This was the question posed by Port Of Astoria Commission President Bill Hunsinger of Tim Gannaway following comments Mr. Gannaway made at the commission meeting.
Mr. Gannaway, a former county commissioner, commented on the lawsuit brought by Oregon LNG against the port and the individual commissioners over the decision by the port to take a pass on the first of two 30 year agreements to control state owned lands on the Skipanon. Oregon LNG is stymied in it's permitting process as a result. Gannaway said he didn't like the lease either but you can't "un-ring" that bell. He pointed out that the port commissioners might find themselves paying for their own legal defense as well.
While it's true one needs to take news reports with a grain of salt this isn't the issue here. Two judges have now ruled on a number of points in the suit finding in favor of Oregon LNG on every point so far. The judges say the port is in breach on it's sublease with Oregon LNG. One has now said an injunction should be issued to direct the port to take immediate steps to enter into the state lease as required to cure the breach in the sublease with OLNG. It's just as clear as it can be.
I'm waiting to see that news release from the port explaining their position on this. It has yet to come.
Once again, do we listen to you or fall back on "Common Sense" Tom?
ReplyDeleteJudges can rule all day long but where's the order?
Hence the crux of Bill Hinsinger's seeming amusement at Tim Gannaway and what was it Gannaway, as a County Commissioner, was being threatened by litigation for?
I agree that "Port" does need to issue a position statement to update us, "The Citizens of Clatsop County' in whose trust they serve, on their strategy and motivation for their posture on "The Suits" and "Lease".
Patrick-
ReplyDeletemy best guess is that the district court judge will issue the order and it will be appealed to the 9th circuit. I'm sure the Port's attorney is counting on this entire matter going there. It's the only thing that makes any sense at this point. Mr. Tienson has been quite successful using the approach of filing suits to force mediation. The difference here is that he is not the one filing the suit and is forced into the unusual position of defending against one. Unless he can get a ruling that gives the port a bargaining chip there is nothing that would force OLNG to the bargaining table.
I would think that it would not be to Hansen/OLNg's advantage to have this issue go any further through the ourts than necessary either and that strategy would be hugely beneficial to "Port" to have the legalities of the chronology and history of all parties involved aired in court.
ReplyDeleteThat, in my view, could, with the right litigator, get really messy for Hansen and backers.
One thing I'm still wondering about, is why should anyone worry? The property is still the issue and if the Port doesn't own it, then DSL should be the masters of the lease. The Port is the middle man with no real economic interest and it is a shame that a company like OLNG should put the pressure on the Port, which represents the people of a public port, thus no matter what a few win, most of us loose.
ReplyDeleteContract law is very very very strait forward. The PofA is in blatant violation of a legally agreed upon contract. If they persist, the Port of Astoria will pay millions of dollars of our money and the individual commissioners will likely be individually liable.
ReplyDeleteDo these commissioners, and the ports lawyer (who's obviously biased against LNG) think they know the law and legal precedent better than two federal magistrates? I fear the PofA's lawyer is leading these commissioners down a very dangerous path. I guess I'm expecting too much for these elected officials to be leaders and recognize when they are being used.
Anon - The Port brought this on themselves (us).
ReplyDeleteThe only outcome I see is costing taxpayers money and delaying the inevitable.
OLNG is protecting their interest. You would too.
Patrick: The "right litigator"??? Is that a joke? The port is way out of their league on this and have been turned on their heads by several judges. I'm afraid Perry Mason couldn't defend this.
This is nothing more than some serious ego's, that happen to represent you and I, afraid to admit they just screwed up.
Shenanigans!
Several judges, one controversial Broadcast Media personality and OLNG Legal Beagles have issued opinions but no binding order to "The Port" to do anything.
ReplyDelete"Port" officials and their Legal Counsel are pretty much keeping close-mouthed on their strategy.
"The Port"?
"Out of their League"?
Well, I'm excited to see what the next chapter brings.
What I am more curious about is the status of the "Short Sea Shipping" proposal between "Port" and Santa Maria Shipping and the grant application.
I'm not in anyone's camp here, but I could possibly see a rather desperite mode by OLNG in Peter Hanson's motivation to garner support from Tom Freel. You can read it in Freel's explanation of OLNG's attorney. It smells of despirtation and if OLNG was totally unquestionable, why such pressure on the Port. Freel has been played. I think the Port needs and should win a larger Win Win lease from OLNG, surely not the Win-Loose they so seek with Freel's support.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice to see the small guys win here and real jobs created, but listening to Freel makes me smell collusion and personal win, like the others before him.
Pater Hansen/OLNG, in my opinion does not want, under any circumstance, to have his laundry and history of this lease/bad business deal aired in a public court proceeding and I would venture quite a few of our own so-called historic community leaders as well.
ReplyDelete