Do you really think the 20 to 30 people at the Port meetings (at least the meetings at the airport) and the 100 or so at the town meeting is a fair representation of all three districts?

This is quite a poignant comment. Based upon the vocal minority one could easily come away with the impression that the entire community is up in arms over SEED and the Port. I found it interesting that a public meeting only amassed a bit over 100 attendees, just as the nearly 50/50 split contradicts comments that “the community” is opposed to the project.

Fallacy of presupposition.

There’s a difference between questioning procedures, and those who made rude comments and assumptions about Israel and his religious involvements. I referred to the latter. Are you defending their actions?

I’m not commenting here – but have a suggestion:

Other than door to door visits, I suggest the best way for the Commissioners to know their voters and the public they serve is by way of a survey.

Why haven’t they sent one? Will they send one?
Sharon O’Hara

The Port should have taken more time to conduct its due diligence before the initial vote to contract with Godstream. Once questions began to surface regarding references, scope of work, and the Letters of Intent, this was an opportunity to get those answers for themselves and the public while taking a week or so to re-negotiate terms. Interview the proposed team, contact more company clients as listed on the website, speak to IslandWood and Sellen Construction – both local, hold a preliminary meeting between Godstream and Mithun to watch the former in action. Many options here.

Now the questions posed earlier in the meeting by the Commissioners – and those of citizens – are moot. Instead of conferring with these entities, there was a decision midstream to rescind a prior motion and stop everything cold. There is nothing wrong with revisiting and being willing to change one’s mind when more information presents itself, but this was a reactive vs. proactive decision tonight. It creates bad blood with potential business partners, and this precarious status is not improved by those who swarm like a pack of rabid jackals to publicly skewer all who appear.

Each commissioner expressed excitement regarding the potential of the Letters of Intent, but now we’ll never know the potential for tenants in the one building or the leads for SEED. If they were real but for some details, this was a significant screw-up. If vapourware it’s time to recover. What about O’Brien & Company? Not only was it already hired by the Port for consulting on SEED, but it provided LEED project management to Kitsap Community Resources towards Silver certification, helped the project achieve recycling of 90% of waste from construction, saved 20% in energy costs relative to a standard code building, and implemented “green” housekeeping and landscaping practices. No synergy here?

The role of the Commissioners is one of governance. The role of Port staff is operations. Just as I was surprised that a commissioner surprised staff with a motion to not take the 1% tax raise, I am surprised that a commissioner is the one bringing this contractor and contract forward, especially on such short notice.

Regards,
Kathryn Simpson

In any case, it would be prudent to document some procedures going forward if the Port hasn’t already done so. Should SEED go forward, it will be approached by all sorts of companies who want to ‘help’. There has to be a vetting process in place, as well as staff functions to check references and include standard provisions in its contracts.

The Port of Seattle has a Small Works roster of contractors for opportunities under $200,000, and another for consultants and larger construction. There is also a small business roster for vendours and suppliers….all part of its efforts towards a competitive bidding process. I wonder if the Port of Bremerton has something similar.