VIRGINIA PORTS -- EFFORTS TO LEASE/SALE


 
VIRGINIA PORTS -- SUSPEND THE PROPOSAL TO LEASE 

Virginia's ports are crown jewel assets not only for Virginia but for America. They are premier among ports of the world, not only for commerce but for extensive Naval Operations. They are critical to national security. They are invaluable and irreplaceable assets, hence all factors must be considered in decisions as to how such critical assets are managed. Without knowing all details of the proposed “public-private partnership,” to fund widening of I-64 seems a long stretch. It's unjustifiable, in fact, versus other methods of financing transportation needs.
The total cost-to-benefit must be thoroughly considered. What do we win, what do we lose? We understand the need for revenue for transportation funding. However, we have concerns about the current proposal as we had for the previous initiative to sell the ports. We had similar concerns about the initiative to spin off the ABC operations to raise transportation funds, while grossly undervaluing the ABC business assets. Fortunately, both efforts were stopped.

With the proposal to sell the ports, we had justifiable concerns about losing the irreplaceable asset. Of special concern was the probability the ports would end up with foreign ownership as the investors sold them to achieve their targeted ROI. Fortunately, our concerns and, undoubtedly those of others, were heard and acted on. We urge you to do the same with leasing proposals for the ports.

We have similar concerns with the current initiative. Do we lose a unique asset? Loss of control is of critical concern. It is imperative that entire business and operating plans be revealed in detail. As reported, the proposal does not seem acceptable – ill-conceived and force-fit into transportation funding, in fact.
As aforementioned, Virginia ports are vital to national security. What happens to our vast Naval operations now and in the future. This is a critical issue! The ports are important not only to the commerce of the Commonwealth of Virginia but also to the national GDP. At a time when Virginia needs economic development and America's economy has serious structural problems, limiting capability to grow GDP, is this initiative constructive? It's reasonable to think not.

What are the alternatives? We have asked previously for resolution of the “Transportation Trust Fund” and the “Funding Formula.” We believe these basic elements of funding must be dealt with before new initiatives are undertaken. We see the ports issue similarly. What options are available, including bonds?
What is the real financial return? Let us see the entire financial analysis. We are compelled to compare this to the attempts to sell the ABC operations to finance a small fraction of transportation funding needs. In that case, the financial return was inadequate and even negative to the general fund. The advisers' valuation of the business was a fraction of it's true valuation when done with acceptable methodology. Here again, we are thankful our concerns, and that of others, were heard and acted on. We ask for the same consideration of this ports proposal. It's a critical issue!

We urge you to reconsider the proposal for encumbering the ports in long term leases with the same concerns that we expressed for earlier proposals to sell the ports and the ABC operations. Other means of funding highways must be found, starting with issuing bonds. 

We want what is best for Virginia, which is also what is best for America. Losing control of our ports does not meet that criterion. 

Respectfully,
Joe A. Mann, CEO The Mann Group, 148 The Green, Williamsburg, Va 23185, 757-229-4633
Philip Richardson, CEO Richardson Companies, 300 Windsor Hall Dr., A-314, 757-258-3200
James City

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICAN AIRLINES -- MORE ABOUT UNIONS AND CH 11

I apologize for the structure of the post below, with no segmentation, but the system refuses to do it my way. To my post yesterday re AMR's chapter 11 filing relating my experiences over many years flying with AA, an AA pilot wrote a thoughtful comment that caused me to think a bit more about the precursors to conditions of their bankruptcy. Frankly, I have what is perhaps too much experience with trade unions and their excesses, but know less about others such as the airlines. After learning more about the negotiations of AA with their unions, I now think it's justifiable to post the comments below. I've seen too many industries destroyed by union excesses coupled with management incompetence in caving to excess demands. Start with coal (dead for many years), steel, textiles, shoes, electronics manufacturing, and more.  The Detroit 3 (once the big 3) deserves special mention. As their costs rose to $72/hour (fully loaded) and costs in the southern industry w...
Read more

LEFTIST MIND-SET OF TODAY -- REFLEXIVE, THOUGHTLESS SUPPORT FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

"Trying to persuade a prejudiced mind is as Sisyphean as trying to open a closed mind is Quixotic." Mann, May 2012 In a blog post herein below on May 1, 2013, I outlined what we who manage people and enterprises know as absolutes about performances of people who are put into management and supervisory positions for which they haven't requisite qualifications. For those who have progressed through several jobs to their level of incompetence, this is known as the Peter Principle as defined by Laurence J. Peter. In all likelihood, all who have managed people for any length of time have seen this principle played out. While Peter's observation applies to progression through multiple job levels, if a person is put into any job for which he is unqualified, the concept is also valid. Elective political positions is where I see this most often played out. The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States is the most significant example of this in my lif...
Read more

ETHANOL -- The worst mandate ever gets even worse

When politicians get control of science and the inept or dishonest scientists, nothing good comes of it. There are many examples -- global warming (aka climate change) is the most prominent. The ethanol mandate, although a part of the climate change mania, stands on its own as arguably the most ridiculous mandate of all time. President Jimmy Carter, who was influenced by a misguided college professor, can be charged with the mistake of promulgating the ethanol mandate.  Of course, Al Gore is the politician who played the global warming issue like a drum and has benefited financially from it. Use of ethanol in motor fuel is not a net positive either in costs or in impact on the environment.... enormous hype to the contrary notwithstanding. Ethanol does not have the positive effect on the environment as touted. It has only about 60% of the specific energy of petroleum fuel, which begs use of more fuel to achieve the same energy as petroleum fuel. And, so it does. I have my own exp...
Read more