I could have titled this rant "Messengers in Season..Shoot One Now" or maybe "Port Uses Gasoline to Put Out Fire"
Allow me to explain.
At this week's Port Commission meeting Commissioner Sanders brought forward a complaint she claims to have received from a constituent who she would not name. The complaint questioned a possible illegal meeting that may have been the result of of a chance quorum of commissioners at the port offices in February. She wanted answers. She wanted to know if she was being excluded from the boys club. She demanded that Port President Larry Pfund answer the accusations. She wanted justice for her anonymous constituent. What else did she want? That part isn't entirely clear.
The reaction to this public discussion has been interesting. So far I've had a couple of lengthy emails from Commissioner Holcom. One is forwarded from the Port's lawyer whom Sanders
apparently questioned on this issue. The lawyers opinion is that no illegal meeting took place. Sanders brought it up anyway and told him she would according to another email from Executive Director John Crider.
Holcom, obviously emotional regarding this, states that he would have preferred to see some
"Journalistic Editing" and cries about the ethics of reporters just doing their jobs in reporting what happens.
In yet another email copied to everyone in the news business around here and addressed to
Pfund, Holcom states that this episode was politically motivated (duh) and wonders why reporters didn't offer the impending election as part of the story. He attaches a copy of a resolution passed last year by the commission that lays out ground rules for commissioner conduct designed to waylay blind-siding members of the commission when it comes to introducing agenda items. He asks Pfund to refresh his memory on this agreement and take steps to ensure the ground rules are followed.
Holcom takes me to task for comments I made during Coastwatch Call-in regarding the
situation. Sorry Floyd but I call them as I see them.
Regardless of the drama surrounding this little dust-up, the not too distant past performance of the Port Of Astoria will cause people to sit up and take notice if anything appears improper. It is appropriate to discuss the performance of elected officials in any capacity and to allow a full and public discussion of how business is conducted. To suggest that a reporter write a story with unfounded supposition as part of the news is not responsible and unethical at anytime.
This is an editorial. I may suppose all I wish. If one of my reporters were to do that in the context of a news story that person would be joining the ranks of the unemployed very rapidly.
These matters do create some discomfort for those who hold public office. No doubt about that fact. Before we make Commissioner Sanders the villian in this soap opera we need to consider what her reasoning might have been (WARNING..Pure supposition follows)
To do this properly we have to take a walk in Sander's comfy loafers. If I were an elected person to an office of some importance and I received a formal complaint from a constituent of my district regarding possible misconduct on the part of other commissioners would I:
a) Consult the commission groundrules I signed to find the best approach to investigating the matter and bringing it to the public and trust that those commissioners named in the complaint (who don't seem to respect me at all) will respond with concern and launch a full inquiry?
b) Bypass the commission and an Executive Director I don't trust to seek a legal opinion from a lawyer directly and then take the issue to the commission as though I never got the opinion in the first place?
c) Turn the entire matter over to the State for an arm's length investigation.
d) Tell my constituent the outcome of the legal decision, and let it go.
The answer is obviously not (d)
You see what happens when one does not work and play well with others?
We should feel sorry for Floyd and all the elected officials who have not taken media 101. Perhaps this situation will teach them that first, reporters report on things that they believe graps people's attention; second, they report in a way that will do just that; and third, reporters never get it right because, in some cases they don't care as long as they sell papers (airtime)and in other cases they simply don't have the background to know what is actually happening. The reporters excuse is always something like "I'm just reporting what someone told me" or "I call them like I see them." Government officials have to realize that the media is not a friend or ally. Likewise, blaming the media is a fruitless act and only makes more news to sell. Instead, the official must couch everything he/she does in a way they wouldn't mind seeing on the front page (or during Lars Larson breaks). Sorry, Floyd.
ReplyDeletei find it laughable that holcom, hunsinger, and pfund are denying their collective meeting in the directors office. they must take us for fools if they think they were all on different missions inside the directors office during a "meeting". the office is too small.
ReplyDeleteand pfund should know better. well, i guess he could have been tricked into this whole thing.
as far as sanders not playing well with others, i guess i'd be sitting their shaking my head too. serving with the gang of three would drive me nuts. (can't blame ya sanders).
i hope they all get re-elected. the entertainment value is priceless. it is unfortunate the port is without good leadership though. with the gang of three stifling hess and sanders, i doubt we'll see any leadership emerge. that part makes me sad i guess.
keep up the good work Tom and Jeff. in my 13 years at the port, you guys always gave the port a fair shake. i didn't always like what was reported but i can't say it wasn't calling it as you saw it. tell holcom to buck up and quit being a whiner.
I don't know Sanders,but sounds like she is a tattle-tale I certainly don't know the rules of meetings among port commissioners.
ReplyDeleteI don't get how if you happen to meet a fellow commissioner in the building and it was deemed a secret meeting?
Was someone sitting down at the building and spying?
I think Sanders, in her understanding of exactly who it is she serves, her constituents and the the citizens of Clatsop County in the doing of "Public Business", did exactly the right thing and Hunsinger, though not ill-intended because I don;t think he knows any better, in his comment that it should basically have been quietly dealt with outside the public domain just reinforces the public perception of mistrust at "The Port".
ReplyDeleteIf Sanders wanted to improve her working relationship with her fellow commissioners she should have handled that waaaaay differently. She very clearly is a conspiracy theorist and wouldn't trust her own shadow to follow her around.
ReplyDeleteIn my supposition, she is trying to undermine the credibility of Pfund during political season. I bet a friend of hers will run for election this year and she is just laying groundwork. The "anonymous constituent" may very well be the person intending to run for commissioner.
Love him or hate him, Floyd is sharp and gets the big picture. He just tends to rub people wrong as he is very outspoken and has a bit of an ego that he'll put in your face. End of the day though, you want him on that Commission as he will fight for the "good of the order" and he's a smart guy.
Thanks very much for the above comments. It's good to get correct information from people where were there, rather than what we are told third, forth etc person. I especially appreciate "g's" comments as he has a unique perspective from which he obseved the meetings.
ReplyDeleteI find this all very interesting espcially how close "g" is with TF in all of this. Why doesn't anyone aske why us vendors get stuck with "g"s bill for the building he now turned over to his father and we are all still waiting to get paid? The Port, which he was a commissioner, gave him a sweat heart deal and the tax payer still gets hosed! Go get them hunsinger and use that pit bull holcom to get it done!
ReplyDeleteBeing of the Female Gender, myself, I always cringe when other females whine. (Saunders, do you picture any of your fellow comissioners pulling this stunt?) I voted for Saunders...thought she seemed good in the interviews.
ReplyDeleteToo bad she didn't grow up here.
It is not a conspiracy when you meet three friends in the Andrew and Steves Restroom.....or three Comissioners in the Port Office. It is a small town, and you tend to run into people frequently.
Gee, we might have Comissioners who, IF they wanted to have a secret meeting WOULD HAVE BEEN SMART ENOUGH (yes, even the ones who seem dim to you) TO GET TOGETHER SOMEWHERE BESIDES THE PORT OFFICE!!
Doesn't the Port have enough trouble without looking for more? Put on your big girl panties and fight like a Real Commisioner (don't be a sissy). They will respect you for it....if they ever do have a secret meeting....I'm sure that they will be smart enough that you and I will never see or hear about it!