ENDORSEMENT: YES on Issue 82 on Cleveland Port Authority

“Back to basics” for the Port of Cleveland. Let’s Hope.

On September 26th, a contingent from the Cleveland Port Authority met with Cool Cleveland editorial members to make their case for passage of Issue 82, which is a five-year renewal levy that will support 35% of the Port’s operating cost. The 0.13-mill tax, if approved by voters, would cost a homeowner $3.50 per year on every $100,000 worth of real estate. The following is an endorsement for Issue 82.

***

Port /pôrt/-a town or city with a harbor where ships load or unload, esp. one where customs officers are stationed

There is a first rule for success that goes for individuals and organizations alike: know who you are, and be yourself. The initial line of the Port of Cleveland’s Vision Statement gets at this, reading “The Port of Cleveland will be known as the premier port on the Great Lakes.” Given the Port acts as a literal portal for Cleveland to the flow of goods and ideas in the global economy, the vision, while simple, is smart.

But in recent history, particularly under former CEO Adam Wasserman, the Port Authority strayed from its organizational identity, in effect letting go of its raison d’être to be something else, such as an organizational vessel for the development of a waterfront district. While the Port’s duties as a financial conduit for local development are not only legislatively granted, but needed, the lack of organizational focus nonetheless hurt the Port’s capacity for strategic investment, leading to years of wasting time and money on endeavors such as the port relocation plan to E. 55th—a “wayward ship” of a proposal if there ever was one.

Managed right, however, the Port of Cleveland is a vital cog in the regional Great Lakes economy, which—despite what you have heard—is still a global force.

For example, in recent a Forbes article “Rust Belt Chic and the Keys to Reviving the Great Lakes,” writer Joel Kotkin notes “the Lakes region boasts a $2.6 trillion economy equal to that of France and far larger than the West Coast.” Kotkin references a Brookings report stating the Great Lakes should invest in “better infrastructure, such as bridges, ports, freight rail and roads” that capitalize on the region’s resource advantages. In other words, enabling the regional economy is a network of water and rail, and the Port’s docks and rail ties are Greater Cleveland’s front and back door to billions in capital flow.

Of course the caveat goes back to management, particularly a strategic re-direction, and it appears the new Port leadership understands this. In a sit down with members of the Cool Cleveland editorial board, Board Vice President Chris Ronayne made constant reiterations that it was “back to basics” for the Port. The Port’s CFO Brent Leslie and campaign manager John Farina echoed the sentiments, noting that investments in maintaining the water pathways for the likes of Cleveland’s ArcelorMittal—“one of the most efficient steel production centers in the world” according Farina—was a Port priority.

Backing up Ronayne’s “back to the basics” drumbeat are recent Port actions including a new $4.5 million dollar rail loop that tightens the logistics efficiency when goods transition from ship to train, as well as the hiring of William Friedman, a maritime expert, as the new director. For 2013, shipping is expected to be up 5%.

Okay, so a port is a “port.” Still, the reality is that the Port of Cleveland—as authorized by State ordinance—is also a government economic development agency that issues private equity-backed bonds to finance development.

Here, the Port has been accused of funding development that operates beyond the margins of its organizational mission, financing, for instance, suburban shopping centers, downtown tourist attractions, sports facilities, and hotels. Port representatives argue the projects are sound investments. On bulk, that may be true. Yet the issue, and one pressed with Port brass, was not the viability of any single project per se, but whether the Port had a strategic framework governing what gets funded. Because without a well-heeled strategy comes investment waste. The Port’s partnership with a New York City film studio, Nehst Creation, to film 3 movies in the area that never panned out is one good example.

What would a sound Port economic development strategy look like?

Economically speaking, a region attempts to grow through how much it produces and how much it consumes. The port investments listed prior—such as the hotels, stadiums, retail, etc.—are bottom lines based on people buying stuff. But the job growth potential of a consumption economy is limited. From the article “Think Consumption Is The ‘Engine’ Of Our Economy? Think Again”:

There is a fundamental illogic to the notion that an economy can be grown by encouraging consumption. When a person consumes, by definition, they use things up. The very process leaves us with less than before. Growing the availability of valuable goods and services for society by using them up is not just an impossibility—it’s an absurdity. Consumption is the goal, but it is production that is the means.

The alternative is to advance economic growth by investing in the potential to produce paychecks, which comes from new jobs, with new jobs resulting from an environment of innovation that values thinking, research, development, and design. This is economic development 101. But the “basics”—there is that word again—often gets muddied by the hip new development trend that is “big ticket” development du jour that so often focuses on consumption-side economic growth, like casinos and nightlife districts.

That said, it would be a wise approach for the Port to strategically side on those projects that focus on the productive capacity of Greater Cleveland, such as its recent financing of the Beaumont School in Cleveland Hts., which is constructing a new 24,496-square-foot STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) building aiming to train the next generation of Clevelanders.

Again, the Port gets this. It gets that its organizational identity is based on providing capacity for local makers to produce. It gets that “Cleveland makes things,” and “not just Wal-Marts,” so stated Cleveland AFL-CIO Executive Harriet Applegate, who accompanied the Port representatives to the talk. It gets that the port is, well, a port.

“This is a new port,” stated Board V.P. Chris Ronayne continuously. Hopefully, it’s a new port that does “old” things in a better way. Because the Port of Cleveland is the portal to a global Cleveland.

Closing that door means shutting a legacy that still has a future.

Cool Cleveland recommends you vote YES on Issue 82.

 

The Cuyahoga Board of Elections isn’t sending out applications to vote by mail this year. To request a mail-in ballot, go to http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/vote-by-mail.aspx.

 

Post categories:

• Uncategorized
• Kids
• News
• BizTech
• Thomas Mulready
• Civic Affairs
• Video
• Politics