Nansen Field Ownership

The article concerning the Norwegian government’s property, Nansen Field on the Palos Verdes Peninsula (June 14), has come to my attention. There is a lawsuit pending concerning the property.

Your article is marred by errors and inaccuracies; I feel compelled to attempt to correct some of the most egregious ones.

The least defensible misstatement is the canard that the Nansen Field property was “donated” (to whom?) by the previous owner, the Palos Verdes Corp. In fact, the Norwegian government, through its agency, the Norwegian Welfare Service for Merchant Seamen, purchased the property in 1948 at what was then fair market value. Over the years, Norway also improved the property at great expense, creating athletic facilities and building several clubhouses on the property for the use of Norwegian merchant seamen.

Norway’s adversaries enjoy painting themselves as intrepid “Davids” fighting the Norwegian government’s “Goliath.” However, what truly characterizes Norway’s adversaries in this matter is a quite astonishing lack of appreciation for the Norwegian government’s generosity towards the local Norwegian American community over the years. For many years, Norway has freely allowed individuals, clubs and organizations with Norwegian affiliations to use the Nansen Field property virtually free of charge, and has required only that they contribute to the maintenance of the property in a manner justified by their own use of the property. Instead of the gratitude, the Norwegian government has instead been confronted with an egregious attempt on the part of Ragnar Amlie and his cohorts, some of whom have enjoyed the free use of Nansen Field for years as a result of Norway’s generosity, to appropriate for themselves property that has belonged to Norway for more than 45 years.

Norway purchased the Nansen Field property in 1948 for the very specific purpose of it serving as a recreational area for Norwegian merchant seamen during the time they spent in local harbors. However, due to the decline in Norwegian shipping on the West Coast of the U.S. and to other changes in the way merchant shipping is conducted (primarily much shorter layover times), the property cannot any longer be used for the purpose for which it was acquired. It would seem to be a matter of elementary fairness to let a property owner dispose of the property or put it to some other use. To the Norwegian government’s utter amazement, Amlie and his cohorts have a different view of the matter.

ANFIN ULLERN, Consul of Norway, Los Angeles