Just Say No to Port's Request for Money

A beggar who is dressed as a CEO is still a beggar.


The Port of Virginia – or is it the Port of Hampton Roads? – is the beggar. And the tax payers are the rubes, gullible and giving.

Here's the spin: “Port operations in Hampton Roads are nearing capacity.”

The Virginian-Pilot headline is dramatic without a column inch of serious drama. In fact, the headline is a burlesque of drama. And the article following the headline is a public relations piece masquerading as an editorial.

The Pilot writes an editorial that reads as an advertisement supplement pandering to the port's plea for more money. To justify wasting $350 million, the advertorial incites the Public to consider the abundant, yet disputable, economic impact of the port on the region.

The Pilot: THE PORT OF Virginia is one of the region's biggest economic engines, supporting 375,000 jobs and generating an annual impact of $60 billion.

Economic impact studies hew to the adage “garbage in, garbage out.” Most are nonsense, if not misleading, and most are thinly disguised propaganda thinly disguised as scholarly research.

The Pilot: It is the third-busiest port on the East Coast behind Savannah, Ga., and New York and is poised to leverage its deep drafts and rail connection to the Midwest for continued growth.

Virginia may be the third busiest port on the East Coast. But one should ask how much market share Virginia gained or lost over the past five years.

Critics should also question if man hours are up or down. Man hours are the number of hours dockworkers work to load and unload cargo.

And why isn't Virginia number two instead of three? Virginia's position in the ranking hasn't moved in five years or more. No cause for celebration – or a reason for more money.

The Pilot: As The Pilot's Robert McCabe recently reported, port officials and Gov. Terry McAuliffe's administration are working on a plan to expand Norfolk International Terminals. That terminal and Virginia International Gateway, the former APM Terminal in Portsmouth, have hit 90 percent of capacity for handling containers.

This misleads and confuses.

It's one thing to say that the APM Terminal and Norfolk International Terminal have hit 90 percent capacity for handling containers.

It's quite another thing to say the APM Terminal is under capacity and NIT is over capacity.

But the editorial doesn't say that. In fact, it says nothing of sort and in doing so misleads and confuses.

For we do know that a high number and a low number combined result, more than likely, in the average that we desire.

Perhaps the well-paid port officials ought to hire a pro to teach them how to utilize existing land and operations rather than pleading the governor and the taxpayer for more money.

Perhaps the same well-paid port officials could fill up Portsmouth Marine Terminal first rather than begging for more money.

Perhaps Governor McAuliffe ought to hire another adept to teach port officials how to attract business rather than waste time and money on pretty yet frivolous marketing campaigns.

Perhaps the governor should ask – no, demand – that Virginia take the number two spot on the East Coast before the state hands over money.

Perhaps the Virginia Maritime Association, the industry's lobbying group and formerly named the Hampton Roads Maritime Association, should act as a real voice for the maritime industry in this port instead of the VPA's toady.

Perhaps it's time to get government out of the port and get the port out of the hands of well-paid autocrats.

Editor's Note: This is an old ploy port officials have played for decades. Every time port officials want money, they wail about waning capacity at the terminals.