The resolution applying the coal ordinance to the OBOT facility is invalid, because it is a breach of the development agreement.

West Oakland communities concerned as popular ban goes down in court

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Sierra Club and San Francisco Baykeeper respectfully move to dismiss two of the claims embedded within OBOT’s First Claim for Relief, namely, that Oakland Ordinance No. 13385 and Resolution No. 86234 violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by (1) discriminating against out-of-state interests in favor of local ones; and (2) imposing an undue burden on interstate commerce. (Proposed) Defendant-Intervenors make this motion on the ground that as a matter of law, the facts alleged in the Complaint, judicially noticeable facts, and the plain language of the Ordinance and Resolution do not support viable claims by OBOT. Accordingly, this Motion seeks an order dismissing with prejudice the Commerce Clause discrimination and undue burden claims alleged within OBOT’s First Claim for Relief.

pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-2, that on April 20, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the courtroom of the Honorable Vince Chhabria, at the United States Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, Sierra Club and San Francisco Baykeeper, by counsel, will move the Court for an order dismissing two Commerce Clause claims filed by Plaintiff Oakland Bulk & Oversized Terminal, LLC.

Groups filed in support of city council’s ban on handling and storage of coal in Oakland

West Oakland organizers recently led their community to victory against a multi-million dollar dirty energy proposal.

Community unites to ban what would have been the largest coal export facility in California

Grupos comunitarios y ambientalistas aplauden al Ayuntamiento por proteger la salud y seguridad de los residentes de Oakland

Community and environmental groups applaud council for protecting health and safety of Oaklanders

The Sierra Club, Alliance for a Better Utah, HEAL Utah, Grand Canyon Trust, Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, Living Rivers, Earthjustice (on behalf of the Sierra Club and Grand Canyon Trust), and The Sloan Law Firm, PLLC (on behalf of Living Rivers) urge you to investigate the State of Utah’s misuse of $53 million in federal communitydevelopment funds to finance a bulk shipping terminal in Oakland, California and thereby encourage mining and export of Utah coal. We believe that these actions require review by your offices for possible legal and ethical violations.

Letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch cites potential legal and ethical violations of federal law

Carta a la Procuradora General Loretta Lynch cita potenciales infracciones a la ley federal de carácter legal y ético

Developers, politicians and Utah coal barons wanted to bring California's largest coal export facility to West Oakland. Who schemed up the idea to send trainloads of coal to one of the most burdened neighborhoods in the area, and who worked to keep this nightmare from becoming a reality?

Communities in California are fighting back against a proposed coal export terminal that would burden their communities with additional pollution and health impacts.

The bill commits $53 million Utah taxpayer dollars to a proposed Oakland Coal Export Terminal

Legal action helped clarify information in the City’s review process; the next step is to continue advocacy efforts while the City proceeds in good-faith

Community groups ask Utah Attorney General to reject public funding of proposed Oakland coal export terminal

Community groups ask Utah Attorney General to reject public funding of proposed Oakland coal export terminal