NOAA on the Duwamish? Media event announced for tomorrow

You’ve probably heard about the controversial decision for NOAA to leave Seattle, where it’s had vessels on Lake Washington, and move to the central Oregon coast. Just got word of a media event in West Seattle tomorrow to urge the federal government to reconsider, and to take a look at “existing federal facilities” including Federal Center South on the Duwamish. Scheduled to appear tomorrow morning at Herrings House Park is a contingent including Mayor Mike McGinn, U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, City Councilmember Jean Godden, and, from Harbor Island-headquartered Todd Shipyards, retired Adm. John Lockwood. They’re planning to announce a letter they’re sending to Commerce Secretary (and former Washington governor) Gary Locke asking that the NOAA-siting process be reopened.

5 Replies to "NOAA on the Duwamish? Media event announced for tomorrow"

  • JAT July 7, 2010 (4:14 pm)

    I would love NOAA to stay here, but since their mission is to study things in the Ocean, all provincialism notwithstanding, doesn’t it make more sense for them to be on the, you know,… Ocean?

    I don’t relish more openings of the low bridge either…

  • Christie July 8, 2010 (9:15 am)

    I work in the Federal Center South building and welcome the NOAA ships to dock here and do their repairs. I hope that they can convince NOAA to stay here.

  • SleepinginSeattle July 8, 2010 (10:03 am)

    A little late don’t you think. Christie, NOAA knows where it needs to go. The only way they will stay is if Cantwell, who slept through this whole process, can force them to stay against their better judgment by resorting to the dirty politics of calling in favors, sticking some rider in a piece of legislation and hoping no one in Congress will care enough to do the right thing and stop it.

  • Simply Put July 8, 2010 (3:17 pm)

    This is not a little late, we have been trying to get more people involved in this issue since the original Solicitation for Offers was announced. Nobody in NOAA besides those with a vested interest in relocation, believed Newport had a chance, as they have zero large scale vessel infrastructure in place.

    And Cantwell is doing her job, shedding light on NOAA’s flawed-from-day-one process.

    NOAA did not even include long term costs in this move, because, according to NOAA, when rebutting a Dept of Commerce review that discovered nearly a dozen issues, “The comment in the SPE’s memorandum questioning why the financial analysis failed to include the “total cost” introduces a set of cost factors not defined in the SFO nor in the SSP. Inclusion of such factors, therefore, would have been inconsistent with both SFO and SSP and would have dramatically increased the risk of protest.”

    This is a pathetic attempt by NOAA to derail oversight, follow rules only when beneficial, and get a brand new facility, regardless of the actual cost to the taxpayer.

    Get involved and demand NOAA be held to it’s own standards, DOC rules and regulations, and multiple breaches of Executive Orders. The recent Dept of Commerce Inspector General report outlined dozens of flaws in the process, to which NOAA disregarded, saying they will do a better job next time.

  • John QP July 9, 2010 (11:24 am)

    If the Duwamish was such a great idea, why wasn’t it put forth by Seattle from the get go? If the process was so flawed as is now being claimed by Cantwell, McGinn, and McDermott, why did Seattle, Bellingham, and Port Angeles willingly and enthusiastically submit bids? Bids these same politicians promoted.
    As SimplyPut states, the only thing that changed was that Newport, an Oregon port, with many strong attributes (including being on the ocean that these vessels study and having the lowest lease cost by far), unexpectedly (at least to Washington politicians) won the contest.
    And while the Inspector General identified some flaws in the selection process, he directly states that even without those flaws Newport still in all likelihood would have won the contest.
    The time for questioning NOAA’s criteria for their base is not after you’ve already willingly entered and lost the contest.
    Instead now is the time to move on. The new base in Newport is already under construction because NOAA’s Seattle lease is up next summer. They need a place to berth and Newport, even after all of this politically-inspired and intense scrutiny, has held up well as the best choice.

Sorry, comment time is over.