Shipping Business?

Might sound completely crazy but The Port Of Astoria is looking into getting into the container shipping business. Not just as a container yard operator either. The Port is seeking a grant for a demonstration project where the Port would build and own two small container ships and a company out of California would lease them. There is a possibility that the slow moving negotiations for the Port to purchase North Tongue Point and efforts to clear the rail line to Portland may play into this idea at some point. Stay tuned.

Something Fishy?

Here is the secret email sent out to select individuals by ODFW seeking a meeting on Marine Sanctuaries that would form new advisory groups effectively dismantling the process to date.



From: Cristen Don [mailto:Cristen.N.Don@coho2.dfw.state.or.us] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 5:35 PMTo: administrator@co.clatsop.or.us; Tim Josi; tthompson@co.lincoln.or.us; Bob@ouroregonocean.org; MidCoast Watersheds Council; Engelmeyer; port@portofsiuslaw.comCc: Ed.Bowles@state.or.us; David.S.Fox@state.or.us; Feldner, Jeff; Hildenbrand, KaetySubject: Marine reserve community teams: focus group invitation
Hello:

Please accept this invitation, from ODFW and Sea Grant, to participate as part of a small focus group to discuss a process for the formation and implementation of Marine Reserve Community Teams for the three marine reserve evaluation areas: 1) Cape Falcon, 2) Cascade Head, and 3) Cape Perpetua.

You are receiving this invitation because you have been identified as a key player in the formation of existing community teams and/or represent a local government entity that has shown interest in the marine reserves process and formation of community teams.

We would like to schedule a meeting for 3 hours in Newport for this discussion. If you could please email me (cristen.n.don@state.or.us) to let me know if you are interested in participating and your availability on the following dates:

1) Tuesday September 8th (our preferred date)
2) Thursday September 3rd
3) Friday September 4th

Please note that invitations are not transferable. However, if you are unable to participate, we welcome your recommendation of someone who could knowledgeably participate in your place.

Issues to be discussed will include:
· Community team membership requirements as established in HB 3013
· One official Marine Reserve Community Team per evaluation site
· Evaluation areas that overlap counties
· Existing community teams
· Solicitation and selection of team members
· Rules and governance structure of teams
· Other issues

Invitees:
Duane Cole – Clatsop County Manager
Paul Engelmeyer - Audubon Society, Ten Mile Creek Sanctuary Manager
Mark Freeman – Port of Siuslaw, Port Manager
Wayne Hoffman – MidCoast Watersheds Council Coordinator
Tim Josi – Tillamook County Commissioner
Bob Rees – Our Ocean, North Coast Organizer
Terry Thompson – Lincoln County Commissioner

ODFW and Sea Grant:
Cristen Don – ODFW Marine Resources Program
Dave Fox – ODFW Marine Resources Program
Ed Bowles – ODFW Fish Division Administrator
Jeff Feldner – Oregon State Extension, Sea Grant Program
Kaety Hildenbrand – Oregon State Extension, Sea Grant Program

I will email participants the finalized date, time and location in Newport. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.

Thank you,
Cristen Don

-----------------------------------------------------Cristen Don
ODFW Marine Resources Program
2040 SE Marine Science Dr.
Newport, OR 97365

(541) 867-0300 x284
cristen.n.don@state.or.us
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/MRP

Roberts Recall Moves Forward

The recall effort against Clatsop County Commissioner Patricia Roberts moves forward. County Clerk Cathie Garber says the chief petitioner is Larry Well from Gearhart; an agent authorization is designated as Deborah McEwen. 441-valid signatures need to be certified by November 23rd. Ten days follow to verify those signatures. Patricia Roberts has five days from December 3rd to decide to resign or justify her course in office. An election must be held by January 12th. Meanwhile, recall efforts of chair Jeff Hazen and Ann Samuelson have a deadline of October 19th to return signatures. Hazen and Samuelson have until November 3rd to make their decisions. The recall election for both would be set 35-days from November 3rd or December 8th. However, Garber says if all three recalls happen on the same date this would save the county money. "If we have three separate elections, it could be probably anywhere from ten to twelve-thousand dollars apiece."

The recall of Roberts states in part that she's repeatedly voted in support of the Bradwood Landing LNG site application. Roberts tells KAST that she's been anticipating the second effort to recall her. "I represent people in my district and the entire county to the best of my ability and also for their betterment. If you disagree with someone on one issue.and it's because of that one issue that you decide to recall them.I haven't done anything illegal or immoral.or anything wrong. I've just been doing what I was elected to do and I'm going to continue to do that. I hope people realize that this is just an abuse of the recall system."

The following is a letter from Jim Mabbott the Superintendent of the NWRESD which overseas several counties schools that sheds some light on the situations that led to the recall of Ann Samuelson from that school board.



August 19, 2009

To the Editor:

This letter is in response to the recent recall effort regarding Clatsop County Commissioner Ann Samuelson and the “ethics investigation ” regarding her service as a Jewell School District Board member. During her time on the Jewell Board, Ann exceeded the Oregon School Board Association code of conduct for Board members, worked tirelessly on behalf of students, staff, and community members, and had absolutely no ethics violations attached to her record. Ann has also served on the Board of Northwest Regional Education Service District since July 1, 2007.

As you may know, over a year ago, a few Jewell School District citizens closely associated with John Seeley (former Superintendent of Jewell School District and who recently had his teaching license revoked by Oregon Teachers Standards and Practices Commission, as stated in local newspapers) filed an ethics complaint against all Jewell School District Board members (current and several former). The ethics commission found there was no merit to those complaints other than a small notation regarding a process that has been common in the great majority of school districts in Oregon: school districts commonly meet in Executive Session to discuss the need for an immediate temporary Superintendent when the current Superintendent leaves without notice, or as in this case, is put on paid administrative leave pending an investigation (I served as one of the interim Superintendents for no compensation during that time). It is my opinion, and the opinion of the District’s attorney, that this process is consistent with Executive Session law (ORS 192.660). In fact, this was a very rare situation in that the Ethics Commission did not penalize the district in any way.

Ann Samuelson has done nothing wrong in her role as a Jewell School District Board member or as a Clatsop County Commissioner. You may disagree with her opinions, but is that a reason for Oregonians to recall our elected officials? If so, I suspect we wouldn’t have any!

Today's Mail

Someone sent me a copy of a lawyer's letter addressed to Port Executive Director Jack Crider dated May 19th of this year. The letter, signed by J. David Bennett, renders his opinion of what might happen if the Port Commission failed to properly exercise it's lease with the Department of State Lands for the Skipanon property under sublease to Oregon LNG.

Guess what?

It absolutely confirms the chain of events that likely will occur if the Port fails to enter into the 30 year lease with the state that I had speculated in an earlier post here.

Bennet states "It is our strong recommendation that the Port exercise its option with DSL and extend the OLNG sublease."

That doesn't mean extending the current five year term but to continue along the lines of the original agreement which called for one five year term to be followed by two 30 year successive terms.

Bennett also states "It is likely that OLNG would be successful in a suit against the Port if the Port prevents OLNG from obtaining a new 30-year term. The damages OLNG would suffer would be subject to proof, but its initial thrust would be its out of pocket expenses (which would be in the millions of dollars) and loss of profits (which would be more difficult to show, since it is not currently permitted and the economic feasibility is not known)."

My understanding is that this letter dated in May is not the first piece of legal advice the commission ignored from different lawyers who said pretty much the same thing.

I would also say at this point that OLNG simply can't accept a change in lease terms and doesn't need to do so since they have unilaterally entered into the first 30-year phase of the agreement with the Port.

The Port commission is gambling that a current Department of Justice probe into past port dealings under Peter Gearin will somehow negate the lease agreement with OLNG.

I strongly doubt this is a possibility. The lease with DSL appears to be in order. The sublease with OLNG also appears to be in order. The motivation behind the terms of the leases are in question. Regardless of the outcome of that investigation it would take yet another suit to put the question of the validity of the lease before a judge based on the outcome of the investigation.

That's a very "thin ice" gamble for the Port and the taxpayers the Port owes responsibility.

The letter is posted on our main station site: http://www.kast1370.com/

Yet Another Recall

A petition to recall Commissioner Pat Roberts was rejected on technical grounds Wednesday but it's likely to be resubmitted. I'm told that the agent who submitted it was Jim Scheller who was unsuccessful in his efforts to unseat Roberts in the last election. I'm told that a telephone campaign has been underway to gather support.

On KAST yesterday Commissioner John Raichl said that under the circumstances since he voted in favor of the latest land use decision that triggered the current recalls that he might see himself facing recall at some point. He says he's not worried about it. John is a commissioner because of the previous recall of Commission Chair Richard Lee about a year ago.

We now have a pattern in local politics that relies heavily on recall in regard to any issue connected to LNG.

I wonder when the people who support the LNG projects will file their petition to recall Commissioner Dirk Rohne? After all he voted to essentially stop Bradwood Landing from moving forward. If it makes sense to mount a recall on one side, isn't it reasonable to do the same on the other?

We could eliminate regular elections altogether.

Note: In regard to the last election.

The final tally following the hand count by the Clatsop County Elections Division was 1,465 for Roberts and 1,445 for challenger Jim Scheller – just two votes different from the original 22-vote margin recorded in the final official results from the Nov. 4 election, when the tally was 1,466 for Roberts and 1,444 for Scheller.

Big Mistakes

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.

Floyd Holcom said...
Lets set the record straight. The decision not to pursue the money to bring NOAA to Astoria had nothing to do with the County. I'm told it was primarily a decision based on a conversation Skip Hauke, and the CEDR Director had with the Daily Astoria owner Steve Forrestor.

Apparently, as was told to the CEDR members, Mr. Forrestor had contacts in Seattle which told him that the State of Washington would never let NOAA leave Seattle. How wrong he was, but I'm sure he will never admit it. He failed to explain his role on his recent editorial.

Despite personally working on this for two years on at least getting a look see, Sen. Betsy Johnson, Skip Hauke and others deserve a big thank you for turning the governments head toward Oregon, and at the end of the day, we'll keep trying to get something to our area.

NOAA belongs in Oregon, I think Tongue Point, but it is a victory nevertheless and Newport will benefit greatly.

We should all be happy and Astoria will see residual benfits of it being in Newport.

I predict vessels parking at the POA because the bar closeses there much more than the CR Bar.

Floyd

Rumor Control

Here's the latest rumor about Commissioner Ann Samuelson. Recall petition gatherers are now saying she was responsible for the NOAA fleet going to Newport rather than Astoria.

Incredible.

It seems some of those involved in the recall easily confuse the Clatsop County Commission, of which Ann is a member, and the Astoria Port Commission which decided not to pursue the NOAA fleet.

Ann had nothing to do with it, of course, but the signature collectors will say anything to find a hot button that would convince you to sign.

What She Does

Commissioner Samuelson has often mentioned her concerns regarding the availability of mental health treatment and care in Clatsop County. The following is offered as a testimony of that work. tf



CLATSOP BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE

No. 10 Sixth Street, Suite 103
Phone (503) 325-5722 Fax (503) 325-8483
Astoria, Oregon 97103
July 28, 2009

I am writing this letter in support of Commissioner Ann Samuelson.

This letter has solely to do with her advocacy in the realm of treatment for the vulnerable residents of our county who have mental health, addictions, or developmental issues they struggle with every day.

Ann is a very strong proponent for these populations, and, on many occasions, has spoken about these issues in her public board meetings, and with the media.

She is a member of several social service advisory committees, including the Clatsop Community Health Improvement Partnership, which is dedicated to finding ways to make life better for our county residents who struggle in a variety of ways.

I understand that there are many political and economic issues that our County Commissioners are faced with in their tenure. This letter speaks to the humanistic issues that exist here as well, and Commissioner Samuelson’s continual and voracious efforts to make things better for these fragile residents should not be ignored. She has been a tremendous support for the programs in our county which deal with our citizens who suffer with a variety of personal afflictions.

It is important for this perspective to be noted on her behalf.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Nancy Winters
Executive Director

Keepers

Latest poll results on kast1370.com indicates 81% of those responding do not support the recall of Clatsop County Commission Chair Jeff Hazen. The poll will end Friday. Log on and vote!

The previous poll indicated 83% support to retain Commissioner Ann Samuelson.

The debate regarding LNG rages on on the comments section on this blog and I would invite you to explore those.

Excellent Comment

On occassion we get a comment post that is worthy of highlighting on the blog. The following is one of those as a cautionary tale for those who might consider signing one of the commissioner recall petitions. This is in response to my previous post regarding the city of Warrenton. tf

I wondered the same when my wife and I stopped to chat with the people in front of the Astoria Post office last week. It ended up with a friendly goodbye and a smile. It started out by my simply asking the fellow why he wanted to recall the commissioners and of course he indicated the issue was their LNG decision. When I asked him what his no. 1 issue with that development was, he said that it would cause tremendous shipping restrictions on the river because the river would be essentially closed to shipping while an LNG ship was in transit. I said I found that rather incredulous if true, and he allowed as how he too felt it hard to believe, but had "looked it up" to find out it was. So I said I would certainly look into that, and he appreciated my willingness to be open to his facts as he said he understood them. I got him to admit then that this was indeed the major reason he was objecting the LNG development, and that the other objections we've all heard were not so important. I told him that if true, that I would also find it an important and troubling restriction, but that I hadn't heard that one before. But at any rate I said the LNG decision still shouldn't make the commissioners subject to recall, they were just voting their conscience, not doing anything worthy of recall, and he said he appreciated the sentiment.

Two days later I caught up with the same guy. I had done some investigation by reading the actual Coast Guard. In it the CG clearly states that as a matter of "routine" they will allow other ships to pass within the 500 yard restriction zone around an LNG ship, and that it will be similar to what is now done in coordinating passing cruise ships; all that will be required is coordination between the river pilots guiding the ships as they do routinely now.

So I told this fellow the good news, privately wondering what can he say if this was his main objection. He immediately jumped to a previously unmentioned issue ...well, the market for natural gas is so limited there's no need for LNG so we don't need one in Clatsop county. I asked him if he was an expert on the world's natural gas market, or if he used natural gas in his house to which he replied that Bradwood's gas would only be going to California etc. We exchanged more rhetoric, but the discussion was over. Basically his whole approach was disingenuous; he was misinforming people, he was purposely lying to himself and others about his motives, and his approach was dishonest. In other words, he became a caricature of the economic ignoramuses who seem to be running things in politics these days.

So we parted laughing again, except that this time for me it was a laugh of contempt and sadness for this country to have met local people who are willing to deceive in order to promote their wishes. He probably has a great future as a liberal politician if he applies himself.

Art Hyland
Astoria

Why?

Here's a question:

Why is the City Of Warrenton allowing petition gathering to happen on city property?

You may think that the slice of land in front of the Warrenton post office is owned by the Postal Service but not so. The spot where those who are seeking to recall Commission Chair Jeff Hazen is city property.

The city commission was pretty clear about it's collective feeling about the recall at the last meeting. Mayor Gramson in particular stated the effort is an inappropriate use of Oregon recall laws.

And yet there they are sitting at a card table with a sign asking people to sign the petition. I haven't seen any crowds gathering to sign up but if the leadership of the city disagrees with the recall so strongly then why would they allow this to happen?

There is nothing that would require the city to allow it unless someone in the city granted a permit for the use. That raises another question. Do they have a permit?

It's quite clear that the city of Warrenton should explore this issue as soon as possible.

Can We Call This Off Now?

Check the latest results on http://www.kast1370.com/ as of this morning's poll change.

I put a simple question about recalling Commissioner Ann Samuelson on line after the show and as of 7:45 this evening the results show 74% against the recall.

To be perfectly honest it's just a quick poll. It's not scientifically designed. I would point out though that past KAST on line polls have been a very good barometer of public thinking on critical topics.

I encourage you to log on and cast your vote. The poll ends Monday.

Then we'll post a poll dealing with Jeff Hazen.

Just keep in mind that if you sign one of those recall petitions it looks at this point that you will be contributing to an effort that will result in loss of revenue to all of us just running an election like this during some of the toughest times we've seen in many years. If you don't like these people can't it wait until the next regular election?

The only reason I can think of for staging this whole recall strategy would be the hope that just by having the election the anti-LNG minority in this county will use it for political gain trying to show that they are larger than they really are once again.

It's so dishonest there should be a law against it.

KAST Polls Recall

We posted a poll on the effort to recall county commissioners Jeff Hazen and Ann Samuelson last week. The results so far are no surprise. Those against recalling Hazen make a strong showing voting against recall by a large margin. The straw poll is much closer for Samuelson.

Again not surprising.

She took a political black-eye with the Jewell recall combined with the fact that a former Cannon Beach city councilor is the chief petitioner in the Samuelson recall effort.

Last year the local Democratic party unseated Samuelson as a delegate in an internal battle. The party is largely controlled these days by many of the same people who have been behind efforts to stop LNG projects. Removing Samuelson from her party responsibilities is touted by the democrats as a necessary move to stop what they saw as a potential take-over by pro-LNG forces.

As a result of those factors Samuelson ends up getting hit from all sides of her expansive district.

The diversity of Samuelson's district makes it possible for the anti-LNG group to attack her on multiple fronts, something they have been preparing to do for some time. For Hazen the task of retaining his seat is far easier. His district is more compact. There is less diverse opinion, certainly in the business community. He is well known and, by his actions, a proven leader. People recognize that quality and value it.

Based on the outcome of the KAST.com poll if a recall election were to happen today Hazen would retain his seat and the Samuelson recall would be too close to call.