I responded, “Yes, the one my fellow commissioners and I unanimously adopted back in 2008? What about it?”

“It won’t help you grow your business, it’s meaningless.”

I can understand my lobbyist friend’s pessimism. Considering that the global shipping industry suffered an estimated $5 billion in losses in 2011, their minds have lately been directed elsewhere, namely on stemming the bloodshed.

There has been an obsessive focus by global shipping lines and their customers – the shippers of goods, or in industry lingo the “beneficial cargo owners” (BCOs) – on reducing costs throughout the supply chain. But the beauty of bringing sustainability into the supply chain is exactly that – it is not only the right thing to do for our planet, it also helps the bottom line.

So despite my lobbyist friend’s skepticism regarding the business case for sustainability, there has in fact been an increasing focus on sustainability by major retailers (such as Target and Ikea) and consumer products companies (such as Nike and Hewlett Packard) that account for a significant percentage of inbound cargo from Asia.

The Port of Seattle is well-positioned to benefit from this industry emphasis on sustainability and greening the supply chain. We believe that the Port’s green initiatives will help attract business and grow jobs for our region.

In 2009, the Port of Seattle commissioned Herbert Engineering Corp. to analyze the carbon emissions of intermodal shipments from Asia to North American markets. The study, which was updated in 2011, found that routing through the Port of Seattle offers the lowest carbon footprint for cargo coming by sea from Asia to major markets in the U.S. Midwest and East Coast.

The Port has marketed our comparatively low carbon footprint both to BCOs and global shipping lines as the “Green Gateway,” and we continue to collaborate with industry to come up with business friendly solutions for mitigating environmental impact.

It is true that the preliminary efforts by these businesses with regard to sustainability were focused on physical improvements such as lighting in warehouses, recycling and other downstream improvements. In the past couple of years, however, we are seeing an increasing shift of awareness to areas of the supply chain such as transportation.

Wal-Mart last fall announced a commitment to drive sustainability deep into its supply chain. It and other large retailers have been leaders in this area.

With the largest retailers taking the lead, we believe that it is only a matter of time before small retailers follow. The Port of Seattle’s position as a leader in sustainability, and the low carbon footprint of shipping from Asia into the Midwest through Pacific Northwest ports, position us well in the minds of these customers when selecting a gateway to ship their goods.

Nike already requires that ocean carriers list the carbon impact of their services as part of its contracting process. Retailers and other shippers have responded positively to the Port of Seattle’s Carbon Calculator tool, finding it useful in their own internal calculations of the carbon footprint of their supply chains.

In fact, we have gotten very positive comments from importers about the way we have implemented our environmental programs. The Port’s eschewing of confrontation in favor of a collaborative approach – working with industry to address environmental impacts – is well-regarded among the international trade community.

Shipping lines are also taking note. We have had excellent participation in our voluntary At-Berth Clean Fuels program, which incentivizes shipping lines to burn low sulfur diesel while at the Port. In each of 2011 and 2012, we saw participation of over 70% by frequent calling ships. Our business friendly approach has been attractive to shipping lines that are considering adding to or expanding services in the Pacific Northwest.

Our goal to be the greenest, cleanest, most energy efficient port in North America encompasses more than just our seaport and more than just air emissions. We are focused on improving air and water quality at both at both our seaport and airport, reducing energy usage at all of our facilities, recycling all sorts of items used by us and by our tenants, and cleaning up contaminated Port-owned properties and restoring those properties to productive use.

The Port of Seattle’s environmental goals and green initiatives are not only the right thing to do, they will help grow jobs for our region.

The trip drove home two truisms. First, to remain competitive in the global marketplace, Washington State trade officials need to keep their eyes on many different moving parts. Second, we are all in this together – the economic health of the region on the east side of the Cascade Mountains impacts the region west of the divide, and vice versa.

Central and eastern Washington agricultural products represent the largest category of containerized freight exported through the Port of Seattle. The state’s agricultural businesses exported $8.6 billion in farm products in 2011.

We kicked off our trip with a tour of Anderson Hay & Grain’s operations in Ellensburg, followed by a roundtable with local hay and alfalfa exporters. We received an earful from the participants, who told us that they are losing business to hay and alfalfa farmers in the US Southwest because the shipping rates out of Southern California are much cheaper than out of the Northwest. Hay going from Seattle to a northeast China port costs $1,000 per container but only $500 out of Los Angeles and Long Beach (See this article in the Ellensburg Daily Record).

After our meetings in Ellensburg, we traveled to Wenatchee to meet with apple and cherry exporters in the offices of the Washington Apple Commission. The major concern of both the apple and cherry exporters is the need for more capacity to get their products to overseas markets.

Washington is producing larger and larger fruit crops. A record 39 million boxes of Washington apples will likely be exported this season, and that number could increase by as much as 20 million boxes next season. Washington State cherry crops are also increasing, and up to 20% of the annual crop goes by air to Asia.

Because Washington is a high-export state, empty containers are quickly filled and sent back to Asia. If empty containers are not available, shippers have to rail those commodities to ports where containers sit idle (or in the case of many cherry exporters, truck the cherries to airports other than Sea-Tac Airport).

Containers off-loaded in ports like Los Angeles and Long Beach don’t have to go far because 80 percent of the contents are consumed in Southern California or adjacent areas. Both those ports have many more imports coming in than exports going out, so shipping lines have incentive to discount their rates to fill up empty containers returning to Asia.

To address this issue, Puget Sound ports need to work on getting more imports through our seaport terminals. As a discretionary port in a price sensitive industry, to do that we need to make sure that the Port of Seattle is as competitive as possible.

We talked with Eastern Washington farmers and business leaders about getting their support for our efforts to reform the federal Harbor Maintenance Tax, which places a competitive disadvantage on Puget Sound ports.

The Harbor Maintenance Tax is an ad valorem tax on imports being shipped through US seaports. All US ports pay the HMT on the value of what’s contained in incoming containers.

The revenues are used to dredge shipping lanes leading up to harbors, which makes sense in many places, including Columbia River ports in southern Washington. But the Puget Sound is a naturally deep water harbor and shipping lanes to the ports of Tacoma and Seattle do not need dredging. The tax puts us at a significant disadvantage – as much as $200 per container – when competing with the British Columbia ports, which don’t pay the tax (For more information on how the HMT hurts Puget Sound ports, see this editorial in Tacoma’s News Tribune).

We are working with Eastern Washington agricultural interests, other port stakeholders and our Congressional delegation to address the negative impact of the HMT on Washington deep water ports. It is only one issue, however, that we are keeping our eyes on in making sure the Port of Seattle remains competitive for Washington exporters.

To ensure Washington ports remain vibrant gateways for trade, Puget Sound port officials need to keep watch over many different moving parts, some of which we control, many of which we don’t.

I will address other aspects of the supply chain in future blog posts.

The conference has become the preeminent annual seaport cargo industry conference at which port and industry professionals come together to make business contacts and trade intelligence on the state of trans-Pacific trade.

Transportation Issues Daily asked me to examine how the three current trends in the maritime cargo sector that dominated discussion at TPM may impact Puget Sound ports. To read more, click here.

Austin is a city with a deep music heritage and thriving music scene, and organizations across the city embrace this love of music, including the airport. Austin-Bergstrom International Airport marks the city’s music heritage with exhibits on local music throughout the airport and live performances by local artists on stage in the central food court area.

Flying out of Austin after two days of soaking up the local music scene, James and I got to talking, Seattle has a rich music heritage of our own, why don’t we have something like this at our airport?

In the immediate years after the Austin trip, we focused on keeping port operations stable through the Great Recession. But we always maintained our interest in exploring how we could use our own region’s great music heritage to make the airport experience better for the traveling public.

In March 2012, we launched the Sea-Tac Airport Music Initiative. The Music Initiative is a cooperative effort by the Port of Seattle, the Seattle Office of Film and Music, the Seattle Music Commmission and music-specialist PlayNetwork to (1) showcase the Pacific Northwest’s music culture, and (2) enhance the experience of the millions of passengers who pass through Seattle Tacoma International Airport each year.

We didn’t just want to copy other airports’ efforts, whether it be Austin or Chicago or Nashville. Sea-Tac Airport staff did a phenomenal job in developing an initiative that is quintessentially Seattle in its marriage of music and technology.

The Music Initiative brings music to your ears via speakers and video screens throughout the airport featuring the region’s wide variety of music. The Initiative initially was composed of five complementary elements:

• Overhead music by Northwest bands in the terminal;
• Airport public service announcements read by local musicians;
• Feature videos about local music on terminal and baggage claim monitors;
• A downloadable local music app that tells you what song is currently playing at the airport and has links to local concert calendars; and
• A local music web player via the airport’s free wifi.

This week we launched the next phase of the Sea-Tac Airport Music Initiative, live music performed by local artists in the airport concourses. Check out this wonderful performance by local folk musician Shelby Earl in the arrivals hall at Sea-Tac Airport during the inaugural day of our live music program.

For a schedule of performances at Sea-Tac Airport over the next twelve weeks, please go to the following link.

Policymakers continue to point to job creation as the most pressing issue facing the nation. You’re talking our language. Fostering growth through freight mobility is the Port of Seattle’s core mission.

This year in Olympia, we’ve got an opportunity to put the rhetoric into action by passing a major statewide transportation revenue package. We must act on long-deferred infrastructure investments, including transportation projects like State Route 509 that move manufactured goods and agricultural commodities to market.

We focus on transportation systems that provide access to global markets because they translate directly into jobs. A new study commissioned by the Washington Council on International Trade and the Trade Development Alliance concluded that four in 10 jobs here are tied to international commerce. Washington truly is a global state.

The Port of Seattle is at the heart of our export growth engine. We handle 2 million containers a year, and in our Century Agenda vision, we aim to triple the value of outbound cargo and grow 100,000 jobs across the region.

We’re investing in infrastructure to make that happen. The port has committed $362 million to freight corridors around King County in the last 15 years, including the Alaskan Way deep bore tunnel. More needs to be done.

The Legislature must act decisively to keep Washington competitive in a global economy. We understand it’s never easy to raise transportation revenues, even when the need is clear — Puget Sound remains among the nation’s 10 most congested regions, according to the Texas Transportation Institute.

A balanced approach is important, and the port’s freight mobility priorities will benefit other vehicles and transit users. The State Route 509 extension near SeaTac will open new options between Interstate 5 and the airport and waterfront. The Mercer Corridor project, in conjunction with the Alaskan Way tunnel, will keep things flowing to the north end of Elliott Bay.

In Sodo, we need improvements to east-west arterials to unlock the choke points that gum up freight movement between the seaport, two key rail yards and area freeways. Our community is already investing billions to keep that Sodo transportation network working. On the average workday, 5,000 trucks travel through the area. If the new sports arena lands in that same congested zone, we know there will be further complications for freight mobility that must be mitigated.

We also know our port is part of a larger system. Barrels of ink have been spilled on the topic of the rivalry between ports of Seattle and Tacoma, but on this issue, our two ports march in lockstep. The State Route 167 extension in Pierce County is a freight infrastructure investment that’s important to the region’s long-term economic vitality. And our FAST Corridor Partnership with communities along I-5 provides grade separations that improve safety and help get goods to market via rail.

Much remains to be done. Our state’s backlog includes projects of major significance all over the state. A new Columbia River crossing to replace the existing antique drawbridge (the only stoplight on I-5 for 1,500 miles) is long overdue. Investments in Central and Eastern Washington will speed farm products and manufactured goods to markets across the globe.

This is where the rubber hits the road. Let’s find the political will to pass the first major statewide transportation package since 2005, not just to grow construction jobs for tomorrow, but to support a vibrant economy for the next generation. These projects are truly an investment in our kids’ prosperity.

Commissioner Tom Albro is president, and John Creighton is vice president, of the Seattle Port Commission.

I disagree with David and believe that our selection process has resulted in six very qualified, very capable finalists, who – considering the totality of qualities it takes to be successful in the role of port commissioner – would all do well in the position.

Still, David’s article hit a nerve.

David’s article hit a nerve because many in the local maritime industrial community have been frustrated for some time that the Port of Seattle, an organization that is responsible for some 194,000 jobs in our region and is up there with Boeing and Microsoft as a regional jobs creator, often can’t seem to punch at its political and economic weight. The voices of Port officials often seem to get lost in the cacophony of voices we have across the region.

A good example is the Port’s Century Agenda, our strategic plan to help create 100,000 new port-related jobs for our region in the next 25 years. All five port commissioners, individuals of varied backgrounds and varied politics, felt it important that we have a long-term plan for the Port of Seattle. In the 1960s, commissioners made the farsighted decision for the Port to be an early adopter of containerized technology. In the 1990s, commissioners made the decision to bring the cruise industry to Washington State, an industry that today brings over $400 million in revenue each year into the local economy.

Similarly, the current commission wanted to do our part to keep the Port strong as a regional jobs creation engine for generations to come.

Over the last several years, commissioners have worked closely together, with each other and with Port staff, to create a 25-year plan that we project will add 100,000 new jobs to our region. Over that time, we held more than a dozen roundtables where local business and industrial executives, academics, government officials and community leaders engaged in public discussions regarding: (1) where they saw the regional economy headed in the next 25 years, and (2) what long-term goals the Port of Seattle should be adopting to ensure that we remain relevant and competitive over the long run.

We took the wealth of information that we received from these roundtable discussions and sat down with staff to figure out goals that we believed would capture the region’s imagination, goals that were ambitious, yet achievable. And we went to work developing five and ten year milestones to help us get there.

All five commissioners then went out into our community, meeting with city councils, chambers of commerce, trade associations, community groups and the like, discussing our Century Agenda and getting feedback. We received a universally positive response to our plan.

Fast forward to 2012, when the King County Council and the Seattle City Council overwhelmingly supported a proposal to build a basketball arena in South Seattle next to the Port’s major east-west freight corridor. Both councils voted to endorse the plan to build an arena and associated entertainment district in Sodo (albeit subject to the proper regulatory approvals), despite the fact that the proposed arena site is in the heart of an industrial area that contributes over $3 billion a year to the local economy, despite the fact that the industrial community represents close to 35% of the City of Seattle’s tax-base and despite the Port’s well publicized growth plans in South Seattle.

Many in the maritime industrial community felt that we were merely an afterthought to the City and the County in the arena approval process.

The Port of Seattle does not seem to have unified community support behind it as often as, say, the Port of Tacoma or the Port of Walla Walla. Is that a real issue? Is it an issue others in our community should care about? Or am I, are other Port of Seattle officials, just being crybabies?

Would the dynamics be different if, as David Brewster suggests, the Port Commission was able to attract more high profile civic leaders? Would the dynamics change if the members of the Port Commission were appointed instead of elected? I think both those questions are worth asking, though I believe the ultimate answer to both questions is “no.”

After eight years of being a Seattle port commissioner, I believe that our lack of influence with other regional governments is less the result of the absence of star power on the commission than it is the result of an independent special purpose government lacking effective “levers” to push back on sister governments.

Most of our levers, most of our ability to influence other actors in the region, come in the form of carrots, not sticks. For example, over the last 15 years, the Port has committed over $360 million to state and local roads projects outside our fence lines. We have worked with cities around Sea-Tac Airport on economic development projects that will bring jobs to their communities.

When we do have “sticks” in our toolbox, there is a real hesitancy to use them because we know how important a good working relationship with other regional governments over the long-term is to the economic health of the region and to the Port.

Moreover, I believe that a big reason why the Port of Seattle often cannot get its voice heard above the din of other interests in King County is actually a positive: the wealth of jobs creators in our region. We have Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, the Gates Foundation and many other businesses and organizations that are leaders in their respective sectors based right here in King County. And many businesses that have begun elsewhere in our State have relocated to King County as they have grown, such as Weyerhaeuser in the 1960s and Russell Investments in the 2000s.

In other communities, ports have a higher profile because they are often among the few, sometimes the only major economic engine for their communities. I would not, however, trade King County’s wealth of employers for anything.

The Port of Seattle is an asset not only to King County, but to the entire State’s economy. That’s why you see farmers in eastern Washington often vigorously advocating for Seattle area roads projects about which local residents are lukewarm. So another question to ask is: would it be better if the Port of Seattle were a department of state government under the governor’s office? That would likely solve one problem in giving the Port of Seattle strong levers to push back on perceived threats to maritime and industrial land use by local governments impacting Port operations. But that idea is also problematic.

The Port of Seattle was established at a time when Progressive Era politics were ascendant. City leaders were distraught that the big national railroads basically controlled the City’s waterfront and that local businesses were having a hard time being able to ship their goods to market at competitive prices. A movement developed to buy back the waterfront from the railroads and keep it as a public asset. The Port was given the authority to levy a tax on property owners in the County, which would be used as seed capital to acquire property and build infrastructure.

I am a strong believer in the tenet that there should be no taxation without representation: King County citizens are the ones who pay the Port tax levy, should they not also be the ones determining the Port of Seattle’s future? Even if we were to change the funding model, shouldn’t the citizens of King County have a say in what happens in their communities?

The questions raised by David Brewster and others are valid questions that we would do well to spend some time reflecting on. They are questions I have often thought about in my two terms on the Seattle Port Commission.

The current governance model for the Port of Seattle is not perfect, and it has many pitfalls. Still, for many of the reasons stated above, I believe it to be the best model out there for making sure that the Port is responsive to, and ultimately serves, the interests of our community and our State.

As the article notes, some 70% of America’s imports and 75% of its exports go through our country’s ports, and the number of ships calling at US ports continues to rise.

The case for investing in Puget Sound ports is particularly compelling. We are two sailing days closer to Asia than our neighbors to the south, saving time and fuel for shippers coming from the Far East (see the port’s Green Gateway Study). We have naturally deep water harbors, which allow us to avoid the cost and environmental degradation of ports needing to constantly dredge the channels leading up to their berths.

The maritime industrial cluster in Seattle alone provides, directly and indirectly, over 60,000 family wage jobs and generates over $10 billion in annual revenue for our region (See the 2009 City of Seattle study). Industrial businesses in Seattle, which rely on the efficient movement of freight, account for 35% of the city’s tax base, paying for essential government services for its citizens.

The Seattle Port Commission’s Century Agenda – our 25-year plan to help create 100,000 new port-related jobs for the region – seeks to build upon our region’s strengths. Among our goals is to grow seaport cargo volume to 3.5 million TEUs a year and triple air cargo through Sea-Tac Airport. To do that, we are working to lead a regional initiative to strengthen access to global markets and supply chains for Northwest businesses.

One of the biggest factors in keeping Puget Sound ports competitive is the efficiency of freight movement through our transportation corridors. To achieve our 25-year growth goals, we need to see State Route 509 completed from the airport south to Interstate 5. Similarly, for the Port of Tacoma to achieve its growth goals, it needs to see State Route 167 completed to Tacoma port terminals.

Both of those roadways are state projects in excess of a billion dollars. I and my fellow commissioners and staff, therefore, will be working hard this year to build the coalition needed to convince the legislature and the public of the need for new revenue to invest in our state’s transportation system.

The new year apparently brings with it some very positive developments on this issue. TSA has announced a plan to replace the scanners at all US airports, including Sea-Tac.

The TSA operates Advanced Imaging Technology, or “backscatter”, scanners in the security lines at Sea-Tac Airport. Sea-Tac Airport is the 17th busiest commercial airport in the country, with 32.8 million passengers having passed through the airport in 2011.

Passenger rights groups and some members of the academic and scientific communities have expressed concerns about the type of radiation emitted from, and privacy and reliability with respect to, the backscatter scanners. Because of these concerns, many passengers choose to “opt out” of going through Backscatter Scanners, choosing a physical pat-down and older technology x-ray machines instead.

Backscatter scanners are one of two types of “whole body” imaging technologies being used to perform full body scans of airline passengers. A competing technology is the millimeter wave scanner. The energy that is emitted by backscatter scanners is a type of ionizing radiation.

Some groups point to studies that have shown ionizing radiation to be carcinogenic even in small doses, though the doses used in airport scanners are believed to have a negligible effect. Millimeter scanners use a different, less controversial scanning technology.

Over the last year, the TSA has been replacing backscatter scanners in use at many of the nation’s largest airports with millimeter-wave machines that do not emit x-rays and feature privacy software that produces a generic image of passengers’ bodies. Sea-Tac was not among the airports that received the new technology.

In a recent letter to the airport industry trade group Airports Council International – North America (ACI-NA), however, the TSA has announced its intention to remove the backscatter scanners in use at all US airports by June 2013 and replace them with the less controversial millimeter wave technology machines.

The health and safety of the traveling public is our paramount concern at the Port of Seattle. This is very good news indeed.

Kirkland—Seattle Port Commissioner John Creighton, who has served on the port commission since 2006, today announced his intention to seek re-election this year.

Commissioner Creighton originally ran on balancing formerly competing interests of environmental stewardship and expanding cargo and passenger capacity at the seaport and airport.

“I am proud that during my time as Commission President in 2007-2008,” Creighton stated, “the Port of Seattle began focusing on growing port operations in a more sustainable manner
and set out our vision to be ‘the cleanest, greenest, most energy efficient port in the nation.’”

The early emphasis on greening the port while making it more competitive has paid off. In 2010 and 2011, the Port of Seattle saw over two million TEUs a year come through its cargo terminals. In 2011, a record 32.8 million passengers traveled through Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

During the summer 2012 cruise season, the port had a record 933,900 passengers
pass through its cruise terminals. The economic activity created by the Port of Seattle impacts close to 194,000 jobs in our region.

Creighton also cites his efforts to improve transparency at the port—helping author and implement reforms to make activities from contracting to commission deliberations more accountable to taxpayers. These efforts include working with colleagues to establish a Commission audit committee in his first year in office, and leading a vigorous reform initiative in response to a critical state audit report in 2008.

“We have worked hard to bring sunshine into the operations of the port,” said Creighton. “While we still have work to do, our reforms to date have helped restore public confidence, improved oversight and management, and allowed us to focus on the real work of building a stronger, greener port that will help drive our regional economy.”

Over the last two years, Creighton has served as co-chair of the commission’s Strategic Planning Committee, working closely with his fellow commissioners, port staff and regional stakeholders in developing a 25-year strategic plan to help grow 100,000 new port-related jobs for the Puget Sound region. In December 2012, the full commission unanimously approved the port’s 25-year strategic plan, also called the Century Agenda.

During his time on the port commission, Creighton has championed transportation and economic development initiatives important to moving our region’s economy forward. He serves on the Washington State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (appointed by Governor Gregoire in 2006) and on the advisory board of the Visit Seattle, Seattle’s convention and visitors bureau. He is also chair of the State Route 509 Corridor Completion and Freight Improvement Project Executive Committee and a member of the Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation Policy Board.

Growth in both freight and tourism will play a large role in the port’s 25-year plan, and finding new ways to fund tourism promotion is more important than ever. Early last year, Creighton was named by his colleagues to be the lead commissioner in working with the local travel and hospitality industry to strategize how to increase tourism spending in Washington, a $16 billion a year industry to our state.

“I would be honored to continue serving the citizens of King County on the Seattle Port Commission,” said Commissioner Creighton. “I would like to help put in place the early initiatives required for the port to meet our Century Agenda 25-year goals.”

About Commissioner John Creighton

John Creighton was elected to the Seattle Port Commission in 2005 and re-elected in 2009. He served as Port Commission President from 2007-2008, and for the last two years as co-chair of the Commission’s Century Agenda committee. The Century Agenda committee has led the development of the Port’s 25-year plan to help grow 100,000 new port-related jobs for the Puget Sound region.

John Creighton is a business lawyer who practiced law in Washington, D.C., and overseas in Istanbul, Helsinki and Singapore with the law firm White & Case LLP prior to returning home to Seattle in 2000. He grew up in the eastside suburbs of Seattle, and attended Interlake High School in Bellevue. For more information about Commissioner John Creighton, please visit www.johncreighton.org.

To find out more about the Seattle Port Commission’s Century Agenda – which sets out a series of goals for the port in the next 25 years, including growing seaport operations to 3.5 million TEUs – visit here.

Small businesses have been the engines of economic growth in America, stimulating economic growth and generating 64 percent of net new jobs in our country over the last 15 years. In today’s economy, small businesses matter more than ever.

The Seattle Port Commission is committed to the idea that the economic opportunity created by the port is shared by all segments of our community. The Commission’s Century Agenda, our 25 year strategic plan to help grow 100,000 new jobs for the region, includes aggressive small business contracting and workforce development goals. We intend to increase the funds spent by the port with qualified small businesses on construction, goods and services to 40 percent. We also set the goal to increase workforce training, job and business opportunities for local communities in maritime, trade, travel and logistics.

The Commission approved the creation of the Office of Social Responsibility (OSR) at the port in 2008 to help focus the port’s small business contracting and workforce development initiatives. In January 2010, the Commission approved a resolution that strengthened the port’s small business initiative.

The port’s Small Business Program aims to increase the number of small businesses competing for port procurements and has two main sub-programs: the Small Contractors and Suppliers (SCS) Program and the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program.

Small business certification at the port parallel’s King County’s certification process: by achieving certification with one agency, a small business can contract with both agencies. Once certified as an SCS, firms can benefit from vendor training and continuing education workshops, as well as procurement incentives.

The port’s DBE Program was established in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. Most of the port’s DBE opportunities relate to contracting with Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, which operates under the supervision of the Federal Aviation Administration.

It is the port’s policy to ensure nondiscrimination in the award of DOT assisted contracts, create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for those contracts and assist in the development of DBEs, in order to increase their competitiveness in the market place.

Last September, the Commission unanimously passed a motion aimed at helping DBEs at Sea-Tac Airport. The Commission’s motion focused on the DBE food and beverage operators, many of which have been negatively impacted by the down economy and realignment of airlines at the airport.

The motion directed the port’s CEO to establish criteria for determining whether DBEs should receive relief in the form of lease extensions, allowing them additional time to recoup the investments made in their airport shops, up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in some cases.

Some of the DBE restaurants at the airport – including the Africa Lounge and Maki’s – have won national awards. Yet the aviation world has been on a roller coaster since 9/11, with airlines merging and going bankrupt, businesses and leisure travelers cutting back on flying and increased security measures making it much more expensive to do business at airports.

By historical accident or otherwise, most of the airport’s small business operators were given locations at the ends of concourses with the least passenger traffic, and have shorter leases and higher rents than concessions in the Central Terminal and other prime locations. Small businesses do not have the same ability as large businesses to spread their losses across dozens of stores.

When the global shipping industry was bleeding billions of dollars in red ink in 2010 because of adverse economic conditions, the Commission approved a rent deferral program, allowing our terminal operators to defer millions of dollars of rent until the end of the year. We did this to give our seaport tenants breathing room during brutal economic conditions, and incentivize them to keep jobs in Seattle and continue increasing cargo shipment though our port. In 2011, we saw record cargo come through the port and we were made whole on our rent.

Our job as commissioners is not to pick winners and losers with respect to companies that do business at the port. But it is our job to make sure that conditions are right for businesses to succeed and create jobs for our community.

For years the port has pursued policies to help big business at our airport and seaport succeed and generate economic development for our region. It is about time that the port put that same sort of focus on helping small businesses in our community succeed, the segment of our economy that accounts for two-thirds of all jobs created in our country.

About Commissioner John Creighton

John Creighton was elected to the Seattle Port Commission in 2005 and re-elected in 2009. He served as Port Commission President from 2007-2008, and for the last two years as co-chair of the Commission’s Century Agenda committee. The Century Agenda committee has led the development of the Port’s 25-year plan to help grow 100,000 new port-related jobs for the Puget Sound region.

John Creighton is a business lawyer who practiced law in Washington, D.C., and overseas in Istanbul, Helsinki and Singapore with the law firm White & Case LLP prior to returning home to Seattle in 2000. He grew up in the eastside suburbs of Seattle, and attended Interlake High School in Bellevue. For more information about Commissioner John Creighton, please visit www.johncreighton.org.

To find out more about the Seattle Port Commission’s Century Agenda – which sets out a series of goals for the port in the next 25 years, including growing seaport operations to 3.5 million TEUs – visit here.