B6
THE ASTORIAN • SATuRdAy, JuNE 15, 2019
To the Voters & Taxpayers of Clatsop County
I would like to thank the people who donated to my campaigns over the last 12 years, and the people who voted for me and those
who didn’t. I’ve gotten great advice from you and tried to bring to the Commission your concerns. It has been a great experience to
represent the commercial fishermen, the wood products industry and tourism.
Some of the things I really enjoyed as a port commissioner were:
• Representing the port at Fish Expo
• Working with the commission and a port manager, meeting new possible tenants where every commissioner was involved and every
commissioner had the information needed to make good decisions. This is how the port was able to bring Oregon logs, logged
in Oregon and shipped from an Oregon port, instead of being loaded in a Washington port, where we made the money and they
didn’t. This was a big economic boost to Clatsop County’s economy.
• Tongue Point was another good acquisition for the Port of Astoria. With help from the city, who loaned us the money, and a work-
ing commission we were able to come up with a lease agreement with the owners of Washington Group, only to be given away by a
commission who didn’t have the same vision as we had.
• The Riverwalk Inn Motel definitely had bumps in the road but ended out under the management of Chester Trabucco and Bill Orr
and under their management became a great success and money maker for the Port of Astoria.
• The East End Basin. This facility cost over 22 million dollars to build. This was built to be the largest commercial fishing marina on
the West Coast. This is one of the only marinas that actually self scours itself and hasn’t needed to be dredged. So it has always been
a money maker for the POA, it is capable of handling a 150 vessels. That is why I have been so protective of it for the public.
• Going to Oregon Department of Fish and Game meetings representing the commercial fishermen and sports fishing industries even
though I have commercial fishing interests. I knew that commercial fishing and sport fishing were the backbone of the community I
represented.
I will miss driving the POA float in the Regatta parade. I think this gave me a feeling of pride in the community I care about, and I
especially enjoyed the Anchor Ladies that used to ride on the float. They are part of the history of the POA.
I’ve also been labeled as a critic of port management. I took my job seriously because I care about the port. I’ve worked at the port for
43 years as a longshoreman and 12 years as your port commissioner. You are elected to oversee the workings of this entity. I promised
transparency and when I couldn’t fulfill my obligation I went to the newspaper to tell the truth about what was really going on in the
POA.
Once again, thank you for allowing me to represent you, the public, for allowing me to be your port commissioner. I’d also like to be
transparent and give you an idea why it is not a good time to be a port commissioner in the POA. Over the last 3 meetings, what has
happened, bothers me as well as it should bother you. Three meetings ago the port manager stated South County is not an important
priority. The commission didn’t want to have a meeting in South County. They want your tax dollars but not your voice. Same thing,
East End Mooring Basin tenants, they want your tax dollars and moorage fees without giving anything back. This will be a piece of
property that Jim Knight wants to sell the Riverwalk Inn to make up for the mistakes he has made by management blunders. The paper
stated that Bill Hunsinger may be vindicated by the information coming out about the POA. That is wrong. I stated before the elec-
tion that all commissioners should be held responsible for their share of the cover up of actions of the port manager who broke port
policy and his contractual agreement.
We as commissioners, have put ourselves in a position that has hurt the POA credibility and even though three commissioners in the
last two meetings have tried to rectify some of the issues that the port has two commissioners seem to be stating that the management
is doing a great job, and that it is a personal vendetta to get rid of Jim Knight as manager of the POA. Also stated by a commissioner, it
will cost millions of public dollars to get rid of the port manager. How many millions has it already cost the taxpayers with Jim Knight
in office? My opinion is if this budget is passed, this administration will have paid over nine hundred thousand dollars in attorney fees
over the last 4 1/2 years.
The port commission received a 22 page letter from an employee who resigned that is very damaging to the commissioners and the
port manager, which is supposedly backed by emails so that he would have written proof of his dealings with the port manager. This
employee gave the port commission seven bullet points which describe his boss. These bullet points are:
• Rarely at work, indifferent to port office and personnel
• Agent of chaos, reactive rather than proactive
• Incapable of leadership/management, incompetent
• A lot of talk with little action, unable to complete a task
• Word is not to be trusted, dishonest
• Unreliable, sets up meeting and does not attend, blames others for failure
• Ignores tasks and timelines while others wait response (grants, replies, ect.)
Unfortunately for the POA this representation exists not only within staff, tenants and contractors but public agencies from Clatsop
County and Salem and beyond.
A commissioner the other day, in a public meeting, stated he had read the 22 pages and said “it was full of innuendos and mistruths”,
in other words, he wants to make this employee seen as not telling the truth and a disgruntled employee. A second commissioner said
you need to look at this employee’s back history. I know this employee, he does not lie and would not have given up a job that pays well
with great benefits and a possible future with the POA if he didn’t want to be involved in an investigation that would explain the cover-
up that is going on in the POA.
A tenant, Chester Trabucco, gave the port commission, the radio station and the Daily Astorian his 20 plus pages with email docu-
ments back and forth with him and Jim Knight on what was really going on with the Chinook building.
Two commissioners don’t want me to give you any of this information. At the present time if you listen to the presentation by each
commissioner you will see that the vote would be, in my opinion, to replace the port manager. Also stated by Frank Spence, chairman
of the commission, that the POA would probably not get any money from the state if Jim Knight remains manager. Do I think possi-
ble backdoor politics is going on at the POA? Yes, I do. Whether I am a commissioner or not, I’m always going to be watching what
goes on at the POA. Another thing that I witnessed as a port commissioner was the blame put on Steve Fulton, who did absolutely
nothing wrong in the Riverwalk Inn lawsuit as stated by John Rachiel, chairman of the port commission, under oath as a witness. The
bad thing is Steve was a good commissioner with great expertise that the port needed with free wetlands issues and a strong vision on
what the port should be doing.
After the Riverwalk Inn case and the port was convicted on all nine counts I felt that Jim Knight should have been let go at that time
for his involvement of telling the commissions that Param’s group was out. The commission, a month or so later, in my opinion, wanted
to reward him with a raise and a new contract. I felt, in my own mind, we continue to reward with failure.
Port of Astoria Issues-Review of Port Staff and the Port Commission
There was no response regarding my previous letters to the Commission and the press regarding the issues the Port has failed to
resolve. The Port is facing a huge cost of capital improvements to our docks that we refuse to plan for, the Port of Astoria is on a slow
march to insolvency. This Commission continues to avoid its duties to the public to resolve these outstanding problems.
Since Port Director Knight arrived:
1. Director Knight submitted an application that contained false statements for an ODOT Connect Grant for the repair of Pier
2 West. This official grant application document submitted by Director Knight mis-stated the availability of Port supplied en-
gineering, permitting and the match funds. The Port accepted the $2,200,000 grant, subject to the Port providing the match of
$660,000. Director Knight subsequently verbally informed ODOT that Port did not actually have the $660,000 he previously
certified as available in the application; he also did not have the required engineer’s analysis of the dock repair project.