At about 11 p.m., the meeting came down to one final speaker: Roberta Stewart of Bandon. The Hales Center for the Performing Arts on the campus of Southwestern Oregon Community College in Coos Bay had been filled to capacity when the meeting convened at 6 p.m., with overflows of people sitting on the stairs along the auditorium's sides and standing up against the back of the room. By the time Stewart had her chance at the microphone five hours later, fewer than a quarter of the audience remained.

This was the last officially scheduled meeting concerning the proposed liquefied natural gas holding facility on the North Spit of Coos Bay, as well as the LNG tankers such a facility would draw, and a proposed 223-mile-long, 36-inch gas pipeline, before project applications are submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission this fall. The pipeline would run from the holding facility to the California border. FERC, which is responsible for authorizing the site and construction of onshore LNG facilities, organized the meeting to elicit input from local residents on specific environmental and safety issues.

That's not what transpired.

On stage were Paul Friedman, FERC project manager; Ross Reineke, engineer for the Office of Pipeline Safety for the Department of Transportation; and Capt. Patrick Gerrity, of the U.S. Coast Guard, Sector Portland.

Stewart, a soft-spoken older woman, approached the microphone, greeted the men, and said, “When I talked to the man from FERC at the LNG open house at The Mill a few weeks ago, he said he wasn't interested in my opinions,” said Stewart. “So I guess I'll talk about some of my opinions now, then, since I'm not sure I'll ever have another chance.”

When FERC receives an application for a LNG facility, it's required to complete an environmental impact statement, evaluating issues such as impacts on vegetation and wildlife, air quality, geology, cultural resources and soil. After his preliminary introductions, before he began taking comments from the audience, Friedman explained that “comments should be on EIS-related issues only.” He explained that local input was needed to determine what FERC, the Coast Guard, and other organizations would look at when composing an EIS.

Friedman then told audience members that “comments will be limited to three minutes each, and I'm really going to hold people to that,” because, he said, about 90 people had signed up to speak.

That number of speakers, and the number of people who had filled the auditorium on a Tuesday night offered a clue as to what was to come, which wasn't 90 well-researched suggestions on how to make the EIS better. Instead, what came was an outpouring of disapproval:

n disapproval of the fact that these projects were proposed for the area;

n disapproval of the effects these projects would have on the county;

n disapproval of the effects these projects would have on residents; and

n disapproval of the fact that FERC, not local government agencies, has the say so about if proposed projects were built.

For hours, the men on stage sat in metal chairs and listened to disapproving comments, some politely worded, others shouted, others delivered almost tearfully.

ppp

The tone of the meeting was set from the start. The first audience speaker was Daniel Serres, a member of Friends of Living Oregon Waters, who came to the microphone wearing an anti-LNG shirt and stated that the LNG holding facility would damage the area's environment and that the gas would only be used for California, anyway.

“We're using only 10 percent of this gas and getting 100 percent of the mess, and it is on that basis that I ask FERC to deny these project applications,” said Serres, who left the microphone to enthusiastic applause.

The issues that Serres touched upon were repeated many times over the course of the meeting, as were most criticisms of the projects.

Steve Jones stepped to the podium to encourage FERC to study potential impacts to Henderson Marsh, just west of the proposed LNG terminal, and possible erosion along the river channel. He said he was worried about the effects of a massive excavating project to remove a sand dune and dredge for the docking area for tankers and an in-bay turning basin.

Jody McAffree, of North Bend, among others, said that the area lacks the necessary emergency infrastructure to handle the hazards that come with LNG importation. Ken Denton, of Coos Bay, argued that the 31-day period for public comment, which started when Jordan Cove Energy Project filed a draft resource report June 23, should be extended from its termination date of July 24. Friedman agreed, and said comments from the public would be accepted by FERC past July 24 (see sidebar). Carl Siminow, of North Bend, spoke about how he was “uncomfortable” having a liquid natural gas facility so close to his home, when an accident at the facility could cause him and his family “so much harm.”

About 15 speakers were residents of the Glasgow area of Coos Bay, where portions of the pipeline are proposed to be built. Phil Keizer, a property owner in Glasgow, said he was “horrified to find that the pipeline is supposed to go straight through the subdivision I own, which will destroy it.” Many audience members from Glasgow and elsewhere speculated that the construction of a pipeline and holding facility would cause the area's property values to plummet.

Of all the speakers, the number who made pro-LNG comments could almost be counted on one hand. Former state Sen. Ken Messerle, of Sumner, was the first to make such comments, when he said that “the area's been struggling for 20 years, and Jordan Cove ... would be a tremendous benefit to the area.”

A sizable portion of the crowd booed Messerle as he walked from the microphone, prompting Friedman to tell the audience, “Let me make one thing clear: You may applaud, but you absolutely may not boo anyone.”

After Messerle, no other speaker was booed, though applause was subdued when David Kronsteiner, president of the Oregon International Port of Coos Bay; and Ron Opitz, executive director of the South Coast Development Council, made similarly positive statements about the proposed project. Kronsteiner appealed to FERC not to approve a pipeline “route through residential areas along the east side of the bay.”

Emily Ashworth, of North Bend, was one of the many speakers who used her three minutes to lament the fact that FERC had final say over the projects.

“These FERC people are probably appointed by the same people who put people in FEMA!” she shouted, gesturing dramatically with her hands. “And we all know how that turned out for New Orleans.”

She then yelled repeatedly that she didn't “want to get FERCed, and (didn't) want her community to get FERCed either,” to the audience's sustained applause and hooting.

In lieu of comments, many speakers came to the microphone with questions. In response to Reineke's statement that the pipeline would be inspected regularly, Ann Keizer, of Coos Bay, asked how that could be done when the pipeline was underground. Suzanne Ross, of Coos Bay, asked why a holding facility was being proposed in an area at risk for tsunamis.

All questions proved rhetorical, as communication was almost entirely one way throughout the meeting. After their opening statements, about the only time the men on stage used the microphone was to call upon the next speaker or to remind people when their three minutes was expired.

ppp

By the third hour, most of the crowd had dispersed, and the affair took on the feel of a support meeting. People began telling stories about why they moved to the area, illustrating how the LNG projects fly in the face of those motivations. Some commented with wistful humor about how fate had delivered a proposed pipeline to their backyards. Cathy Denton of the Glasgow area quipped about the irony of her choosing, “of all the places I was looking at,” to build a house in the Glasgow area, on a portion of land that may soon be uprooted for a natural gas pipeline. Memories of the area's lost timber industry were invoked with regularity.

After the final scheduled comments from Stewart, which mostly rhetorically questioned the benefits of the proposed projects, Friedman looked out at the diminished audience.

“Well, that's it,” Friedman said. “Does anyone else want to say anything? Anybody who didn't sign up to speak?”

A few people put their hands up. They would end up saying things that had been said at least a dozen times already, but that didn't matter at this point. Their 2 cents would be submitted while the chance remained.