Factory Receives Private Financing & Still Pays No Property Taxes

Comments

Board of Commissioners Postpones Vote on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency

1/22/2018

Comments

 
Picture
The county has postponed the vote for extending the plan for the North Bay Urban Renewal Area.  When the city council of North Bend and Coos Bay approve the changes made to the plan by the county commissioners it will go back to the county where their attorney will draft an ordinance.  Then it will go to the board for a vote.   Stay tuned.
 
For more info on The Campaign to Shut Down the CCURA go to www.cooscountywatchdog.com/shut-down-the-coos-county-urban-renewal-agency.html
 
 
In other news, John Sweet and Melissa Cribbins are up for reelection.  Currently, only Commissioner Sweet is facing one serious contender for the primary election in May, former budget committee member, Steve Scheer. 
 
For more info on the election go to www.facebook.com/DefeatJohnSweet


Related Posts:
Update on The Campaign to Shut Down the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare
Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing

Comments

Update on The Campaign to Shut Down the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency

1/7/2018

Comments

 
Picture
The campaign to shut down the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency begun about six months ago when the Port of Coos Bay announced that they planned to renew the North Bay urban renewal area for another twenty years with a maximum indebtedness of $37 million. 
 
The county Board of Commissioners have made the final decision over the plan and they had three hearings to discuss it, one in August 31, another on October 30 with the final meeting on December 13, 2017, which ended with ALL THREE commissioners approving the plan.
 
Now the process moves from the public hearings where the board approved the plan and they will add it to an ordinance as exhibit A.   The commissioners will have to enact the ordinance that initiates the plan and at that point, the people should be able to file a referendum.   Commissioner Cribbins said they have tentatively scheduled the vote for Tuesday, January 23 at the boards regularly scheduled meeting.  The county will post more info when the meeting becomes official.  
 
People are encouraged to contact the BOC:
Robert "Bob" Main
(541) 396-7540
Email: bmain@co.coos.or.us     
 
 
John Sweet
(541) 396-7541
Email: jsweet@co.coos.or.us   
 
 
Melissa Cribbins
(541) 396-7539
Email: mcribbins@co.coos.or.us
 
 
Videos of the hearings:
December 13, 2017
https://coosmediacenter.viebit.com/player.php?hash=Makyr2P6cWn2
 
August 31, 2017
https://coosmediacenter.viebit.com/player.php?hash=COouDtEQJUqy
 
September 25, 2017
https://coosmediacenter.viebit.com/player.php?hash=H1rPhV2VF0Fd
 
Port of Coos Bay CCURA
http://www.portofcoosbay.com/ccura/

More info on the Campaign to Shut Down the CCURA
www.cooscountywatchdog.com/shut-down-the-coos-county-urban-renewal-agency.html
 
The Campaign on FB
https://www.facebook.com/ShutDowntheCoosCountyURA/

Picture

CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing

Related Posts:
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare
Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Comments

Coos Bay Town Hall Meeting ~ Input on Urban Renewal Slush Fund January 9, 2018

1/5/2018

Comments

 
Picture
TOWN HALL MEETING
Urban Renewal Agency Wants Your Input
The Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency (Agency) is in the process of reviewing the Empire Urban Renewal Plan (Plan).  For the most part, the Plan was created more than twenty years ago. A number of Urban Renewal Projects listed in the Plan have been accomplished while others have yet to be undertaken. One of the largest projects, the South Empire Blvd Street project was recently completed. That project included a complete makeover of South Empire Blvd, which was aimed at increasing pedestrian and bicyclist safety through the widening of the street and installation of bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and lighting.     
 
The purpose of the Plan review is to ensure the project list reflects today’s needs of the District. It is more than possible that the Plan will need to be updated to reflect the current and anticipated future needs of the Empire Urban Renewal District. Over the next few years, the Agency will have additional resources to undertake projects listed in the Plan.The Agency would like to gather public input on not only the remaining projects already in the Plan, but also potential projects that would be added to the Plan. The Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency will be hosting a Town Hall meeting on Tuesday, January 9 at the Dolphin Theatre beginning at 5:30 pm. The Dolphin Theatre is located at 580 Newmark Avenue. A copy of the current Empire Urban Renewal Plan can be found online at Empire URA Plan.  

http://coosbay.org/uploads/PDF/Plans/Coos_Bay_Empire_Plan_with_Amendments_073115.pdf
Related Posts:
Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare

Comments

CCURA Public Hearing TODAY December 13, at 3pm in the Owen Building

12/13/2017

Comments

 
The following meeting will be held in the Owen Building at 3:00pm.  It was advertised on the Port of Coos Bay website for 1:30pm, but that is the incorrect time.  It has been changed, but if the Port Director cannot schedule a meeting should the commissioners be giving him access to $37 million dollars. 


December 13, 2017 REVISED SPECIAL MEETINGS NOTICE COOS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS The Coos County Board of Commissioners has scheduled or will attend the following meetings during the period of December 11 through December 15, 2017: Wednesday, December 13: 10:00 AM worksession- Insurance Premiums- room 121 3:00 PM Continuation of Hearing on Urban Renewal Plan Amendment- Owen Building large conference room

Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017


Comments

Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017

12/11/2017

Comments

 
Picture
The Coos County Commissioners will be holding a
public hearing on December 13th 2017, at 3:00 PM.

The meeting will be held in the
Owens Building at 225 N Adams St, Coquille, OR 97423. 


2017 Some of the Meeting Documents

2017-12-13 Proposed Updated CCURA Plan Amendment November 22, 2017
File Size: 2542 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-12-13 Report on Proposed Updated CCURA Plan Amendment November 22, 2017
File Size: 611 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-12-13 Updated Urban Renewal Information Coos County
File Size: 107 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

 AM-17-005 Urban Renewal
North Bay Renewal Agency District Report
North Bay Urban Renewal Plan Amendment
North Bay Urban Renewal Plan as Amended
12/05/17 Memo to the BOC

Picture

The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency

 FB page dedicated to shutting down the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
www.facebook.com/ShutDowntheCoosCountyURA/
Related Posts:
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare

Comments

Coos County Regular Board Meeting Tues 9:30am Dec. 5, 2017 ~ LNG on Agenda

11/30/2017

Comments

 
Picture
Tuesday, December 5:

8:30 AM Regular Board Meeting– Owen Building large conference room

(NOTE: executive session begins at 8:30, with the public portion of the meeting scheduled to begin at 9:30)

For the complete agenda & packet, go to www.co.coos.or.us & go to Board of Commissioners Meetings


Agenda Item H.  Request Approval of Order in Appeals Case AP 17-004 Planning

2017-11-27 OSCC vs Coos County JCEP Permit Appeal
File Size: 2129 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Picture

Comments
<<Previous

    Categories

    All
    A.F.P.
    Agenda 21
    Bandon
    B.I.A.
    B.L.M.
    Coos Bay
    Coos County
    Coos County
    Coquille
    County Charter
    Curry County
    C.W.A.
    Democratic Party
    D.E.Q.
    Eco Devo
    Eco Devo
    Economic Development
    Educational
    Elections
    E.P.A.
    F.D.A.
    F.E.M.A.
    Individual Rights
    I Spy Radio
    Jury Nullification
    Legislation
    Letter To Editor
    Mary Geddry
    N.D.A.A.
    News Wave
    N.O.A.A.
    North Bend
    O&C Land
    O.D.F.W.
    O.D.O.T.
    O.F.F.
    O.H.A.
    O.P.R.D.
    O.R.C. Mining
    O.W.E.B.
    P.E.R.S.
    Petitions
    Port Of Coos Bay
    Public Comments
    Public Events
    Regulation
    Republican Party
    S.A.O.V.A.
    State Of Jefferson
    The Bandon Marsh
    The Economy
    The Rob Taylor Report
    The Supreme Court
    The Tea Party
    Urban Renewal
    U.S.A.C.E.
    U.S.D.A.
    U.S.F.S
    U.S.F.W.S.

    Sign-Up Now to Stay Informed

    * indicates required

    View previous campaigns.

    Send Letters to:
    ​cooscountywatchdog@gmail.com​

    Disclaimer: Letters to the Editor and other opinions published in The Coos County Watchdog blog are not necessarily the views of the Editor, Publisher, or possible anyone else in their right mind.  The Watchdog reserves the right to edit, omit, or copy any and all submissions. 
    Letters to the Editor must be attributed with a name, address, and contact phone number. 

    WARNING:
    Political correctness is not practiced on this
    page & some content is inappropriate

    RSS Feed


    Archives

    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from DieselDemon