Badwood Landing's demise: A victory for Oregon's values
By Oregonlive Guest Columnists
By Oregonlive Guest Columnists
May 11, 2010, 9:00AMBy Jack Marincovich, Ivan Maluski, Dave Cruickshank and Brett VandenHeuvel
Should Oregonians and our elected leaders sit by and watch Texas-based energy companies degrade our farmland, forests and salmon? Of course not........
4 comments:
what a steaming load of bullcrap
What a relief ANON.
Who else did Bradwood stiff?
Foster's Forgotten FOIA Lost in Kroger's High Priced Transparency Initiative
Carrie Bartoldus
• Sun, May 23, 2010
Brent Foster was the director of Columbia RiverKeepers in 2008 when John Kroger, as the newly elected Attorney General, appointed him Special Counsel on the Environment to the Department of Justice. At the time of his appointment Foster was lead counsel in a lawsuit against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for violations of the Freedom of Information Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
On November 24, 2008, Foster represented the plaintiffs, Columbia RiverKeepers and Willamette RiverKeepers, in Oral Arguments the before the court. Yet, a mere three months later, Foster neglected to mention his involvement in this lawsuit in an inter-office memo to Attorney General and Governor Kulongoski. The inter-office memo was used to obtain waivers from state agencies so that Foster would be allowed to represent and advise the state agencies on LNG and pipeline issues.
In the inter-office memo Foster states that Columbia RiverKeepers and the State of Oregon had both intervened in FERC's review process of the Palomar Pipeline while he was director of CRK. Foster writes, "I approved the intervention but have had little other involvement in the FERC intervention." He neglects to state that he is listed as lead counsel in the intervention to obtain the names of the landowners where the Palomar pipeline is proposed in the FOIA lawsuit. Foster neglected to state that he had taken part in the oral argument in front of the court as recent as November of 2008 in the case. The impression that the State and Columbia RiverKeeper were not involved in the same intervention was not dispelle
I think what you were intending to say here is that there is transparency and then there is "transparency". Maybe I'm wrong because I don't know the facts or anything about what "intervention" means to these people.
Post a Comment