Port of Olympia Seeks Clearer Vision

Above: The Port of Olympia has launched a new initiative, Vision 2050. A 27 member task force, which includes Chris Richardson, Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, and Rhys Roth, Center for Sustainable Infrastructure, above, met for the first time on Tuesday.

By Janine Gates

Little Hollywood

http://www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com

Eager for a fresh start after ousting executive director Ed Galligan last month, the Port of Olympia has embarked upon a public outreach initiative called Vision 2050. 

A 27 member task force is charged with helping port staff and consultants interpret public feedback that will help shape how the port will look, feel and function in the years ahead.

Task force members were handpicked by port staff, its project consultant, and Thurston Regional Planning Council staff. They met for the first time Tuesday afternoon at the Lacey branch of South Puget Sound Community College. Eighteen task force members were in attendance, and one called in on speaker phone.

The public process is off to a rocky start. 

Notice for the meeting was sent out at 2:20 p.m. on Monday afternoon only to those who were already on the port commission agenda email list. A press release, social media postings, and links on the Port's website announcing the initiative will be posted Wednesday, said staff.

“While I understand the short notice wasn't ideal, it still fell within the 24-hour notice required for public meetings,” Jennie Foglia-Jones, Port of Olympia communications manager, told Little Hollywood on Tuesday morning.

The port's website for Vision 2050 is www.portolympia2050.org and is expected to go live on Wednesday.

No port commissioners were in attendance, but acting executive director Rudy Rudolph was present throughout the meeting. One member of the public was present. 

Vision 2050 Purpose

The meeting agenda included an overview of port functions and financing by Eric Johnson, executive director of the Washington Public Ports Association.

“We are fundamentally about community control of important assets such as waterfronts, airports and industrial areas,” he said.

Throwing the doors wide open, Johnson said ports have a lot of flexibility in what they choose to do, adding that ports now have the authority to own and operate tourism facilities.

It was Marc Daily, executive director of Thurston Regional Planning Council, who asked about the elephant in the room – port acceptance of controversial cargo such as military cargo and ceramic proppants - and asked whether or not the port has a choice in what it decides to accept.

Johnson walked back his comments saying the port has to abide by certain laws such as the Federal Shipping Act of 1984 which states that terminal operators cannot unreasonably discriminate in the provision of terminal services.

Throughout the two hour meeting, task force representatives asked questions, obviously unclear about their role, what they were being asked to do, and why.

Staff responded that the project’s scope of work was approved by the commissioners. 

While the commissioners adopted its current strategic plan in 2017 and like it, they are open to feedback. Depending on the feedback, the commissioners may go back and revisit the plan, said Foglia-Jones.

“The primary responsibility of the task force is to ensure we design a comprehensive and inclusive engagement process, interpret community input accurately and translate those ideas into a vision and action plan that ensures the Port remains prepared, impactful and sustainable in the years ahead,” she said.

The task force is anticipated to meet approximately five times between June 2018 and August 2019 and will be responsible for presenting a recommended vision plan, with strategies and actions to the commissioners for consideration and adoption.

It is unclear when the group will meet again, but it may be several months or up to a year.

The consultant and his team will interview selected community members, conduct an online survey, offer presentations and forums, and use social media to collect public feedback.

Questions posed will include: 

When you think of the Port today, what's the first thing that comes to mind?

The Port funds operations through multiple business lines. What do you consider priority areas for future revenue growth?

Looking forward, what do you perceive as the Port's most significant barriers to success?

Over the longer term, where do you think the Port should focus direction and/or investment?

Public Involvement

With fifteen minutes to spare in the agenda, task force members were asked to review and endorse the consultant’s proposed public engagement plan.

Helen Wheatley of Olympia holds one of the four public-at-large positions but was unsure of her role and hesitated to endorse the process. She said more time is needed to ensure representational community engagement.

She wondered about the methodology for identifying stakeholders and expressed concern that the group wasn’t being asked to provide input into the study or the outreach methods.

“The actual request for proposals for this project says the Port of Olympia is seeking assistance in the development of a community vision for the Port of Olympia. It also says it would be in alignment with the update to the Port’s Strategic Plan,” she said.

Referring to a 2012 citizen survey conducted by the Port of Olympia, she wondered what the port plans to do with the information it gathers about community values and preferences if it is not in alignment with the port’s current strategic plan.

She is requesting that the public make suggestions about organizations that should be on the task force.

“Organizations that should really be on this committee list need to be alerted that this is happening,” she said.

Above: Helen Wheatley, in pink, provides feedback to Thurston Regional Planning Council staff during a meeting of the Port of Olympia Vision 2050 initiative.

Task Force Members

Travis Matheson, Task Force Chair, Vice-Chair, Port of Olympia Citizens Advisory Committee

Stephen Bramwell, WSU Extension/South Thurston Economic Development Initiative (STEDI)

Michael Cade, Thurston Economic Development Council

Jeff Choke, Nisqually Indian Tribe

Josh Cummings, Thurston County

Todd Cutts, Olympia Downtown Alliance

Marc Daily, Thurston Regional Planning Council

John Doan, City of Tumwater

Ann Freeman-Manzanares, Intercity Transit

Michael Grayum, City of Yelm

Brian Hardcastle, Tumwater School District

Brad Hooper, North Thurston School District

Teri Pablo, Yelm Community Schools

Ray Peters, Squaxin Island Tribe

Drew Phillips, Public-at-Large

Bryan Reilly, Olympia & Belmore Railroad

Chris Richardson, Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation

Rob Rose, International Longshore Workers Union Local #47

Rhys Roth, Center for Sustainable Infrastructure at The Evergreen State College

David Schaffert, Thurston Chamber of Commerce

Bill Sloane, Olympia Yacht Club

Keith Stahley, City of Olympia

Shanna Stevenson, Public-at-Large

Shauna Stewart, Experience Olympia & Beyond

Dr. Tim Stokes, South Puget Sound Community College

Rick Walk, City of Lacey

Helen Wheatley, Public-at-Large

For more information about Port of Olympia issues, go to Little Hollywood, https://www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com and type in keywords. 

Olympia Port Budget Proposes Raising Taxes

Above: The port meeting room was packed for a community conversation held by Port Commissioner E.J. Zita on Tuesday afternoon. Citing the Washington Open Public Meetings Act, Zita refused to attend a port executive session scheduled for 12:15 p.m. about a log loader contract. Commissioner Joe Downing said the executive session would be rescheduled.

Zita Refuses to Attend Port Executive Session on Log Loader Contract

By Janine Gates

Little Hollywood

https://janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com

The Port of Olympia has a lot on its plate: controversial cargo, a direct action rail blockade that continues in downtown Olympia, a 2018 budget that proposes to raise taxes to the highest extent possible without a public vote, and transparency issues over missing and edited video of public meetings.

To discuss any or all of those issues, Port Commissioner E.J. Zita held a public “commissioner chat” session at port offices Tuesday afternoon, just 45 minutes before she was scheduled to participate in an executive session with fellow port commissioners Bill McGregor and Joe Downing.

She said the turnout was the largest crowd for one of her commissioner chats that she’s ever seen.

In front of about 35 members of the public, including several longshore workers, Commissioner Zita did not attend the executive session, and explained why she believed doing so would be in violation of the Washington Open Public Meetings Act.

The hot button issue of the day was about the port’s proposed purchase of two front end log loaders for $3 million and the legality of the contract to purchase them. It was also the purpose for the executive session. 

A contract for the log loaders signed in June by the port’s executive director, Ed Galligan, appears to have exceeded his delegated authority. The executive director is authorized to sign agreements for up to $300,000 in one year without a vote of the commissioners but unbeknownst to commissioners, the contract was a one year lease to own commitment totaling $720,000. 

Zita said the commissioners were told the lease would be for $60,000 a month starting in November. The log loaders cost $1.8 million to purchase, but the financing arrangement balloons the price to $3 million over a period of 20 years.

A June email to the commissioners from Galligan states, “The rental agreement gives the Marine Terminal Director, Longshore labor and the Port's maintenance crew time to properly test the equipment without an obligation to purchase.” The agreement involves the trade-in of the two existing log loaders.

“....The port commission needs to figure out what to do about this and staff suggested the executive session,” she explained to the group.

The Executive Session That Didn't Happen

The executive session was publicly noticed to discuss potential litigation and was expected to last 45 minutes, with no actions or decisions to be made.

Executive sessions are not open to the public and limited to pending lawsuits, personnel actions and setting minimum prices for real estate. All three port commissioners must be present.

At 12:15 p.m., conversations with just a couple flare-ups around the issue were well underway when Commissioner Downing arrived in the back of the room and informed Zita, who was in the front of the room, that it was time to go into executive session.

Zita informed him that she was not going to do so.

“Yea, I can see you have a great meeting going on,” he said, with more than just a touch of sarcasm in his voice. He started to leave.

Heads swiveled back and forth between the two as Zita asked Downing not to leave until she had her say, stating that she has formally noticed commissioners and staff of the inappropriateness of holding a private meeting. 

She requested that the meeting be held in public.

“Then it wouldn’t be an executive session,” Downing said, adding that the executive session would be rescheduled. He left the room.  

Zita continued the meeting explaining that she was not required to go into executive session. Her interpretation of the law was that if she had attended the executive session, it would be illegal, quoting RCW 42.30.110, which prevents commissioners from discussing the matter in executive session when it has already been brought up in the public.  

The need to hire outside counsel may be necessary since port counsel is present in the meetings.

If there were adverse legal or financial consequences to the Port, those consequences would result from Galligan’s lease authorization in excess of his delegated authority, not from public discussion about it, she said.

While Zita did not question the need for the log loaders, she questioned the manner for their purchase.

“We do not have the funds for the log loaders. We have yet to pass a budget and allocate funds,” she said. Zita says the budget is tight and the commissioners are about to raise taxes as high as legally allowable without public approval.

Several community members questioned why the port hasn’t budgeted in advance for machinery needed to do basic business and suggested raising the rates to the three primary marine terminal tenants so the higher rates could pay for the equipment.

“I think it’s an option worth exploring,” said Zita.

Speaking of a backlog of deferred maintenance, Zita said the marina office has mold in one of the offices making it unuseable. The 2018 budget also is proposing to cut janitorial services and repaving projects.

“The marine terminal needs at least half a million dollars a year to repave port property due to wear and tear. It’s currently budgeted at $450,000 and that amount is proposed to be cut to $300,000….We shouldn’t have to do that. We’re already behind on deferred maintenance and trying to meet our financial goals….We’re not meeting that goal,” she said.

Log Loader Use

Logs from Washington State are exported to Japan, China and South Korea. According to the port, it takes about 1,200 truckloads of logs to fill one vessel arriving in Budd Inlet. 

The front end log loaders are used by three primary marine terminal tenants: Weyerhaeuser, Holbrook, and Pacific Lumber and Shipping.

In an email to Little Hollywood, Galligan said that all the port's loaders are “governmental property,” and used for a broad range of cargo handling, operated by the longshore union ILWU, Local 47, and billed at an hourly rate per the port's tariff.  

He said the loaders were used for the movement of corn and gold ore that the port handled earlier this year. 

 

Longshore workers present at Zita’s meeting said they could use better equipment and ships can be loaded quicker and more safely. Zita questioned whether or not the economics of better productivity with the new log loaders is beneficial for the longshore workers

Chris Swearingen, a longshore worker, said it takes Olympia longshore workers five days to load a ship, compared to seven to ten days in Aberdeen and eight days in Tacoma. 

“We’re a good port,” she said.

“You’re already highly productive,” Zita interjected.

“….When a machine breaks down it takes us six days sometimes…we’re not losing hours or pay when we get good equipment and good machines. We’re going to keep to that five days. It’s about safety. We want safe equipment. We’ve been trying to get new log loaders for four years. I’ve been trained on a log loader. It scares me. They’re big machines, they’re breaking down....It’s like a car and it starts getting miles on it. You don’t say, 'I can’t afford it' when the tires are on treads - you go for the safety….The machines are wearing out. We need to get them taken care of....The company is getting more hours when the machines break down….” said Swearingen.

The port commission is set to vote on its 2018 budget on November 27, 5:30 p.m. at 626 Columbia St. NW, Suite 1-B, Olympia.

Above: Robert Rose of the longshore union ILWU, Local 47 and other longshore workers attended Commissioner Zita's community chat on Tuesday afternoon. Rose complained that the meeting wasn't posted on the port's website and accused Zita of illegal use of port property for campaigning. Zita said port staff did not have time to post a notice of the meeting on its website and trusts that will happen in the future.

“If you want to talk about transparency, a lot is being dropped by the port,” responded audience member Robert Jeffers, referring to recent videotapes of public meetings that have not been recorded or have been edited. Zita said she knows staff is working on solving those problems as well.

Little Hollywood writes extensively about Port of Olympia issues. For more information and photos, go to https://janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com and type key words into the search engine. 

Port Responds to Olympia Rail Protesters

By Janine Gates

www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com

As the blockade of a Union Pacific train carrying ceramic proppants in downtown Olympia continues into its sixth evening, Port of Olympia executive director Ed Galligan issued a brief press release written and released late Wednesday evening:

“The Port of Olympia is continuing to monitor a blockage located on a privately-owned rail line outside of Port facilities, where protestors have essentially halted interstate commerce for Port and other local business customers (e.g. Mottman Business Park). 

“Given the location and nature of these impacts, any future response or resolution will be coordinated by appropriate local, state and federal authorities.  The Port’s top priority is to see this situation resolved peacefully and ensure the safety of all involved, including Port staff who have also been subject to intimidation via recent vandalism at the Port’s administrative offices.  

“The Olympian has reported that the Port’s involvement in the shipping of fracking sands is one of the stated reasons behind the current protest. While the Port respects differing opinions, it is important to note that Port Districts are regulated by the Shipping Act of 1984.  The act requires ports to move all cargos deemed safe and legal.”

It is unclear why Galligan would single out The Olympian newspaper as the sole source for his information. The protesters and other community members have made it abundantly clear to the Port that the shipping of ceramic proppants is one of the reasons for their protest. 

At least two commissioners have been in direct communication with the protesters, and all, including Galligan, have received letters from community members about the issue. 

Many concerned individuals were present and spoke at the port commission meeting on Monday night during public comment, and an autonomous group at the rail blockade issued a public letter to the port that was sent to the port and reprinted in a Little Hollywood article Wednesday morning. 

Commissioner Downing’s View

Little Hollywood asked the three Port Commissioners over the past weekend about the rail blockade. E.J. Zita’s statement was published in a previous article. Commissioner Bill McGregor has not yet responded.

Received on Wednesday, here is Port Commissioner Joe Downing’s statement about port cargoes:

As a Port Commissioner, I am bound by two things: the Shipping Act of 1984, and the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, both of which prohibit states or local agencies from interfering with interstate (and international) commerce.  On a more personal level, I will not act in conflict with the law of the land: 48 out of 50 states allow fracking, as does the federal government. Fracking in general has allowed the United States two very big dividends:

1)      We have less greenhouse gases from energy production, due to more reliance on natural gas, and less on coal;

2)      We are less reliant on Middle East oil, and that makes going to war over oil that much less likely – the last oil war in Iraq and Afghanistan cost 4,400 American, and 500,000 Afghan and Iraqi lives.

Not only that, but the public has implored the Port to improve its bottom line by making the Marine Terminal more profitable.  So, how can we decline cargo when we are uniquely positioned to accept proppant cargo from China, and to export logs grown from many different private land tracts?

I appreciate the citizens who come to Port meetings to voice their concerns.  I continue to believe that the great majority of people who live in Thurston County want me to a) use my best judgement in Port matters, and b) diversify, not divest, the cargoes of the Port.

For more information about the Port of Olympia, ceramic proppants, and the rail blockade, go to Little Hollywood, www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com and type key words into the search button.