I love privacy and secrets -- part of my job specialty; but why for the love of God and what is holy does the city sue to keep things confidential from its citizens/residents?
> State law allows The Dalles to seek to block that ruling by suing the news organization, which is what the city did Friday.
It does not say the city has to seek to block. I would expect Google to be taking this action.
> I feel like it really only needs to be disclosed to city council members who are voting yes or no,” Long-Curtiss said. “I’m fine with that.”
And how are you going to keep them accountable if you can't know the numbers and request some objective expert counsel? And I am sure there is going to be a "do not sue us if we screw up your water supply," and a "first dibs on water" for Google in the contract regardless of how the water supply and drought turns out.
I am sorry but if the city council gets to keep their seats, it is the townspeople mistake. Personally, I would seek to kick them out of office just for filing this suit.
> The city said a nondisclosure agreement with Google prohibits it from disclosing such information and it seeks reimbursement for the legal costs associated with the public records dispute.
> “Under Oregon state law what Google has submitted and has asked the city to keep in confidence is a valid trade secret and so we are obligated to keep it confidential,” Jonathan Kara, attorney for The Dalles, said at a city council meeting last month.
It sounds like the city is trying to hold up its end of an NDA. I have no idea how Google might feel about the information being disclosed, but I suspect the city is at making the effort here in order to be a good partner.
The article also says the city has disclosed that the additional capacity is less than 5 million gallons per day. The issue at hand does seem to be the exact specifications, which is strange, because I doubt citizens would care about that over the ballpark figures:
> Even now, though, The Dalles’ water system capacity is limited to about 10 million gallons a day, and the city says demand is growing whether or not Google expands.
> The deal with Google would expand The Dalles’ capacity to 15 million gallons a day by ceding some of the company’s groundwater rights to the city and by pumping treated water into the aquifer. State law limits subsequent withdrawals to 90% of what is pumped into the aquifer.
> While The Dalles won’t say how much water Google wants, the city says the added 5 million gallons a day in capacity would meet the company’s needs and leave an unspecified additional amount available for general public use.
The Dalles sought to understand such issues through three Google-funded studies on the city’s water system, according to Anderson, which provided a clear understanding of the aquifer’s capacity even though it didn’t provide firm information on its boundaries.
Legally, they can not directly use the river. Diversion of federally protected rivers in any amount is surrounded by a huge amount of paperwork and even more transparency requirements and public comment periods than what they're trying to do with The Dalles.
Of course, even if they could do that they'd face opposition for potentially polluting the river, raising its temperature, and diverting water in some amount from a scarce resource.
Project 02
Google data center in The Dalles, Oregon
One of the largest Google data centers is located in the town of The Dalles, Oregon, on the Columbia River, approximately 80 miles (129 km) from Portland. Codenamed "Project 02", the million[60] complex[further explanation needed] was built in 2006 and is approximately the size of two American football fields, with cooling towers four stories high.[61] The site was chosen to take advantage of inexpensive hydroelectric power, and to tap into the region's large surplus of fiber optic cable, a remnant of the dot-com boom. A blueprint of the site appeared in 2008.[62]
> State law allows The Dalles to seek to block that ruling by suing the news organization, which is what the city did Friday.
It does not say the city has to seek to block. I would expect Google to be taking this action.
> I feel like it really only needs to be disclosed to city council members who are voting yes or no,” Long-Curtiss said. “I’m fine with that.”
And how are you going to keep them accountable if you can't know the numbers and request some objective expert counsel? And I am sure there is going to be a "do not sue us if we screw up your water supply," and a "first dibs on water" for Google in the contract regardless of how the water supply and drought turns out.
I am sorry but if the city council gets to keep their seats, it is the townspeople mistake. Personally, I would seek to kick them out of office just for filing this suit.