Port ‘pep rally’ attendees point fingers at Columbia


By Molly Parker
mparker@scbiznews.com
Published Jan. 6, 2009

Before a cross section of maritime-related workers met in downtown Charleston last night, an invocation was delivered asking for peace at the Port of Charleston and help from God in sustaining jobs on the waterfront.

It’s been a rough few weeks for the maritime industry since Maersk Line — the port’s largest customer — announced it was pulling out of Charleston when its contact expires at the end of 2010.

Recent stories about Maersk and Port of Charleston

Maersk Line pulling out of Port of Charleston
Maersk’s decision to leave port rattles state
Groseclose ‘hopeful’ for Maersk compromise
Maersk threatens to leave Port of Charleston
Ports Authority cuts shipping fees to keep business


“When things are going right in life — it’s human nature — we take things for granted. And the state of South Carolina has taken for granted the Port of Charleston and the South Carolina State Ports Authority,” Mayor Joe Riley said.

Building bridges

The Charleston mayor was one of several dozen people who attended the meeting hosted by Citizens Related to the Port of Charleston, a new group that has formed in the aftermath of Maersk Line’s decision to pull out of Charleston when its contract expires at the end of 2010.

CHARLESTON PORT The crowd was mixed with shipping line representatives, port executives, trucking company owners, independent truckers, union members, commercial real estate agents and a few politicians.

But attendance at the meeting was far from overwhelming. The bulk of the folding chairs in the Gaillard Municipal Auditorium exhibition hall sat empty.

Benjamin Flowers, a longshoreman, said the meeting was not sanctioned by either the International Longshoremen’s Association or the S.C. State Ports Authority. Rather, he called the meeting to gather groups of people with ties to the port who rarely sit down in a room together.

Flowers said he would have liked to have seen more state lawmakers in attendance but that the meeting served its purpose regardless. Rep. David Mack, D-North Charleston, did make a few brief comments — the crux of his speech was about fighting for the working people — but he left right afterward, saying he had another meeting to attend.

“One thing we must come together on is that we are all somehow related to the Port of Charleston,” Flowers said.

Port pep rally

A few jabs were thrown at the SPA. A handful of SPA executives and managers were in attendance, but CEO Bernard Groseclose was not among them.

Bill Campbell of the Port Truckers Association said it was unfair for the ports authority to float Maersk a proposal that it didn’t have the authority to grant. Maersk wanted to move to the SPA’s common-user gate operated by nonunion employees, thus eliminating a few dozen union jobs. In making its decision to leave, Maersk said it was doing so because the ILA would not compromise.

“The responsibility should not fall to the ILA worker to keep Maersk here,” Campbell said. “I think they are trying to weed some of the union jobs out of this port, and it’s very important we don’t let that happen.”

Although two uniformed officers stood in the back of the room, the majority of the meeting unfolded more like a pep rally than a fierce debate.

Pat Barber, outgoing president of the Charleston Motor Carriers Association, said it doesn’t seem like the majority of folks understand how the maritime industry works.

“I don’t think we do a good enough job tooting our own horn,” Barber said.

Blaming Columbia

A fair amount of finger-pointing went toward Columbia.

Dee Sineath, a vessel operations manager with Hamburg Sud North America, said legislators should provide more state incentives for steamship lines and other maritime businesses.

Hagood Morrison, an industrial broker with Colliers Keenan, said the state needs to re-examine property tax changes it penned in 2006. The General Assembly provided substantial relief for homeowners, but the burden is “falling right on the backs of commercial users,” he said. Morrison also called on the state to fund infrastructure improvements in Jedburg, where a host of industrial buildings are planned, and in Orangeburg County, where Jafza International plans to build a large warehouse and logistics park.

Barber said support from Columbia has been weak in past years. He accused some unnamed people of “trying to be the hero” when they don’t understand how things work.

McConnell responds

State Sen. President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, who has been railing on the port in recent months, did not attend the meeting Monday night. But, when contacted Tuesday, the Charleston Republican said he did not find it fair to blame Columbia. Lawmakers signed off on $167 million for a port access road to serve the North Charleston terminal, he said, and have been actively involved in discussions aimed at keeping Maersk in town.

“I reject the idea that the Legislature has not been responsive,” McConnell said. “We’ve been very responsive.”

McConnell said he thinks it is imperative that lawmakers have an honest discussion this year about the port’s operating model, because business has declined so much. He also plans to file legislation shortly requiring a public vote for any bonuses awarded to the Port of Charleston.

He has taken exception to the $500,000 worth of incentive bonuses awarded to port employees in the fall, about $208,000 of which went to port executives. Groseclose received the most, at $27,720.

The bonuses were awarded based on an SPA board-approved plan, but the board never held a public vote before the bonuses were doled out. The SPA said that’s because the plan had already been approved and was triggered by the authority meeting its operating margin target of 32.54%. The authority’s revenues and earnings hit all-time records and it closed the past fiscal year with an operating margin of 34.28%.

But McConnell said that sends the wrong message. If there are to be bonuses, they should be based on increased business, not operating margins, he said.

“Business is down at the port, and all across state government we are cutting back,” he said, “and the port distributed bonuses like candy at a Christmas parade.”

Reach Molly Parker at 843-849-3144.

Do you give this article a thumbs up? Thumbs_upYes

Comments:

Added: 7 Jan 2009

In the June 9, 2008 edition of TIME magazine, Justin Fox's column, "The Curious Capitalist", includes the headline "A Port That Exports." It is an entire page dedicated to the declining dollar, the U.S. trade deficit, and the model of port expansion exhibited by the Savannah, Georgia port. In addition to quotes provided by John Trent, the director of operations for the Georgia Ports Authority, the column quotes Hamid Moghadam, whose AMB Property owns and operates distribution facilities near ports and airports worldwide. He is quoted as saying, "I think [the Savannah port] will be the No. 2 port in the U.S. within the next decade." As you know, the port of Los Angeles/Long Beach is still (and probably will be for some time) the nation's largest. In 2006, the U.S. trade deficit was at an all-time high. During the last two years, we have witnessed the declining value of the dollar, which, in turn, has increased the demand for U.S. products, inevitably leading to an increase in exports. As a result, the trade deficit decreased by more than 0.5% in 2007. It is expected to fall even more in 2008, and would have fallen further but for the spiralling price of oil. Additionally, the southeastern states have experienced a manufacturing renaissance. The products manufactured in South Carolina and the surrounding states should be leaving from the port of Charleston. But after reading the article in Time magazine, and keeping tabs on the disheartening developments regarding Maersk's decision to pull of Charleston, I have begun to wonder, is South Carolina falling behind? In my humble opinion, now is the time for bipartisan agreement on port expansion, while taking into careful consideration the effects on the local environment (which will impact the area's number one source of revenue: tourism), traffic volume and flow, efficient transportation of goods to and from the port, and job creation. It is time for Governor Sanford to step in. This calls for leadership of the highest order. Petty quarelling serves no one and hurts everyone.

John Ensminger


Added: 6 Jan 2009

I have been involved with the waterfront community for over 30 years and think that the current situation is not just related to issues that are at the forefront today but go much further back. Remember when there was going to be a terminal on Daniel Island, I think the rejection of that facility was the first showing that the local communities, the county government and the state legislature were not pro steamship line or international trade and that set in motion international companies looking at their options and what might be their best alternative. Today we are seeing the result of those decisions and there is no quick fix, what could you base your 10 year plan on? We may lose Maersk in spite of all we do, it is hard to stop a ship once it has started moving, but remember they are only 25% of the volume. We had better start listening and talking with the remaining 75% before they make decisions that continue the decline in the best port on the eastern seaboard.

Bruce Cannon


Added: 6 Jan 2009

Bruce, You might be interested in a column written by Business Journal Publisher Grady Johnson. His sentiments mirror some of your own: http://tinyurl.com/95kw2c Thanks,

Andy


Added: 6 Jan 2009

Bruce: it's easy to stop any ship - you just put it in reverse! It stops eventually. In this case all the parties involved need to have an open mind and a will to work together. that means negotiating from a zero position - no-one has any preconceived, or pre-stated, conditions going in. That way, all options can be explored. And you are mis-informed about the reasons for local communities being against the port. They're not per se against the port, just some of its manifestations. Sometimes the port acts as a private entity, but when the chips are down and its under attack, it chooses to be a "state entity", deriving protection from that stance. What needs to happen is for the port to be a private, for-profit entity that gains its rewards from its efforts, not from some outdated, unapproved, formula for paying bonuses to its executives. The public (community)isn't stupid - they see all this, but think they can't do anything about it. That's why it's important to keep them informed - with unbiased information, not biased rhetoric like yours. Two moves would see more support for the port - get rid of "Wither or Die" Groseclose and Miller the Spinner.

David Berry


Added: 6 Jan 2009

Why did Maersk pull out of Chareston instead of Savannah, Jacksonville or Norfolk? They are opening up a port in Mobile in a few weeks because they need room. It maybe that the State, SPA, the unions and business in genral show the shipping companies that they are boss. Maybe they feel the shipping companies are to do it Charlestons way or the highway. If you keep doing what you have been doing all the shipping companies are going to leave Charleston.

bargeman


Added: 20 Jan 2009

Many things to think about..... Can there be a rescue for the Maersk fiasco? Is the ILA doing some PR repair by using their pocket guy in senator Glenn McConnell to push blame to another? BTW, what were the bonuses paid out to the checkers union last year, and how does that compare to the Port employees? Why are the streets outside of Columbus street filled with cars owned by ILA members? Will McConnell, who could be credited for ousting SPA CEO Bernie Groseclose just in the nick of time take credit? Why is the Mr. Bernie Groseclose resigning within days of the ILA election of a new president? Why is one of only two profitable state entities being questioned when such things as Clemson's shady dealings with the Hunley project are over looked? Will the overzealous "Contain the port" people come to the realization that they screwed up with Danial Island? Who started all that anyway? Who reaped the financial windfall from the availble real-esate? Will the Politically inapt, overzealous greed of government posturing continue to influence and ultimately destroy the economic back bone of South Carolina?

anonymous


Leave New Comment