FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2016
THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS — 5
Local
Marvin’s plans huge expansion
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
CONTINUED FROM
PAGE 3
Though the company,
which George G. Mar-
vin established as the
Marvin Lumber & Cedar
Company, in Warroad,
Minnesota, in 1912,
doesn’t plan at this time
to expand the Baker City
plant’s workforce of 150
hourly employees and five
managers, the planned
facility expansion will
help to ensure that there is
the future capability to do
so, along with keeping up
with demand for products,
as stated by Vassar, and
Fuller.
“It’s good that the expan-
sion is headed back this
direction (Fuller motioned
toward the west side of
the property). It doesn’t
really affect the face, or
the looks, or the street
(17th), or some of those
things; they’re (the City
and County) are pretty
concerned about that. All
of this is back, where it’s
not really visible from the
street. It’s back toward the
railroad tracks,” she said.
Construction of the
addition will be mostly
City Hall
Week
CONTINUED FROM
PAGE 1
“It’s unfortunate that
we don’t have some of our
legislators here but we will
have an opportunity as we
move forward to meet with
them individually,” said
Warner.
Craig Honeyman intro-
duced himself to the group
and explained the purpose
of the meeting, saying that
the LOC, every two years,
forms committees dealing
with a variety of issues
from water and energy to
transportation, health com-
munications, general gov-
ernment, human resources
and finance.
These committees then
go out into local communi-
ties to identify strengths
and weaknesses of cities
regarding these issues then
narrowing it to just a few
specific issues to identify
opportunities and threats in
the legislative process that
need to be dealt with in the
upcoming session.
The agreed-upon pri-
orities are what LOC will
focus on with legislators.
These meetings, said
Honeyman, “Give us an
opportunity to be with you,
answer your questions and
help educated each other
about these issues.”
Honeyman also indicated
that he and other staff
members go to the Capital
in the first couple of weeks
of the legislative session
featuring their top priori-
ties.
The issues are again
addressed during what is
known at the Capitol as
City Day, which will be
held February 8, 2017.
Honeyman advised that
part of the day was the
LOC providing briefings
about the issues and the
rest of that day he encour-
aged attendees to make
appointments with their
legislators to speak about
Newspaper lawsuit
Todd Arriola / The Baker County Press
Sandi Fuller stands in front of the area that will be transformed when the
expansion starts.
contracted out, Fuller
said (specific contractors
haven’t been determined
yet), but some of the
expansion work will be
handled by in-house elec-
tricians and millwrights,
among others. For now,
research is still being
conducted, and the design
is still being adjusted, with
machinery options and
compatibility taken into
consideration.
“You’ll start seeing some
activity, I would like to
hope, by spring of this next
year—March, April, some-
thing like that ... It’s well
underway ... We’ve been
around for a while; we plan
to be here for a lot longer,”
she said.
the issues and any other
concerns they have for
their particular municipali-
ties. The group then began
their discussions of the
pre-determined priority
topics.
Property Taxes.
The first issue addressed
was property taxes. The
LOC is seeking to pass
comprehensive property
tax reform.
Property taxes are a con-
siderable source of income
for many important needs
and the way that these
taxes are collected needs to
be changed.
Honeyman stated that the
proposed changes would
“have to be amendments
to the Constitution of the
State of Oregon. As such,
if approved by legislature,
have to be sent out to the
voters.”
Any change to the state
constitution has to be
approved by the voters.
Measure 5 passed in 1990
and Measure 50 passed
in 1997 were intended to
limit the legislative need
to continue raising taxes
to meet demand for more
money.
However, these measures
had unintended conse-
quences.
Measure 5 capped tax
amounts at 1.5% of retail
market value (RMV) while
measure 50 added a per-
manent tax rate restriction,
varying throughout the
state and applied tax rates
to assed values instead of
the RMV.
The legislature in turn
created new property tax
exemptions and other
special assessments that
have caused approximately
25.9 billion in lost revenue.
The issue of compression
was also briefly addressed.
Compression occurs when
the amount of taxes col-
lected due to Measure 5
reduces the revenue to be
distributed to fund special
bond levies such as for
school districts.
Honeyman noted that by
bringing this matter to the
voters local control would
be reestablished.
Honeyman acknowl-
edged that any vote involv-
ing an increase on taxes
was a difficult one and
realistically “doesn’t stand
a good chance.”
He also said, “There is a
remarkable lack of under-
standing,” indicating that
this (property taxes) was a
complex system.
Warner agreed that to get
voters to agree to a Consti-
tutional Amendment was
not going to be easy. “We
don’t have a very good
track record,” he said.
PERS.
The group then turned
to a discussion on PERS
(Public Employees Retire-
ment System).
The PERS system has
long been in crisis as
more and more employees
retire and begin to collect
benefits.
The obligation is met
through employer ob-
ligations and earnings
on investments. In 2008
significant losses were
suffered on investments
and those earnings are
consistently not being met
therefore resulting in a $22
billion deficit.
The LOC is seeking leg-
islation to create savings
by addressing investment
efficiencies, by no longer
paying for consultants
and risk managers and by
making them accountable
to the Oregon Investment
Council.
Reducing the annuity
or “money match” rate
employers contribute from
7.5% to 3.5% to more ac-
curately reflect the market.
Redirecting Individual
Account Plans Contribu-
tions into the defined
plan potentially reducing
employer rates by 6%
possibly shortening the
duration of the unfunded
liability and Devoting
Unanticipated Revenues
to Employer Rate Relief
dedicating any revenue not
expected to this fund.
Recreational Immunity.
Next the Group ad-
dressed Recreational
Immunity. The goal is
a simple one; to ensure
employees, officers and
other agents of landown-
ers, including cities are
exempt from liability under
Oregon’s recreational im-
munity law thus restoring
civil immunity to landown-
ers and their employees
against tort claims for
injuries sustained while
recreating provided the
property owner did not
charge a fee for access to
their land.
It was noted that the City
of Pendleton had already
closed three of its local
parks due to issues involv-
ing injuries the public
sustained while on free
use City owned property.
That statement was only
speculation and was not
confirmed.
Honeyman told the
group that this matter
looked good and was
pretty simple.
Transportation.
The final topic addressed
was Transportation.
The issue of Oregon
street and road mainte-
nance and preservation
needs have outpaced the
resources available.
The LOC wants to help
draft a comprehensive
multi-model and statewide
transportation funding
package. Some of the ideas
tossed out were increas-
ing the state gas tax and or
increasing licensing and
registration fees, imple-
mentation of tolling and
the possibility of a per mile
tax.
Many vehicles are
becoming extremely fuel
efficient and therefore
need less gas, collection of
monies from the gas tax is
being greatly reduced and
a per mile tax is making
more sense to many. Pub-
lic-private partnerships are
being explored as are ad-
ditional light rail, bicycle
and pedestrian options.
The LOC’s position is
to support transportation
funding while searching
to obtain more resources
to adequately continue
funding the protection of
the assets already in place
while preparing to expand
as needs arise.
For more information
on these topics visit www.
orcities.org/legislative.
The defendants initially faced claims of Violation of
Fiduciary Obligation, Theft of Intellectual Property, Inter-
ference with Contractual Relations (newspaper purchase),
Interference with Contractual Relations (advertisers) and
Interference with Contractual Relations (retailers).
McQuisten was represented by attorney Kevin Mannix
of Salem, and the Perkinses were represented by attorney
Rebecca Knapp out of Enterprise.
In 2008-2009, McQuisten worked for then-owner of
The Record-Courier, Greg Brinton, who expressed to Mc-
Quisten the desire to sell that newspaper. With the possi-
bility that editor and long-time employee, Debby Schoe-
ningh was interested in purchasing the paper at the time,
McQuisten removed herself from negotiations. Schoen-
ingh eventually decided to pursue other adventures, and
in 2012, Brinton once again approached McQuisten about
purchasing The Record-Courier.
Financials showed the newspaper to be a salvageable
business that would not only have been self-sustaining,
but provide a built-in income for McQuisten and her
family. Therefore, both parties came to an agreement on
purchase terms.
McQuisten enlisted the services of the Baker County
Economic Development Office, operated by Rep. Greg
Smith, who employed Gina Perkins as his confidential
assistant at the time. The three, as well as Brinton, his
wife Trish, and their CPA met in various combinations on
numerous occasions over the span of almost a year.
Confirmed by documents on file with the Economic
Development Office, McQuisten was seeking assistance
in obtaining financing for initial operating costs, but not
for the purchase of the business, as well as help working
with the IRS to remove a series of liens in place against
Brinton and his newspaper due to unpaid payroll taxes.
Perkins was present at each and every meeting, and main-
tained McQuisten’s confidential client file.
McQuisten stated in sworn court documents that she
personally provided financials for several years of opera-
tion for The Record-Courier, a multi-year business and
marketing plan, and the purchase agreement between
herself and the Brinton family. She never sought assis-
tance preparing those materials, but provided them in the
course of obtaining financing advice.
Brinton and McQuisten entered into a purchase agree-
ment, facilitated by Elkhorn Title Company.
Upon Smith’s advice, McQuisten registered the business
name The Record-Courier, LLC with the Secretary of
State, under which to place any approved financing.
In 2013 after McQuisten had eventually secured operat-
ing capital and the IRS had renewed its agreement to lift
the liens to allow the sale, both buyer and seller moved
forward to close the purchase. According to employees
at Elkhorn Title at the time, Brinton physically came into
their office and gave the go-ahead to schedule signing
of the final closing paperwork. McQuisten received the
call, which set closing that same week, and agreed to a
time. After that point, Elkhorn Title staff became unable
to reach Brinton. McQuisten also attempted on multiple
occasions by phone, text and email to reach the seller
and could not. Brinton sent a text message asking for
more money, then disappeared again without any further
discussion on the matter.
Several weeks later, Brinton finally confirmed via email
that he considered the purchase off, and Elkhorn Title was
able to release the payment amount for the full purchase
price, which McQuisten had already provided, back to
McQuisten.
That fall, McQuisten decided to move forward with
launching The Baker County Press as a branch of her ex-
isting book publishing company, Black Lyon Publishing.
Only days later she was informed that Perkins had closed
purchase of The Record-Courier herself in a purchase
agreement for about $2,000 more than the former agree-
ment with McQuisten.
Because the name The Record-Courier, LLC was regis-
tered to McQuisten with the State, Perkins registered her
newspaper as The Bar One Record-Courier. McQuisten
never used the name she had registered after the purchase
had fallen through, and simply let it lapse.
Perkins then posted on Facebook that she and Brinton
had spoken as far back as 2009 about her purchasing the
paper, and her interest in doing so. Perkins had disclosed
neither that apparent conflict nor her continued interest in
purchasing the newspaper during the multiple meetings
with McQuisten.
At this point, both Perkins and McQuisten each began
operating their respective weekly newspapers. The Baker
County Press was launched in December of 2013 online,
with the first print issue released the first Friday of Janu-
ary of 2014.
McQuisten, friends, family and reporters for The Baker
County Press soon began noticing that the newspaper was
being removed altogether from retailer racks, damaged or
hidden from view. McQuisten was told by three separate
managers or owners at three separate unrelated stores
that Lynn Perkins had come into their businesses visibly
angry, demanded in front of customers that the competing
newspaper be removed or not allowed on racks, and even
physically removed the product from display himself.
Each of the three owners/managers issued a written state-
ment detailing these accounts on file with the Court. Lynn
Perkins issued a statement of denial.
McQuisten enlisted an attorney to issue a Cease and
Desist Letter to the Perkinses, covering many of the is-
sues that would later become claims in the actual lawsuit.
McQuisten filed suit in June 2014 after the Cease and
Desist letter was ineffective, and updated that suit in
September of that year.
Perkinses filed a counterclaim stating that by owning
the name The Record Courier, LLC, McQuisten was
operating under unfair marketing practices.
Subscriptions start as low at $29.95 per year. Just mail in the form on page 9!
SEE LAWSUIT PAGE 9