Stinger management official offers insight
I was employed by Stinger Welding, Inc., as shop superintendent and later as senior project manager three years prior to Carl Douglas’ death in December 2012.
I retired on July 1. Since that time, I have provided oversight and services to Steel Girder, LLC., on a subcontract basis, mostly because of convenience since I am the only remaining management employee in the Libby area. Most of this work was in support of the ongoing operations at the Libby facility to complete the final shipments of the Snohomish River Bridge completed in September and shipment of equipment and raw materials owned by Steel Girder, LLC. The equipment and raw materials will be used at Coolidge, Ariz., for ongoing operations at that location.
During the time of my employment, I was not directly involved with the financial arrangements of the purchase of equipment and property. However, since that time I have been involuntarily included in the recent restraining orders and most recently included as a defendant. So, whether I want to or not, Lincoln County has put me in a position where I need to tell my fellow residents of Lincoln County what is really going on.
The county has continued to offer many statements about their claim to the land, building and equipment (cranes). Tommy Fisher, owner of Fisher Industries for which Steel Girder, Inc., is a subsidiary, has on the other hand, been silent. This was in an effort “to work with the Lincoln County Port Authority and others involved to make the best of a bad situation.”
Fisher is now allowing the release of the other side of the story.
Said Fisher: “Instead of working with me to come up with a solution beneficial to everyone, the Port Authority has chosen to file another lawsuit, and refused my repeated attempts to negotiate a reasonable resolution to the legal disputes.
While I will continue to defend my rights and protect my financial investment, the costly and time-consuming legal proceedings initiated by the Port Authority are of no benefit to anyone, including the taxpayers of Lincoln County. Now that a second judge has turned down the Port Authority’s request for an injunction, I am hopeful that the Port Authority will work with me toward a reasonable resolution.”
Statements from the presiding judges in this latest attempt by Lincoln County to block Stinger Montana are self-explanatory and, without question, indicate how horribly weak this case is. A few of the statements made in the denying motion for preliminary injunction and dissolving temporary restraining order are as follows:
Judge James A. Manley, 20th Judicial District Court, Lake County Courthouse:
• “The conclusion is inescapable that plaintiff has little or no chance of prevailing on its new claims of trespass or ownership of the cranes, and that this action is motivated by a desire to keep possession of Stinger’s cranes for tactical reasons.”
• “Plaintiff’s new claim of ownership interest of the cranes is based on a vague theory that, because third party(s) loaned money or made grants, and some of the money was used to purchase the cranes, some of the money may have to be returned, and plaintiff could possibly be liable for such ‘clawback’ provisions, and therefore plaintiff somehow has an ownership interest in the cranes. It is uncontested that the cranes were purchased by Stinger or one of its related companies, and the cranes are titled in the name of the purchaser, not the name of the plaintiff.
• “Plaintiff does not prevail under MCA 21-19-201(1), because plaintiff failed to show it is entitled to the relief requested. Defendants are not trespassing or threatening to trespass. Defendants are trying to lawfully regain possession of their property. Plaintiff failed to show likelihood of success on the merits of its claim of ownership of the cranes, and the claim appears specious.”
Judge James B. Wheelis, 19th Judicial District Court, Lincoln County Courthouse:
• “Not only would it invite or require additional hearings, but it seems imprudent to disrupt the court process by allowing a party who senses an adverse ruling to pull the jurisdictional rug from under a judge who is considering the merits of a motion heard while properly in jurisdiction. Permitting a party to do so seems especially noisome given it involves substitution, a stratagem born in sleaze.”
Why the county would take this direction is beyond me or anyone else that has any knowledge of the issues. But on the other hand, this whole lawsuit and restraining order thing is without question the most ludicrous action that I have ever experienced. Anyone at the hearing, which I was, knew that the county had lost by a distant margin before the judgment had even been reported. The county lost on literally every issue. It wasn’t even close.
But to make matters even worse, comes a recent statement by Brigid Burke, executive director of the Kootenai River Development Council: “We’re a long way from being through this.”
Really? Seriously?
How much more money, county taxpayer money, are we going to spend supporting a case that cannot possibly be won? I am in possession of nearly all the documents in this matter and have failed to find even one single page of documentation that supports the county’s claims.
Allan Payne, council for the Port Authority, has stated several times that it is a matter of what is right and what is wrong. Well, Mr. Payne, what is right is that we comply with the agreements that are in place and have been signed by all the commissioners, board members and Carl Douglas.
That is what the court is going to rule on, not what you think is right. You have placed the county in a huge liability state by interfering with the operations of Stinger Montana. While you go home with a big paycheck, we the taxpayers are going to be left to pay for this mess.
(Ralph Seeley is a semi-retired senior project manager for Stinger Welding, Inc.)