My understanding is Port of Coos Bay commissioners are appointed by the governor and are volunteers and therefore unpaid for their public service. The current crop of commissioners, Brady Scott, Dan Smith, Jerry Hampel, Dave Kronsteiner and Caddy McKeown were appointed by former governor, Ted Kulongoski.

Recent public comments by Port management and commissioners as well as paid advertisements making provably false claims about public safety, taxation, job creation and financial markets raises concern about the competence of those administering Port funds and assets. Jeff Bishop, salaried director of the Port earning six figures, has exaggerated the number of new jobs and downplayed the risks of the proposed Jordan Cove LNG terminal.

Opponents of the terminal don’t know whether Bishop simply hasn’t read the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) as well as the testimony and evidence uploaded by Jordan Cove Energy Partners or if he is deliberately misleading the public. The same holds true with claims about local taxation, engineering designs, geological studies and tsunami modeling.

At the last Port commission it became apparent the commissioners who vote on the critical issues probably don’t read the data either begging the question, just what do they base their decisions on? The Port filed as an intervenor on behalf of the Jordan Cove FERC application. An intervenor is a a party who does not have a substantial and direct interest but has clearly ascertainable interests and perspectives essential to a judicial determination.

As an intervenor, the Port is heavily involved in the permit application and they have submitted comments and testimony to FERC in support of the Jordan Cove project. In addition, the Port has developed an entire business plan to develop a container dock that is contingent upon the Jordan Cove terminal. Commissioner Caddy McKeown appears not to know the Port is an intervenor or if she does, doesn’t understand what it means when she claims the Port is not involved in the permit process.

Caddy: I just want to clarify something and I am getting the impression from the way some of this conversation goes that you are assuming it’s our permit. This is Jordan Cove’s permit. We have the land but the process for the permitting is not ours. And I think there seems to be some confusion about that, uh, (mumbled) they, that’s their job to do… they have to prove that they’re worthy. FERC will reward a permit, that’s not ours. We are not involved in that process. We are involved in owning a piece or having an option right at this moment on a piece of land. And I think a lot of this comes to us maybe inappropriately because this is not our process to go through, its Jordan Cove’s process to go through.

The commissioners, having accepted the appointment to the board, also have a responsibility to the public. They may choose to support the Jordan Cove project but they must also look out for the Port and the public. Governor Kulongoski and the State Attorney General both question the failure of the permit process to properly establish need for an import terminal before taking public land via eminent domain.

While I am not unalterably opposed to the LNG resource being part of the Oregon energy mix, the failure of the permitting process to address whether there is sufficient demand and need for LNG in this region is a serious shortcoming of the FERC permitting process.

The Oregon Department of Energy analysis concludes that the market in the western United States may support, at most, one LNG facility of the size of the three facilities proposed in Oregon. Yet, all three different sites remain under active consideration by FERC. The proposals are requiring local governments and state (and federal) agencies to devote scarce
resources from other pressing problems to evaluate projects that in all likelihood may never be built. FERC’s own website states that:

“The market ultimately determines whether an approved LNG terminal is ever built. Even if an LNG terminal project receives all of the federal and state approvals, it still must meet complicated global issues surrounding financing, gas supply and market conditions. Many industry analysts predict that only 12 of the 40 LNG terminals being considered will ever be built.”

The approach of approving far more facilities than will ever be built is unacceptable 10 me. The people of Oregon deserve better. Facilities like LNG terminals, which have the potential for significant environmental impact should only proceed if it is determined that natural gas is needed and after a comprehensive review that determines both environmental and market
objectives are met.

Bishop stated more than a year ago during a Coos County Urban Renewal Agency meeting the Jordan Cove terminal may not be built for twenty years. “These people take the long view”, he said. Of all the feasibility studies paying outside consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars for solid waste disposal plants and container docks on the North Spit the feasibility of building a LNG terminal in a designated hazard zone is not one of them. Yet the commissioners agreed to commit the Port as an intervenor on the Jordan Cove application.

Who is minding the store for the public?