Mono County/Ormat get “greenmailed”
A union scam has made its way to Mono County and is targeting the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Ormat’s Mammoth Pacific I Replacement Project.
The scam is a form of “greenmail,” similar to blackmail, but using environmental issues on renewable energy projects as the threat. Some labor unions hire environmental lawyers to exploit California’s environmental protection laws and force private developers to agree to union-only Project Labor Agreements. If the developers don’t give in, their projects are stalled or stopped by appeals and litigation.
On Thursday, Oct. 11, the Mono County Planning Commission held a special meeting to consider final approval of the M-1 Replacement Project’s Final EIR (FEIR), conditional use permit, setback variance and reclamation plan. The M-1 replacement project is the proposed construction of a new geothermal plant within walking distance from the existing geothermal plant that Ormat currently owns and operates off of Hwy 203.
The existing plant is approximately 25 years old, and Ormat is looking to replace it with a new, more efficient, state-of-the art facility. The old plant would then be used as a storage facility.
During last week’s site visit to the plant and subsequent public hearing, the Commission, Mono County staff and Ormat received some unwelcomed guests. Two lawyers attended, Mitchell Tsai, Independent Attorney-at-Law, and Elizabeth Klebaner of Adams Broadwell Joseph and Cardozo. Tsai was there to represent Laborers’ International Union of North America (LiUNA) and Klebaner was there on behalf of California Unions for Reliable Energy (CURE).
Adams Broadwell Joseph and Cardozo is the law firm named in many of the online articles and reports on this topic, which explain that this “greenmail” has made its way all over the state, affecting projects as large as the San Diego Convention Center’s expansion.
In Mono County, the two lawyers picked at three things in the FEIR and presented at least 100 pages of documents to County staff and the Commission on the day of the meeting.
The three items they targeted were a small portion of language in the County’s General Plan regarding setback variances, air quality issues that could result from the plant’s emissions, and biological impacts on the deer population in the area.
Klebaner spoke first and was able to get through her presentation before Commissioner Scott Bush became fed up.
“Who are you and who do you represent that wants to slow this down?” Bush asked her. “This is not a new thing to the County. The plant has been there for almost 30 years and now you’re saying its terrible.”
Klebaner stated that she was there to represent geothermal unions wanting sustainable plants. When Bush asked for a list of union members in Mono County that she represented so that he could go and speak with them about this issue, Klebaner drew a blank and said she would have to get back to the Commission with names. Mono County Associate Planner Courtney Weiche said this week that the County had received word back from Klebaner that her firm was not legally obligated to supply a list of names and therefore would not do so.
When it was Tsai’s turn to speak, Bush repeatedly interrupted him asking if it was his goal to stop the plant for good.
“It sounds like you want to stop the project, but you’re representing the people who would work on it,” Bush said. “You’re raising issues without any solutions.”
“I was just asked by my clients to take a look at the EIR and suggest ways to mitigate further,” Tsai said.
Commissioner Steve Shipley asked if Tsai’s deer expert had actually made a trip to the location for a field study or if the expert had just used old information and studies. Tsai did not know. It was, however, pointed out several times that during the course of the environmental study on the project, the County had not heard any objections from the Department of Fish and Game, which is the local authority used as a litmus for the significance of biological impacts of a project.
Since the County didn’t hear anything back from DFG regarding the project, it was confident that the agency did not have issues with the deer population in the project’s area. No news is good news when dealing with large agencies such as DFG.
Several local contractors attended the public hearing to support Ormat and ask the Commission to move the project forward.
Ultimately the Commission voted 4-0 to approve the project. What will happen next will depend on whether or not the unions and their lawyers file an appeal to the Commission’s decision.
If an appeal is not filed, the only item that will go before the Mono County Board of Supervisors will be a General Plan Amendment to clarify the language regarding setback variances.
If, however, an appeal is filed, which is what County staff was expecting, then a review of the entire project would need to go before the Board of Supervisors.
Any parties wanting to file an appeal would need to do so within 10 days of the Commission’s decision, which would give them until Oct. 22.
