Court Hearing Dates:
The Federal Court Hearing for the Richardson Grove Case is in San Francisco, Thursday February 23, 2012 at 2pm, court room #8, 19th floor, with the Honorable William Alsup.
The State Court Hearing for Richardson Grove is in Eureka, Wednesday March 14, 2012 at 9am, court room #8, with the Honorable Dale A. Reinholsten.
The public and supporters are welcome to attend; Please be respectful of the Court.
Greetings …On February 2, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee marked up its major surface transportation bill, HR 7, (called the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act.) The bill contained numerous anti-safety provisions. One of them would have allowed a “state option” to permit 97,000 lb. trucks and triple-trailer trucks to operate on most roads in many states across the nation. However, Congressman Lou Barletta (R-PA) and Congressman Jerry Costello (D-IL) introduced and championed an amendment that REMOVED these provisions and replaced them with a responsible study on the impacts of truck sizes and weights.
This was a great victory but just shows that the trucking industry will continue to lobby vigorously for bigger, heavier and more dangerous trucks. As good as this news was, there are other great concerns regarding this bill:
It would make financing for mass transit much less certain and more vulnerable, by ending a 30-year agreement that guaranteed mass transit a one-fifth share of the fuel taxes and other user fees in the highway trust fund. Instead it would complete annually with other programs.
It would open nearly all of America’s coastal waters to oil and gas drilling, including environmentally fragile areas that have long been off limits. The ostensible purpose is to raise revenue to help make up what has become an annual shortfall for transportation financing. But it is really just one more attempt to promote the drill-new-drill everywhere agenda and the interests of their industry patrons. And, most alarmingly:
It would demolish significant environmental protections by imposing arbitrary deadlines on legally mandated environmental reviews of proposed road and highway projects, and by ceding to state highway agencies the authority to decide whether such reviews should occur.
Obviously, we need to keep the pressure to oppose these provisions on our current Congressman Mike Thompson as well as the candidates for the new CD2. If this bill passes the House, we will have to contact Senators Boxer and Feinstein to oppose passage in the Senate. Please remember to “Take Action” on <http://saverichardsongrove.org/> to contact our California legislators and Governor to abandon the Richardson Grove project.
We need to take action and contact our Congressperson – for most of us this would be Mike Thompson. As you know, CALTRANS wants to widen Highway 101 in Richardson Grove to allow STAA truck access. Now the trucking industry has succeeded in getting legislation introduced to increase the legal weight limit – the bill is the Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill (H.R. 7)
States could permit trucks weighing up to 97,000 pounds — and in some cases as much as 126,000 pounds — on interstate highways under the bill. The current limit is 80,000 pounds in most states. Increased weight limits are supported by the trucking industry, but opposed by safety advocates.
“Larger and heavier trucks mean bigger safety risks for highway drivers,’’ Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., wrote in a letter to House lawmakers last week asking them not to raise weight limits.
You can Google Mike Thompson for his web site to send your comments or use <http://mikethompson.house.gov/contact>. Here are a few talking points:
On average 4,000 people are killed in truck crashes annually and 100,00 more are injured. The annual cost of truck crashes exceeds $19 billion. In the past 10 years more than 48,000 people have needlessly died and over 1 million have been injured in truck crashes. Enough is enough.
In fatal 2-vehicle crashes involving a passenger vehicle and a large truck, 98% of the deaths are occupants of the passenger vehicles. Adding more weight to a big truck dramatically increases the risk of death and serious injury.
The American public strongly opposes allowing bigger and heavier trucks. In an April 2011 public opinion poll, 74% of Americans opposed increases to truck weights, with more than half of Americans strongly opposing them.
Big trucks dramatically underpay their fair share of bridge and road damage and motorists are footing the bill. States and Congress are already struggling to find sufficient funds to repair roads and bridges and we don’t need bigger trucks doing more damage that motorists have to pay for.
Bigger trucks mean more truck traffic, more fuel consumption, more emissions, particularly greenhouse gases, and will result in more deaths and injuries.
Highway 101 is NOT Interstate 5! Keep STAA trucks out of Richardson Grove State Park! Thank you for helping to protect our Park, our old growth trees and ourselves!
Greetings … the legal wheels are turning so stand by for action! On December 6 the Plaintiffs (the good guys – EPIC, CBD, CATS, et. al.) filed their motion for Summary Judgment in the Federal Court action.
This motion asks the Judge to decide that there are no triable issues of fact for a jury to decide in the complaint and that judgment should be awarded to the plaintiffs. In other words, no trial is necessary and the plaintiff wins.
However, CALTRANS will have something to say to the contrary, and their reply will be filed on December 28. Then the Plaintiffs get a chance to reply to that and the Plaintiffs’ Response will be filed by January 18. Finally, CALTRANS gets one last shot and their Reply will be filed by February 1. Then there will be a hearing where the attorneys have one more chance to argue their case in front of the Judge.
The hearing is scheduled for February 23, 2012 at 8:00 AM in Judge Alsup’s courtroom on the 19th Floor of the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco. All are encouraged to attend if possible. We’ll update you as the time draws nearer.
And that’s not all! A companion lawsuit was filed in State Court at the same time that the Federal Court lawsuit was filed but it has been relatively dormant until now. The Plaintiffs will file their opening brief this Friday, December 9 in the Humboldt County Superior Court in Eureka. A hearing is scheduled there for March 14 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 in Eureka and more updates will issue as we draw closer.
To keep up on the action feel free to access EPIC’s website at www.wildcalifornia.org. The “Action and Issues” tab has a pull down menu and Richardson Grove is the first topic. Click there and it will take you to the most current information on our struggle and you will be able to access the actual legal documents from there.
In the meantime, this is just a reminder that we have an exciting opportunity here in the newly formed Congressional District #2 which stretches from the Golden Gate Bridge up to the Oregon boarder. This new Congressional seat is open since Mike Thompson is moving to a District to the east and will no longer represent us. There are multiple candidates running for the new seat and now is the time to get them talking about Richardson Grove and other issues of local concern.
Try to attend as many local town hall meetings as you possibly can when these candidates come to your area. For example, there will be a debate of the candidates at the Mateel Community Center in Redway on January 15 – a great opportunity!
Now is also a great time to submit letters to the editor and opinion pieces and/or write to your Legislators – the State Legislature is in recess so your Assembly and State Senate representatives are in their home districts so it’s a good time to share your concerns.
That’s it for now, but stay tuned. Meanwhile, all the best for a peaceful holiday season and a Happy New Year! Should you wish to be removed from this listserv simply email me. Regards, Barbara Kennedy
SAN FRANCISCO— A federal judge on Wednesday ordered California state transportation officials to stop work on a controversial plan to cut wider highway lanes through ancient redwoods in Northern California’s Richardson Grove State Park. The judge granted the injunction that was being sought by a group of plaintiffs that includes three environmental organizations and several citizens, finding the project is likely to harm trees and may violate federal law.
The judge halted plans by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to realign a section of Highway 101 that winds through old-growth redwoods in the park to accommodate large-truck travel. The work would require crews to extensively cut into the roots of towering redwoods that stand along the highway within park boundaries. The injunction prohibits all on-the-ground construction and even contract advertising, bidding, or awards until the merits of the case are heard. The case is to be heard on Dec. 1, 2011.
The court’s decision centers on the controversial project’s potentially fatal damage to the prized ancient trees, as well as harm to sensitive wildlife. The plaintiffs charged that Caltrans failed to evaluate impacts of the project in violation of environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act. Those arguments were recognized as valid in Wednesday’s court decision granting the injunction. The federal lawsuit accompanies a California state action also filed by the coalition.
“This project would cause irreparable damage to one of our most prized state parks, and this decision confirms the legitimacy of our concerns,” said Gary Hughes of the Environmental Protection Information Center, a plaintiff group based in Humboldt County. “We believe that this ruling highlights the ecological importance of the state parks in redwood country, and we hope that decision-makers are beginning to understand the legal and ethical responsibility they have to steward these globally important protected areas for future generations.”
“With less than 3 percent of our ancient redwood trees remaining, we cannot allow Caltrans to injure and kill the precious giants of Richardson Grove State Park,” said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. “We hope that with this court decision, Caltrans will scrap this misguided project that would sacrifice redwoods and the endangered species that depend on them for the sake of a few more oversized trucks speeding through the grove.”
Plaintiffs in the case (No. C 10-04360 WHA) are Trisha Lee Lotus, Bess Bair, Bruce Edwards, Jeffrey Hedin, Loreen Eliason, Environmental Protection Information Center, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics and the Center for Biological Diversity. They are represented by a team that includes Philip Gregory and former congressman “Pete” McCloskey of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, a law firm in San Francisco.
Judge Orders California to Halt Work on Richardson Grove Highway Expansion That Would Harm Ancient Redwoods – EPIC’s Press Release
Richardson Grove Injunction Cites Inconsistencies in Environmental Review; Caltrans Stands By Project – Times Standard
Preliminary Injunction Granted in Richardson Grove Case – Times Standard
Order Granting Preliminary Injunction – United States District Court
Save Richardson Grove allies are invited to rally in Sacramento on June 22, 2011 to protect the Grove. Participants from Humboldt and Mendocino counties will be joined by organizers from the San Francisco Bay Area, and from other locales around the state, when they converge at noon right in front of Caltrans’ headquarters in Sacramento, at 12th and N Streets. At the rally, the group plans to deliver postcards of opposition from across the state and country to send the message that the project should be immediately rescinded, at least until a better alternative can be identified.
After four years of holding off the road widening project, the broad coalition of activists, including the Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters, recognized as a long time redwood region defender, is inviting concerned citizens to rally for Richardson Grove to ensure that democracy is respected and the legal cases heard on their merits before the project moves forward. With no procedure available to the public to express substantive concerns for the negative effects the project could have on the local economy and ecological health of the ancient redwood grove, the group will take their message to Sacramento.
For more information please email: contact_us@saverichardsongrove.org.
May 25, 2011— A coalition of conservation groups, the Environmental Protection Information Center, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Californians Alternatives to Toxics, along with local residents asked a federal judge to stop California transportation officials from moving ahead with a controversial highway project that would jeopardize ancient stands of redwood trees in northern California’s Richardson Grove State Park.
The coalition seeks to halt plans by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to realign a section of Highway 101 that winds through old-growth redwoods in the park. The work would require crews to dig into the roots of towering redwoods that stand along the highway within park boundaries. Today’s filing asks a judge to stop the project until legal proceedings are complete.
The threat of possibly fatal damage to the prized ancient trees, as well as harm to sensitive wildlife posed by the controversial project, is driving today’s legal challenge, which is the second filed by the coalition. Caltrans has failed to evaluate impacts of the project in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
“The importance of this old-growth redwood stand, in view of the important heritage of the redwood forest, requires special consideration before projects that would impact the stand are allowed to go forward,” (see below) Joe McBride, a professor of forestry and landscape architecture at the University of California at Berkeley, said in today’s filing. “Substantial, irreparable damage would occur to the trees in the project area. This would, in turn, cause negative impacts to the overall health of the forest.”
McBride’s finding is based on his scientific review of the potential of impacts to each tree along the project route — a review plaintiffs show Caltrans failed to undertake.
“This project will cause major damage to one of our most prized state parks,” said Gary Hughes of the Environmental Protection Information Center, one of the plaintiff groups and spokesman for the coalition. “For Caltrans to railroad this multimillion-dollar project by grossly understating its impacts is a violation of the public’s trust and a wasteful use of taxpayer money.”
“With less than 3 percent of our ancient redwood trees remaining, we cannot allow Caltrans to injure and kill the precious giant trees of Richardson Grove State Park,” said Peter Galvin, conservation director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We will fight this project to the end, no matter how long it takes.”
Plaintiffs are Trisha Lee Lotus, Bess Bair, Bruce Edwards, Jeffrey Hedin, Loreen Eliason, Environmental Protection Information Center, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics and the Center for Biological Diversity. They are represented by a team that includes Philip Gregory and former congressman “Pete” McCloskey of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, a law firm in San Francisco.
Diverse and energetic opposition to Caltrans’ project to alter Highway 101 through Richardson Grove State Park emerged Monday with a well-attended rally and non-violent civil disobedience resulting in 12 arrests. The actions, held at the offices of Caltrans District 1 in Eureka, were organized by the Richardson Grove Action Now group and attracted over 200 people and multiple media outlets that covered the event.
The rally Monday represented much more than the mostly student contingent, that staged the civil disobedience. A broad diversity of voices in the group were united with a single goal that shook the offices of Caltrans in the form of a chant that rang out throughout the rally: “One Demand: Cancel the Plan!”
A range of people involved in the Coalition to Protect Richardson were asked to speak into the microphone during the rally, to offer brief words of inspiration, songs, and accurate information about the project to the crowd. One of the speakers, Barbara Kennedy, has been working to educate the public about the project since Caltrans began drawing up plans, back in 2007. Her words for the crowd were spoken in a characteristically measured tone, but the crowd’s enthusiasm grew as she spoke. Kennedy’s words of insight were followed by a long time Piercy resident named Cheri Porter, who explained the adverse impacts that businesses in the town of expect, should the project proceed.
In summary, Porter explained, “Every business in Piercy will be negatively impacted, if not destroyed through this project. We just can’t afford it. With two lumber mills closing in our community, we depend on tourism to survive and this project will hurt that.”
Withstanding debate between the needs of export-reliant businesses and the many voices of opposition to the project, most people agree that the State Park must not be harmed. This resolute stance by many in Humboldt and Mendocino Counties, the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond may outweigh vocal beneficiaries of the project, like Sun Valley Group Inc. and Emmi Holding Inc.’s Cypress Grove Cheese Company. Until now, these companies and a handful of others have seen no other alternative to fulfill their transportation needs then the widening of 101 through Richardson Grove State Park for larger truck access.
With only a few months before planned construction and a swelling number of defiant activists becoming involved in fighting the project, the time has come to identify an agreeable alternative and push for its implementation. The two sides of the debate could find common ground, by identifying a plausible solution to satisfy a few businesses’ shipping needs but without completing an expensive and risky construction project in the old growth redwood grove within the State Park. One immediate alternative to Caltrans’ Richardson Grove plan would be a new legislative exemption to allow certain industries to run larger trucks through the grove. This could both offer relief to businesses burdened by expensive shipping costs and preserve the community of ancient trees for future generations.
Currently, cattle trucks are allowed through the grove, even though the trucks’ longer trailers exceed the 48 foot kingpin to rear axle restriction. If new legislation was introduced that allowed for a permanent exemption for additional trucks, perhaps the heated debate of “trucks versus trees” could be resolved.
Meanwhile, the campaign is growing.
EPIC’s campaign to protect Richardson Grove State Park has gathered thousands of postcards to stop the project, mailed “activist packets” to campaign supporters across the state and hosted well-attended educational forums. With the Californians for Alternatives to Toxins, the Center for Biological Diversity and five citizen plaintiffs, EPIC also filed two lawsuits challenging the project on legal merits.
The first of these lawsuits charges that the Environmental Impact Report prepared for this project does not meet California Environmental Quality Act standards, and that the project is unnecessary because equivalent trucks pass through the grove every day, without incident. The Federal case cites violations of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The attorneys representing the plaintiff group include Sharon Duggan, Kevin Bundy and the esteemed Cotchett, Pitre and McCarthy law firm. Former US Congressman Pete McCloskey and other well-known California public figures have also come forward opposing the plan, and supporting EPIC’s legal and campaign strategy.
Throughout the last year, over 35,000 people took online actions protesting the plan, and that number will continue to grow. As more people learn that the treasured, ancient trees marking the entrance to the redwood region face a risky construction project by Caltrans, the opposition will grow with the numbers of people informed. Social networking sites like Facebook help viral messages like these extend to unlimited numbers of potential supporters. Already, the Save Richardson Grove FB page has 1670 members, and this is without any assertive campaign to promote the social site.
Now campaign organizers are discussing proposals for massive rallies, action camps, major concerts and other big events to attract activists from around the state to show their strong opposition to Caltrans and the plan to widen 101 through Richardson Grove. All of these efforts could be redirected if either Caltrans cancels their project voluntarily, or another alternative with California lawmakers can be reached quickly.
Three years after Caltrans first announced their intention to widen Highway 101 through Richardson Grove State Park, no construction has begun. The agency may have cited an urgent need to complete the project, but has not been successful in forcing the project through amidst controversy. In response to deficient environmental documents and inadequate public review, EPIC and our allies had no choice but to file a lawsuit to stop the project. In addition to a legal battle, the public campaign to protect the grove continues to build momentum. Starting later this month, we will have new opportunities to coordinate our efforts so we might build our political power and influence decision-makers to rescind the project altogether.
At this writing, EPIC, the Californians for Alternatives to Toxins (CATs), the Center for Biological Diversity and five citizen plaintiffs have filed two lawsuits challenging the project, one in State court and one in federal court. The two lawsuits raise many issues to the court, namely that Caltrans did not adequately assess the environmental impacts under either Federal or State laws designed to protect our rivers and forest ecosystems. We have an incredibly talented legal team, including the leadership of Sharon Duggan and the support of the acclaimed Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy law firm. Soon, these cases will be heard in San Francisco for the Federal lawsuit and in Humboldt County for the state lawsuit. As soon as we hear from either court about scheduled dates, we will post them on our website, so those interested may attend the hearings. Even with many of the attorneys working pro-bono on this case, the cost of these legal challenges can be overwhelming. Please consider donating to the Richardson Grove Legal Fund, to support the effort.
Rumors and poor media coverage have led the public to inaccurate conclusions about the Richardson Grove highway widening project, including that Caltrans’ project planners have all but one permit to proceed, and that they intend to begin the project as soon as February, 2011. Sources at Caltrans consistently state that they cannot begin the project next month, and that agency does not, contrary to popular belief, have all of their permits in order to even contract the construction work. Estimated start date for Caltrans is June 2011, but if we have anything to do with it, no project will proceed!
While construction will likely not start as soon as anticipated, our collaborative campaign to protect the ancient stand of redwoods along 101 must now get more organized, for anticipated public events in the coming months. Now is the time for campaign supporters to create visual tools, spread the word and organize regional meetings with a member of the coalition to keep informed. One self-organized group of activists have taken the first step and organized a meeting (location TBA) during the last week of January. This free potluck gathering in Arcata will offer an opportunity for an in-depth update from EPIC, a strategic planning discussion, and plenty of time to paint banners and build puppets for future rallies. In addition, Richardson Grove Campaign materials will be available, including t-shirts, brochures, stickers and petitions.
