Unbelievable!

Probably worth rereading the Jan. 13, 2012 post “Boise Attorney opposed to Dynamis deal” for background info. Fred Tillman Sharon Ullman and Rick Yzaguire were County Commissioners at the time and blundered into the Dynamis contract when they already had a contract with Fortistar. I remember Mr. Steele at the time saying this has the makings of some very large retirement funds for attorneys. Repair of broken and voided contracts is usually expensive—current Commissioners may well have gotten the best deal available but former commissioners were the culprits

EDITOR NOTE–We agree Sam. It is still galling that we unwashed have to pay the price for all the “deals” our local government folks work out on our behalf.

If only foresight was 20/20 like hindsight. Read BG’s primer link especially the comment by Gene Fadness. The contract was complicated and designed to play out over 20 years. And as I remember it, it wasn’t so much about generating electricity, but more about reducing or mitigating the costs of operating the dump.

You see, it ain’t cheap to run garbage trucks all around at 4:30 in the morning and to dig a pit, liner to EPA specs and bury all those tons of garbage every day. Don’t forget about the elaborate GPS tracking and mapping of every single load in case the cops need to dig up a body in the future.

No one has ever been charged with a crime right? Sharon tried to explain it but no one wanted to listen. The lynch mob had its mind made up. Remember when Mark Johnson cut her short on Viewpoint? Mark, if you’re reading this, that was low.

I’m pretty sure the then Commissioners thought they were doing the right thing, but stuff happens and the deal went bad.

The real question here is what policies have been put in place to prevent a repeat? And what oversight are you daily complainers providing?

Another real question: If the dump is getting a cut of the electricity, why does my Boise City Utility Billing bill keep going up? Weren’t all those new bins supposed to reduce costs? Yeah, what about the bin experiment?

If that press release is supposed to be informative in some way, maybe they need to hire another PR person to help with the press releases!

My take-away: The system is currently generating enough energy for 2400 homes. (The rest is mumbo-jumbo.)

So – if everybody who uses the landfill would double their trash volume… we could conceivably power almost 5000 homes!

Editor, you may recall that prior to Dynamis (but actually part of the scheme) was the creation through declaration (no public meetings) of a new green industrial park called ARTIC – Ada Renewable Technology Industrial Complex. This was what paved the way for the false RFP so Dynamis could be ‘hired’. All of this happened within weeks of each other.

See comment here by modern columbo in your own Guardian, outlining the zoning issues that were never addressed when ARTIC was suddenly there.

https://boiseguardian.com/2012/10/26/ada-pz-to-hear-dynamis-issues/

You ask why they might now settle: I purport the county is covering all the bases for future pet projects that are related to energy or the ARTIC designation (even as they are still not allowed per current zoning), as they have bought out Fortistar’s rights to future excess gas production through this settlement. Fortistar could otherwise sue next time the county is scammed by another green industry involving trash and that knows they can make some money in the deal. You know, we are getting a reputation as easy-to-scam. A million here, a couple million there.

See this article, where ARTIC was very much pre-planned to allow for Dynamis:

http://www.wastebusinessjournal.com/news/wbj20111108D.htm

Being as the Ada Commissioners got snookered by Dynamis into a fancy incinerator scam from the beginning, it is an outrage we are still paying for it. The only good news is that it never got built, otherwise we would all be breathing a toxic, carcinogenic soup. Thank the vocal minority who put up a big stink and shot this albatross down.

“…waste-to-energy schemes masquerading as renewable-energy sources,… …will undermine the ban on waste incineration, cause toxic pollution and reduce employment in the recycling sector…”

“…government agencies and officials are falling for the ruse at great expense to the health of communities and the environment.

Waste-to-energy schemes cover a broad range of technologies that directly generate energy from burning waste, including gasification, plasma, pyrolysis and mass burn incinerators, some of which have already been issued clearances and permits to operate…”

EDITOR NOTE–With so many “sources” being linked, we will be editing a little closer in the future. This will be arbitrary, but there are simply too many links being posted. Feel free to quote excerpts, but please don’t link away from the GUARDIAN.

Fuzzy.. Yzaguirre was re-elected after the Dynamis mess.

It would be interesting to actually hear from a contract law attorney on the topic, but a quick internet search suggests that in a breach of contract suit, the party has to prove harm occurred. Breach of contract where no harm has occurred are rarely if ever supported. If the County never diverted waste to Dynamis that should have contractually gone to Fortistar then it appears there was no harm or loss to Fortistar and maybe Ada County should have fought the suit.

Uh— Boise cynic–Sharon Ullman was apparently trying really hard to make a deal as she was engaged to one of the Dynamis engineers at the time and eventually married him. She also bought a new house during this time period.

My partner thinks Boisecynic is Sharon Ullman playing dumb.

The common thread between Dynamis and Hidden Hollow Energy is a simple one. Both contracts were potentially first breached by the Ada Commishes.

Then newly elected Commish Case promoted BOCC actions which ultimately fatally damaged the Dynamis contract. The BOCC’s decision to take a proactive approach pleased many Dynamis detractors but ultimately placed the enforceability of the original contract squarely before the legal system. From a strictly political expediency standpoint, Case made a lot of political hay from his “stand his ground” position, while Ullman ultimately got blamed for the contract’s failure. Neat trick when you realize Ullman was out of office when the breach actions occurred.

The “post Ullman” breaches left the door open for Dynamis to threaten counterclaims for additional millions in damage flowing from what could have been seen as breach of contract on the part of the County. The BOCC’s decision not to seek the return of the 2 million dollar “loan” was essentially the settlement and liquidated damages which Dynamis Chief C. Lloyd Mahaffey and his pals laughed all the way to the bank with. None of this could have happened without the BOCC believing that the outcome of any litigation could/would have found them culpable for breach of contract.

Today Commish Tibbs echoed the same logic in support of the decision to settle with HHE. Tibbs did not say how much the BOCC paid for the costs of legal fees on “our behalf”, but it is conceivably equal to HHE’s attorney fees. Total cost in round numbers for this episode of “Dancing With Garbage” appears to be about 3 million.

How about a bit more proactivity in avoiding such legal entanglements? The current BOCC Commishes deserve no medals for their performance in both the Dynamis and HHE debacles.
The truly sad part is that just a bit of patience might have avoided any accusation by Dynamis of breach on the part of the BOCC. Once the 2 million County seed money was transferred to Dynamis, the ball was in their court. Dynamis had to produce a viable design which had to convince the Feds to invest in their “waste to watts” project. From what I could see this plan was never going to be completed in time for the Federal deadline, a problem which would have been wholly Dynamis’ owned.

The BOCC did everything it was supposed to under the development contract (and more) right up until they pulled the plug on the deal and demanded the money back. This action left the BOCC open for liability far greater than the original 2 million and they were left with no choice but to quietly settle (sound familiar?) with Dynamis. Whether or not Dynamis could deliver on its promises became a moot point. It no longer mattered, they had a scapegoat and they made the most of them.

I also questioned why the Dynamis exit didn’t settle the HHE complaint of breach as the worst case scenario of “not enough swamp gas to go around” did not occur. The bottom line has little to do with the mechanical facts and much more to do with convoluted legal recovery theories which apparently gained enough traction to once again send the BOCC into damage mitigation mode. Studies of futurely available methane production at the landfill suggested that there would be excess gas production regardless of Dynamis’ digesters consuming MSW at any volume considered, but that wasn’t the point! The gas was promised to HHE and anything less could be seen as a breach with a side of lost economic opportunity to boot.

In simplest terms, any promise of diverting HHE dedicated methane gas availability/production potentially constituted both lack of good faith and breach of the existing “gas to watts” contract with HHE. Did HHE over-react? 2.6 million dollars says they rolled the dice just right.

After four years of litigation, the Court recently ordered mediation between HHE and the BOCC. At some point the legal counsels for both sides met to compare legal arsenals and the BOCC deciders were convinced to cut a deal.

There is no question that the romance is over between HHE and Ada County which seems a bit counterproductive on the part of all parties.

The former contract did generate some positive cash flow to the County and HHE was selling the KW’s at a premium to Idaho Power.

The real question is why both parties proverbially “cut off their noses to spite their faces”? Or did they? Stay tuned, the next really bad idea is already in the works.

Aggrieved Party. Is that you again Sharon? Reads like you. You can’t hide. You should know that the people of the county won’t be fooled again by your brand of dishonest politics and bully tactics. Yes we saw your new website. Everyone is ready and waiting to make sure all the past comes back to bite you. The county is still better off without you, no matter what you say or do.

There are only 26 letters in the alphabet. Can’t ANYONE write a press release, website post, or comment thereto and explain what happened?

Being the devil’s advocate has its pitfalls, but I never thought I would be accused of being Ms. Ullman!

Is the concept of a layperson who actually does due diligence to be able to speak from a position of fair comparison so alien at this point in time?

My advocacy for the underdog taxpayer did not begin with the BOCC and it definitely preceded the Dynamis debacle by more than a decade…long before Ms. Ullman first appeared on the Ada County radar screen.

Not everyone is cut out to be a Dave Frazier. Few dare to put their money where their mouth is the way that he has.

Not wanting to alienate anyone who comments here, but if you aren’t part of the solution you might be part of the problem.

A friend of mine told me the following story which seems to be apropos at this time: THIS IS A TRUE STORY!

His ne’er-do-well brother decided to build a “dog eared” cedar fence around his home…asking their Father to assist him in building it. The brother basically “straw-bossed” the fence installation from the comfort of his chaise lounge. At some point the brother retired to enjoy a “cold one” and a well deserved nap leaving Dad to finish nailing the upright slats into position.

When the sleeping son awoke he went out to observe the results of dear old Dad’s best efforts. To his dismay the slats were literally nailed in totally hodge-podge fashion with no effort made towards any linear continuity. The now fully awake son called his Dad and demanded to know if he knew just how bad the fence looked!!!
The Father replied: I CAN’T SEE IT FROM MY HOUSE”.

So the next time a problem occurs which doesn’t appear to really bother you, ask yourself if you “just can’t see it from your house”.

Advocacy dictates that you at least try to see the problem even if it doesn’t impact you in a way which spurs you to action. If you cannot be an advocate, at least don’t throw rocks at those who try to make a difference.
Detractors are a dime a dozen.

Which do you want to be?

Aggrieved Party – “…if you aren’t part of the solution you might be part of the problem…”

Your last comment is a word salad of dubious meaning, but I assume you are saying if we the people are not part of the political process, then we can’t bitch.

I wholeheartedly endorse Warm Fuzzy Feeling saying that our govt is in fact a criminal organization. When I ran for public office, I sounded a lot like Donald Trump, just basically wanting to scrap “the system/status quo” and toss out all the leeches that pretend to represent the people.

My attempt to attain the political office of Boise City Councilman was terminated by Kevin Ritchert of the Idaho Statesman who deemed me unworthy.

Only those whose allegiance is pledged to the status quo is allowed into the palaces of power. Those of us who would tear down the Holy Trio of rich folks, politicians, and lapdog / traitor media are demonized. If we accidentally enter the inner sanctum, we are ignored and driven out by the political criminals.

J Smith
IMO, interpretation of being “part of the solution” goes to the heart of personal responsibility.
Where does the buck truly stop in any discussion of how our system of governance became what it is?
The blame game may temporarily distract us but it does little to resolve any issue.
Dave and others have learned the hardest way possible that real change comes about most often either by legislation or promulgation.
Setting any new legal precedent (promulgation) is an uphill legal battle the entire way and very expensive regardless of the outcome. Even then the Judiciary may not have sufficient law from which to make a decision. (The lack of a definition of “judicial review” effectively ended years of effort to address certain Title 50 statutes regarding the Constitutionality of Urban Renewal. Since that time there have been a number of legislative successes in changes to UR).
Individuals can and do make a difference.
Advocacy is largely a thankless task which few want to expose themselves to, but at no time have I ever heard one of these advocates declare that the task at hand should be abandoned or voided because they might fail.
Almost 106 years ago, Teddy Roosevelt said it best:
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”