|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology.
Report on Oregon Senate Hearing on SB 76
By Kathy
Lehman
February
4, 2009
Below are
my notes on yesterday's
hearing, and some info
on the committee's
planned schedule for SB 76. There is every evidence the committee will vote
to approve SB 76 out of committee, with a recommendation to the general
Senate to approve it, as early as tomorrow.
I traveled to Salem with Rex and Dr. Richard Gierak. We were the only
attendees from the Rogue Valley and western Siskiyou County. There were many
who made the trip from the upper Basin, pretty fairly divided between
support for, and opposition to, dam removal, and the KBRA and AIP.
We all met with Senator Whitsett before the hearing, so he could review our
planned testimony and make suggestions to salient points that needed to be
emphasized. Senator Whitsett and his staff worked very hard to encourage
people to attend and testify at this hearing yesterday, and he was very
generous with his time before and after the hearing. Everyone opposed to dam
removal, both in Oregon and California, owe this informed, and articulate
but gentle man a thank you!
The hearing room was packed, mostly by PacifiCorp people, Gang Green, public
officials, and the press. The committee Chair, Senator Jackie Dingfelder,
stated each of us would be given 3 minutes to give our testimony before the
committee, to ensure everyone who wished to had the opportunity to address
the committee. She indicated those who traveled the furthest would be asked
to speak first.......following several panels of speakers starting with the
Governor's rep, and groups such as PacifiCorp, the Klamath Tribes, the
Karuks, Water Watch, the Public Utility Commission, and the Citizens Utility
Board of Oregon. She also told us we would be granted some leniency in time
to be sure we had the opportunity to say what we wanted to, especially those
of us who traveled over 100 miles to attend the hearing.
Because of the time restriction placed on our testimony (and the lack of
others to help us read our much-longer-than-3-minute testimony to the
committee) most of what Rex, Dr. Gierak, and I had to say was never heard by
those in the hearing room (including the press) and by those watching the
televised hearing from around the state.
I was the first witness called after the panel testimony was completed. We
had earlier watched Glenn Spain advising Senators how wonderful the
settlement agreement was......that EVERYONE agreed it was the best possible
solution to the water issues in the Klamath River basin, representation in
the settlement talks had been so wonderfully inclusive, and that there was
no one who objected to this solution. So the very first thing I told the
committee, after giving my name and PFUSA affiliation, was that I was one of
those people they had earlier been assured did not exist.......representing
organizations and individuals in both California and Oregon, who had never
had any representation in these discussions, had in fact been refused
participation, and remained unalterable opposed to these agreements AND DAM
REMOVAL.
Roughly one minute into my summarization of my testimony, Chair Dingfelder
interrupted me, said the committee had my written testimony, so would I
please summarize my statement and conclude quickly, as there were many
people they still needed to hear from. Unfortunately, I allowed her rudeness
to break my rhythm and composure enough that I was not able to even give my
summary in the time allotted........again, keeping my points from being heard
not only by those others attending the hearing, but those watching the
hearing via TV. I should have anticipated the tactic, and will certainly be
wiser the next time I address a committee that I knew going in would be
generally hostile.
I had already noted that the Governor's rep, the same gentleman who attended
last week FERC meetings in Yreka, in his testimony told the committee much
of the objections to SB 76 that were in my testimony and that of others.
Many of us pre-submitted our testimony to the committee via fax or email. He
could have picked up some of our objections at last week's FERC meetings,
but I didn't mention any of my testimonial objections
there........especially since I didn't plan on testifying, AND I didn't even
write and submit my testimony to the committee until o'dark thirty Tuesday
morning.
planned schedule for SB 76. There is every evidence the committee will vote
to approve SB 76 out of committee, with a recommendation to the general
Senate to approve it, as early as tomorrow.
I traveled to Salem with Rex and Dr. Richard Gierak. We were the only
attendees from the Rogue Valley and western Siskiyou County. There were many
who made the trip from the upper Basin, pretty fairly divided between
support for, and opposition to, dam removal, and the KBRA and AIP.
We all met with Senator Whitsett before the hearing, so he could review our
planned testimony and make suggestions to salient points that needed to be
emphasized. Senator Whitsett and his staff worked very hard to encourage
people to attend and testify at this hearing yesterday, and he was very
generous with his time before and after the hearing. Everyone opposed to dam
removal, both in Oregon and California, owe this informed, and articulate
but gentle man a thank you!
The hearing room was packed, mostly by PacifiCorp people, Gang Green, public
officials, and the press. The committee Chair, Senator Jackie Dingfelder,
stated each of us would be given 3 minutes to give our testimony before the
committee, to ensure everyone who wished to had the opportunity to address
the committee. She indicated those who traveled the furthest would be asked
to speak first.......following several panels of speakers starting with the
Governor's rep, and groups such as PacifiCorp, the Klamath Tribes, the
Karuks, Water Watch, the Public Utility Commission, and the Citizens Utility
Board of Oregon. She also told us we would be granted some leniency in time
to be sure we had the opportunity to say what we wanted to, especially those
of us who traveled over 100 miles to attend the hearing.
Because of the time restriction placed on our testimony (and the lack of
others to help us read our much-longer-than-3-minute testimony to the
committee) most of what Rex, Dr. Gierak, and I had to say was never heard by
those in the hearing room (including the press) and by those watching the
televised hearing from around the state.
I was the first witness called after the panel testimony was completed. We
had earlier watched Glenn Spain advising Senators how wonderful the
settlement agreement was......that EVERYONE agreed it was the best possible
solution to the water issues in the Klamath River basin, representation in
the settlement talks had been so wonderfully inclusive, and that there was
no one who objected to this solution. So the very first thing I told the
committee, after giving my name and PFUSA affiliation, was that I was one of
those people they had earlier been assured did not exist.......representing
organizations and individuals in both California and Oregon, who had never
had any representation in these discussions, had in fact been refused
participation, and remained unalterable opposed to these agreements AND DAM
REMOVAL.
Roughly one minute into my summarization of my testimony, Chair Dingfelder
interrupted me, said the committee had my written testimony, so would I
please summarize my statement and conclude quickly, as there were many
people they still needed to hear from. Unfortunately, I allowed her rudeness
to break my rhythm and composure enough that I was not able to even give my
summary in the time allotted........again, keeping my points from being heard
not only by those others attending the hearing, but those watching the
hearing via TV. I should have anticipated the tactic, and will certainly be
wiser the next time I address a committee that I knew going in would be
generally hostile.
I had already noted that the Governor's rep, the same gentleman who attended
last week FERC meetings in Yreka, in his testimony told the committee much
of the objections to SB 76 that were in my testimony and that of others.
Many of us pre-submitted our testimony to the committee via fax or email. He
could have picked up some of our objections at last week's FERC meetings,
but I didn't mention any of my testimonial objections
there........especially since I didn't plan on testifying, AND I didn't even
write and submit my testimony to the committee until o'dark thirty Tuesday
morning.
SB 76 is supposed
to limit the financial exposure
of PacifiCorp ratepayers
for dam removal. THIS IS SUCH A SPECIOUS assurance for many of us. Those of
use who are ratepayers, and who live in southern oregon or northern
california, and who are federal taxpayers.......or most of us in the
immediate area......will receive no such financial protection as the claimed
~$1.50/month increase in our bills..........since we will actually pay
through the nose, not only via electric rate increases, but also state and
federal taxes.
It's also important to understand that most, if not all.........and you can
verify this with Sen. Whitsett's office......those who support the KBRA, AIP
and dam removal will escape paying most of the costs of this criminally
stupid project. Most people in Oregon, especially in the large population
centers upstate, are not PacifiCorp ratepayers. Additionally Upper Basin
supporters have signed onto KWAPA, the Klamath Water and Power Authority.
KWAPA (http://www.kwua.org/energy/kwapa) "is a Joint
Powers/Inter-governmental Agency and is made up of water agencies within the
Klamath Reclamation Project. A Joint Powers Agreement allows signatories to
the agreement, who have statutory authorities that are common to each
participant, to exercise those common "powers" jointly for the benefit of
all parties.
Each of the Parties to the Agreement has the power to purchase, generate,
transmit, distribute, sell and interchange electrical energy..." so they
won't be paying PacifiCorp's costs, either.
There were many excellent points brought out by those testifying against SB
76; I will leave to others to report as they wish to.
At least two of us testified to the fact that the KBRA and AIP violate
existing state and federal laws, and even the U.S. Constitution. Not one
committee member asked for specifics. I testified that the KBRA would kill
the longstanding, codified 30,000 acre foot diversion to the Rogue Valley,
completely eliminating ALL WATER to TID, and cutting water deliveries to
approx. 25% of all RV irrigators (I told this to Sen. Whitsett before the
hearing). When I said this to the committee, none of the comm. members
expressed any interest or concern, including Sen. Jason Atkinson, the
Senator for our area in Southern Oregon. Craig Tucker refuted my claim, and
GOD BLESS SEN. WHITSETT, because he forced Craig Tucker to admit the truth
of what I said in front of the committee.
According to this news report
(http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/02/bill_would_pass_alo
ng_cost_of.html), the Senate Env. and Nat. Res. Committee could vote on SB
76 as early as tomorrow.....so if you have comments, or more comments, NOW
is the time to email them to the committee at beth.herzog@state.or.us. I'd
suggest you also email or fax them to YOUR Senator, PLUS Sen. Whitsett
(sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us).
http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/agenda/agendas.htm
This information is subject to change several times a day, so check for any
changes to what is posted below:
75th Oregon Legislative Assembly
Committee Agendas Online
Environment and Natural Resources
Office: 347 Phone: 503-986-1755
Date: Thursday-February 5
Time: 3:00 P.M.
Room: HR F
Joined by the House Committee on Environment and Water.
Public Hearing
SB 80 Directs Environmental Quality Commission to adopt by
rule greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system to achieve greenhouse gas emissions
reduction goals.
Possible Work Session
SB 76 Directs Public Utility Commission to determine
depreciation schedules for Klamath River dams based on assumption that dams
will be removed in 2020.
Staff respectfully requests that you submit 25 collated copies of written
materials at the time of your testimony.
Persons making presentations including the use of video, DVD, PowerPoint or
overhead projection equipment are asked to contact committee staff 24 hours
prior to the meeting.
//////////////////////////////////////////////
Date: Tuesday-February 10
Time: 3:00 P.M.
Room: HR C Public Hearing SB 193
for dam removal. THIS IS SUCH A SPECIOUS assurance for many of us. Those of
use who are ratepayers, and who live in southern oregon or northern
california, and who are federal taxpayers.......or most of us in the
immediate area......will receive no such financial protection as the claimed
~$1.50/month increase in our bills..........since we will actually pay
through the nose, not only via electric rate increases, but also state and
federal taxes.
It's also important to understand that most, if not all.........and you can
verify this with Sen. Whitsett's office......those who support the KBRA, AIP
and dam removal will escape paying most of the costs of this criminally
stupid project. Most people in Oregon, especially in the large population
centers upstate, are not PacifiCorp ratepayers. Additionally Upper Basin
supporters have signed onto KWAPA, the Klamath Water and Power Authority.
KWAPA (http://www.kwua.org/energy/kwapa) "is a Joint
Powers/Inter-governmental Agency and is made up of water agencies within the
Klamath Reclamation Project. A Joint Powers Agreement allows signatories to
the agreement, who have statutory authorities that are common to each
participant, to exercise those common "powers" jointly for the benefit of
all parties.
Each of the Parties to the Agreement has the power to purchase, generate,
transmit, distribute, sell and interchange electrical energy..." so they
won't be paying PacifiCorp's costs, either.
There were many excellent points brought out by those testifying against SB
76; I will leave to others to report as they wish to.
At least two of us testified to the fact that the KBRA and AIP violate
existing state and federal laws, and even the U.S. Constitution. Not one
committee member asked for specifics. I testified that the KBRA would kill
the longstanding, codified 30,000 acre foot diversion to the Rogue Valley,
completely eliminating ALL WATER to TID, and cutting water deliveries to
approx. 25% of all RV irrigators (I told this to Sen. Whitsett before the
hearing). When I said this to the committee, none of the comm. members
expressed any interest or concern, including Sen. Jason Atkinson, the
Senator for our area in Southern Oregon. Craig Tucker refuted my claim, and
GOD BLESS SEN. WHITSETT, because he forced Craig Tucker to admit the truth
of what I said in front of the committee.
According to this news report
(http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/02/bill_would_pass_alo
ng_cost_of.html), the Senate Env. and Nat. Res. Committee could vote on SB
76 as early as tomorrow.....so if you have comments, or more comments, NOW
is the time to email them to the committee at beth.herzog@state.or.us. I'd
suggest you also email or fax them to YOUR Senator, PLUS Sen. Whitsett
(sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us).
http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/agenda/agendas.htm
This information is subject to change several times a day, so check for any
changes to what is posted below:
75th Oregon Legislative Assembly
Committee Agendas Online
Environment and Natural Resources
Office: 347 Phone: 503-986-1755
Date: Thursday-February 5
Time: 3:00 P.M.
Room: HR F
Joined by the House Committee on Environment and Water.
Public Hearing
SB 80 Directs Environmental Quality Commission to adopt by
rule greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system to achieve greenhouse gas emissions
reduction goals.
Possible Work Session
SB 76 Directs Public Utility Commission to determine
depreciation schedules for Klamath River dams based on assumption that dams
will be removed in 2020.
Staff respectfully requests that you submit 25 collated copies of written
materials at the time of your testimony.
Persons making presentations including the use of video, DVD, PowerPoint or
overhead projection equipment are asked to contact committee staff 24 hours
prior to the meeting.
//////////////////////////////////////////////
Date: Tuesday-February 10
Time: 3:00 P.M.
Room: HR C Public Hearing SB 193
Directs Water
Resources Department to
develop state water resources strategy. SB 194 Requires Water Resources
Department to implement Oregon Water Resources Department Strategic
Measurement Plan. Possible Work Session SB 76 Directs Public Utility
Commission to determine depreciation schedules for Klamath River dams based
on assumption that dams will be removed in 2020. Staff respectfully requests
that you submit 25 collated copies of written materials at the time of your
testimony. Persons making presentations including the use of video, DVD,
PowerPoint or overhead projection equipment are asked to contact committee
staff 24 hours prior to the meeting.
develop state water resources strategy. SB 194 Requires Water Resources
Department to implement Oregon Water Resources Department Strategic
Measurement Plan. Possible Work Session SB 76 Directs Public Utility
Commission to determine depreciation schedules for Klamath River dams based
on assumption that dams will be removed in 2020. Staff respectfully requests
that you submit 25 collated copies of written materials at the time of your
testimony. Persons making presentations including the use of video, DVD,
PowerPoint or overhead projection equipment are asked to contact committee
staff 24 hours prior to the meeting.
(Permission to post from the
author.)