The story of hijacking a port

From the tales of adventures we have read about the pirates hijacking ships. Hijacking of entire ports is quite rare. The most horrible case of Estonians hijacking a port was the destruction of the city Sigtuna by the men from Saaremaa. Therefore an attempt at hijacking in Haapsalu nowadays sounds even more incredible, although this is the reason why the marina that operated successfully for four seasons, was closed to the sailors last summer.
Text Viktor Siilats

It all started with one phone call.

“Viktor, who do I have to turn to when I want to come to Haapsalu , to Your marina with my boat?” The caller was the parliament member , Mr Tõnis Palts.
“Probably to that guy,” I replied.
“What guy?”
“Well, the one you were telling those long stories in front of the whole Parliament, of course.”
“Oh, I had no idea you’d heard about that. I’m very sorry indeed!”
“Alright, come then and contact the marina captain prior to your arrival on the radio channel twelve.”
As a remark: when protecting the possible additional income of the Maritime Administration officials by being in the examination board of the courses for skippers of recreational vessels, Palts made me an example of bad yachtsman, placing my sailing abilities in doubt in front of Riigikogu. For more on this and also the painful road of building a marina in Haapsalu, see separate story on the home page of Grand Holm Marina at www.grandholmmarina.ee

Palts and Parts come to visit

Anyway, after this call Palts’ yacht “Karmen” became a frequent and most welcome guest at Grand Holm Marina. Last year, one day in August, Palts’ boat was moored at the marina at the same floating pier that later proved a cause for several problems, together with the Minister of Economic Affairs and Communications, Juhan Parts, and the members of their political party on board. At that time, the Minister was not bothered by the non-existent waterway or the pier allegedly blocking the non-existent checkpoint, nor even the fact that Grand Holm Marina was offering her services without a port certificate approved by the Minister. “Viktor, do you think the state should support small ports financially?” Palts asked me in the presence of the minister. At that moment I had absolutely no idea that this was a trap. I said that I had made all the investments by myself and did not need any support from the state. But to be honest, a small port cannot really make ends meet. So it’s more just a pretty toy. “Juhan, what do you think, if the state supported the small ports financially?” Palts kept asking Parts. The Minister answered that he does not support the idea of subsidizing private enterprises, since that would inhibit the free development of economy.
It seems the Minister must have changed his views over the night and the hospitality of Grand Holm Marina got paid by the political concept that Haapsalu marina was a nice place, only the owner seemed to be the wrong man. The ex-mayor of Haapsalu, Teet Kallasvee, who five summers ago coaxed me into investing in Haapsalu, explained it as follows: the local elections were coming and Haapsalu was one of the few towns their party has control over. That by allocating the sudden financial support to the development of small ports would ensure them another victory. Very soon the mayor of Haapsalu, Ingrid Danilov, told me that it was nice of me to invest in Haapsalu marina at the time when nobody dared to do so, but now their “own people” of Haapsalu had taken interest in marinabusiness and that I was probably about to face several problems.

Ours and theirs

“Ours”, as it appeared, were my competitor in boatsales, Sulev Paakspuu (AS Bellboats) and the party companions of Parts and Palts, Aivar Reivik and Arvo Oorn from AS Volta. Previously, the owners of the neighboring plot to my marina had warned me, that if I did not buy the former yacht club building and the corresponding plot right away, they would sell it to the very powerful people who would put my marina business to an end. My reply, as to any blackmailing attempts was, that I was not interested in that kind of discussion. Besides, the waters in front of the former fishing-kolkhoz yacht club building was very shallow and therefore unsuitable for a marina and the yacht club as an institution was long inactive. The only thing remaining was a run-down pub Kessu’s.
Nevertheless, the owners of the neighboring plot seem to have power and energy. As the chairman of the Freedom Monument Foundation, Reivik has that close access to the decision-makers, that both the unexpected support programme for the small ports and also the changes in the maritime acts serve him just fine and even enable him to retroactively finance the purchase of his plot from the support funds.
Then the scenario familiar from the 1940s was applied, where the owner of the property was ridiculed and called the public enemy and was deprived of his property. All that so the one coveting his property might keep it for himself. Cynical demagogy in the interpretations of victory and freedom served as effective means in manipulating the sea-ignorant public.
The public relations manager of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications, Gea Otsa, was ordered to organize a massive media attack. And where else would she turn to than her previous workplace, the office of “Äripäev” (local Dagens Industri) where she was remembered kindly under the name of Gea Velthut-Sokka. Äripäev, that has never been interested in the problems of thousands of recreational boat owners, all of a sudden published a three-page-story with emotional photos and aggressive front page, the main content of which was the concern over whether the five yachtsmen from Haapsalu can sail straight to Kessu pub in the future or will they have to stand where they did in the recent past and walk those 50 metres on foot. The economic newspaper, that had so far advocated fair and honest tax paying, all of a sudden took a vehemently protective position towards black economy and tax-exempt income that the owners of the neighboring plot were illegally earning from their pier without authorization for use. At the same time Gea Otsa skillfully managed to censor her ex-colleagues and thus there is not one syllable about the fact that Reivik’s business partner, Arvo Oorn is accidentally the father of the spouse of the Deputy Secretary General of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Eero Pärgmäe.
The ex-mayor of Haapsalu, Teet Kallasvee and his party companion Andres Ammas managed to convince Andrus Karnau, the business editor of the newspaper Lääne Elu (a share of which belongs to Ammas), that he would raise many complicated issues concerning maritime business in his current and also the previous publications. The whole business was supported by a competitor Paakspuu’s boat tester Priit Veski (under the pseudonym PriitV) and his supply manager Indrek Orav (under the pseudonym Indrek66), whose task was to represent “indignant crowd“.
Accusations started to pour down from the storm clouds over my head: Siilats has blocked the shipping lane, the waterway, the marina, the border checkpoint etc. The aim was to give the public the impression as if there was another marina next to mine, having been a marina far longer and being now a place where the good old yachtsmen from Haapsalu were now trapped. And in addition the readers who had not seen the navigation charts were misled by telling them about a navigable channel that should continue that way and that it was only my fault that the historical yawl could not sail to the front of the Rannarootsi Museum.
It didn’t take long until Reivik offered through media to purchase my marina, hoping to obtain it for a cheap price. Yet, there’s no smoke without fire. A long time ago the fishing kolkhoz Lääne Kalur really did dredge both their port and also the fairway to their port, which I as their legal successor bought from them. Unfortunately that dredge did not lead to any other ports and the story that this dredge belongs to the townspeople or yachtsmen, is far from truth: the property of the fishing kolkhoz was a collective property, as we all know, therefore belonging to the members of the kolkhoz, and they had already received their remuneration.

Don’t you try to write anything down!

Approximately the following conversation took place last spring in the office of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MEAC). The participants recorded it for the protocol, that, however, never came to be, since the "son-in-law” of my new neighbor simply forbade it. The aim of the meeting was to create with about a half-a-year’ delay the marina that I had allegedly been blocking since last autumn, that is, the new Veskiviigi marina.
There were three different options under discussion: the first and the most expensive one for the state was to create the Veskiviigi marina and reduce the existing Grand Holm Marina belonging to me, for the benefit of the new marina. The second option was to create Veskiviigi marina and dig a new fairway that would meet the necessary requirements around Grand Holm Marina. The third option, the cheapest and totally problem-free for the state would have been to create that Veskiviigi marina and let the new owners take care of their fairway, as it has been customary in Estonia so far but also obliged by the legislation.
So, let’s have a look into the council room to see what is going on there. Around the council table are seated the Secretary General of the MEAC, Marika Priske, the Deputy Secretary General (“son-in-law”) Eero Pärgmäe, the director of the department, Aivo Lind, a lawyer Gerli Lootus and the chief specialist Gerli Koppel. From the Maritime Administration, the director general Andrus Maide and his deputy in maritime safety, Rene Sirol, who is also the chairman for the Committee of (Not) Opening Ports for Shipping Traffic, are present. In the times which are very difficult for the Estonian but also European economy the top officials of ministery of economy discuss a most important economic problem:
The Director General of the Maritime Administration, Mr. Maide starts with a lengthy speech, criticizing the present legislation, according to which every marina, regardless of its size, must apply for an independent aquatic area. The director general has obviously forgotten that all the legislative initiative proceeds from the Maritime Administration itself, therefore he is actually criticizing the typically rather stupid system that the Maritime Administration has come up with.
Maide’s language is quite interesting, spiced with the humor typical to Hiiumaa, I guess, the best “pearls” being something like: “When we haven’t been presented anything, then we have no idea what we have not been presented.” Or: “See, here it is , this so-to-say natural channel that the fishermen once dug for themselves.” About how to find arguments fro non-approval of floating piers of Grand Holm Marina:
Gerli Koppel: “I have a few questions to the Maritime Administration: You require approval for the hydro-technical work. I asked Erik Noor (surveillance department for ports) and he told me that if Siilats gave you this drawing for approval and he does not draw these boats here, you would approve the drawing without further remarks.” Rene Sirol: “We could do that, today, yes, his aquatic area reaches to that point and if he doesn’t draw the boats and says that the space between the boats shall be this and that much, and we can see that maneuvering would not be problematic, there would be no reason for us not to approve it.”
Gerli Koppel: “Did you ask him to do that, then?”
Rene Sirol: “Well, yes, we did, but he can tell us anything, like, he’d put the 12-metre ones there and so there would be enough space and there’s nothing to do, then.”
Andrus Maide: “Siilats knows very well that he has to grant that passageway! Therefore it cannot be approved without ships either! But since I don’t work at the surveillance department for ports…”
Eero Pärgmäe (the Deputy Secretary General and the son-in-law): “These arguments Andrus brought out, that the passageway through the aquatic area has to be granted, have these been written down in any legal acts?”
Gerli Koppel: “No, not yet. They’re in the draft.”
Andrus Maide: “I have no idea how this is regulated... That means, it’s yet not explicated...”
And even though the present laws do not require the floating piers to be approved by the Maritime Administration and the surveillance department for ports has seemingly no arguments for not approving these piers, the Maritime Administration, by the orders of its Director General, did not approve the piers of Grand Holm Marina, requiring these to be completed first
About the new fairway for the new planned marina which demands the passageway through existingone: Gerli Koppel: “How much is that dredging costs, about 150-200 thousand? Is that only dredging or also the transporting depositing of the mud?”
Andrus Maide: “We don’t know that yet. In one of the conversations Siilats claimed, yes, that he would do it for 200 thousands. I don’t know what data he was relying on, but this is a speculative approach. I don’t know. I think it was Pärnu dredging pump that made that offer but we don’t know, it’s not that simple and I see no need in digging it.”
Gerli Koppel: “Veskiviigi Marina also claimed that this dredging would not prove too expensive. The only issue is that dredging is not possible until July, because of the fish.”
Andrus Maide: “And what would it be like in the future, someone else makes an aquatic area next to Veskiviigi, does the state then have to keep digging canals? If someone wishes to create an aquatic area, then creating the gateway to the port should be only this owner’s concern... !!!”
Long silence follows. The honorable Director General and everyone else have probably understood that this statement went totally wrong. Of course the creating of Veskiviigi gateway should be the concern of the new marina owners and the state should neither interfere nor bear any expenses. It seems, the Director General of the Maritime Administration has spoken for the most sensible and cheapest option for the state!
But he composes himself very quickly.
Andrus Maide: “But what would happen, when Grand Holm Marinas aquatic area coordinates were to be withdrawn? Nothing! The court case is inevitable anyway. Well, I… It’s just the same, what he will file an action for. That would just settle it.”
The conversation then concentrates on whether the idea of allegedly blocking the actually inexistent checkpoint of borderpatrol could be used as an excuse to decrease Grand Holm Marina aquatic area and close down the marina.
Gerli Koppel: “The question here is, whether the Ministry of Internal Affairs will have an official recourse or the director of the Border Guard will not make a decision at all to make it official, this granting an access to that Haapsalu marina … But unfortunately its called Haapsalu Marina, not Veskiviigi… But that would be a very good argument for us!”
Unfortunately, although the director of Haapsalu Border Guard did play along in the beginning and misled even the Secretary General of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, regardless of the Schengen Area, the journalists from Navigaator, despite their efforts, did not manage to find neither Haapsalu marina nor the checkpoint there. And the former Haapsalu marina, which existed just de facto according to Eestonian Maritime Administration pilotbooks on coordinates 58˚57,5`N 23˚31,6`E and this coordinates situated in the Grand Holm Marina! No checkpoint was to be found at the neighbours of Grand Holm Marina, either. Then intervened the Minister of Internal Affairs and it didn’t take even two months until the checkpoint was declared a mistake in the resolution of the Government of the Republic. Near the end of the summer the Haapsalu border inspection post was closed down altogether. The reason: lack of border-crossings in Schengen area. On searching for the Haapsalu border checkpoint, read separate article on www.grandholmmarina.ee
Meanwhile, the meeting continued in full swing.
Gerli Koppel: “One legal question: let’s assume we proceed with option 1 and by the order of the Republic cut off that piece of his aquatic area. Suppose he does not remove his floating pier right away anyhow. Could the Maritime Administration then do it? Could we then remove it in order to grant the access to the other marina?”
Rene Sirol: “No, not directly by force, like you go there and…”
Andrus Maide: “I mean, when we’ve finished this (ed: the aquatic area of the new Veskiviigi marina), two owners should have a say in this. That other one there, the previous owner, he didn’t protest anything. When that (ed: new) aquatic area is established, it would be already blocked and that’s the issue between two owners and then the police must interfere.”
Eero Pärgmäe: “Domestic quarrel and fights!”
Andrus Maide: “Solving of the domestic quarrel. And if you ask me, Veskiviigi should now seize the initiative, because when it is blocked… it is obvious case of blocking and how to solve… all these cases are solved the same way.”
Rene Sirol: “But they had the rights to place their pier there, since they have this aquatic area, but they are not allowed to use it!”
Gerli Koppel: “But in the reality the marina has been operating, although having no permission. What have you done about that?”
Rene Sirol: “Nothing at the moment.”
Andrus Maide: “You put it down nicely, that it would end badly.”
Rene Sirol: “There was a time when the port of Tallinn operated the same way. What are we supposed to do?”
Gerli Koppel: “I know, that’s our weakest argument, this principle of equal treatment.”
Rene Sirol: “He should be lucky he was allowed to continue that long. He can’t rely on that.”
Gerli Koppel: “We can’t rely on that.”
Gerli Koppel: “Gerli, what do you think about this first option, the court?”
Gerli Lootus: “What sum would Grand Holm Marina’s claim amount to? How can they prove their claim?”
Marika Priske: “If he does not have the permission to operate as a marina and keep boats there, then there is no basis for any claims. What loss of profit could we speak about then?”
Gerli Koppel: “Very many ports have operated without the port certificate.”
Eero Pärgmäe: “But they’ve never placed any claims either.”
Gerli Koppel: “But they could…”
(giggling) Andrus Maide: “Let’s say, so far the general attitude has been tolerant, but when you start placing your claims, you have nothing to claim, since you have no basis for income, actually. To show that you’ve made investments for 16 millions – at least not in that aquatic area, definitely not. But nevertheless, how much would that be?” Rene Sirol: “But he’s bluffing!”
Andrus Maide: “Even if it is necessary to pay a part of this, it’s much healthier...
Eero Pärgmäe: “...than to dig a new channel.”
Andrus Maide: “The matter with the digging is, you only get to one marina. If there were 3 or 4 more… Perhaps then the public waterway would continue that far.”
Gerli Koppel: “Why did you remove that lateral mark?”
Rene Sirol: “Because the public waterway ends right there.”
Andrus Maide: “At that moment.”
Rene Sirol: “Because of this situation.”
Andrus Maide (laughing): “According to Siilats, and it’s also been in the press that the waterway ends right there. It really ended, when the Government of the Republic placed the aquatic area right in front of it.”
Gerli Koppel: “At the time nobody thought of the borderpatrol checkpoint being there after all?”
Andrus Maide: “At the time the former owners of yachtclub were very passive. They, too, should have done something there. The question with the pontoon is not that the Maritime Administration will go and remove it by force, but the new owner will say that his movement is restricted. We can only help to remove it if such a decision is issued.”
Eero Pärgmäe, the son-in-low of the new owner of planned Veskiviigi marina: “I still do not represent the owner, I am still the Deputy Secretary General here, thank you!” (all-round giggling)
Eero Pärgmäe: “My only interest is that all this crap would come to an end quickly.”
Gerli Koppel: “This crap is just about to start!”
Andrus Maide: “Three options and in any case someone will file an action. And Siilats will do that anyway, regardless of the option. Therefore my choice would still be option 1.” Gerli Koppel: “I also like this option 1 the best.”
Andrus Maide: “That’s a sure thing.”
Someone tries to argue, predicting a court case lasting for three years. That every move will be sued and the initial legal protection will be applied for. The court may suspend the regulation.”
Andrus Maide: “Then let it be suspended, if nobody represents the next port there. Are we discussing the starting of operating of the next port or are we discussing the possible solutions to the present situation? If the Ministry has decided to decrease the area, then they would have no reason to take offence at the state. If Siilats contests that decision of the Government of the Republic... there’s nothing we can do about that. In that case, the dispute has to be between these very same… The two of them… And the state has done everything: allocated him coordinates and reduced the coordinates, taken the situation to legal basis, so that everyone would be treated equally. If we look at it from the viewpoint of the state, then the situation should be solved. If we concentrate on whether they can do anything, that goes beyond this table already. Then we’ll have to separately…”
Gerli Koppel: “With all the other options you’ll also go to court for three years, what’s the difference then.” The other participants do not say much, including the Secretary General who is obviously influenced by the Director of the Maritime Administration. But the issue, whether Veskiviigi marina will also be included in the legislative proceeding if the court suspends the regulation concerning the decreasing of Grand Holm Marina aquatic area, seems to be of general concern.
Meanwhile the Director of the Maritime Administration, who seems as if seized control over the Ministry, declares self-forgetfully that the Ministry will include it, if necessary. Then the Government is also required to give a written reply!
Gerli Koppel: “Damn it, Veskiviigi marina cannot start operating with that pier on the way!”
Eero Pärgmäe: “One thing is, that you go to court for three years, another, that you cannot start operating.”
Andrus Maide: “But you have to have a way home!”
Gerli Koppel: “That pier must be removed!”
Andrus Maide and Rene Sirol together: “That’s it, then – domestic quarrel and the police.”
Andrus Maide: “The police will then remove that pier. Because when the Government of the Republic lays down new borders, then these will withdraw. And at that moment the wharf must be removed!”
Meanwhile the council discovers an aquatic area called port of Haapsalu. It exists only in papers and has never operated as a port after its establishment. The water is too shallow there for navigation. But could that non-existent port be used as an excuse?
“Here’s another aquatic area from 1999. A port! Here you go, with the coordinates and everything!” “It’s not a port, it’s only an aquatic area. It has not claimed any waterways.”
Andrus Maide: “It’s on a very shallow spot at a dubious place. That was actually our argument, too – one port and another aquatic area, so the waterway should continue. If there had been nobody behind there, we wouldn’t have done anything either. So it develops, but the water to that aquatic area is only, like, under-knee-deep, as far as I know.”
Gerli Koppel: “We’ll have to find all the possibilities for Veskiviigi marina to start operating!”
Eero Pärgmäe : “In the front of public it would be good idea to mention that third port as well…”
The conversation then briefly touches upon the one historical yawl to use as agrgument too, but the council then unanimously agrees that it doesn’t make any difference whether to call a historical vessel that was broken by drunk driver, is called a yawl, a yacht or a cog under construction – a low draught and the lack of keel allow these vessels to sail anywhere, so the argument of yawl probably cannot be used at all.
Eero Pärgmäe: “Let’s make up our minds now. I can understand we’ve reached a full consensus. Whereas I haven’t decided anything, so please no protocols. Don’t you try to write anything down!”
Andrus Maide: “He wasn’t even here!”
(giggling) Eero Pärgmäe: “So we’ve reached the consensus to proceed with option 1.”
Gerli Koppel: “This draft for goernmental order must be done, but I have another question to Gerli, something that the State Chancellery also mentioned: can you substantiate this friction by the constitution?”
Gerli Lootus: “The court will say how substantiated this motivation is. Whether it is sufficient or insufficient. But it’s a job that has to be done, there’s no other way. The State Chancellery must agree!”
Gerli Koppel: “The State Chancellery usually does not initiate legislative proceedings. We’ll have to say …. For example, that something went wrong…”
Someone says that the aquatic area was allocated for Grand Holm Marina for business activities. That GHM was planning its business activities… But nobody pays any attention.
Gerli Koppel: “Then we’ve finished!”
Marika Priske: “Now, comrades, it’s been a pleasure! Constructive.”
Gerli Koppel: “Then let’s start drawing up that motivation. Can we count on your contribution?”
Gerli Lootus: “Arrangements shouldn’t be a problem; we’ll formalize diminishing of Grand holm Marina like to DETERMINE it not to revoke or diminish!
Gerli Koppel: “Yes, yes, to determine new ones… annul the previous ones and determine the new ones.”

Domestic quarrel a la Haapsalu

After a while Minister Parts submits to the Government of the Estonian Republic the most disadvantageous option, that clearly includes the claim for losses – the option 1: to establish the aquatic area of Veskiviigi marina and determine (decrease) the aquatic area of Grand Holm Marina.
But behold, the Government of the Republic rejects Parts’ draft resolution. In a week’s time Parts submits basically the same draft again, but this, too, is rejected. Only on the third try Veskiviigi Marina gets their aquatic area, only with the reservation that in determining the draught of the vessels to be served there, they have to take into consideration the already existing Grand Holm Marina. The aquatic area of Grand Holm Marina is not to be changed, revoked nor “re-determined”.
Immediately the “domestic quarrel” scenario is activated. Te already boat tester Priit Veski, from the neighbours payroll, whom the police caught earlier the stealing the guiding buoys for the floating pier position in the autumn, was the firstone in the spring to “discover” with the help of divers that the anchors of the floating pier of Grand Holm Marina have shifted a little outside the basin. Immediately the Veskiviigi people started to “crash” into these anchors and naturally, they immediately inform the Marine Administration, who gladly issues a precept.
Although the brand new Veskiviigi Marina has neither port certificate nor the authorization for the use of their floating pier, it actively starts operating and the homepage of Haapsalu municipality advises the foreign guests to visit the under-construction Veskiviigi – by jeopardizing their boats. “This is not safe navigation!” expressed Swedish sailor, Mikael Brantning his annoyance on the web pages www.ellennet.se and the number of visitors to Haapsalu decreases about ten times. At the same time, the running aground in the area increases drastically. Some German yachts avoiding Haapsalu run ashore at Voosi Kurk (Voosi Gullet), some are lured to the shallow by the confusing commercial of Haapsalu municipality, inviting people to enter the non-marked fairway to Veskiviigi. Some run out of fuel on their way from Saaremaa to Tallinn, whereas earlier it was possible to fill the tank in Haapsalu. But our Border Guard does a good job saving everyone. In the interests of the “domestic quarrel”, Lääne Elu writes about the incidents and the “heroism” of the marina captain of Veskiviigi in solving these. The attitude is that of Armenian Komsomol was: we first create the problem by ourselves and then we have problem to solve! In the photo it can be seen how the local yachtsmen who were allegedly “trapped” last year and whom the Estonian public and also the officials so unanimously supported, and also a few brave foreign yachtsmen happily use Veskiviigi Marina, since in fact there are fairly enough water to go around Grand Holm Marina, problem is that this passage is unmarked.
“We do not charge them any money, they give it to us voluntarily,” the Veskiviigi marina captain, former borderpatrol officer justifies the violation law by receiving no cash. The committee led by Rene Sirol, who is already known to the readers, issues a legal instrument on the not opening Grand Holm Marina for the traffic, but agrees after two months that the law would not facilitate such a decision. Thereafter the Maritime Administration prolongs the approval of the floating piers until the end of summer and then does not approve them. At the same time the old floating piers with sunken booms are approved at Veskiviigi. It is carefully observed that Grand Holm Marina, that meets all the requirements for safe mooring, would not offer any services.
Therefore the marina is closed also to those in distress. The 30 new and deep berths, designated specially for the yachtsmen stand empty the whole summer. After long and determined prolongation another, now already a legal instrument on the opening of a port for shipping trade is drawn up, but the Maritime Administration simply refuses to submit it to the Minister. On the orders of the Director General of the Maritime Administration the marina remains closed, although the law in effect does not really facilitate that, as the members of the council rightly noted. Perhaps one day the new one will. At the same time most of the small ports in Estonia operate without the corresponding act and port certificate, but they are obedient and tame.
And so passes another summer season where both the state and town despite the difficult economic situation easily give up the money from tourism and also taxes. All that matters is that Grand Holm Marina would make no profit and would bear losses at any cost!
Haapsalu municipality sends a couple of more desperate letters to the Ministry, not with an aim to re-open their popular gateway, but to decrease the aquatic area of Grand Holm Marina for the benefit of Veskiviigi Marina, owned by “their own people”. The people from Veskiviigi express a similar wish. Unfortunately the Ministry that started the whole thing, replies now already negatively to these requests, putting the mayor and council of Haapsalu into a very stupid situation. The Government of the Republic decided that the aquatic area is to be given for longer than one year, since the payback period of investments into ports is a very long-term business.
Ongoing dispute proved, that Grand Holm Marinas basin is provided just for the GHM only and not for the neigbouring Veskiviigi marina. Court also states, that limits issued for Veskiviigi regarding the draughts of vessels serves not just information purpose but means in the “clear Estonian language” - they should go around and if necessary they should clean their fairway from the soft mud.
Five years ago Haapsalu longed for a proper marina. As soon as it was finished, they started to wish for a new one immediately. It reminds you of a Russian fairy-tale of the Goldfish, where in the end the old lady, who wished too much, is sitting again by her broken wash-tub. Greed comes before a fall!