Forest Grove passes resolution against LNG terminals

Jill Rehkopf Smith
The Oregonian
March 11, 2008

FOREST GROVE -- Forest Grove has became the first Oregon city to pass a resolution opposing construction of liquefied natural gas terminals near the mouth of the Columbia River and pipelines to Central Oregon.

City councilors on Monday unanimously supported the resolution, which cited the project's potential danger to the ecological balance of the Columbia, to the natural resources along the pipeline route and to the water supply of Forest Grove.

"It's not a case of 'Not In My Back Yard,'" said Councilor Pete Truax, who drafted the resolution. "This is 'in nobody's back yard.'"

Out-of-state companies have proposed building several LNG terminals in the state, including two on the Columbia River.

Proponents argue natural gas provides cleaner energy than coal and the projects will provide good jobs in Oregon. The gas would be extracted from other countries and shipped to a Columbia River terminal, then sent through underground pipelines to far-off distribution points, including California.

Two of the proposed pipelines, Palomar -- a joint venture between Northwest Natural Gas Co. and TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. -- and Oregon LNG, would pass near Gales Creek and Gaston and through Forest Grove's watershed.

Councilor Tom Johnston said that growing up in Gales Creek he lived through earthquakes and landslides and worries about damage to a pipeline located there.

Councilor Victoria Lowe pointed out that it's not just Forest Grove's water supply that might be affected because the pipeline would pass near Hagg Lake, which serves Beaverton, Hillsboro and other cities.

In addition to local testimony, Brent Foster, executive director of Columbia Riverkeeper, drove in from Hood River for Monday's hearing.

Foster cited damage from construction of a Coos County natural gas pipeline, a project approved by voters in 1999, such as erosion, landslides, stream pollution and tainted or blocked water supplies.

Foster also invited councilors to type "gas pipeline accidents" into the Google search engine on their computers to see all the references that come up.

Gov. Ted Kulongoski and key state agencies share Forest Grove's concerns, said Patty Wentz, a Kulongoski spokesperson.

The pipelines and terminals need state permits before they can be built, and state attorneys are looking into the extent of Kulongoski's authority to hold up those permits, Wentz said.

Kulongoski is also concerned that a 2005 law that took siting authority for such facilities away from the state and put it into federal hands also limited citizen involvement.

"People are trying to be involved in this process," Wentz said of the Forest Grove resolution. "It's not a hollow gesture. The governor is paying attention."