Connect with us

News

Mayor tied to Tesla Supercharger site questioned over ‘conflict of interest’

Published

on

Tesla Supercharger station in Aberdeen, Washington [Credit: Trebor Thickweb via app check-in]

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.

Advertisement

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.)

Advertisement

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, UtilitiesCity 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]

Key items in the re-negotiated agreement between the city and Tesla include (Aberdeen City Council Meeting Agenda, August 24, 2016. See page 3):
  • 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”?

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

Some questions:

  1. 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?
  2. 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?
  3. 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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments

News

Elon Musk gets brash response from Ryanair CEO, who thanks him for booking increase

Published

on

ARLINGTON, Va., May 9, 2023 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Ryanair announced Europe’s leading low-cost airline has selected the largest 737 MAX model to power its future growth with an order for up to 300 airplanes. The purchase agreement is the biggest in Ryanair’s history and includes a firm order for 150 737-10 jets and options for 150 more. Image credit: Boeing

Elon Musk got a brash response from Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary, who said in a press conference on Wednesday afternoon that the Tesla frontman’s criticism of the airline not equipping Starlink has increased bookings for the next few months.

The two have had a continuing feud over the past several weeks after Musk criticized the airline for not using Starlink for its flights, which would enable fast, free, and reliable Wi-Fi on its aircraft.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk trolls budget airline after it refuses Starlink on its planes

Musk said earlier this week that he was entertaining the idea of purchasing Ryanair and putting someone named Ryan in charge, which would oust O’Leary from his position.

However, the barbs continued today, as O’Leary held a press conference, aiming to dispel any beliefs about Starlink and its use case for Ryanair flights, which are typically short in length.

Advertisement

O’Leary said in the press conference today:

“The Starlink people believe that 90% of our passengers would happily pay for wifi access. Our experience tells us less than 10% would pay; He (Elon) called me a retar*ed twat. He would have to join the back of a very, very long queue of people that already think I’m a retar*ed twat, including my four teenage children.”

He then went on to say that, due to Musk’s publicity, bookings for Ryanair flights have increased over the past few days, up 2 to 3 percent:

“But we do want to thank him for the wonderful boost in publicity. Our bookings are up 2-3% in the last few days. So thank you to Mr. Musk, but he’s wrong on the fuel drag. Non-European citizens cannot own a majority of European airlines, but if he wants to invest in Ryanair, we think it would be a very good investment.”

O’Leary didn’t end there, as he called Musk’s social media platform X a “cesspit,” and said he has no concern over becoming a member of it. However, Ryanair has been very active on X for several years, gaining notoriety for being comical and lighthearted.

Advertisement

The public spat between the two has definitely benefited Ryanair, and many are calling for it to end, especially those who support Musk, as they see it as a distraction.

Nevertheless, it is likely going to end with no real movement either way, and is more than likely just a bit of hilarity between the two parties that will end in the coming days.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlines expectations for Cybercab production

“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlined expectations for Cybercab production as the vehicle is officially set to start rolling off manufacturing lines at the company’s Giga Texas factory in less than 100 days.

Cybercab is specifically designed and catered to Tesla’s self-driving platform and Robotaxi ride-hailing service. The company has been pushing hard to meet its self-set expectations for rolling out an effective self-driving suite, and with the Cybercab coming in under 100 days, it now needs to push for Unsupervised Self-Driving in the same time frame.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is set to go unsupervised

This is especially pertinent because the Cybercab is expected to be built without a steering wheel or pedals, and although some executives have said they would build the car with those things if it were necessary.

However, Musk has maintained that the Cybercab will not have either of those things: it will have two seats and a screen, and that’s it.

Advertisement

With production scheduled for less than 100 days, Musk broke down what people should expect from the initial manufacturing phases, being cautiously optimistic about what the early stages will likely entail:

“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”

Musk knows better than most about the challenges of ramping up production of vehicles. With the Model 3, Musk routinely refers to it as “production hell.” The Cybertruck, because of its polarizing design and stainless steel exterior, also presented challenges to Tesla.

The Cybercab definitely presents an easier production process for Tesla, and the company plans to build millions of units per year.

Musk said back in October 2024:

“We’re aiming for at least 2 million units a year of Cybercab. That will be in more than one factory, but I think it’s at least 2 million units a year, maybe 4 million ultimately.”

Advertisement

When April comes, we will find out exactly how things will move forward with Cybercab production.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla reveals awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive, but it’s ending soon

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Europe & Middle East/X

Tesla has revealed an awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive to help consumers make the jump to one of its affordable mass-market vehicles, but it’s ending soon.

Tesla is offering one free upgrade on eligible inventory of the Model 3 and Model Y until February 2.

This would help buyers receive the most expensive paid option on the vehicle at no additional cost, meaning white interior or a more premium paint option will be free of charge if you take delivery on or before February 2.

Tesla states on its website for the offer:

“Only for limited inventory while supplies last. Price displayed on inventory listings already deducts the cost of the free option.”

Advertisement

This latest incentive is just another advantage Tesla has by selling its vehicles directly and not using some sort of dealership model that relies on approvals from higher-ups. It is important to note that these programs are offered to help stimulate demand and push vehicles into customers’ hands.

It is not the only incentive Tesla is currently offering, either. In fact, there is a much larger incentive program that Tesla is working on, and it has to do with Full Self-Driving transfers, which could result in even more sales for the company through Q1.

Advertisement

Tesla is ending its FSD Transfer program on March 31, as it plans to transition to a Subscription-only basis with the self-driving suite for anyone who has not already purchased it outright.

This could help drive some on-the-fence buyers to new vehicles, but it remains to be seen. Given the timing of the program’s demise, it appears Tesla is hoping to use it to add additional sales and bolster a strong Q1 2026.

Interior and exterior paint colors can add up to $2,000 if you choose the most premium Ultra Red body color, or an additional $1,000 for the Black and White interior option. The discount, while small, could help get someone their preferred design configuration, instead of settling for something that is not quite what they want.

Continue Reading