News
Mayor tied to Tesla Supercharger site questioned over ‘conflict of interest’
He was young. Ambitious. Gifted. One of the greatest players to ever set foot on a professional baseball diamond, “Shoeless” Joe Jackson’s career ended in tatters for his alleged role in the infamous Chicago “Black Sox scandal” of 1919.
Call it a “conflict of interest.” It involved money. Lots of it.
Something else that involves money – lots of it – is afoot in Aberdeen, Washington: A Tesla Supercharger station and a “Gateway Center.” Aberdeen Mayor Erik Larson is a staunch proponent of both.
Updated: Mayor Larson fines himself $500 for violating the state’s conflict of interest ethics code
Mayor Larson is making the rounds looking for funding to help cover the costs of Gateway Center construction which is expected to cost upwards of $8M to complete, and incorporate Tesla’s Supercharger station into the design.
Questions within the community are swirling around what appears to be a conflict of interest regarding the mayor’s involvement in the Tesla deal. Documents have surfaced showing that the mayor has, or had, a financial interest in the electric car company that’s building the Supercharger station, apparently while he was negotiating with the company to bring the project to a city-owned lot. Why the station is being built on publicly owned land rather than on a private site is also in question.
Background
Mayor Larson negotiated the original agreement with Tesla for the charging station, which could have cost the city up to $2,000 a month in utility bills. The lease agreement came before the Aberdeen City Council for approval last summer. Originally, the City of Aberdeen was on the hook for paying electricity costs.
Tesla Supercharger station in Aberdeen, Washington during construction [Credit: Trebor Thickweb via app check-in]
As noted in the Aberdeen City Council meeting agenda dated July 13, 2016, the lease language at that time included (see page three):
“The Mayor has negotiated with Tesla Motors, Inc. for the construction of a Tesla supercharger station in Aberdeen on the city of the former Chevron station. The supercharger will be incorporated into the design of the Gateway Center. … the city will also be responsible for… paying the utility bills for Tesla vehicles that use the charging station, up to monthly cap of $2,000 per month.” (Emphasis added.)
Reading further, Item 8 of that actual lease agreement specifies that:
“Tesla agrees to arrange for all Tesla-related utility services provided or used in or at the Premises… Tesla shall pay directly to the utility company the cost of installation of any all such Tesla-related utility services and shall arrange to have the utility service separately metered. (Counterparty) shall be responsible for paying all utility bills related to such meter after installation, including payment for electricity consumed at the Premises during the Term, up to two thousand dollars ($2,000) per month.” (Emphasis added.)
Other Cities, Other Charging Stations
Tesla lease agreements with city governments aren’t new. Similar charging stations exist in five other Washington cities: Centralia, Burlington, Ellensburg, Kennewick, and Ritzville. There are eleven Supercharger stations in Oregon. All are located on either hotel/resort type private property or some other type of retail/outlet center. But the Aberdeen location is on a city-owned lot.
In California, two Supercharging stations on publicly owned property exist in Ukiah and Crescent City. But the terms negotiated by those cities for the stations are jarringly different from those negotiated for the Aberdeen site:
In Ukiah:
– “Tesla pays for the entire project, including staff time and utility costs.” (Ukiah Daily Journal, August 8, 2015.)
In Crescent City:
- The city is being paid by the tenant for use of its property. A proposal by Recargo, Inc. to build and operate a universal electric vehicle charging station in Crescent City included a $4,800 annual payment from Recargo to the district for use of the property. (Del Norte Triplicate, October 11, 2016.)
- “Essential components” of the city’s lease agreement with Tesla includes: “(1) the term, which is five years with two five-year options to renew, (2) Tesla will build and maintain the facility, and (3) the lease amount is one dollar per month.” (City of Crescent City Council Agenda Report, April 6, 2015.)
- Tenant “agrees to arrange for and pay for all Tenant-related utility services provided or used in or at the Premises during the term of the Lease.” (#10 – Utilities – City of Crescent City Ground Lease for Tesla Supercharging Station, April 6, 2015.)
- “Tenant shall pay directly to the utility company the cost of installation of any and all such Tenant-related utility services and shall arrange to have the utility service separately metered.” (#10, Utilities – City of Crescent City Ground Lease for Tesla Supercharging Station, April 6, 2015.)
In Aberdeen:
- The city (re: taxpayers) could get stuck with “up to 30,000 for the costs of installing the new infrastructure for the city” per the re-negotiated August agreement.
[Credit: Conservelocity]
- The provision requiring the city to pay for electricity used by Tesla vehicles was removed.
- The proposed new lease requires Tesla to pay for all costs of charging Tesla vehicles.
- The lease also requires Tesla to install infrastructure “that would allow the city to add charging stations for other electric vehicles at some point in the future.”
- The city “will reimburse Tesla up to $30,000 for the costs of installing the new infrastructure for the city.” (Emphasis added.)
According to minutes from the August 24, 2016 Aberdeen City Council Meeting, a motion to adopt the re-negotiated lease agreement carried.
An interesting wrinkle, as announced by Tesla on November 7, 2016, is that Tesla has decided to stop offering unlimited free use of its network fast-charging stations worldwide beginning this year.
So, other than hopes of helping “attract potential tenants to the center as the first project participant” and providing “nearby restaurants and retailers with additional business” per Mayor Larson, just how, exactly, does the supercharging station tangibly benefit Aberdeen taxpayers or offset “up to $30,000” in reimbursements to Tesla “for the costs of installing the new infrastructure for the city”?
The Daily World reports that “A $30,000 grant will help Aberdeen reimburse Tesla for installing the station.” In light of the agreements hammered out with other cities for charging stations on public land, however, why is Aberdeen on the hook for reimbursing Tesla for any installation costs?
Another wrinkle:
According to an October 28, 2016 story in The Daily World, five Aberdeen sites were in the running as possible locations for the new Supercharger station, including the parking area for the Center. Larson explains:
“They (Tesla) could have easily worked with Gateway Mall or sought out private ownership, but they were interested in the Gateway Center parking lot.”
Why was a publicly owned site selected instead of a privately owned one? Is city government using public funds to compete with private business?
Additional questions swirl around Mayor Larson’s financial interest in Tesla Motors.
Some questions:
- Did Mayor Larson disclose his financial interest/common stock in Tesla Motor Company anywhere other than on his 2015 and 2016 PDC F-1 forms?
- As a candidate, Mayor Larson reported his stock value as $4.5K – $23.9K. After he was elected, he reported the value as $24K – 47.9K. What’s up with that?
- The mayor apparently handled all negotiations with Tesla, even though he had/has a financial interest in the motor company (See PDC F-1 forms, above). Did the city know about his financial interest in this company? If so, did it okay the mayor as negotiator of the Tesla lease agreement anyway? Why?
Perhaps a contract negotiator sans an apparent financial interest in the project under negotiation might be a good idea?
While we’re raising questions, what of Shoeless Joe? After the Black Sox scandal, Jackson never set foot on a professional baseball diamond again. He was banned for life along with seven other Chicago players for their alleged involvement in intentionally throwing the 1919 World Series to the Cincinnati Reds. Jackson’s alleged involvement in the conspiracy is still the subject of hot debate. Some maintain that the only things Joe was guilty of were being young, ambitious, gifted, and a bit naive.
Ring any bells?
Kristine Lowder
This guest post was written by Kristine Lowder of Conservelocity. Do you have a post you’d like to share? Email it to us at info@teslarati.com
News
Tesla China extends its 7-year financing promotion once more
The move marks Tesla’s second extension of the program this year.
Tesla has extended its seven-year ultra-low-interest and five-year interest-free financing programs in China once more, pushing the offers through March 31, the end of the first quarter.
The move marks Tesla’s second extension of the program this year. The financing plan was first introduced on January 6 as a strategy aimed at offsetting higher ownership costs ahead of China’s planned 5% NEV purchase tax in 2026.
The original promotion was set to expire at the end of January but was extended to the end of February. This has now been extended again through March.
The repeated extensions reflect growing competitive pressure. Tesla’s 2025 retail sales in China totaled 625,698 units, representing a 4.78% year-on-year decline, as per data compiled by CNEV Post. That being said, this decline is partly caused by the Model Y’s changeover to its new variant in Q1 2025, which resulted in lower sales during the quarter.
In early 2026, the Model Y also lost its position as China’s top-selling EV in January to Xiaomi’s YU7, though this was also a month when Tesla primarily exported vehicles to foreign territories, which pushed local delivery numbers lower.
During January 2026, Tesla China exported 50,644 vehicles, roughly 1.7 times higher than the same month a year ago and more than 15 times higher than December’s level.
Tesla’s financing push has not gone unanswered. BYD this week introduced its own seven-year low-interest plan across its Ocean lineup and Fang Cheng Bao sub-brand, also valid through March 31. Other competitors including NIO, XPeng, Li Auto, and Geely Auto have already rolled out extended-term loan programs as well.
News
Tesla China focuses on local deliveries as Q1 enters final month
Tesla’s estimated delivery times for all variants of the Model 3 and Model Y in China were listed at just one to three weeks.
Tesla’s delivery wait times in China have dropped to some of their shortest levels in years, an apparent hint that Giga Shanghai has largely cleared its order backlog and currently has strong production capacity.
As of February 26, estimated delivery times for all variants of the Model 3 and Model Y in China were listed at just one to three weeks, as per observations of Tesla China’s official webpages by CNEV Post.
That marks a notable shift from the several-week or even two-month waits seen late last year.
The one-to-three-week delivery window suggests that Giga Shanghai is likely focusing on the local market, at least for now as the company enters the final month of the first quarter. Tesla China typically spends the first half of the quarter catering to markets that import vehicles from Giga Shanghai.
Historically, when Tesla’s wait times in China compress to their shortest levels, the company often follows with fresh market actions.
In past cycles, shortened delivery timelines were followed by promotional activity. After delivery windows narrowed to one to three weeks in early 2024, for example, Tesla later introduced an RMB 10,000 instant discount on Model Y final payments that year.
To spur local demand, Tesla recently extended its seven-year ultra-low-interest and five-year interest-free financing offers through March 31. This marks the second extension of the policy this year.
So far, posts from the Tesla community suggest that interest in the company’s vehicles among consumers in China is still strong. Videos of busy delivery centers across China have been shared on social media.
China’s competitive EV landscape has evolved as of late. With regulators discouraging aggressive price wars, automakers are increasingly leaning on financing incentives instead of direct price cuts. Major players including BYD, NIO, XPeng, and Li Auto have introduced similar loan extensions and promotional financing packages.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s The Boring Company closes Tunnel Vision Challenge
The Tunnel Vision Challenge invited individuals, companies, and governments to propose a tunnel project up to one mile long.
Elon Musk’s The Boring Company has officially closed submissions for its Tunnel Vision Challenge, confirming that a total of 487 entries were received before the deadline.
In a post on X, the company wrote, “Tunnel Vision Challenge is closed! 487 entries received – TBC team is excited to go through them all!” The company added that “We will select the top ~15 in the next week, and reach out with follow-up questions,” and that an “overall winner will be announced on March 23.”
The Tunnel Vision Challenge invited individuals, companies, and governments to propose a tunnel project up to one mile long with a 12-foot inner diameter. The winning entry will have its tunnel constructed free of charge.
Submissions could range from Loop passenger tunnels to freight, pedestrian, utility, or water tunnels. The only requirement was that the project clearly demonstrate how tunneling would meaningfully improve transportation or infrastructure between two points.
Just days before the deadline, the company provided an interim update noting that 407 entries had already been received. “Update on the Tunnel Vision Challenge – 1 mile of free tunnel! With 3 days left to submit, 407 entries have been received. Great to see enthusiasm for tunnels!” The Boring Company wrote at the time on X. By the close of submissions, the total had grown closer to 500 entries, hinting at strong interest in underground transportation solutions.
Entries are being evaluated on usefulness, stakeholder engagement, and technical, economic, and regulatory feasibility. Applicants were required to quantify projected benefits, such as time saved per rider or cost savings per shipment, and provide maps showing proposed alignments and other details. Submissions that included geotechnical or subsurface data are expected to receive additional consideration.
The Boring Company will fund the tunnel’s construction itself, though related infrastructure costs may be discussed with the winning team. The company also retains discretion to modify or cancel the challenge.
Tesla China extends its 7-year financing promotion once more
Tesla China focuses on local deliveries as Q1 enters final month
