Page 2
The INDEPENDENT, February 21, 2008
The
INDEPENDENT
Published on the first and third Thursdays of each month by
The Independent, LLC, 725 Bridge St., Vernonia, OR 97064.
Phone/Fax: 503-429-9410.
Publisher Clark McGaugh, clark@the-independent.net
Editor Rebecca McGaugh, rebecca@the-independent.net
Assoc. Editor Noni Andersen, noni@the-independent.net
Opinion
Why all the ordinances?
Another public hearing, another council meeting, an-
other ordinance (spelled “law”). Here’s a partial list of
our concerns, in question form, on the latest one, ordi-
nance 711;
1) Why doesn’t the city hold Town Hall meetings
where citizens can come and have an open dialog
about topics that affect them, before Public Hearings at
which many feel they have no say?
2) Why is it so important to cram these ordinances
through that we need back-to-back public hearings by
the Planning Commission and the City Council starting
at 5:00 p.m. when many people aren’t even home from
work yet?
3) What’s so important about this ordinance that it
had to be done now? Don’t we all have enough going
on without a round of hearings on a 64-page document
that we are told only consolidates existing ordinances,
except for two changes?
4) About those two changes; why do we need the
city to tell us what ‘pitch’ our roofs have to be and that
our front doors have to face the street and have a cov-
ered entry or porch that is at least 5 feet by 10 feet?
5) If those were the only two changes, why does the
handout explaining the changes include changed lan-
guage that says, “Exterior finishes shall have siding
and roofing which in color, material and appearance is
comparable to the predominant materials of surround-
ing dwellings characteristic of the neighborhood”?
6) When citizens are told in the public hearing notice
that the ordinance will be available for inspection five
days prior to the hearing, why were there last minute
changes handed out at the hearing? Maybe they
weren’t really ready for the hearing?
7) Do we, the citizens of Vernonia, really want these
kinds of restrictions on our homes, even for our own
good and to protect our property values?
8) Ok, this isn’t part of the ordinance, but…Vernonia
residents are required to pay permit fees of $160.00 to
replace a furnace, range, dryer, and have the gas test.
Everyone else in the county would usually pay $40.00
for the same furnace, range, dryer and gas test, but
those fees have been waived for flood victims in Co-
lumbia County (but not in Vernonia). How is this equi-
table? And, is this why permit fee schedules are not
available at City Hall.
9) How does all this help us recover from the flood?
Out of My Mind…
by Noni Andersen
Economic development is a goal in both Co-
lumbia and Clatsop Counties, which are under-
standably concerned about improving local
economies and creating new jobs. One pro-
posed development that would add jobs to the
economy is a new terminal in the lower Colum-
bia River that would be used to bring in liquified
natural gas (LNG).
This proposal, which would site the terminal
about 20 miles upriver from Astoria at Bradwood,
is only one of several proposed LNG terminals
on either the Columbia or in Coos Bay. It would
provide jobs, more during construction than in
actual operations, yet many Oregonians are op-
posed to LNG terminals. Why?
The Bradwood terminal (backed by Northern-
Star Natural Gas Inc. of Houston, Texas) would
require storage tanks and processing facilities as
much as 13 stories high on an undeveloped
stretch of the Columbia River.
The liquified gas would be transported from
Russia, Indonesia, the middle east or Australia,
in 900-foot tanker ships. These tankers will have
priority on the river, regardless of other river traf-
fic, either commercial or recreational. Because
of their size, they will need to go as far as 38
miles upriver in order to turn back toward the
ocean, and the river will need to be dredged to
accommodate them.
Once the super-cooled natural gas reaches
Bradwood, it would be pumped into big storage
tanks. Then it would be reheated and sent to
market as a vapor in high-pressure pipelines.
Because of the federal Energy Policy Act of
2005, the states lost authority to license (or not
license) LNG plants. That authority was given to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC). Additionally, land needed for the
pipelines to market the gas, may be obtained by
eminent domain.
The proposed 3-foot Palomar Gas Transmis-
sion pipeline would go about 200 miles from
Bradwood to Maupin, in Central Oregon, where
it would connect to an existing pipeline that runs
from Canada to California. A high pressure
pipeline of that size will require a right-of-way
about 120 feet wide through both public and pri-
vate property. Land owners along the proposed
route are understandably upset.
NorthernStar says the natural gas would be
used in Oregon, a statement most Oregonians
found laughable. Most say it is as back door ap-
proach to marketing the gas in California, which
has rejected similar projects.
Oregon’s hands are not totally tied, and Gov-
ernor Ted Kulongoski has written to the feds in-
sisting that review of such projects be stopped
until there is a study of Oregon’s future energy
needs. The state can also require full environ-
mental reviews, including the impact on endan-
gered species, including salmon.
Citizens along the proposed pipeline are con-
cerned about safety, as well. Is Oregon prepared
for emergency response if a high-pressure
pipeline ruptures and explodes? This doesn’t
happen often, but when it does, it is serious.
More jobs may lose out to other concerns.