From: Wald, Zachary

Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 9:06 AM

To:
Farmer, Casey; McElhaney, Lynette
Subject:
Re: OAKLAND SAYS NO! TO COAL SHIPMENTS AT THE OAKLAND ARMY BASE
Yes Casey;
Zac Wald
Chief of Staff
Oakland City Council President
Lynette Gibson McElhaney
(510) 238-7032
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:49 AM -0700, "Farmer, Casey" <CFarmer@oaklandnet.com>
wrote:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OAKLAND SAYS NO! TO COAL SHIPMENTS AT THE OAKLAND ARMY
BASE
Contact
Lynette Gibson McElhaney, 510.506.8079 or Zac Wald, Chief of Staff,
510.282.2971
May 13, 2015 The recent news headline Unlikely Partners: Utah Investing $53
Million to Export Coal Through Oakland Port, came as a shock to Oakland s
political leaders, who have consistently opposed the export of hazardous fossil
fuels
due to safety and environmental concerns.
Lynette Gibson McElhaney, President of the Oakland City Council, is unequivocal
in
her opposition to coal being exported from City-owned lands, "West Oakland canno
t
be subjected to another dirty industry in its backyard. We were told that this n
ew
terminal on City property would increase economic growth, but I see Coal exports
as
the Trojan Horse in the development of the Oakland Army Base - it is not the typ
e of
economic development that we want - no thank you!"
Air quality and public health have long been critical issues for West Oakland re
sidents
- West Oakland children are admitted to the hospital with asthma complications a
t a
higher rate than almost anywhere else in California. The West Oakland Environmen
tal
Indicators Project, a community-based environmental justice organization, has be
en
fighting for years to reduce the toxic diesel particulate emissions that come fr
om the
heavy trucking and shipping activity nearby.
Says Gibson McElhaney, Since coal was not contemplated to be exported when the
Army Base Development project was approved, the community has not yet had the
chance to make their voices heard on this subject. This is unacceptable
The Oakland City Council, and the Port Board of Commissioners have already taken
stances against coal exports, specifically:
*
In February of 2014, the Board of Port Commissioners rejected a proposa
l to
ship coal from one of their terminals.
*
In June of 2014, Councilmember McElhaney and her colleagues passed a
resolution opposing the transport of coal, oil, petcoke (a byproduct of the oil
refining process) and other hazardous materials by railways and waterways
within the City.

The decision to ship coal from the Oakland waterfront has implications beyond th
e
health of local residents who may be affected by coal dust or potentially hazard
ous
spills.
According to Jess Dervin-Ackerman of the Bay Area Sierra Club, Utah and other
coal producers are so eager to ship their product out of the country, because th
e
domestic market has dried up, as the United States adopts cleaner forms of energ
y.
West coast ports are rejecting new coal-shipment terminals because coal
even if
it's
burned somewhere far away is a dirty fuel that has global impacts in terms of
climate change.
Casey Farmer
Policy Director and Community Liaison
City Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney
Oakland, District 3
cfarmer@oaklandnet.com
Direct 510.238.7031
Cell 510.863.4059