Index to the web page below:

Rio Linda Elverta News Front Page article August 29, 2002

FPL Withdrawal letter August 20, 2002

CEC Order Terminating Proceedings August 28, 2002

Preston Robinson's Letter to the Rio Linda News, printed August 29, 2002

Florida Power and Light has withdrawn its application to build a 560 megawatt power plant in the Rio Linda/Elverta community, citing an inability to obtain sufficient air quality credits, an unfavorable market for electricity and "significant community opposition."

The withdrawal is seen by many as a stirring victory for the Rio Linda/Elverta community members who banded together to fight the proposal, and a stinging defeat for Supervisor Roger Dickinson, who pointedly ignored wide-spread community opposition and actively worked "behind the scenes" to push the project.

"I honestly believe that FPL would have had a potentially lethal impact on our community. Whether it would be a result of pollution, outages and/or accidents arising from careless operations, a combination of those or other factors, I don't know. I am just immensely relieved that FPL will not have the opportunity to validate my speculation," said community activist Deborah Courtney.

Jeff Culley, President of the Rio Linda/Elverta Chamber of Commerce, expressed similar thoughts. "At first, we thought the power plant would be a done deal," he said, "and that there was nothing the community could do to stop it.

"We were advised to assemble a community group that would negotiate the best possible benefits package for Rio Linda and Elverta," Culley said. "But when we started digging to find our negotiating points, we found that this project would really be a disaster for the community. This plant did not belong here."

The project was to be sited on approximately 90 acres east of the railroad tracks and one-half mile south of Elverta Road. An accompanying natural gas pipeline would have stretched across the rice fields toward Woodland.

The official end to FPL's two-year effort to build a power plant in Rio Linda/Elverta came in a August 20 letter written by FPL Energy Sacramento Vice President Derrel Grant to the California Energy Commission (CEC), the state agency that licenses power plants.

Community members have been anxiously awaiting this day ever since the commission officially suspended work on the project in September, 2001, when FPL was unable to provide a workable plan to mitigate the ton of pollutants the proposed plant would release into the air every day.

FPL's efforts were also hampered by the project's inability to adequately comply with the local community plan and the county's general plan, or to mitigate problems relating to water and soil resources, visual blight, noise, land use, biological resources, worker safety, fire protection and transmission system engineering.

A wide range of community members and organizations came together to point out these and other problems.

Opposition ranged from the outspoken members of STOP, a community group formed to Stop The Oppressive Powerplant, to the mainstream Chamber of Commerce and the Rio Linda/Elverta Community Planning Advisory Council (CPAC), whose members were Rio Linda/Elverta residents appointed by the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors.

When FPL filed its original application with the CEC in January, 2001, local opinion of the project was neutral. Community members formed the Florida Power and Light Liaison Committee (FPLLC), to negotiate a benefits package to mitigate the project's impact on the community. The FPLLC followed in the footsteps of a community liaison group formed in 1995, when the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors had rezoned the land for a co-generation facility to produce power and convert rice straw from nearby fields into ethanol (the previously licensed SEPCO project). That facility was never built.

The FPLLC included representatives of all major community organizations, including schools, fraternal and social groups, churches, local government districts, sports organizations, the fire district and adjoining neighbors.

This group began meeting, and asked FPL to do a presentation at a public meeting sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, where extensive outreach would urge the public to attend. Such a meeting was held, and the notice some of the people received was the first they had heard of the proposed power plant. Over a hundred people showed up. FPL declined to attend, saying that they had already had an open house and had also done a presentation in this community before the CEC commissioners, and they were not required to do any further community outreach. FPL went on to state that they were not convinced that the FPLLC was who they should be negotiating with. Their refusal to recognize or negotiate with the FPLLC was bolstered by First District Supervisor Roger Dickinson's refusal to formally recognize the committee.

FPL instead adopted a "divide and conquer" strategy, saying that they would not negotiate mitigation/community benefits proposals with any stakeholder involved with FPLLC. They then went to groups that they did want to negotiate with, such as the Parks and Recreation District and Elverta School District. FPL told them that they would like to negotiate a community benefits package with them, but they would not do so if they continued to participate in the community group. They also said that they would only be negotiating with a select few of the stakeholders in the community.

"From a public relations point of view, FPL's actions were a disaster," said STOP co-chair John Sassaman. "By refusing to meet and negotiate with members of the community, FPL alienated local residents, turned away potential allies and generally made their lives much more difficult. It was a classic PR blunder."

Sassaman cited FPL's own documents as another series of missed opportunities and out-and-out blunders.

The company provided interested parties with literally tons of paperwork. "Unfortunately," Sassaman said, "much of what they provided contained glaring inconsistencies and half-truths, or presented opinions as facts. These shortcomings allowed community members to successfully attack FPL's proposal with FPL's own words."

As an example, Sassaman cited an FPL map that omitted the Elverta Elementary School, a so-called "sensitive receptor site" located 3,200 feet from the proposed plant. "FPL tried to explain the shortcoming away by saying they were using an old map. Their map must have been pretty out of date, since the school has been there since 1855 -- pre civil war." Sassaman also noted that FPL held their open house at the school before the incorrect map was issued, and company officials spoke to the school superintendent about negotiating benefits.

"The quality of FPL's scientific analysis was consistent with their map skills -- and equally lacking," Sassaman added.

Other community members echoed Sassaman's comments. "The key to defeating FPL was reading and evaluating their paperwork," said Chris Chaddock, a neighbor of the proposed project. "It was so lacking. I was continually blown away by their lack of knowledge or skills in evaluating the issues involved with licensing a power plant. That was something that just amazed me."

FPL's words and deeds also raised doubts from the Rio Linda Water District's Board of Directors. The proposed plant would have required at least 2,800 acre-feet of water per year, and FPL repeatedly changed the proposed source for that water, to the consternation of the water board and others. If they used groundwater, it could have caused the toxic plume of contaminated groundwater from McClellan to enter local wells.

Although the water board was required by law to provide a "will serve" letter to any water user in its district boundaries, the conditional letter issued to FPL contained numerous caveats and conditions.
FPL could not identify a proposal that addressed community concerns and complied with the water board's caveats and conditions. "I don't think that FPL could meet the water district's requirements," said Jay O'Brien, a member of the water district's board of directors.

Despite the growing concerns and opposition from the community, FPL representatives continued to act as if their proposed facility met the requirements for the SEPCO project. Their actions were supported by an opinion from the Sacramento County Planning department -- issued without the normally required public hearing or notification and sent to the CEC -- stating that the project complied with applicable zoning laws. 

Rio Linda/Elverta residents started questioning the Planning Department's opinion almost immediately. Residents also questioned the unusual deviation from the county's normal land use planning process. One of the first steps is review by the local CPAC -- a step that the county originally bypassed. A public hearing at the county Planning Commission was also skipped.

By June of 2001, the CPAC acted on numerous requests from residents to consider the land use issue. County Planning Department staff kept telling the CPAC that the zoning was already in place and that there was no issue, but members of the community finally were able to produce documentation regarding the project which convinced the CPAC to look at the land use issue.

At the July, 2001 CPAC meeting, after reviewing all the documentation over several days of deliberation, the CPAC decided that a hearing should be held to determine consistency with the current zoning and the Sacramento County General Plan and the Rio Linda/Elverta Community Plan. The Rio Linda/Elverta Chamber of Commerce voted to support this decision.

The CPAC held the public hearing in August, over two different days. During the August meeting, one of the FPL representatives indicated that the company had had a private meeting with County Planning staff before filing the application, where the county indicated that the zoning was fine and there would be no problem.

After hearing from hundreds of concerned citizens, none of whom spoke in favor of the project, the CPAC voted unanimously to formally disagree with the Planning department's assessment, finding that the project was inconsistent with zoning requirements, the Sacramento County General Plan and the Rio Linda/Elverta Community Plan.

Deborah Byrne, the chair of the CPAC at the time, was pleased with how her group fostered discussion and the formation of community consensus. "The CPAC worked very hard to give the community every opportunity to voice its opinion on this issue," she said. "Once it became clear how the community felt about FPL and its project, the CPAC did its very best to represent that viewpoint to those who would be deciding the fate of this project."

The CPAC's written comments spanned 17 pages, and called for the Board of Supervisors to reject the proposal.

In a meeting in early September of 2001, the supervisors did not endorse the CPAC's recommendations, but also did not unilaterally reject them. After hearing from an auditorium full of concerned residents who attacked the proposal as inappropriate for its proposed site, the board instead opted to delay their decision until the California Energy Commission made progress on FPL's application.

The project was not without its supporters. The handful of community members who spoke in favor of the project during public hearings called the power plant the proverbial lesser of two evils. "I believe that this project is a good project," supporter Charlea Moore told the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors. "The land is not ever going to be anything other than industrial, and I fear the next project proposed for this area will be worse for the community impacts than this one." 

The project also drew strong support from northern California labor unions, whose members would be hired to build the plant.

The most notable supporter was Supervisor Roger Dickinson who, despite running unopposed in the next election, received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from labor unions, FPL attorneys and the wife of an FPL lobbyist.

Dickinson repeatedly touted the power plant's economic benefits, which reportedly included a wealth of jobs and revenue for the community and the county, and a stream of steady customers for Rio Linda and Elverta's restaurants and stores, as well as property tax revenues of $3 million per year.

These benefits were widely questioned by community members, and frequently contradicted by FPL documents and by statements from FPL officials. During the CEC's July 17 community meeting, for example, FPL officials stated that no local residents possessed the skills required to be hired as a full-time employee. Furthermore, an FPL traffic circulation plan showed employees leaving the plant via Elverta Road to Highway 99. The sole access road into and out of the plant was located as far away from the community as possible. 

Community members were particularly outraged by claims that the community would benefit from FPL's estimated $3 million a year property tax payment, saying that Dickinson and other county officials failed to mention that the plant's construction would cause other local property taxes to plummet. During a community meeting on June 8, 2001, FPL officials stated that local property values would fall by up to 40 percent during the two-year construction of the plant. Values would have risen to their original level 10 years after the plant entered service. So after 12 years, local property owners would only be back to where they started before the plant was built. 

Although community members objected to what they perceived to be biased activities by county officials, they had nothing but praise for the fair and impartial professionalism of the California Energy Commission Staff, specifically Lance Shaw, CEC Project Manager, and Mark Hamblin, a planner in the CEC's Land Use & Traffic/Transportation Unit.

In a letter cross-posted to a community email list, STOP member Jay O'Brien praised Lance Shaw for the CEC's efforts. "We couldn't have done our part in this without your fair, unbiased, even-handed treatment of this project as its Project Manager. It is professionals, like you, who set the example of 'good government' as intended by our founding fathers. I'm proud of our Energy Commission; keep up the good work!"

The future of the site appears to be, quite literally, open. During the August 13, 2002 CPAC meeting, Supervisor Dickinson spoke in favor of making the property and surrounding land undeveloped open space. In response to a question about the county's ability to ensure a smooth transition between Rio Linda/Elverta and the City/County Joint Planning Vision area, Dickinson said "The first thing that I believe we all hope is that the Ueda Parkway will be extended north to and past the Sutter County line. We haven't talked to Sutter County about that, that I know of, but at least within Sacramento County we would like to see the Ueda parkway go all the way up the canal, Steelhead Creek as it's now known, and that presumably would provide something of a buffer no matter what development pattern becomes."

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION ) DOCKET NO. 01-AFC-1 FOR THE ) FTL ENERGY SACRAMENTO POWER, LLC )   RIO LINDA/ELVERTA POWER PROJECT ) (AFC ACCEPTED 02/02/01) (RIO LINDA) ) _______________________________________ )   ORDER TERMINATING PROCEEDINGS Background On August 20, 2002, Applicant submitted notice withdrawing the Application for Certification (AFC) in the above-captioned proceeding. Discussion Applicant's notice of withdrawal complies with Energy Commission regulations, which provide that the presiding member shall issue a written order terminating proceedings upon receipt of a properly executed withdrawal notice. (Title 20, California Code of Regulations, section 1709.8.) Order Henceforth, review of the AFC in this matter is immediately terminated, no further filings in this matter shall be accepted by the Energy Commission's Docket Unit, and the proceeding is hereby closed. So Ordered. Dated August 28, 2002, at Sacramento, California ARTHUR H. ROSENFELD, Commissioner Presiding Member Rio Linda AFC Committee JAMES D. BOYD, Commissioner Associate Member Rio Linda AFC Committee

Printed August 29, 2002