By John Stark
Finalists for the Port of Bellingham’s executive director position are scheduled to be announced at the Tuesday, Oct. 16 port commission meeting at 3 p.m. in the Harbor Center meeting room on Roeder Avenue.
(Also on the meeting’s agenda is a resolution laying the groundwork for a land swap on the Bellingham waterfront, in which the city of Bellingham will cede industrial land to the port, in exchange for the port’s share of an old city landfill property at the end of the Cornwall Avenue right-of-way. The City Council will also need to vote on the deal. UPDATE: The City Council has scheduled a hearing on the matter during its 7 p.m. Monday, Oct. 22 meeting at City Hall.)
Rob Fix, the port’s financial officer, has served as interim executive director since April 2012, when Charlie Sheldon was ousted from the post in a 2-1 vote, after an 18-month tenure.
The process for picking a new executive is expected to include public appearances by the candidates, as was the case when Sheldon was chosen in 2010.
It is in the public’s interest to follow this process closely.
There are millions at stake, and the Port is the single largest government agency that can effect job creation and improved home values. With falling home values, and many homeowners buried in houses worth less than they owe, and 15,000 people in Whatcom County either unemployed (7,500) or under-employed (part time or college grads flipping burgers).
The leadership at the Port can have profound far reaching effects that ripple throughout our local economy; both private business and government tax revenues are effected by decisions at the Port.
In three weeks we are going to the polls and one of the ballot measures is Port Proposition 1. This ballot measure will expand the Port Commission to five Commissioners from the current three.
Please vote YES on this measure. Five minds are better than three, but let’s not fool ourselves. The sole reason that this is on the ballot is because the current Commission is failing horribly, and we are paying the price.
The owners of the Port have lost control.
In our contentious political times, the support for increasing the Port Commission to five, is incredibly broad, and that should tell folks something. Unbelievably Democrats and Republicans support this change. Across racial, regional, and economic lines there is broad support. Your YES vote is in good company.
WHY are folks so unhappy with the current Port leadership?
Well let’s look at the undisputable facts. Upon hiring a new Executive Director, this will be the fifth person in 4 years to hold this position. The Port has been publicly fighting with the City of Bellingham whose taxpayers will be on the hooks for the vast majority of the expensive infrastructure needed at the waterfront redevelopment, while the Port pockets the sales of the property with road, power, and sewer installed by the City taxpayers; Fighting with the City who will need to build the roads and infrastructure for the waterfront, is incredibly dumb. The Port should have joined the City in a single purpose organization to develop this property long ago.
This record alone is enough to question the leadership at the Port, but the icing on the cake, and the impetus for changing the Port Commission to five members was the public firing of the Port’s last and shortest tenured Executive Director.
While some senior staff at the Port and the Port Commissioners think the firing of Charley Sheldon is no big deal, they profoundly misunderstand the situation they created.
When Mr. Sheldon came onboard the Port needed to rebuild trust on many issues, and Mr. Sheldon began to rebuild this essential trust with the public. When rogue staff aligned with a dictatorial Port Commissioner and assisted by a jelly kneed Port Commissioner, they did not simply fire Mr. Sheldon secretly on a Saturday afternoon with no cause, they fired the public!! The public supported Mr. Sheldon; and the senior staff and two Commissioners flipped the public the middle finger.
No managers of an organization disrespects its’ owners, … and does not pay a price.
Two Commissioners sided with a handful of senior staff, and they fired the Captain, against the wishes of its owners.
Neither Commissioner Walker of Jorgenson could successfully stand for re-election now, but the public is still saddled with a dysfunctional Port until they can be replaced and this is unacceptable. This is why there is a ballot measure – Port Proposition 1
Please vote YES.
Here is what the battle at the Port is over. The land on the waterfront is destined to be luxury condos and the crown jewel is a yacht harbor for the new extra large yachts that don’t fit in the current Bellingham harbor, paid for by every property taxpayer. Ex-Executive Director Shelden had the audacity to suggest that there is no longer the demand for this luxury yacht harbor and it would not pay for itself, saddling taxpayer county-wide for years paying off the debt for this boondoggle. Shelden dared use logic and economic reason to do what makes sense for the whole county, and resisted pouring millions of taxpayer money into Emperor Walkers dream of “Building a yacht harbor and they will come.”
Sheldon knew what he was talking about, as he came from a 20 year career at the Port of Seattle. Parking lots for yachts do not produce many jobs, countywide economic impacts, or taxes.
Sheldon had the audacity to propose a more balanced approach with job creation as also being important to the economy of the whole county. Sheldon also had the audacity to remind Commissioner Walker that the primary purpose of a port is to create jobs, and not a parking lot for wealthy people’s toys.
Needless to say it went over like a t*rd in the punch bowl. Sheldon got fired because he wanted to create good paying jobs, and not a yacht harbor.
Here is why this discussion matters. The land on a working waterfront creates more jobs than any other category of land. Consider this. If the Port creates 1,000 luxury view condos on the waterfront; What will this glut of housing do to the price of your home?? Now consider the alternative, whereby the Port creates 1,000 jobs, which in turn these jobs all need to purchase a home. What does that do to the price of your home?
Job creation creates many times more economic impact rippling throughout the local economy, including increased tax revenues, than a handful gardeners maintaining condos.
Emperor Walker and Jellyfish Jorgenson, assisted by their allies in the senior staff have only one way out of this pressure to create jobs, and that is to hire an Executive Director that agrees with their folly to create a yacht harbor and develop a bunch of low paying service jobs. Watch Walker; he is going to try and game the system, but it will not work.
If Walker games the system, the public will notice, and the revolt will continue.
Five Commissioners will return the Port to public control and neuter Emperor Walker.
Vote YES on Port Proposition 1
I’s say No to #1;
More is not always better but it sure costs more, instead of wasting a bunch more tax dollars if you don’t like what you got why not vote new ones into office at the next election instead of adding more cost to the operation of the port?
Who’s to say that if you get a bunch more port Commissioners you gonna like them any better, it’s ain’t about quantity but quality, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
AFY,
Normally I agree with you, but in all due respect I doubt that you are adding up the costs accurately. There is a cost to continually paying headhunter fees and staff and Commissioner time for the revolving door at the Port Executive Director position.
There is a cost to fighting with the City and the public.
All of this can be measured in dollars and cents, and it is adding up.
If Walker gets his way and the yacht harbor does not fill up, then this will cost the taxpayers big, especially with interest payments over decades. Several Ports have tried this Mega Yacht “build it an they will come” theory, and everyone that has been built in the last five years in Puget Sound has turned out to be an expensive, disappointing, and is costing taxpayers millions that could have been spent of worthier projects.
I you think we should be spending tens of millions of Port dollars on a yacht harbor that will be lucky to half fill, then step up on your soapbox and shout your ideas to the world.
Bad decisions can cost millions, and I am sure that you will agree, that it is never too soon to stand up to government spending on yachts.
Democracy does not end the day after the elections. As your copious blog comments here are a testament to, one can continue to comment on public behavior, —-even after the election is over.
So tell us, are you for spending $40,000,000 plus interest on a yacht harbor now?
Give us your thoughts as to what you would do to create jobs in Whatcom County.
My guess would be that our friend would, most onerously, build a coal dump.
Festus, thank you for taking the time to lay out your understanding of this issue. As one who has not had time to thorougly research it, I appreciate that a lot. Of course, I never assume I can take anything posted here at face value, but on matters of which I know little or nothing, I appreciate the sort of posts you made and use them as jumping off points for my own research. That said, it’s nice to be lazy and hear from folks with a depth of perspective and knowledge on an issue. If anyone can make an articulable intelligent counterargument that doesn’t begin with “I’s say,” please post.
Because, AFY, I don’t read your posts anymore. You post so much crap, that were you to make an intelligent argument, I would no longer know.
And since AFY/Joe has mocked me about on this blog page, stating everyone knows his identity, let’s be clear:
AFY is Joe Wilson, Sales Manager,
Pederson Construction
3974 Bakerview Spur
Bellingham, WA 98226
Phone: 360-734-9180
Fax: 360-734-9649
Correction: “mocked me ABOUT this”
And I would have assumed Terry that you also would have listed your address and relevant phone numbers!
Why else list AFY’s unless you wanted readers to contact/harass him, simply because you feel you’ve been “mocked”?
Grow up – you’re acting like a spoiled child when she didn’t get her way.
And before you go off on me – yes my name IS Edward
Edward Who? I’m listed. I didn’t post AFY’s personal contact information. I only posted his professional contact info with Pederson Construction because he has, for so long, obfuscated and diluted discussions on this blog with an agenda. First Amendment and all that, doncha know, but let’s be clear about who is whom what’s being posted and why.
There have been references in comments on the main page to my husband and his employer and his state license, for cripes sakes. There is no question but that anyone who wants to know who I am can learn all they wish via googling. I am outing AFY/Pederson because I’m sick of right-wing tactics. Game on.
For the record, if anyone wants to know for whatever purpose, I posted above just before 8:30 p.m. 10/13. Have no idea what B’ham Herald is doing with time/date stamps.
Poor TW thinks she doing something that ain’t known by anyone who wants to know, but I’s always been an advocated of whatever turns you on!
Festus we do agree most of the time, but in my opinion adding more commissioners is not the way to address your grievances, you can add more commissioners and still have the same results. Personally I’s feel bigger government isn’t needed but just better if it is not performing to the voters specifications, if I’s had me way we would even reduce the size of our county council to three and give those three more responsibility and the pay it should require.
I’ll take quality over quantity, any day any time, don’t ya know.
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Pederson, you were almost there making an intelligent argument, and then you had to resort to the “I’s” crap. I stop reading anything you say from that point forward. Come on, guys. Just make a straightforward case.
I agree that quality is better than quantity, if only we had quality.
When a three person board is suffering from quality it is especially vulnerable, and the public finances along with it.
That is an inherent weakness of any 3 person board of commission.
Back to my original and unanswered question; Do you want our PORT TO BUILD A $40,000,000 YACHT HARBOR WITH THE TAXPAYERS MONEY?
Simple question, don’t ya know.
Festus to be honest I haven’t studied up on the yacht harbor issue but if it means more taxes I’s most likely be agin err!
However the yacht harbor isn’t what we are voting on, it’s whether to go to a larger board, IMHO three’s company and more is a crowd that we don’t need to get the job done!
Therefore it’s gets me no vote, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
AFY,
This is where you are wrong, and a walk back in history is insightful
GP, DOE, and the environmental community ALL agreed to fill in the fill in the ASB Lagoon to clean up the GP site. The Port threatened to sue and force GP to sell the land.
The clean up plan was cheap, and a highly effective method of encapsulating the pollution, all the while creating 34 acres of prime industrial land to provide jobs and taxes.
The environmental community then put the issue on the ballot, and the Port then asked the City to sue and have the initiative squashed. The initiative was squashed.
Now years later, the Port hires a very qualified Executive Director from the Port of Seattle and he had the audacity to suggest that a yacht harbor would likely end up half empty and an albatross around the taxpayers neck saddling the taxpayer with paying off the debt.
So the Port fires the Executive Director. Well not exactly. On Friday the Port votes to keep the Executive Director, but then on the weekend a bunch of secret meetings and communications with staff and legal counsel running between two of the Commissioners come to agreement that the Executive Director must go. No public notice whatsoever and certainly in violation of the spirit of the public meetings laws designed to protect us from back room meetings.
The publicly supported Executive Director is gone, and the yacht marina is saved.
If the Port spends $40,000,000 on a yacht marina, the taxpayer will get the bill.
Bremerton already tried this and failed and now has to subsidize a money losing yacht harbor to the tune of $350,000 a year.
I cannot believe that with this ongoing battle of wills between the Port/City and public and your interest in government, that you have no opinion.
This is what bad government looks like and this yacht harbor for 350 yachts costing $40,000,000 is a good use of the 210,000 taxpayers in Whatcom County, especially when 50% of the yachts will likely be from out of the county.
Have some guts, don’t duck the issue, and give us your opinion on the yacht harbor, Joe.
Oh, and by the way, the yacht harbor will create 5 jobs for the $40,000,000 taxpayer investment.
I cannot believe you do not have an opinion, Joe.
But I’s do have an opinion Festus, vote no on #1!
That’s my opinion on what we are voting on, you could be 100% right in everything you say but the issue we are voting on is not that but whether we should expand the Port commissioners and that I’s think is a waste and not needed.
Port Proposition 1, doesn’t even have a word about yachts in it, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
That is exactly the opinion I needed.
You just drove voters our direction.
Glad to be of a service, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Does your website have a contact page? I’m having trouble locating it but, I’d like to shoot you an e-mail.
I’ve got some creative ideas for your blog you might be interested in hearing. Either way, great website and I look forward to seeing it expand over time.