Letter to the Editor:
You might be aware that I was involved as a facilitator/mediator during the negotiations between the city of Umatilla and the Port of Umatilla in regard to the zoning issue that surfaced about a year ago and subsequently was sent to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). What you might not know is how those negotiations got started, who was involved, and how things ultimately got resolved. Now that the disagreement has been resolved, I thought I should take a few minutes to share with you my experience.
Let me start by admitting that I have a pre-conceived opinion about politicians in general and I expect that most people share it. In fact, my opinion was shared by Abraham Lincoln, who said, “Politicians are a set of men who have interests aside from the interests of the people and who, to say the most of them, are, taken as a mass, at least one long step removed from honest men.”
That said, I personally know several of the parties who were involved in the dispute between the city and the port and had already come to believe that they did not fit Lincoln’s description of a politician. So, when I got a call early last October from one of those men, Roak TenEyck, one of the Umatilla city councilors and the then president of the Umatilla Chamber of Commerce, asking me to consider helping facilitate negotiations between the city, the port, and the involved land owners, I couldn’t say “No.”
You see, Roak and Kim Puzey, the port manager, had been talking about the situation and had both become convinced that letting LUBA decide the outcome would damage everyone involved. They needed to find another way. To be clear, they rightly believed that letting LUBA pick a winner and a loser would ultimately result in all parties losing.
Once they agreed to negotiate, they involved Lyle Smith, who was also on the city council; Bob Ward, the Umatilla city manager; and John Turner and Tim Mabry, who are on the Port Commission. These six and I met for the first time on Oct. 20, 2014. After that first two-hour meeting was over, I was told by both the city and the port that they expected it to last for only about 10 minutes because the dispute was so pronounced and the disagreement so strong. They were pleasantly surprised and cautiously optimistic leaving that meeting. I also noticed a palpable resolve from the participants. That first meeting gave them hope that appeared to result in determination to find a solution.
We met three times to explore and ultimately work through the details of the solution that you are aware of. Each meeting lasted about two hours.
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the very real temptation to fight because of the high emotion, pent-up frustration, and perceived loss of reputation which both sides faced because of the press coverage to date of this situation. I point this out because understanding that temptation makes their focus on finding a win-win solution even more remarkable. They had to set aside their own feelings and personal agendas for the good of the citizens they serve.
George Washington once said, “I have no other view than to promote the public good, and am unambitious of honors not founded in the approbation of my Country.”
James Freeman Clarke said, “The difference between a politician and a statesman is that a politician thinks about the next election while the statesman thinks about the next generation.”
I think it is clear that the participants in the negotiations and the full memberships of the Port Commission and the Umatilla City Council behaved as statesmen in the full spirit of Washington’s view of public service.
While conflict is unfortunately unavoidable in life, I’ve always believed that the true measure of a person is how they handle conflict when it appears. If that is true, our area is lucky to have public servants like those I had the privilege of working with through this process.
Respectfully,
Joseph Franell, Hermiston
