It took 20 years to raise the $ 700 million to build the Ravenel Bridge, a decade to mend the $ 558 million to deepen the port of Charleston. If Jim Newsome manages to convince the legislature to sign a check for $ 550 million to the State Port Authority in a few hours of PowerPoint presentations, it will be a sales job for all ages.
The chief executive of ports won $ 546,236 last year, but give the man a bonus. He will have earned it along with the car and membership grant at the country club and the elegant Harbor Club.
While we all agree that the port is a major asset for the state, the legislature needs to slow down. There’s a lot of “trust us” and not even close enough scrutiny when it comes to more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer money. Remember that $ 9 billion hole in the ground in Fairfield County, those SCANA criminals (the appropriate word at this point) sold the Legislature? Or the phantom estimates of the economic impact of bringing the Carolina Panthers’ headquarters to Rock Hill?
The Port Authority wants $ 400 million to build a rail yard at the former Navy base in North Charleston and $ 150 million for a barge system to move containers between the Wando Welch Terminal in Mount Pleasant and the Leatherman Terminal. Newsome says the projects are crucial to keeping the port competitive, in particular against Savannah, and the barges will reduce truck traffic on the road.
Bailey
After years of spending to build new terminals and modernize others, the Port Authority’s debt has increased 12-fold since 2010, almost depleting its debt capacity. For this reason, it asks the Legislature to raise US $ 550 million and transfer it to the port, which is owned and operated by the state.
This is real money. More than two decades have passed since South Carolina issued bonds on this scale, when it borrowed $ 750 million to build schools. It is more than all the $ 520 million that the Legislature previously earmarked for the port over years of building infrastructure. It is 4½ times the $ 122 million that the state has allocated to Charleston since 2012 for flooding.
And yet, that huge request flew through the Senate, anointed as always by South Carolina’s most powerful politician and best friend in the port, Senator Hugh Leatherman. The Florence-born Republican, 89, presented the project on January 27, and his Finance Committee approved it three days later. The Senate spent four days debating the bill before passing it 45 to 1 last month.
Newsome & Co. are not stupid people: they called it the Hugh K. Leatherman Terminal, not the Charleston Terminal, for a reason.
Senator Rex Rice was the only one without a vote. “We would all love to borrow money and not pay it back,” he told me.
Republican Easley, a small businessman who considers himself a supporter of the port, proposed to demand that the SPA pay the loan by charging the senders an additional $ 4 for each container. At an average cost of $ 165 per box, this would represent a 2.5% tax on users. The Port Authority found this very costly and Rice’s amendment was defeated. Instead, a fee of $ 1 was added to pay the $ 150 million barge loan.
The project is now in the Chamber, but the discussion needs to be much broader than a $ 1 versus $ 4 user fee. This is because the $ 550 million loan is just an entry into the port’s ambitious plans and how pay them.
The proposed railway yard and barge operation are in Phase 1. The cost of Phases 2 and 3: projected US $ 750 million. In addition, as Charles Rowe reported on this page last Sunday, State Ports is supporting the replacement of the Don Holt bridge, which would allow ultra-large post-Panamax ships to access port facilities north of the bridge. That could be $ 1 billion.
Keeping the port competitive is important. But $ 550 million spent there (and not reimbursed) and hundreds of millions more cannot be spent elsewhere.
Are we willing to have a door in the top 10 and be the 10 states with the top 10 in public education and in general? (See US News ranking.) What about flood money in Charleston and elsewhere? Affordable housing?
Do South Carolina taxpayers really need to subsidize global shipping companies at the expense of everything else? What about all that oceanfront property where the Port Authority is located in Charleston, including Union Pier? Does anyone worry about the port’s projections that expensive barges will lose money forever?
Senator Gerald Malloy, D-Hartsville, put it well: “They can give us figures that show that the port is responsible for 10% of jobs. And that’s good. But then, let’s talk about the other 90%. “
Everything needs to be on the table.
Steve Bailey can be contacted at [email protected]. Follow on Twitter @ sjbailey1060.