From: Wald, Zachary

Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 5:10 PM

To:
jess.dervin-ackerman@sierraclub.org
Cc:
Cook, Brigitte
Subject:
Re: FW: Draft Press Release/E-News - Oakland Says "No! to Coal
Shipments at the Port of Oakland
Love it!
Zac Wald
Chief of Staff
Oakland City Council President
Lynette Gibson McElhaney
(510) 238-7032
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:45 PM -0700, "Jess Dervin-Ackerman" <jess.dervinackerman@sierraclub.org> wrote:
According to Jess Dervin-Ackerman of the Sierra Club San Francisco Bay Chapter,
"Coal
producers are eager to keep burning this dirty energy source even as the United
States moves
quickly toward a clean energy future. West coast ports are rejecting proposals l
ike this because
coal, no matter where it is burned, is a dirty fuel that has global impacts in t
erms of climate
change. California has worked hard to be a coal free state, and it should stay t
hat way."
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Wald, Zachary <ZWald@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
Jess
Please edit and send back to Brigitte (cc d) here, and we will send it out.
Thanks,
Zac
Zachary Wald
Chief of Staff for Lynette McElhaney
Oakland City Councilmember, District 3
510-238-7032
Contact:
Lynette Gibson McElhaney, City Council President: 510.932.1938
Zac Wald, Chief of Staff: 510.282.2971
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OAKLAND SAYS NO! TO COAL SHIPMENTS AT THE PORT OF OAKLAND
May 8, 2015
Last week s news headline Unlikely Partners: Utah Investing $53 Million
to
Export Coal Through Oakland Port, came as a shock to Oakland s political leaders, w
ho have
consistently opposed the export of hazardous fossil fuels due to safety and envi
ronmental
concerns.
City Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney says that she plans to bring a f
ormal
resolution to the City Council to consider the health and safety impacts of a po
ssible deal to

bring thousands of coal-filled rail cars from Utah, to be shipped out of the Por
t of Oakland.
The resolution from the Council President will call for a public hearing in fron
t of the City
Council, to discuss the health and safety impacts to West Oakland and to Port wo
rkers from
transporting and processing coal at the Army Base. The planned public hearing wi
ll be a chance
for the City Council to hear from the public and from experts, on the health and
safety effects of
having a coal export terminal operating at the Port.
Says McElhaney, Since coal export was not contemplated when the Army Base Develop
ment
project was approved, the community has not yet had the chance to make their voi
ces heard on
this subject.
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 Commissions rejected a proposal to ship c
oal 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 ot
her hazardous
materials by railways and waterways within the City. That resolution was advisor
y only, since
the City does not have jurisdiction over the railways.
The decision to ship coal out of the Port of Oakland has implications beyond the
health of local
residents who may be affected by coal dust or potentially hazardous spills.
According to Jess Dervin-Ackerman of the Bay Area Sierra Club, Utah and other coa
l
producers are so eager to ship their product out of the country, because the dom
estic market has
dried up, as the United States adopts cleaner forms of energy. West coast ports
are rejecting new
coal-shipment terminals because coal even if its burned somewhere far away
is a
dirty fuel
that has global impacts in terms of climate change.
Councilmember Gibson McElhaney will introduce her resolution for scheduling at t
he Oakland
City Council Rules Committee Hearing on May 14th, in the City Council Chambers.
####
Zachary Wald
Chief of Staff for Lynette McElhaney
Oakland City Councilmember, District 3
510-238-7032

From: McElhaney, Lynette

Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 5:05 PM
To: Wald, Zachary
Cc: Cook, Brigitte; Farmer, Casey
Subject: Re: Draft Press Release/E-News - Oakland Says "Hell No! to Coal Shipmen
ts at the Port of
Oakland
Hell No in the Title ok. In the quote needs to be changed to ABSOLUTELY NOT"
Sent by Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney from my iPad
On May 6, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Wald, Zachary <ZWald@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
PRESS RELEASE
Contact:
Lynette Gibson McElhaney, City Council President: 510.932.1938
Zac Wald, Chief of Staff: 510.282.2971
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OAKLAND SAYS HELL NO! TO COAL SHIPMENTS AT THE
PORT OF OAKLAND
May 6, 2015 Last week s 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 do to safety and environmental concerns.
City Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney says that she plans to bring a
formal resolution to the City Council to block the deal to bring thousands of co
alfilled rail cars from Utah to be shipped out of the Port of Oakland.
Says Councilmember Gibson McElhaney, The City Council has been abundantly
clear on this issue in the past, but apparently a reminder is needed. District 3
Residents have suffered major health impacts from their proximity to the Port. W
e
will not stand by and allow another major health risk be inflicted upon them.
In February of 2014, the Board of Port Commissions rejected a proposal to ship
coal from one of their terminals. McElhaney hopes to introduce her resolution
jointly with members of the Port Commission.
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. That resolution was advisory only, since the City does not have
jurisdiction over the railways. The current resolution contemplated by McElhaney
would have a regulatory effects, since the City owns the land where the coal
shipment are being contemplated, and the Port has jurisdiction over what travels
in and out.
Councilmember Gibson McElhaney expressed frustration that this message has
not already been clearly heard by the City s partners in developing the former
Army Base land (transferred to the City by the Federal Government). Says
McElhaney, I have supported the development of the former Army Base,
because the Port is an economic engine that has the potential to benefit all

Oaklanders. Does this mean that I believe that we should keep our economic
options open to include coal? Hell no!
The decision to ship coal out of the Port of Oakland has implications beyond the
health of local residents who may be affected by coal dust or potentially
hazardous spills.
According to xxxx of the Bay Area Sierra Club, Utah and other coal producers
are so eager to ship their product out of the country, because the domestic mark
et
has dried up, as the United States adopts cleaner forms of energy. West coast
ports are rejecting new coal-shipment terminals because coal
even if its burned
somewhere far away is a dirty fuel that has global impacts in terms of climate
change.
####

-Jess Dervin-Ackerman
Conservation Manager
Sierra Club, San Francisco Bay Chapter
2530 San Pablo Ave, Suite I
Berkeley, CA 94702
Office: (510) 848 - 0800 ext. 304
Cell: (510) 693-7677
jess.dervin-ackerman@sierraclub.org
Sierra Club San Francisco Bay Chapter: exploring, enjoying, and protecting the p
lanet for over
90 years. Donate here to continue that legacy.