LNG Survey: Majority supports terminal

By Alexander Rich, Staff Writer
Thursday, November 20, 2008 | 51 comment(s)

Font Size: Shrink Font Enlarge Font | Submit your news

Related Links

A survey paid for by backers of the proposed liquefied natural gas terminal on Coos Bay’s North Spit suggests a majority of area residents favor the project.

Jordan Cove Energy Project and Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline hired Moore Information of Portland to conduct the survey, which has a potential margin of error of 5 percent.

Pollsters got responses from 400 residents in Coos, Douglas, Jackson and Klamath counties.

They determined 56 percent favor the LNG terminal and 16 percent oppose it. The rest were undecided. They found slightly less support for the pipeline that would cross the four counties, with 54 percent in favor and 16 percent opposed.

Supporters most often said they favor the project because of the potential for new jobs and an additional source of energy. Opponents said they are concerned about safety risks and the possibility of environmental damage.

Jordan Cove Project Manager Bob Braddock believes the survey’s results confirm what he has always contended, that the community supports the project.

“We had beliefs about public perception and we wanted to confirm that,” he said. “At least now there is some information that says there are a bunch of folks out there” that support the project.

The survey also confirmed the area’s distaste for eminent domain. Sixty-five percent of respondents oppose the practice, while only 26 percent condone it.

Pollsters asked 20 questions (See details, Page A8), ranging from whether people had heard about the projects to whether they thought landowners would be equitably compensated to have a section of the 230-mile pipeline cross their property.

Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector came up with the survey idea in August, Braddock said. Moore Information had people make calls on Oct. 21-22, contacting an equal number of people in each county. The phone numbers were from a purchased voter list and numbers randomly selected.

The questions were generated by Moore Information after talking with Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector representatives.

Bob Moore, president of the polling company, said callers used probability sampling to select the 400 respondents.

“The ideal is it is representative of the voting population,” he said.

The respondents included 44 percent Republicans, 35 percent Democrats and 22 with some other party affiliation. Fifty-four percent were women, nearly everyone was a high school graduate, and 65 had some form of college or trade school.

Jody McCaffree, leader of the local Citizens Against LNG, said she thought the sample size was small, though even if it was accurate, she thought the most telling thing was that 37 percent of people hadn’t heard about the LNG terminal project and 46 percent about the pipeline.

“I think people are busy living their lives and not paying attention,” she said. “If they understood the whole concept, they’d probably change their minds.”

Opposition was strongest in Coos County, with 23 percent against both the terminal and pipeline. Opposition to the terminal dropped to 16 in Jackson County, 15 in Douglas County and 9 in Klamath County.

Jackson County residents appeared more concerned about the pipeline, as 22 percent said they were against it, while only 13 percent objected in Douglas County and 7 percent in Klamath.

Support for the terminal was strongest in Douglas County, with 62 percent, followed by Klamath, 59, Coos, 57, and Jackson, 46.

When pollsters switched topics from the terminal to the pipeline only Douglas County saw a noticeable drop in support, down to 55 percent.

Moore Information performs surveys for political campaigns, private companies and government entities. Some of its clients include Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., Trust for Public Land, Weyerhaeuser Co., and Southwestern Oregon Community College.



Previous

Have you checked out The World Link Forums?

Comments

The comments below are from users of theworldlink.com and do not necessarily represent the views of The World or Lee Enterprises. Participation Guidelines

Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
Comment Policy

The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.

Please follow these basic rules:

  • No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
  • No deliberately false information.
  • No obscenity or racially offensive language.
  • No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
  • No information that invades another person's privacy.
  • No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.

Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.

The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.

Close Guidelines

Thomas wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:08 AM:

Do any of the entities which are touting Coos county to others as a great place to relocate or to visit ever bother mentioning the impending fabulous LNG facility to be put here?

If not, then one ought wonder why.

Citizen wrote on Nov 28, 2008 8:51 AM:

Or what if the housing market slumps and the last big industry shuts down and we are left to rely aon all these minimum wage earners? Property tax revenue isn't much when nobody can afford to buy land or homes. This area's economy is built like a house of cards. If the terminal did blow up think of the tourism! Think of all the insurance claims and law suits... If it does blow up think about how all you negative folks could say I told you so!

Wow wrote on Nov 28, 2008 8:19 AM:

I have an idea to create some local jobs. Maybe just as many as the mighty savior LNG. A REAL, UNbiassed News paper. LNG is a joke!

To The Pro-LNGers wrote on Nov 27, 2008 4:24 PM:

If you are that hard up for a job, the fast food places are always hiring and so are the local cab companies.

rick wrote on Nov 27, 2008 9:37 AM:

Six Pack I Agree.
What is the governor going to do if one of our cascade volcanoes in Oregon erupts(Mt Hood, 3 Sisters, or even crater lake).Maybe he will ban volcanoe eruptions because all of that ash, may pollute the enviroment.Our governor stinks and yes on lng.
rick

Joe Sixpack wrote on Nov 26, 2008 2:54 PM:

It seems to me that if the green's don't get what they want it's a scam. so here we sit with a governor that thinks seance we have coal it's use and devilment needs to be stopped wind is so good it needs to be put on the north spit but it will kill the some birds and as for the green house gasses the CO2 is being removes be for it gets to the consumers (Norway's North seas gas fields) and the people who think we can all die from the blast go sit by a gas station and smoke that could be just as bad and for all you want to save the world just ban air conditioners for cars and building or better yet go to the third world and tell them to stay that way!!

everyman wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:20 AM:

Forget the polls..forget the town hall meetings...

There is only one way to settle this;

A WINNER-TAKE-ALL CAGE MATCH, PITTING THE BEST OF THE ANTI'S AND THE BEST OF THE PRO'S AGAINST EACH OTHER, IN A DUEL TO THE FINISH!!

Imagine; Common Sense and Jane versus Headmower and everyman, in a tag-team, figure eight leg pretzl!!

Or Thomas and Rick, hurling insults at each other in a manner not seen since Wrestlmania EIGHTY-SEVEN!!

SUNDAY, SUNDAY, SUNDAY!!!! BEEEE THEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERE!!!!!!

Does it matter wrote on Nov 25, 2008 8:59 AM:

Obviously the foreign folks with the money are setting the rules and it doesnt really matter what any poll or pro or non LNGer thinks, at all, about any of this.

1/2 are brainwashed thinking its progress and jobs are coming their way, which won't happen, and the other 1/2 think they can make a change and fight against big money.

Time to wake up and smell the corruption.

Former Bender wrote on Nov 24, 2008 10:53 AM:

Why can't people in the bay area accept change? When something good is staring you in the face - you should take it and run. Do locals ever want to see the depressed economy there improve? Oh my - someone is trying to bring jobs to the area - heaven forbid!!!

Thomas wrote on Nov 24, 2008 8:17 AM:

"a public entity is only allowed to go into closed sessions for specific reasons"

Yes, and as Oregon no longer has an effective way to enforce its Public Meeting Laws, this provision is often abused by most public entities.

Howsoever, no vote or action may be taken behind closed doors, and such must be done in open session after adequate notice to the public. Did the Port Commission do that?

headmower wrote on Nov 23, 2008 4:40 PM:

FOR ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT ANY
IMPROVEMENT IN THE ECONOMIC STAGMILE WE
LIVE IN, IN THIS COUNTY: WHY DON'T YOU
ALLOW SOME VIABLE INDUSTRY TO LOCATE IN
COOS CO. AND MOVE AWAY!!!!

Kris wrote on Nov 23, 2008 12:54 PM:

I support LNG and the family wage jobs that this will create. I also live in the so called "blast zone".

Cynthia wrote on Nov 23, 2008 10:38 AM:

Is this survey the rallying call? It seems that Coos Bay was initially targeted for the LNG project because it was believed that the area could not represent itself. The wealthier residents have been able to lobby to remove the pipeline route from their property. What is the next step? The next meeting?

moonpenny wrote on Nov 23, 2008 10:26 AM:

Still the same ol same. The World plasters a headline and the same crowd comes out of the shadows .. "we accept it" while the other side screams "we reject it". You cant please everyone.

Ignorance is Bliss wrote on Nov 22, 2008 9:34 PM:

Are some of you people really that ignorant??? You talk about this being front news in the paper, yet when it is news against LNG on the cover you never say a word. Your such hypocrites! You bitch and moan like a child when things don't go your way. Yet, people who agree with LNG rarely gripe when an article goes in your favor. As for the one saying we have a choice in this matter, We really don't. It's already been decided.

Thomas wrote on Nov 22, 2008 2:51 PM:

to LAST TANGO IN COOS BAY ---

This 'poll' is too invalid to even debate seriously. No pollster would stand behind such a blatant travesty, unless just for the money.

If the organization that did this is indeed good in other work it conducts, then why did they do such an obviously bogus job here ........ and why did The World publish it?

Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 12:18 PM:

SCAM!!! Wait, where is my nickel. I thought if you said "SCAM" on this page you got a nickel. It seems its written so many times by the anti-LNG faction that its lost meaning. Keep crying wolf, anti-LNGers...maybe your SHAM will end and the propaganda will stop.

kat wrote on Nov 21, 2008 10:43 PM:

To Gene L.

Just as an FYI, a public entity is only allowed to go into closed sessions for specific reasons; in those cases media are allowed to sit in but cannot write about anything that occurred unless it is outside the scope of what the closed session is for. Whenever media attend these sessions, its a good thing because they serve as a watchdog to make sure nothing that is supposed to be public information is discussed.

Mr. Rich wasn't invited in to bias his opinion, the Port had no choice but to allow him to stay the same way the folks from Channel 14 or any other media are allowed to stay.

Last Tango In Coos Bay wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:09 PM:

There is not a professional polling firm in this nation whose findings would be accepted by the anti-LNG group in thi county if the polling firm's findings indicated that the majority of people here do support the construction of this terminal and pipeline. The same group blasted Eco-Northwest's economic impact study. Eco-Northwest is a highly respected firm that has an impressive list of clients including some in this county that rely on the accuracy of their work to borrow money and expand existing businesses or start new ones. If the company's work wasn't accurate they wouldn't still be in business. The anti-LNG group here is the most vocal, but that doesn't make them a majority.

Opinions are like noses wrote on Nov 21, 2008 4:15 PM:

Once again The World has done what Peter Finley Dunne said is the responsibility of journalists: ..."comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." I will let each of you decide which side of that coin you are on.

I have said it many times via this venue...If the local communities do not find some means for attracting/creating employment opportunities, the only marketable job skill that will be important to your children is the ability to say: "Would you like fries with that?" in more than one language.

I have "heard" so many of say what you do not want...how about telling us what it is you do want? Just to save you some effort the timber and fishing industries will never, NEVER be what they were. Get used to it!

Just restart your computer wrote on Nov 21, 2008 3:36 PM:

Seesick, anyone can vote multiple times on these polls. Just restart your computer and you will be able to vote again.

Cindy,I think you should refrase your "People don't want LNG here" to "some people" because I am one of the many that would like to see it here.

How much is con man Bob Braddock Gov Ted paying you for front page coverage wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:13 PM:

Biggest SCAM since the last SCAM of how this Lng SCAM is safe in a Tsunami hazard zone along with the SCAM report saying Lng ship with a 2 mile hazard burn zone is safe!!! I just cancelled my World subscription, due to the fact this is a paid off subjective prejudice newspaper!

John James wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:08 PM:

Take a look around our fair city. It is a far cry from what it was just a few years ago. No jobs, no way for our families to live together in the same community. Everything that comes along that might just be the answer to the depressed state of life on the South Coast is rejected. Maybe the answer is to send all of the transplanted out of staters packing. Then maybe we can get on with improving our sometimes pathetic area.

JUST CURIOUS wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:49 AM:

LET'S POLL THE POSTERS ON THIS SITE AND SEE HOW MANY ARE TRANSPLANTED CALIFORNIAN'S

Common sense wrote on Nov 21, 2008 9:01 AM:

This is absurd.The article said that people that were for this were in favor of the employment and cheap energy.for this I have to say You must make the popping sound when you pull your heads out of your butts.It aint gonna happen.Alaska is the only state that actually drills for LNG and Palen just got the contract to export 80% of that to Asia.The only terminal that exsists on the west coast is in Baja Mexico because the people there have no say in what happens.WE DO and I say NO

Cindy wrote on Nov 21, 2008 8:54 AM:

Why do you people wonder why the World newspaper gives front page coverage to any desperate attempt to sell Coos County LNG. People dont want LNG here!The World is on record for several years as being a supporter of LNG. The last publisher in a SCDC meeting made that clear. How about that letter to the editor signed by Jon Barton. Anyone who knows Jon or his writing style knows that he didn't write that letter. Time for Lee Enterprises to give us a real newspaper.

RB wrote on Nov 21, 2008 7:37 AM:

Mr. Rich, staff writer of The World: your headline implies the majority supports the building of an LNG terminal. This is a flat misrepresentation of the facts.

The World should not be in the misinformation business. You must right this wrong with the same bold print. Or lose many of your devoted readers.

You will find us relatively intolerant of headlines which are not backed up by anything but prejudicial claims!

Boo on the World for allowing this type of preferential journalism.

empire resident wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:49 AM:

What a joke. ask us that live along the bay what we think. The results will be quite different.

Mike L wrote on Nov 21, 2008 2:55 AM:

We could be the EXPORTERS of LNG also, as we have the largest reserves of NG and the pipelines are in place or being built right now from the Rockies for transitting it to the coast. Denbury Resources Inc. (DNR) is just one of many oil/gas companies that are now exploiting old wells using new tech to fully recover every barrel and every cubic ' of NG and using it here in the 'Good Ol US of A' instead of imports. And Obama does approve of this as a clean resource and has been in talks w/T. Boone Pickens regarding NG, Wind Farms & Solar alternatives to imported oil. I do not own any shares of DNR-For the Record.

Too Much wrote on Nov 21, 2008 1:13 AM:

If you're so sure the results of the poll are false, then the citizens against LNG should pay for a one and strictly poll Coos Bay & North Bend or Coos County, whichever you prefer.

I understand when they approached the County Commissioners to do so, they offered to raise the money themselves to pay for the extra cost. Use that money you were going to raise to hire an independent firm. Of course the downside about that is the supporters of LNG will cry foul then if they don't like the results.

Perhaps the better solution is to split the costs with Jordan Cove and choose the independent firm together so that both sides cannot argue with the results, whatever they may be.

Gene L. wrote on Nov 20, 2008 10:53 PM:

The WORLD, according to Alexander Rich, does not believe its own poll. The recent WORLD poll was very likely participated in by folks who had done some research on the subject.

If Elliot Trepper finances Mr Braddock to buy polls, it makes me wonder what else might be for sale.

Tonight I watched as the Port commission went into closed-door session and leaving the interested citizenry behind. The WORLD reporter, Mr. Rich, was taken into the chambers and the door shut .

That cozy situation puts the WORLD in the position of being "part of" the story. If any objectivity was there previously, it is gone now.

steve wrote on Nov 20, 2008 7:29 PM:

One thing is for sure.. A petition was presented to the state of oregon with over 4000 signatures in opposition of the Jordan Cove Project and related pipeline... Tell ya what,,, I'll produce a copy to the world news upon request if this sham of a poll can produce half as many signatures... what a joke this poll is.. right up there with the scdc report that was presented.. NO BACK UP DATA INCLUDED

Coos County wrote on Nov 20, 2008 7:28 PM:

Just want to point out the article says the survey was taken in Coos County, so that would include North Bend, Coos Bay.

rick wrote on Nov 20, 2008 6:59 PM:

Jody McAffree,
I'm tired of people like you who think they can force there political,inviromental, personnal issues on us.You have not fooled me nor most of this community with your liberal tactics!Jody the survey has spoken! Get over it and stop try to block the lng terminal.
rick

seesick wrote on Nov 20, 2008 5:50 PM:

I stand corrected! I was wrong about being able to vote twice in " The World" polls! I just did a test, it DID tell me I had already voted. Sorry "World" and.......

Hubert wrote on Nov 20, 2008 5:37 PM:

Absolutely no business in the US pays for a poll without knowing the end result will be favorable. Recall that SCDC used your tax money to get similar findings. I don't care if there is a terminal. I do care that the World's bias shows again. Where is the World report that Jody McCaffree has collected about 5,000 signatures on a petition opposing local LNG - with a margin of error of zero. The people along the Columbia River where two other terminals are proposed have more signatures. At least the last World editor gave both sides of an issue, not just the side that favors their pals. Time to mount a meaningful cancel the paper drive.

seesick wrote on Nov 20, 2008 5:19 PM:

I agree with you BOB, how many people who LIVE in the blast zone agree to this? All of our family members do, and NONE support it! I NEVER heard of a survey, other than in the World, and that is a joke since you can vote more than once. Hey...WORLD fix your "polls" so one vote per person, I mean if you want to be FAIR....or do you?

Con Game wrote on Nov 20, 2008 5:13 PM:

Isn't it amazing that the survey they paid for came up with what they wanted to hear. Are people here that stupid? Nevermind, I amswered the question myself!

Thomas wrote on Nov 20, 2008 4:57 PM:

This 'survey' is so methodically flawed that its results have no value whatsoever ......... except for causing our community to wonder why The World gave it front page coverage?

How about giving us a real vote on it, Bob?

To Dave wrote on Nov 20, 2008 4:39 PM:

Obama is an ethanol man.

Kari wrote on Nov 20, 2008 4:11 PM:

This has Tin Cup Opitz written all over it.

Pro LNG wrote on Nov 20, 2008 3:57 PM:

Sounds like the CAVE dwellers (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) are the only ones commenting on this story. Here they go again, chasing away yet another company attempting to bring jobs & revenue to the area! I say "Bring it on" Jordan Cove, there are loads of us that want the terminal here!

bob wrote on Nov 20, 2008 2:13 PM:

I wonder what the results of this survey would be if you only asked people living within the blast zone to respond. I'd really like to know.

Here We Go wrote on Nov 20, 2008 1:51 PM:

I think Mr.Rich needs to do the research himself and not listen to Mr. Braddock and Mr.Opitz. A good reporter gets the facts and prints them "NOT" this trash. I just wonder how The World Newspaper feels on this scam. But we will never know, because they will never tell us.

truthordare wrote on Nov 20, 2008 1:16 PM:

I agree with Mr. Pickering's take on the survey paid for by Mr. Braddock. The most recent on-line poll in early November by The World newspaper showed 547 people (52%) opposed to the LNG terminal, 506 (48%) for the terminal. An earlier on-line poll had similar results, where the majority of the people in this community did not favor the LNG facility! Mr. Braddock's community should be drawn from the people affected by the terminal and the pipeline. Unlike Jody McCaffree, I think the people surveyed, who did not know about the terminal (37%) or about the pipeline (46%), did not know because they were not directly affected. That being the case, how could they even respond to the questions without some knowledge about what the projects entail? It's too bad the Coos County Commissioners did not want this issue to be voted on.

dave wrote on Nov 20, 2008 12:45 PM:

if this lng is built, obama says he's going to shut down greenhouse gas emmissions, which lng emits, so what's the use of building it? he's said he's going to "bankrupt" the coal companies to stop greenhouse gas emmissions here in the united states, so it's an exercise in futility.

the only thing obama's going for is solar & wind power, so that's the direction we should be going, especially w/all the wind we have here on the south coast.

coos native wrote on Nov 20, 2008 12:34 PM:

I agree....Take a poll in Coos Bay, North Bend.

Ron wrote on Nov 20, 2008 11:51 AM:

Really? No one I know ever heard of that survey. No one. Not one person, ever.

The World needs to reword their headline so as to not mislead people. How about something like this:

"LNG supporters claim their own survey shows the majority support the building of a terminal in Coos Bay"

Fix this, huh?

Another Bob braddock SCAM report that shows how desperate he is wrote on Nov 20, 2008 11:48 AM:

Have a Oregon state wide vote used car salesman Bob Braddock, since you obviously love to waste your $$$ on these little SCAM reports bought & paid for by you! Then you can leave Oregon forever since you said quote: "If Oregon doesn't want me or LNG, I'll be gone"....remember con man Bobby!!!!!

Common Sense wrote on Nov 20, 2008 11:42 AM:

Con man Bob Braddock is at it again, best poll money can buy! How come every poll in newspapers (Including the World's) & on radio shows has it about 2 to 1 against??? Have a Oregon state wide vote con man Bob Braddock if you think the majority want this California LNG SCAM???

Steve Pickering wrote on Nov 20, 2008 11:00 AM:

Douglas, Jackson and Klamath counties are not Coos Bay. Do the same survey in Northbend, Coos Bay. Bob Braddock has skewed the survey intentionally to make it look favorable.

This is starting to get stupid. We are trying to reduce our dependency on foreign oil energy/oil and this foreigner wants to import foreign gas.

Or as some of the terminals already built are doing, will they instead turn this into an export terminal to survive financially and ship our domestic gas out of country where it will bring a premium price and raise our local cost?


*Member ID:
*Password:
 

Not already registered?

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!



*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

*First Name:
*Last Name:
Would you like to be added to our mailing lists?
Daily Headlines
Breaking News
Special Offers
 
Advanced Search
Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH

Blogroll

Most Popular

Polls

» View Past Poll Results
» Suggest a Poll

Marketplace

Special Sections

More Special Sections