senate and abr deal?

They meet in full session on the 19th. They will vote then IF the finance comitee approves it on the 16th.

Are you guys for it or against?

I support ABR...it might not be the best deal, but its the only deal we're going to get.

Save HOVENSA Page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-HOVENSA/1502218700060861

ABR Page: https://www.facebook.com/abrvi

YouTube Video of Holland Redfield/ABR video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Wuvw_gm_g#t=112

The senate finance committee chair, and Nellie have both stated in yesterday's avis they won't agree to the deal without receiving all the additional docs. This includes the sales agreement. As I've already stated I think this stinks of big government. The sales agreement is a private contract between two parties and should not be subject to government oversight.

The operating agreement is what grants the business approval to operate under specific terms and hence requires judicious review.

Now that the senate is demanding to see a private business sales contract where will this end? I guess next the senate will want approval on real estate sale contracts too.

If the ABR deal was a ship, the senate would be the iceberg.

Totally agree IslandHops!!!!

The reason they don't want you to see the sales agreement is because ABR IS Hovensa. Five guys who admit they have no money, who formed ABR three days after the 4th agreement?
ABR is a Hovensa shell that was formed to get them out of $200 million in taxes and ongoing clean up. A liability barrier with no net increase in employees. Free access to the port through this shell.
If you fall for this then I have a bridge to sell you in London.
Meanwhile, the reason the VI has a right to see the agreement is because they are asking for tax breaks. Translation: if you want welfare and food stamps, then the government has a right to ask for income and asset information.
If they want to withhold this info, then go ahead and operate without tax breaks.
Why don't they want us to see it anyway? It's not like the ABR principals have a red cent. They admitted that at the hearing.
"Okay guys, you pretend to be a separate company. I will sell myself to you on paper. And you get all my liabilities. I still get access to the port. Call it A Blarney Refinery. Yeah. ABR."

Huh??? There is never ever a dull moment in these boards... I have a blast with all the conspiracy theories... and the rumors as well... like the one about the Exxon coveralls seen at the USPS, the properties sold to Exxon, the rental car lots at the airport, etc, etc. Now ABR is HOVENSA... Hmmm, and Monarch is a beautiful butterfly famous for its migration... Should I contact Stephen Hawking to see if he has a theory?

...
ABR is a Hovensa shell that was formed to get them out of $200 million in taxes and ongoing clean up. A liability barrier with no net increase in employees. Free access to the port through this shell.
...
."

That's very interesting. Where is your proof?

...
Meanwhile, the reason the VI has a right to see the agreement is because they are asking for tax breaks. Translation: if you want welfare and food stamps, then the government has a right to ask for income and asset information.
...
."

The government already receives all income and asset information in every corporate tax return filed annually. You want to see it too? Just read the last annual report.
This information would not even be part of a sales agreement. Again approval of an agreement has nothing to do with the confidentiality of a sales agreement between two private entities.

The operating agreement, that does required government approval, is an agreement between the government and the refinery operator. That is what the senators should be concerned with.

Example: If I have a car and sell it to you M.J, and you go to register the car to operate it legally on the roads, why is it any business of the government to demand to see what the sales deal was between you and I for the car? Should they really be concerned if you paid me cash, or instead traded for a couple of goats and a roll of fencing wire? Heck no, it's none of their business.
I know, this is a simple example on an entirely different scale, but the point is the same. As long as you have the legal right to operate the vehicle (license, insurance, registration) it makes no difference to the government what the private agreement was to obtain the car.

Too often we give up our rights to privacy without even knowing it. One by one these rights are absconded with by overzealous politicians. You are arguing that this is such an important deal that even the sales agreement should be subject to oversight, but where does this end? The AG signed a confidentiality agreement and has reviewed the sales agreement on behalf of the government as part of the process. If there was a smoking gun then it would have been caught in that vetting process. There is no need for it to be distributed to all, and likely be leaked to the public. It's of no concern in relation to how the refinery will be operated, and what taxes are paid, and what employment conditions agreed too.

We all want what is best for St. Croix. The information required to make a decision on the ABR operating agreement is at hand. At this point in the process it is up to the senators to do just that, yea or na - not to overextend their bounds, or pass the buck to the next legislature.

MissJustice...your hilarious post on ABR only goes to show how little you really know about the inner workings of this deal. Keep posting on it though...very entertaining!

The reason they don't want you to see the sales agreement is because ABR IS Hovensa. Five guys who admit they have no money, who formed ABR three days after the 4th agreement?
ABR is a Hovensa shell that was formed to get them out of $200 million in taxes and ongoing clean up. A liability barrier with no net increase in employees. Free access to the port through this shell.

Successful business deals on this scale aren't conducted by people with money. Succeeding in this venture will require excellent credit and a sound business plan. Access to the kind of money ABR will require only comes through thorough market research and sound investment analysis. It should be reassuring to the territory that the new business will have to undergo the rigorous scrutiny of the business capital market, which is far better able to assess the business risk, rather than rely on someone with a big bank account, as so much of the criticism of ABR suggests. The Virgin Islands fixation with sugar-daddys with deep pockets always amazes me, since those investors have come to ruin on our shores every single time.

If you fall for this then I have a bridge to sell you in London.
Meanwhile, the reason the VI has a right to see the agreement is because they are asking for tax breaks. Translation: if you want welfare and food stamps, then the government has a right to ask for income and asset information.
If they want to withhold this info, then go ahead and operate without tax breaks.

Partially right. However, 'tax breaks' are not an absolution from taxes, as so many people want you to believe. A tax break is a compromise on an overall tax burden is a compromise that takes into consideration many factors. When a big entity conducts business, it brings with it lots of smaller business activity and all the tax revenue that comes with it. It should be obvious to everyone, on St. Croix at least, that the loss of the refinery was just the tip of the iceberg. The loss of tax revenue on the income of business which supported the refinery has been what crippled the territorial economy, not the loss of the refinery tax revenue.

If the territory wants to attract business activity on this scale, then we will need to understand that it takes fresh bait to catch big fish. If we aren't willing to negotiate aggressively, then business will naturally go to those who are.

Why don't they want us to see it anyway? It's not like the ABR principals have a red cent. They admitted that at the hearing.

Well, true, but: a) see above: follow the money, not the principals; and b) disclosure of these agreements only subjects them to dissection and deliberate misinterpretation, ultimately to our own detriment. For examples see EVERY SINGLE business opportunity which the territory has turned away in the last 20 years.

"Okay guys, you pretend to be a separate company. I will sell myself to you on paper. And you get all my liabilities. I still get access to the port. Call it A Blarney Refinery. Yeah. ABR."

That's some dangerous bull$... right there. The refinery isn't 'ours', and we don't EVER want it to become ours because we will be left with a rusting toxic waste dump and nothing of value.

To succeed as a viable economy we need to support businesses to succeed, while remaining vigilant for the future interests of our economy and our environment.

The reason they don't want you to see the sales agreement is because ABR IS Hovensa. Five guys who admit they have no money, who formed ABR three days after the 4th agreement?
ABR is a Hovensa shell that was formed to get them out of $200 million in taxes and ongoing clean up. A liability barrier with no net increase in employees. Free access to the port through this shell.

Successful business deals on this scale aren't conducted by people with money. Succeeding in this venture will require excellent credit and a sound business plan. Access to the kind of money ABR will require only comes through thorough market research and sound investment analysis. It should be reassuring to the territory that the new business will have to undergo the rigorous scrutiny of the business capital market, which is far better able to assess the business risk, rather than rely on someone with a big bank account, as so much of the criticism of ABR suggests. The Virgin Islands fixation with sugar-daddys with deep pockets always amazes me, since those investors have come to ruin on our shores every single time.

If you fall for this then I have a bridge to sell you in London.
Meanwhile, the reason the VI has a right to see the agreement is because they are asking for tax breaks. Translation: if you want welfare and food stamps, then the government has a right to ask for income and asset information.
If they want to withhold this info, then go ahead and operate without tax breaks.

Partially right. However, 'tax breaks' are not an absolution from taxes, as so many people want you to believe. A tax break is a compromise on an overall tax burden is a compromise that takes into consideration many factors. When a big entity conducts business, it brings with it lots of smaller business activity and all the tax revenue that comes with it. It should be obvious to everyone, on St. Croix at least, that the loss of the refinery was just the tip of the iceberg. The loss of tax revenue on the income of business which supported the refinery has been what crippled the territorial economy, not the loss of the refinery tax revenue.

If the territory wants to attract business activity on this scale, then we will need to understand that it takes fresh bait to catch big fish. If we aren't willing to negotiate aggressively, then business will naturally go to those who are.

Why don't they want us to see it anyway? It's not like the ABR principals have a red cent. They admitted that at the hearing.

Well, true, but: a) see above: follow the money, not the principals; and b) disclosure of these agreements only subjects them to dissection and deliberate misinterpretation, ultimately to our own detriment. For examples see EVERY SINGLE business opportunity which the territory has turned away in the last 20 years.

"Okay guys, you pretend to be a separate company. I will sell myself to you on paper. And you get all my liabilities. I still get access to the port. Call it A Blarney Refinery. Yeah. ABR."

That's some dangerous bull$... right there. The refinery isn't 'ours', and we don't EVER want it to become ours because we will be left with a rusting toxic waste dump and nothing of value.

To succeed as a viable economy we need to support businesses to succeed, while remaining vigilant for the future interests of our economy and our environment.

All should be hyper vigilant as to this deal. The USVI will sell its souls to attract such a large revenue source,...without regards to any negative consequences.

The USVI will sell its souls to attract such a large revenue source,...without regards to any negative consequences.

Really? You've never lived here but feel confident in making such a statement based on what?

The reason they don't want you to see the sales agreement is because ABR IS Hovensa. Five guys who admit they have no money, who formed ABR three days after the 4th agreement?
ABR is a Hovensa shell that was formed to get them out of $200 million in taxes and ongoing clean up. A liability barrier with no net increase in employees. Free access to the port through this shell.

Successful business deals on this scale aren't conducted by people with money. Succeeding in this venture will require excellent credit and a sound business plan. Access to the kind of money ABR will require only comes through thorough market research and sound investment analysis. It should be reassuring to the territory that the new business will have to undergo the rigorous scrutiny of the business capital market, which is far better able to assess the business risk, rather than rely on someone with a big bank account, as so much of the criticism of ABR suggests. The Virgin Islands fixation with sugar-daddys with deep pockets always amazes me, since those investors have come to ruin on our shores every single time.

If you fall for this then I have a bridge to sell you in London.
Meanwhile, the reason the VI has a right to see the agreement is because they are asking for tax breaks. Translation: if you want welfare and food stamps, then the government has a right to ask for income and asset information.
If they want to withhold this info, then go ahead and operate without tax breaks.

Partially right. However, 'tax breaks' are not an absolution from taxes, as so many people want you to believe. A tax break is a compromise on an overall tax burden is a compromise that takes into consideration many factors. When a big entity conducts business, it brings with it lots of smaller business activity and all the tax revenue that comes with it. It should be obvious to everyone, on St. Croix at least, that the loss of the refinery was just the tip of the iceberg. The loss of tax revenue on the income of business which supported the refinery has been what crippled the territorial economy, not the loss of the refinery tax revenue.

If the territory wants to attract business activity on this scale, then we will need to understand that it takes fresh bait to catch big fish. If we aren't willing to negotiate aggressively, then business will naturally go to those who are.

Why don't they want us to see it anyway? It's not like the ABR principals have a red cent. They admitted that at the hearing.

Well, true, but: a) see above: follow the money, not the principals; and b) disclosure of these agreements only subjects them to dissection and deliberate misinterpretation, ultimately to our own detriment. For examples see EVERY SINGLE business opportunity which the territory has turned away in the last 20 years.

"Okay guys, you pretend to be a separate company. I will sell myself to you on paper. And you get all my liabilities. I still get access to the port. Call it A Blarney Refinery. Yeah. ABR."

That's some dangerous bull$... right there. The refinery isn't 'ours', and we don't EVER want it to become ours because we will be left with a rusting toxic waste dump and nothing of value.

To succeed as a viable economy we need to support businesses to succeed, while remaining vigilant for the future interests of our economy and our environment.

All should be hyper vigilant as to this deal. The USVI will sell its souls to attract such a large revenue source,...without regards to any negative consequences.

Oldtart: correct, I've never lived in the USVI,.....However,....I am well educated and experienced in the ways of the world. I think resarting the refinery in St Croix would be a huge benefit to the island and its people,.........however,....I strongly suggest the populace ensures that all operations will be in the most environmentally friendly way possible. I fear the government will simply ignore any and all fiscal and environmental cost associated with the refinery simply because they have an eye on the tax revenue.

Oldtart: correct, I've never lived in the USVI,.....However,....I am well educated and experienced in the ways of the world. I think resarting the refinery in St Croix would be a huge benefit to the island and its people,.........however,....I strongly suggest the populace ensures that all operations will be in the most environmentally friendly way possible. I fear the government will simply ignore any and all fiscal and environmental cost associated with the refinery simply because they have an eye on the tax revenue.

True. We're all a bunch of ill-educated twits with no experience in the ways of the world and know nothing about such deals nor what we should be looking out for. It's truly enlightening to know that there are people like you out there who are far removed from us but who are willing and able to tell us what we should be looking out for and what would be best for us. Thanks!

OT I think she's just offering her opinion to the conversation, not trying to tell us what we should be looking out for.

I will add, as I did awhile ago to another conversation, it doesn't even matter what any of us think, the damned governor and legislator are calling the shots here in the VI and none of us can really do diddly squat to change it!

I meant to say "damned governor and legislature"

OT I think she's just offering her opinion to the conversation, not trying to tell us what we should be looking out for.

I will add, as I did awhile ago to another conversation, it doesn't even matter what any of us think, the damned governor and legislator are calling the shots here in the VI and none of us can really do diddly squat to change it!

Don't agree with you on either count. Maybe you're right and he didn't mean to sound condescending but it hit me that way very strongly so I responded accordingly.

As far as nobody being able to change anything, I don't buy that either. It doesn't happen overnight but if you go about things the right way and diligently seek change then it certainly can be effected - but you have to be tenacious and few are willing to be that.

Some things can be changed for sure, but when it comes to the ABR deal, I stand by my conviction that there's nothing you or I can do. (unless someone has influence with the decision makers in this deal)

One of the few times I have to agree with OT.

Pdmargie, you'll find that most of what you think you know does not apply here.

Best advice till you become established here - Open Ears - Shut Mouth.

Just sayin'

The USVI will sell its souls to attract such a large revenue source,...without regards to any negative consequences.

Really? You've never lived here but feel confident in making such a statement based on what?

Today's Avis says Mapp has done 180 on ABR now that he's elected, and now supports the deal. Wonder if/why he changed his mind.

Today's Avis says Mapp has done 180 on ABR now that he's elected, and now supports the deal. Wonder if/why he changed his mind.

When did he say that he was against the deal? I recall him saying to move slowly, not that he opposed the deal.

Um, that's what I thought he said, too. The mention is in the opinion section, so no sources mentioned. I also don't remember seeing where he's now supporting it.

I believe that the tide has turned and ABR will be successful. The senators have had six weeks to study the operating agreement, the BER has issued a favorable report, the sales agreement has been shown to all senators and Mapp is in favor. If the 30th turns it down, I'm certain the 31st will sign it. This is my opinion only of course.

You can download the findings of Prism Survey below.

Our 817 sample PolitIQ telephone opinion poll with a margin of error of 3.4% was fielded on December 12 . We tested several high profile political figures and institutions as well as the most important policy topic of the day. Take a look and be sure to let us know how we can get to work for you.

Of note:

• Governor-Elect Mapp’s positive image (55% favorable – 16% unfavorable) is a near mirror-image to outgoing Governor deJongh (26% favorable-56% unfavorable). The incoming Governor is better liked among residents of St. Croix (62% favorable) than among residents of St. Thomas (48%).

• Nearly half (47%) of territory residents surveyed hold an unfavorable view of the USVI Senate, while just 31% hold a favorable view.

• Delegate-Elect Plaskett is also viewed positively (50% favorable – 7% unfavorable) as she prepares to take office.

• Fully two-in-three USVI residents (67%) believe that it is VERY important for the Senate to vote on December 19th on the Hovensa sale and re-opening. Another 18% believe it is somewhat important. Solid majorities in both St. Croix (71%) and St. Thomas (63%) believe the vote is very important, as do residents of both genders, all ages, and all races.

• Given information about the Hovensa sale agreement, 66% of residents believe that Yes, the Senate should approve the agreement for the sale and re-opening of the refinery. Support is consistent on both main Islands (St. Croix – 64% and St. Thomas – 67%), and among all demographic subgroups.

• Among those who believe it is very important for the Senate to vote on the issue, 82% believe they should approve it.

http://goo.gl/VgS4Gz