One of the concerns expressed on MGx is that the Port sucks up a lot of state and federal money only to export those dollars out of the area. The Port accomplishes this feat by hiring outside engineers and consultants to do the work these funds are earmarked for. For example, Coos County received $58 million in ARRA funds with Port related activities accounting for almost $22 million all of which went to out of county contracts.
In 2007, the Port allocated the bulk of $5 million in state lottery funds to consultants and engineers out of the area and last month approved almost $1 million in new feasibility studies, again to outside contractors and consultants.
$600,000 for HDR Engineering related to the Coos Bay Line bridges
$240,600 for a feasibility study for a sewage treatment plant on the North Spit
$163,600 to PB Marine for a “Conceptual Alternative Study for the Development of a Bulk Export Facility” to take another look at developing a cargo terminal in Coos Bay. An earlier, 2003, study also by PB Marine determined the enormous investment required to improve the rail line and other conditions would not pencil out or merit siting a local container terminal. Port CEO, Jeff Bishop, has discounted the pessimistic conclusions saying the 2003 PB Marine, “targeted specifically to break bulk and not containers”.
In 2007, the Port was flirting with APM Terminals to construct a cargo dock in conjunction with the proposed Jordan Cove LNG terminal but APM found Vancouver BC more attractive and ended negotiations. Determined to develop a cargo terminal, in 2008 Bishop contracted with Don Breazeale and Associates, a Washington consulting firm, to reevaluate the potential of a terminal at a cost of $76,462.50 to the Port and got the positive outlook he was looking for.
Now, with PB Marine revisiting the economics of building a cargo terminal, with or without an adjacent LNG facility, a company like APM Terminals would still have to be enticed to move here because the Port has no claims to have no plans to be the operator. According to documents provided by the Port, APM has already invested in its own feasibility studies and it seems reasonable other firms will do the same before investing half a billion dollars in Coos Bay, so how do these expenditures benefit the Port? The April 2007 minutes indicate the Port agrees with this assessment.
No successful company will make a decision to site a project that costs hundreds of millions of dollars without considerable due diligence
They will not rely on comments or allegations made by individuals or even the Port without independent verification
Methods for independent verification are extensive – the larger the project the more extensive the effort to verify – the cost of a mistake is too substantial to overlook even the smallest of details
On the other hand, Commissioner Brady Scott, perhaps anticipating skepticism from the public asked questions of the PB Marine consultant, Mike Zachary, to justify the expense. The attached video clip may be of help in explaining the importance of this study.
Do these studies allow the Port to produce sales and promotional tools with which to entice prospective operators to invest in Coos Bay? Given the Port commissioners have adopted a policy of not answering questions from the public I am hoping someone may offer some answers.
