Editor,

Outgoing Port Commissioner Marshall Bronson’s column in The Examiner last week shed some light on why he unexpectedly decided to vote to terminate negotiations with Greenbank Farm’s long-time manager.

Here’s hoping that he’ll reconsider his vote and vote to put the farm back on course.

The column says that the port and its manager are at impasse, although it’s unclear over what; that certain activities have been dropped, although it’s not said whether they produced net income; and that the farm “needs to be financially self sustaining, with various infusions for capital expenses from the port.”

The last statement is not what the farm’s Master Site Plan says. It says, “The Greenbank Farm will strive to nurture economic development and work toward self-sustainability without compromising the values and features of the farm.”

So the plan clearly contemplates that the port will cover operating deficits while the farm strives toward self-sustainability, consistent with the farm’s values and features.

Considering the full financial picture — available resources, prioritized operating and capital costs, local economic realities, etc. — is it timely to announce suddenly an end to operating subsidies?

Mr. Bronson has a long history of service to the port, but the commission discussed so little about specifics on how the manager has fallen short that most of us at the port’s July meeting left stunned.

To put it mildly, the port appears to be alienating many volunteers and supporters of the farm, celebrated in the farm’s plan, whose service spans decades, some of whom were instrumental in the creation of the farm and who over the years have provided significant time and direct monetary contributions.

By treating these people — not to mention the farm’s tenants — as adversaries instead of as a valuable resource, the port threatens a significant source of its own financial support.

It may not be too late. Our commissioners can repair their mistake by completing negotiation of a management contract with the current manager and signing tenant leases that have expired.

Concurrently, they can use their few remaining months in office to prepare a report supporting their view that the farm should no longer receive operating subsidies, which is of course highly controversial.

They and succeeding commissioners can draw on expertise from the current manager, tenants, volunteers and interested people who support the port’s mission.

Opinions could be openly tested – a helpful legacy for the new commission, the port and the farm – as a new commission prepares its updated strategy in 2016.

Daniel A. Walker

Greenbank