Props to the Port Commission on the oil deal.

While 2 of these people are genuine morons who did their best to screw the community by jacking up the highest tax increase in local history for money they didn't need... costing Arch Miller his job, but sadly, not the other two (Wolfe and Baker).

With equal stupidity, the Commissioners endorsed the CRC Scam, proving that none of them are fit for elective office.

And last night, it appeared they were going to cave into the fringe-leftist environmental fascists.

But today, in an increasingly rare show of common sense:

Port of Vancouver unanimously approves oil terminal lease

State will still have to consent to plan

Port of Vancouver

The Port of Vancouver has invested heavily in rail facilities, which was a major factor in attracting a plan by Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies to build an oil transfer terminal. Courtesy Port of Vancouver.

By Aaron Corvin
Columbian Staff Reporter

Originally published July 23, 2013 at 10:11 a.m., updated July 23, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.

digg submit

On Twitter

Reporter Aaron Corvin is live tweeting from the meeting. Follow him on Twitter @col_econ.

Opponents of the proposed oil terminal at the Port of Vancouver urged commissioners to reject a lease deal with Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies on Monday night.

Photo by Troy Wayrynen

Port of Vancouver commissioners today unanimously approved leasing land for a controversial oil terminal despite overwhelming public testimony against the plan by Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies to build the largest such facility in the Pacific Northwest.

Commissioner Brian Wolfe said the lease — worth $45 million to the port over an initial 10 years — addresses public safety concerns and enables the port to re-invest millions in further development. Port managers will stay on top of Tesoro and Savage like “white on rice” to ensure the project is “done right,” Wolfe said.

Commissioner Nancy Baker, who predicted she’ll lose “a number of friends” over her vote, said if the Port of Vancouver doesn’t help build the infrastructure to handle oil then “someone else is going to do it. That’s the way the world works.”

Commissioner Jerry Oliver said the project will provide family-wage jobs and help the U.S. wean itself off foreign oil. “We’re not adding to global warming,” Oliver said. “We’re replacing oil (that’s) already being consumed.”

Although commissioners signed off on the lease, it was only a first step and not the final say over whether the oil terminal, which would handle up to 380,000 barrels of crude per day, will get built.

That’s because the Tesoro-Savage proposal must undergo an examination by the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, which would make a recommendation to Gov. Jay Inslee, who has the final say.

The council’s review could take up to a year or more. The companies hope to launch the terminal in 2014.

Asked for his reaction to the commissioners’ decision, Dan Serres, conservation director for Columbia Riverkeeper, which opposes the oil terminal, said the pressure is now on the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council and Gov. Inslee “to do a better job” than port commissioners of vetting the oil terminal.

Serres said the argument the project will help achieve U.S. energy independence is false, adding that the port ultimately will have “no control over where the oil goes.” And the notion the oil terminal won’t exacerbate global warming is “absurd,” Serres said. Based on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency calculation method, Columbia Riverkeeper estimates the combustion of oil moved through the Tesoro-Savage terminal would result in about 59.64 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually, or the equivalent greenhouse gas pollution impact of roughly 12 million cars.

More: