On the surface it might appear that the decision by the Astoria Port Commission to extend the DSL lease for the Skipanon by two years was a good one. Let me assure you that this represents another major mis-step by this commission.
By not assuring Oregon LNG that it's new lease term would extend for 30 years as previously agreed the Port has guaranteed itself a a legal mess.
The term of agreement with Oregon LNG, which was intended to mirror the DSL agreement, calls for one five year term to be followed by two thirty year terms.
Unless Oregon LNG has control of the property under FERC rules the project can't be built. It's just that simple so it's likely their argument would be that the success of the project is dependent on the Port follow through on the state lease which could also lead to additional suits to recover the costs of the project to date.
For those reasons it is likely Oregon LNG will pursue it's suit to compel the Port to enter into the 30 year commitment because the company claims the lease agreement is purely unilateral on their part. It looks like the Port has changed it's mind about LNG.
This isn't the first time this commission has erred in it's strategy. Most recently it has come to light that Newport got a far better deal in it's air service from Seaport Air in regard to flight times due in large part to a fumbled negotiation on the part of the Port.
If you recall Newport favored Cape Air over Seaport while the Port Of Astoria was a champion for Seaport. To gain Newport's approval Seaport negotiated flight times that make the service far more useful for travelers seeking to make connections in Portland, or Seattle.
Astoria is left with a schedule that is quite limited in terms of round trip options and not suited to the vacation traveler which under previous carriers here constituted nearly 80% of the passengers. It's as though nobody involved in those negotiations even looked at previous usage data. After all the service is government supported, right?
You can't take the early flight to connect in Portland with that first bank of flights heading to the east coast because those flights are out of the gate by the time Seaport is departing Astoria. You can't take care of your business and return on a late night arrival the next day and expect to get back to Astoria the same day. You always face an extra day of travel in which case it's just easier to drive to Portland stay in a nice hotel on a fly/drive package with shuttle service and travel back home at your leisure. You also get to haul your luggage around rather than being able to check it through. Even if it proves impractical to try an early morning connection at the least providing for a late night return might solve half the problem with connections but so far the Port has done nothing significant to affect an obviously needed change and Seaport has not taken steps to seek the improvement for their own survival.
I would urge you to use Seaport Airlines when it's practical for you to do so because they are very good at what they do even if they are limited in their ability to serve us as Horizon once did.
That Port lease and all things Oregon LNG is going to the right place, the courts, if OLG chooses to uphold its threat of suit and it will be the biggest mistake they could possibly make and finally open up the bowels of that entire issue to be settled and hopefully in the interests of those, this scheme and its blunders have been perpeterated upon...The Citizens of Clatsop County and the Lower Columbia River.
ReplyDeleteThe Astoria Port Commission made a proper and correct decision last night, in my view.
Seaport Air?
ReplyDeleteIt will not work if nobody rides the damned planes.
This is another one of those very important issues that all parties, CCBofC, POA, COW, COA, COSS, COCB, CEDR, AWCofC needs to get behind instead of leaving it to a panel of 5 quite possibly partially inept individuals with an ED serving up mostly lip noise rather than solutions.
The blame for its failure will go to all on this one as well.
One more and sorry.
ReplyDeleteWhat other effective and prodcutive use can we find for that Skipanon property, say these fossil fuel speculators hit the road, that will put many in our community to work in good, well paying, sustainable jobs?
The Port of Astoria and the "Shysters" as their leader has called them, have entered onto a slippery slope that will undoubtedly bring forth a very expensive lawsuit and cost us taxpayers much. Oregon LNG is not about to wait 2 years to see if the 30 year lease is approved. This smells of a conspiracy to appease the anti-LNGers but gives the forward look of a prudent business decision disguised as a 2 year extension to align the ducks up. All the commissioners have placed themselves on the titer-totter hoping the state investigation will find a legal out to void the present lease and they then can get on with petty business. This is a prime example of government failure in business when they have our money to spend and spend and spend.
ReplyDeleteThe airlines is another bad decision, when the subsidy runs out they will run back to Seattle. They had nothing to loose did they?
Who do you think is happiest about the Port's decision on OLNG?
ReplyDeleteBradwood.
I fly out of Portland to Chicago every three weeks. Someone has to take me to Portland to catch my plane and someone has to make another trip to Portland to come and get me. The Seaport Airline hardly ever has a flight in a time frame I can use. Their schedule does not conincide with early morning or late arriving evening flights. Since February I was able to use Seaport one way from to Portland to Astoria, and the reason for that was my original flight from Chicago was suppose to get in at 8:00 pm, but the flight didn't get in until the next day at 10:00 am. Seaport is missing out on money from me every 3 weeks. I will have to continue to fly every 3 weeks this winter it would be nice if they had a evening flight so we don't have to drive in the dark in winter weather.
ReplyDeleteSeems like ought to have been a way for the Port to have signed the renewal lease in order to avoid a potentially expensive breech of contract suit, but do so publicly under duress of the publicly stated unknowns at issue. Then they would announce they would actively pursue an investigation into the Port's authority to enter into the original lease, thereby putting the public and ONG on notice that the Port, were it later determined it never had the authority to do so, would move to render all relevant past and present lease document(s) with ONG null and void. (And of course if the investigation turned out the other way, then they would have avoided the expense of a successful ONG suit.)
ReplyDeleteIf the above were doable and followed by the Port (lots of ifs), then the Port would be in a position to renegotiate the lease on terms that would be more favorable and beneficial to the taxpayers of the county, which I understand is the reason for much if not all of the Port's objections to the lease.
Another take, if ONG were to decide to voluntarily agree to a more fair market payment for the lease of the property than the one strangely created years ago, then a lot of ill feelings could be avoided, and ONG would be in the obvious position to negotiate from strength, while showing good faith to the Port and the public. As it stands, they could lose it all in the aftermath of hard feelings, by bringing both environmentalists (their opponents) and local proponents together as one opposition group, which may already be happening.
Naturally, it is speculative at best for mere citizens to comment without knowing the facts that only Port commissioners know. The criminal investigation by the state is a wild card in this, but the commissioners have the advantage of that information and we all don't. All we can do is comment with our limited understanding and hope to add thoughts that could be useful, or not, as the case may be.
Art Hyland
Astoria
Let's see....the Attorney General is investigating. The Port will be making a 60-year decision that will block any other development of the area.....
ReplyDeleteIf you were told that the real estate agent who's trying to sell you a house was under FBI investigation, would you buy this house?
It's not like the former port director who did the deal is a convicted felon or anything.