Sunday, August 15, 2010

Port Wants Military Shipments

Despite any potential reduction in troop levels, I remain strongly opposed to the use of the port for military shipments. This is because the truth, as I see it, is of a continuing imperialism by the USA—and imperialism is unacceptable to me.

In the following article by Matt Batcheldor, which discusses Port and City officials' positions on the potential for renewed military shipments through Olympia, Barner is quoted as being "opposed to the war" but in support of military personnel.

Real support for the soldiers and other working people in the military requires resistance, that is—concerted, assertive, and vigorous resistance—to the principle of aggression. —Berd
http://www.theolympian.com/2010/08/15/1336539/plea-for-protest-policy.html

Plea for protest policy

Olympia: Board considers response, potential costs if activists show at port

MATT BATCHELDOR; Staff writer | • Published August 15, 2010

OLYMPIA – The Olympia City Council is studying how to respond if military shipments again are routed through the Port of Olympia, a possibility supported by port commissioners.

Councilwoman Rhenda Strub brought up the topic at the end of Tuesday’s City Council meeting. She said the city needs a policy for military shipments and also needs to study how to recoup any costs the city incurs after a shipment.

Strub said she’s bringing up the issue now because Port Commissioner George Barner recently pledged his support for bringing in more military shipments. Because the military is drawing down troops in Iraq, cargo shipments could soon be streaming back to the United States – potentially through the Port of Olympia.

Barner and the other two port commissioners said they support compensating the city for its costs.

“I don’t see anything wrong with that,” Barner said. “I think that’s part of the cost of doing business.”

The city should consider requiring the port to post a bond before any protest to cover costs the city might incur, Strub said. She’s not sure if that’s legally possible but said the city should look into it.

The city’s scrutiny of the issue comes nearly three years after war protests at the port during a military shipment cost the city at least $112,168, mostly in police overtime. The port ended up reimbursing the city $70,000, and the city gave $7,243 of that to Tumwater for overtime that its officers incurred during the November 2007 protests. It is unknown how much money the port earned from the shipments.

Police made more than 60 arrests, and there was a cost of time and money from the city’s municipal court system.

There have been multiple claims and lawsuits against the city related to the protests. It is named in one pending federal civil rights lawsuit involving John Towery, a former employee of Joint Base Lewis-McChord who is accused of spying on anti-war activists.

“They (the port) shouldn’t have put that burden on us in the first place,” Strub said in an interview. “It dribbled along over several days. The protest had time to really build and just turn into a debacle.”

City Manager Steve Hall said the real cost of the strife in 2007 wasn’t just financial.

“For me, the biggest cost is the breach of trust between the community – some community members – and members of the city staff because of the port protest,” he said.

Strub’s proposal was referred to the council’s general government committee, headed by Councilman Craig Ottavelli. He said he isn’t sure when the committee will look into the matter; it depends on a conversation with the port about how urgent the military cargo issue is.

“It could be anywhere from three to six months, I’m guessing, before we would see any actual armed forces or military cargo ships calling on the port,” Barner said.

Strub said the city has a responsibility to maintain public safety, but she doesn’t think city police should continue to break up groups of protesters who block city streets. She said private contractors picked fights with protesters during the 2007 shipments.

“I think we should tell them we’re not going to provide police security for private contractors and the Department of Defense,” she said. “I support the military in their goal. I’m not taking a position against them, but we don’t have the resources that the Department of Defense has.

“The City of Olympia should not be asked to make a greater sacrifice in support of the military than the rest of the country.”

Hall said that after recent budget cuts, the city doesn’t have enough officers to provide security, and the port should bring in other jurisdictions to provide it if it schedules military shipments.

Barner cited a recent survey conducted by Saint Martin’s University that shows that 69 percent of people in Thurston County support bringing military shipments through the port.

“I don’t support the war, but I support our armed forces personnel at all levels,” he said.

Port Commissioner Jeff Davis echoed Barner’s sentiments.

“This is a public port, and we’re dealing with public entities here,” he said. “I’m passionate about the military being able to come into any port in the state of Washington.”

Port Commissioner Bill McGregor said the port discussed bringing in more military shipments about a year ago.

“The city said that they weren’t ready yet to do this,” he said.

“We’ve been willing, more than willing, to look at sharing those (city) expenses,” he said.

Matt Batcheldor: 360-704-6869 mbatcheldor@theolympian.com