The Port of Seattle...

[mikerol]

-
Dear Editor,
A an ex-New Yorker with some knowledge of its "Port Authority" and as someone who is researching an in-depth story on the problems that the "Port of Seattle" is having, I could not but help notice your http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2002352465_piered30.html
The thing that I find mind-boggling is that this entity, after all these years, continues to need tax subsidies from King County. No other port in the nation except that of Tacoma [!] does. The State Auditor says that they can collect more property taxes for airport construction; however their collections have sky-rocketed from $30 million to $75 million. If the Port of Seattle were privatized it would generate millions in new property taxes for King County while at the same time saving King County ever increasing tax subsidy for the Port - just one way of looking at the matter. The Port carries a huge debt load which it needs to service. The Fitch bond rating is A + but only because the entity has the backing of King County and the City of Seattle. Actually, the Port of Seattle, once you start delving into its many aspects turns into a veritable mare's nest, and no one hereabouts is willing to sort the morass out or, even, is able to take the requisite hard look at these complexities. It appears definitely to be ill-managed. During the current commissioners' latest term in office the long term public debt owed by the Port has gone from $2.9 Billion to $4.8 Billion (2004 Audit). Some of the Ports interest's are far too much aligned with those of the Carrix Corporation/ a.k.a. SSA Marine, once known as Stevedores of America [the infamous sale of 18 million dollar cranes to SSA!] which enjoys a peculiar unhappy relationship with the unions, and the port uses non-union labor for trucking landfill for the construction of the third runway [overloaded trucks that are hard on the public roads]; and there exists an uncomfortably close a relationship between SSA Marine with some of the commissioners, judging by the sources of their campaign funds; the port incurs fines from the State for pollution, etc. Now the Port is asking for $ 450,000,000 in new long term public bonds. If a new set of commissioners will prevail in changing this state of affairs, so much the better; but it appears that this state of affairs is of nearly a hundred year's standing! And all you at the Seattle Times editorial board can do is write the typical mealy-mouthed piece about the use of an industrial area.
Sincerely,

[noose papier]

There are several problems with what you propose.

The waterfront in NYC is a very different place then it is here, from the cultural values on over to the affiliations of those who run the ports, and the union for that matter. Wealth changes hands there in far different ways. In other words: apples and oranges.

Second, privatizing the port will have the effect of allowing private developers to buy port land without any input from the voters. This means goodbye Terminal 46, hello rich person/tourist playground. Replacing good industrial jobs with the same amount of service type jobs (or temporary construction jobs) is not sustainable. It is bad enough that the Port Commission is more then willing to give up finite industrial land for residential. You can build condos anywhere, but you can't load containers or cruise ships on Madison St.

Third, the fact that the people of King county has some measure of control of the Port (okay, a little, not a lot) facilities, though elected officals is an anomaly. And it is a good one. I think its called "democracy".

Fifth, the poor relationship between the PMA and the unions has nothing to do with tax subsidies. The fact that the waterfront employers are continually looking for ways to screw workers is the problem. Case in point: the White House wants to lean on the union if it shuts the ports down in a strike--but if the *employers* do it in a lockout (which they did, in 2002), they get off scott free. As we can see, Homeland Security is a false front for a power grab in the ports by the Bushies. The Bushies want a poor relationship with the unions, until the unions are eliminated. Privatization will hasten this process.

Finally. Look at what privatization schemes have done in other ports, such as Liverpool, Australia, and even in Kuwait (who longshore workers fortunately booted Bush's buddies, SSA). I'll let you do the research.

[mikerol]

i was not making any claim that the ny port authority and the port of seattle authority are the same, merely used it as the starting point for my comparison. however, the P.O.S. is the only entity of its kind, except for the Port of Tacoma, to require tax subsidization. It is an extremely poorly managed entity, very much saddled with a well integrated old-boy network. Mic Dinsmore, its CEO, is the third highest paid official in the State of Washington, right after the UW football coach and UW President. Coach gets a cool million or more, Dinsmore a quarter mill. I would not myself prefer privatization of the Port of Seattle, but I suggested this as a baseline for the sake of comparison: i.e. the same or close to the same kind of monies could be earned for the people of Seattle/King County/ Washington State if the P.o.S. were well managed. It is not merely that the P.O.S. is hugely indebted, requiring debt servicing far in excess of its tax subsidy, it gives away its properties, it gives away the possibility of earning money on its investment in port facilities by totally undercharging the entertaiment cruise ship business. It is only if you get into the nittty-gritty of that moneyed network that the whole story will come out, and not a single of the major papers or weeklies hereabouts is willing to invest in such a detailed investigation.

[mikerol]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/231484_portland07.html

from the PI.

Ex-port buildings resold for profit

By BRAD WONG
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Seattle-based Charlie's Produce and its parent company reaped a profit of $9.6 million from the sale of two former Port of Seattle warehouses after having owned them for less than one year.

Tuesday, Charlie's Produce officially sold the second of the two buildings off East Marginal Way South to San Francisco real estate company AMB for about $23.5 million, according to the King County Auditor's Office.

After the deal was announced in March, critics questioned why the port had sold both buildings to the produce company last year for nearly $18.9 million. A smaller warehouse, a wooden one, was sold for $5 million during the same month. The two sales amounted to $28.5 million, or a profit of 51 percent.

Critics said the public agency, which appraised both buildings in 2003 at $23 million, could have earned a higher profit by selling both to an institutional real estate company. They also said the larger of the two warehouses could have been used to handle the rise in international cargo.

Port officials have defended the sales, saying the buildings ....."

[mikerol]

Is the PORT OF SEATTLE grossly mismanaged by its C.E.O. Mic Dinsmore in concert with the five sitting commissioners? Commissioner Fisken in an e-mail correspondence with me thinks that it is, which means that a majority of the sitting commissioners have been failing at their job.

1] Why had the P.O.S.'s indebtedness increased from 2 to 4 billion within the last several years; cost of debt servicing versus tax on King County to support the P.O.S.

2]The influence, if any, benign or not benign, of SSA Marine on the dealings of the P.O.S.

3] The performance, great, mediocre, or deleterious of Mic Dinsmore the C.E.O. who serves at the pleasure of the commissioners, and is the second or third highest paid public official in the state.

4] The leasing of the cruise ship terminals at a rate that will never repay the cost of building the terminals... did that come about by accident, or is the port so hard up for business, is there collusion, corruption rife among the commissioners, SSA Marine, Dinsmore, in this and numerous other instances, such as the giveaway of 18 one million dollar cranes to SSA Marine, with the loss of union jobs. I think your interviewer was poorly informed, asked soft ball questions; and if you cannot find someone to do a more probing job you are welcome to give me a crack at the job

5] The commision meets generally in executive sessions [i.e secret] though by looking at these session at the Port of Seattle site you get just a glimpse of what is going on: litigation, contracts...

A an ex-New Yorker with some knowledge of its "Port Authority" and as someone who is researching an in-depth story on the problems that the "Port of Seattle" is having, I find mind-boggling is that this entity, after all these years, continues to need tax subsidies from King County. No other port in he nation except that of Tacoma [!] does. The State Auditor says that they cn collect more property taxes for airport construction; however their collections have sky-rocketed from $30 million to $75 million. If the Port of Seattle were privatized it would generate millions in new property taxes
for King County while at the same time saving King County ever increasing
tax subsidy for the Port - just one way of looking at the matter. The Port
carries a huge debt load which it needs to service. The Fitch bond rating is
A + but only because the entity has the backing of King County and the City
of Seattle. Actually, the Port of Seattle, once you start delving into its
many aspects turns into a veritable mare's nest, and no one hereabouts is
willing to sort the morass out or, even, is able to take the requisite hard
look at these complexities. **It appears definitely to be ill-managed.
During the current commissioners' latest term in office the long term public
debt owed by the Port has gone from $2.9 Billion to $4.8 Billion (2004
Audit). Some of the Ports interest's are **far too much aligned with those
of the Carrix Corporation/ a.k.a. SSA Marine, once known as Stevedores of
America [the infamous sale of 18 million dollar cranes to SSA!] which enjoys
a peculiar unhappy relationship with the unions, and the port uses non-union
labor for trucking landfill for the construction of the third runway
[overloaded trucks that are hard on the public roads]; and there exists an
uncomfortably close a relationship between SSA Marine with some of the
commissioners, judging by the sources of their campaign funds; the
port **incurs fines from the State for pollution, etc. Now the Port is asking for $ 450,000,000 in new long term public bonds. If a new set of commissioners will prevail in changing this state of affairs, so much the better; but it appears that this state of affairs is of nearly a hundred year's standing!

I talked yesterday at considerable length [what a chore] with pal long shore man [very bright, but talks with choked voice], son + sibling from a professional family, who chose to be long shore man, single, car nut, a truly good guy who hates his mom for being so soft hearted!, and is he ever, who has been working at this port for ten years. he knows a lot of deals that went down that have malodor, one big one concerns cargill' renegotiation of their lease, somehow they ended up with less square footage, but then were permitted to sublet what they ended up with so that they end up at a huge profit situation just on that; also another ware house deal; also union malfeasance. As far as he is concerned, the Port is not maxed out; obviously traffic fluctuates; the cruise ship biz is fine from labor's p.o.v. , takes about 100 folks to service one of them. per crane i think once all is said and done its 60 hands.

[Steve Ballinger]

discussion cross-linked on http://portwatchseattle.blogspot.com.

Steve