myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
cable park/hotel negotiations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Northwest USA & Canada
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
johnl



Joined: 05 Jun 1994
Posts: 1141
Location: Hood River OR

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CUSalin wrote:
Which one of you guys can provide evidence that The Friends attorney is requesting a "cash settlement?"


Can you provide evidence he isn't?

I really don't see a need for their involvement at this point and they should gracefully bow out and let the port, city, and Naito work out the conditions for the hotel. And this big push for a settlement hearing behind closed doors does not serve my interest as a member of this community.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CUSalin



Joined: 11 Mar 2001
Posts: 297
Location: Portland / Hood River, OR

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

puppydog wrote:
How about evidence that he is not, like a letter of understanding


I'm going to let you have the last word on this puppy.

In the meantime I'm eager to learn about it if The Friends attorney is seeking what you and some others here are postulating.

_________________
CU Sailin'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CUSalin



Joined: 11 Mar 2001
Posts: 297
Location: Portland / Hood River, OR

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnl wrote:
CUSalin wrote:
Which one of you guys can provide evidence that The Friends attorney is requesting a "cash settlement?"


Can you provide evidence he isn't?

I really don't see a need for their involvement at this point and they should gracefully bow out and let the port, city, and Naito work out the conditions for the hotel. And this big push for a settlement hearing behind closed doors does not serve my interest as a member of this community.


JohnL, if you don't understand The Friends involvement at this point, you might not understand what has transpired up to this point. Unless I do not understand correctly, Mr. Foster's LUBA suit was filed on behalf of The Friends. Don't you get that? They don't come to an agreement on The Babitz/Davies Plan by "bowing out."

The Babitz/Davies Plan hinges on Naito and The Friends coming to an agreement.

I think that, at least in part, the rational behind the LUBA effort has to do with setbacks at the Hotel development. It appears that in regards to this matter, The Friends legal council believes they have an enforceable advantage, so they are pushing the envelope.

I believe negotiations to come up with a written agreement are in order, and it's between the parties in dispute. The cable-park was "our" dispute - the LUBA suit is The Friends dispute with Naito and The City. So "they" should should negotiate the matter if they don't want it to go to court, and if successful, then make public "their" agreement.

I think they will ultimately work this out, and your postulation on things will not help matters or add to any constructive outcome. In fact it may harm them.

You guys gotta realize we're dealing with lawyers and developers here. Really smart, determined people who are trying to commercially gain as much as possible. This is what they do Smile

Do I like the system? Maybe not so much, but it's the way it works. Changing the system is a whole other topic.

_________________
CU Sailin'


Last edited by CUSalin on Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:14 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13808

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CUSalin wrote:
You guys gotta realize we're dealing with lawyers and developers here. This is what they do Smile.

Strike One, Strike Two, and two more reasons that secret meetings about public affairs should worry the public and are often illegal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
youwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 480
Location: North Shore High School

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jsampiero wrote:
nicorico wrote:
...and see it for what it is.


A potential pay-day for what appears to be un-employable attorney with strong ties to the militant environmentalists, who saw an easy way to capitalize on a well-meaning developer's intent to help our community while strengthening their in-state, family-owned business? Listen, I'm sure Naito Development does big numbers in terms of annual revenue, compared to what many of us might take home in a year. Assuming that makes them evil 1%'ers is a bit of a stretch.


You know what: the friends have been right all along - they've been getting played by the man. They just didn't realize Brent Foster was the man. And Hood River is the loser.


Hey Baby, that there is what we 'Mericans call Capitalism. Making buck by any lawful means possible. Are you one of them socialists who is against free enterprise and wealth? If the guy saw a lawful angle to exploit and line his pockets along the way- more power to him. If the developer does not have the balls to take on the fight, then he should pay up and shut up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skiman



Joined: 19 Oct 2012
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not know the reasons why the friends wants to negotiate in private. But having been an attorney, and since the friends lawsuit is the only reason this matter even got to the point of getting Naito to back off on the cable park and got the city and port to work together and find a solution, I think you should be thankful for the Friends who spent the time, money and effort to make this happen, and cut some slack for them and their attorney. The matter certainly is not being served well here by making libelous statements about their attorney. In fact - it is probably seving to harden positions and more likely to result in Naito refusing to come to the table.

The fact is - the friends filed the lawsuit and raised the money to do it. Most negotiations to settle a lawsuit are conducted in private. In fact I have never seen nor participated in a public settlement discussion of a lawsuit between the parties. Naito needs to get off his tantrum high chair, and sit down like an adult and get this done. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain with his little peevish fit, and contributing to it on this forum is not helping.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puppydog



Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Posts: 86

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brent Foster needs his slack cut
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikephillips2011



Joined: 09 Jun 2012
Posts: 32

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="johnl"]
CUSalin wrote:

Oh yeah, I forgot. NOW they want money. And they want their negotiations behind closed doors. Hmmm, sounds a lot like blackmail to me. Which I believe is illegal in most states. But I guess in the business world we just call it "negotiations".

Johnl, what do you call Naito's "proposal" to all of us that we either cough up $2 million dollars to landscape around their hotel OR ELSE they take over the boat basin? Doesn't that sound like blackmail? I understand that there is a fine line between blackmail and business negotiations, but I think both Naito and the Friends have both already crossed way over that line.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnl



Joined: 05 Jun 1994
Posts: 1141
Location: Hood River OR

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, I really didn't want to get that involved in this. But okay one last post, then I'm done......

1. My main objection to this whole thing is that it is NOT about windsurfing or even kiting, but actually a cable park and a hotel. I think it should be in the political group since it is OFF TOPIC for Windsurfing.

2. Phazzle (sorry typed name from memory) has been here for 6 years and has posted 97 times. How many of these are about windsurfing? Helping others, asking windsurfing questions, or talking about locations? I would bet less than 20% and probably less than 10%. The rest all seem to be this enviormental/political garbage. I'm not impressed. It appears he/she wants to use this forum for his/her own political agendas.

3. Hmmm, bow out. Let me define that. Saito said if they drop the suit then they would drop the cable park idea. That sounds like an open negotiation to me. But the Friends won't. Well now from what I read it appears since the clock is ticking and the port (or is it city?) is going forward on the timeline for the original cable park idea. This could have been so simple. Oh yeah, I forgot, lawyers were involved...

3b. Hmm I'm curious. How is Brent Foster currently paid? Is he a salaried Lawyer hired by Friends? Are those donations/contributions/negotiations going to his salary in any way shape or form? Is he donating his time and legal expertiese (although ethically questionable expertiese) to the cause? If so, then my opinion of him goes up slightly. But I doubt it. Please correct me if I'm wrong....

4. MP2011. Unless I'm really missing this, SAITO is not charging the city for landscaping. The landscaping is for the entire basin and trail. Two city individuals came up with the idea to FUND it from FUTURE earnings of the Hotel. Similar to borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, but in this case more like borrowing from Peter after he graduates from school to pay Paul now. This is the same thing others have posted, so I don't know why you are so focused on this.

5. Josh this is for you. I KNOW you think the cable park would be fun etc. BUT that could be built anywhere. How many Columbia Gorge National Scenic areas do you think there are?
Simply put, it doesn't fit "the image" of the gorge (IMHO). Let me use another example based on your principal. A gambling casino built instead of the Hotel. Many would find it "fun", it would provide jobs, it would have more people using it than the current use. It would provide income to the Hood River area. BUT does it belong here? No. Same concept as the cable park.

With that being said, knock yourselves out. Although I still think this thread belongs in the Political/Off Topic area.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Transatlantic



Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CUSalin wrote:
This matter is singularly between Naito and The Friends, not "The Public."


Who's "Friends" are these because they sure as shit aren't mine, they've outlived their usefulness and are going beyond protecting natural resources to hurting and preventing growth in the community. Drive around town during the busy months and tell me how many vacant signs you see around town.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Northwest USA & Canada All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group