An Imaginative Interpretation of Port Events

SHOULD WE BE AFRAID?

Submitted to Shelton Blog by Tom Davis Mason County Progressive

Over the past few months, Port of Shelton Executive Director, John Dobson, has stated outright or strongly implied that:

1. The Bare-Foot Bandit was responsible for damage to a vehicle on Port property, implying that the Port needs more security.

2. Opponents of biomass are Anarchists, and therefore should be considered dangerous, implying that the Port needs more security.

3. That Port property was vandalized by members of the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) activists, implying that…well, you get the picture.

Mr. Dobson’s assertion that the Port of Shelton has somehow become the target of spectacularly deranged acts by unstable individuals, anti-government groups, and radical environmental activists would be less worrisome for its absurdity, if he did not hold the position of Director of Port Operations.

The message, Mr. Dobson wants all who are inclined to take him seriously, is that we should be afraid; so afraid that we should not object to him spending tens of thousands of dollars of public monies on unnecessary security measures, such as surveillance cameras.

Mr. Dobson’s imaginative interpretations of events that others might simply chalk up to the cost of doing business as a public entity speaks directly to an inability to assess a given situation solely on its merits.

So let’s weigh the facts: On the one hand you have two minor acts of actual vandalism, the total cost of which could not have exceeded a couple of hundred dollars in damages; on the other hand you have a proposal involving the expenditure of a significant amount of public monies for the purchase, installation and maintenance of security cameras (and whatever other devices are being suggested).

But according to the fundamental principles of good business practice, the actual costs involved do not justify the anticipated benefits, at least at this time. Existing insurance will likely cover occasional small acts of vandalism with no significant increase in premiums. And while a security system of the type being proposed may result in a slight lowering of insurance premiums, such savings will be offset by an increase in premiums to cover the costly equipment involved.

Of course, the above may have nothing to do with Director Dobson’s sudden passion for Port security. It could be that, given the current trend by Port officials to attract highly polluting industry, he may simply be preparing for the inevitable day when the “villagers” storm the “castle” intent on carrying his head away on a pike.