Commentary and Opinion by Samuel Strait – February 9, 2024 After the conclusion of the most recent Harbor Commission meeting, one would think that the Tri Agency was only resurrected to suit the wishes of the Harbor. Like a group of petulant six year olds from which their favorite and only toy was removed from their grasp, the Harbor Commission couldn't allow the language to exist in the Tri Agency's bylaws that prevented the JPA from pursuing offshore wind power. By moving thus it should become crystal clear that the Crescent City Harbor's sole reason for resurrecting the failed Tri Agency was to pursue offshore wind power and to tap into the financial resources of both the County and the City to do so. Clearly the Harbor lacks the financial resources to do so on its own. Their contribution thus far is a meager $10,000, not exactly a strong position from which to demand anything be excluded from the bylaws. While it really makes no difference whether or not the clause is in the bylaws, it exposes all parties involved that the JPA is a hollow organism that has no real intent to pursue "economic development" within the County and will spend as much taxpayer money as necessary to follow the offshore pipe dream. Keep in mind that the three members of the Tri Agency have already laid claim to $400,000 of local taxpayers funding with no evidence that the JPA will pay the money back. As to the idea that offshore wind power is viable without multi-trillions of dollars of taxpayer subsidies, dream on. While it is true that the North Coast has wind, that isn't really the whole story. The insistence that offshore wind power to be developed is a given, is far from certain. The same promises were made to local governments along the Atlantic Coast years ago and very little has come to fruition. Some of the trials of offshore wind power were recently documented in an article found in The Hill entitled "Biden's offshore wind initiative is set to join the Titanic", (2/1/2024). While I will not belabor the points made, in short the article pretty much buries the effort to actually produce a functioning wind farm, despite the efforts by local governments to massively subsidize the efforts. What has emerged is that without rate payers paying astronomical rates for the power produced by the wind farms along with the aforementioned taxpayer subsidies, neither of which is tenable, developers have begun scurrying away from their leases. Unfortunately, what has seemed to escape the attention of those "experts" at the Harbor District is that floating offshore wind power, the infrastructure yet to be developed, is already forecast to be twice as expensive as that on the Eastern Coast of the United States. Whether or not anything comes of the assurances that Humboldt County's already massive half billion dollars of taxpayer money to be invested towards a marine facility will actually evolve into a wind farm is yet to be seen. Keep in mind that the Atlantic leases were sold eight years ago and aside from billions of dollars of taxpayer money nothing of a substantive wind farm development has occurred. In fact over half the offshore leases have been allowed to lapse. Not a particularly encouraging picture for the possibility of Pacific Coast wind farms where cost and path to development are exponentially much more difficult. It is safe to say that the "seat at the table" will cost the local taxpayers billions of dollars that do not exist within the County, yet the local taxpayers are already on the hook for $400,000 and any further adventures are likely to be far more expensive if the Harbor continues to take the lead. One can only hope that the Board of Supervisors hold serve when the next round of virtue signalers comes to the Board wailing about lost chances should offshore wind power not be in the JPA's purview. Similarly, hopes that those in charge in Humboldt will realize the error of this pursuit before they find themselves seated at the table where the chairs of the proposed developers are empty and billions of taxpayer money has been expended for naught. In the past when our local Board has been faced with a hand full of weepers, the urge to maintain their sensible decision has not often prevailed. They should keep in mind at the fore front of their future decision that they are bound to protect those that they serve which includes local pocketbooks. Anyone can opine that something will happen, it only remains "How much will it cost?" and "will it really happen?"