Hurwitz, Pacific Lumber is cutting Headwaters

LRLake lrlake at aol.com
Thu Mar 5 12:26:34 EST 1998


Camillia's analysis of the following situation is right on.  I have followed
the issue since the acqusition ('87 or'88?).  As a Libertarian and forester, I
find the basic structural and economic weakness of our systen apalling. 
Converting resources to $ in this context (and at this rate) does a disservice
to us all.  Yea, it's legal but unethical.

Lawrence Lake, RPF
Redding, CA

Sorry about the long quote for those who are current....
>On 3/4/98, dstaples at livingston.net wrote:
>
>>CamillaH wrote:
>>> 
>>> When Maxxam acquired PL, Charles Hurwitz had already planned to log at the
>>> maximum rate possible.  No environmentalists involved.  Take a real look
>at
>>the
>>> man you're defending.  (http://www.jailhurwitz.com)  I pray that there are
>>few
>>> or no other forest owners that are like him.  I find it criminal that
>>someone
>>> can buy a company and in essence steal the workers' pension funds.
>Twice!!
>>I
>>> don't care if it's legal; there is no way to justify such actions!
>>> Environmentalists for Headwaters only want 60,000 acres.  Charles Hurwitz
>>took
>>> over 200,000 acres from the Murphys.
>>
>>The URL listed above is the same one that demonized Hurwitz for the past
>>year.  Unadultrated propaganda.  
>
>Just because it's propaganda doesn't mean it is without basis.  You may not
>like that URL, Don, but it has a comprehensive list of actions done by Mr.
>Hurwitz.  If you know of another which is more accurate, please feel free to
>advise.
>
>
>>Criminal?  I ask the same  I did on
>>this newsgroup several months ago.  Show me the indictments.  Show me
>>the prosecution. Show me the jail time.  Not emotional diatribe, but
>>evidence of prosecution.  Other wise, you should add IMHO to your posts.
>>
>First off, Don, I prefaced my statement with the phrase "I find" stealing of
>pension funds to be criminal.  That phrase should be every bit as effective
>as
>"IMHO."    Furthermore, nowhere did I mention any indictments, prosecution or
>jail time.  
>
>No emotional diatribe - here are the facts involving PL's pension fund, to
>the
>best of my knowledge.  PL's treasurer/CFO was directed to decommission PL's
>pension fund through an annuity from an insurance company.  PL's CFO
>announced
>his intention to solicit bids from solid, well established insurance
>companies,
>including Aetna, Equitable,  Metropolitan Life and Prudential.  PL's CFO was
>instructed by Maxxam's CFO to also solicit a bid from Executive Life.
>Despite
>research which showed that Executive Life was the weakest and least reliable
>of
>the five companies giving bids, and over the objections of PL's CFO,
>Executive
>Life was selected as the insurance company to be used for PL's retirement
>fund
>reorganization.  According to the Executive Life consultant in the deal,
>"...it
>came down to a real dogfight at the end and many of the individuals [among
>Maxxam's inherited Pacific Lumber executives] still did not come to an
>agreement.  This was a decision that was just forced on them by Charles
>Hurwitz."  (Executive Life was seized by the CA Insurance Commissioner.)  
>
>The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Committee on
>Energy
>and Commerce held a hearing on the takeover of PL by Hurwitz and Maxxam.  In
>that hearing, Charles Hurwitz said he would be happy to answer any questions
>he
>could about Pacific Lumber's pension replacement, but it should be understood
>that Hurwitz had been "very removed" from the process.  
>
>If you are interested, Don, I will post what else I know that verifies
>Hurwitz
>is not on the up and up.  It will take a fair amount of time and bandwidth
>(?)
>to do, but I'd be happy to share the information with you as time permits. 
>There has been no shortage of investigations and lawsuits involving Hurwitz
>and
>Maxxam. 
>
>
>>Environmentalists want for free that which Hurwitz bought, not stole, in
>>the take over he bought stock.  Why do not the environmentalists set
>>forth to perform the same operation on Hurwitz.  Buy him out.
>>
>
>The environmentalists' preferred option for Headwaters  has been a
>debt-for-nature swap, wherein the 60,000 acres of the Headwaters Forest
>Complex
>would be acquired by the government in return for forgiveness of the $1.6
>Billion FDIC bailout debt Charles Hurwitz owes as a result of the United
>Savings Association of Texas' failure.  
>
>
>
>There was a very interesting segment on ABC's Prime Time Live tonight re
>Headwaters.  Sam Donaldson asked why is the U.S. government paying to protect
>trees which can't be legally cut anyway?  And also why in this deal is the
>price affixed at $380 Million, when the standard by which the government
>determines the value for land acquired through eminent domain, for example,
>is
>based upon the land's fair market value, which in this case would be $20
>Million?
>
>
>>I don't defend the man, don't know him, but I am offended by the
>>emotional name calling of the environmentalists.  Pot calling the
>>kettle.
>
>Civility and good manners are always preferable, IMHO.  And, yes, I find name
>calling to be counter productive to communication.  However, I will admit
>that
>Charles Hurwitz gets my goat and I'm not above calling him names out of my
>frustration.    
>
>The skillet calling the pot calling the kettle is just as ridiculous as the
>pot
>calling the kettle.  .  
>
>
>>Don Staples
>
>Camilla
>
>
>
>
>





More information about the Ag-forst mailing list