Port
of Seattle

Port of Seattle
Century Agenda: Expert Panels'
Recommended Guiding Principles
As Amended by the
Port of Seattle Commission
August 4,2009
Table of Contents
Introduction.............................................................................Page 3
Shared Principles.....................................................................Page 4
Green Port Panel Principles........................................................Page 6
Social Responsibility Panel Principles........................................Page 8
Real Estate and Land Use Panel Principles...................................Page 10
Funding Strategy Panel Principles...............................................Page 12
Appendix A: Implementation Chart for Green Port Principles..........Page 14












Guiding Principles
Introduction
-The Port of Seattle began updating its strategic plan in 2008 by creating a "Century
Agenda" - a vision for carrying out the Port's mission in the first quarter of this century.
The Port plans to adopt the Century Agenda in time for the 2011 celebration of the port's
centennial.
-The goal of the Century Agenda is to refresh the Port's strategic plan, using a four-year
process that builds on the accomplishments of 'the past century while looking toward the
emerging challenges of this century. This four-year process is not moving ahead as
quickly as foreseen, due to the demands of implementing reforms generated by the SAO
Performance Audit and Resolution 3605, and employee furloughs in response to the
economic downturn.
The Century Agenda is an opportunity to engage the broader community in helping
shape a common vision for how the Port of Seattle can best serve the public interest. It
was conceived as a collaborative planning process, open to the public, engaging Port
stakeholders, including customers, tenants, business interests, neighborhoods, partner
agencies, civic organizations, advocacy groups, King County residents, and employees.
To develop the Century Agenda, the Port convened four expert panels of stakeholders to
inform the Port's initial thinking on some of the key emerging issues facing ,the Port. The
expert panels covered four areas: Green Port Strategy, Real Estate and Land Use,
Social Responsibility, and Funding Strategy. Each panel consisted of volunteer
stakeholder representatives, at least one Port Commissioner, and a senior Port
executive.
This document presents the Guiding Principles recommended by each of the four
panels, along with the supporting rationale for each recommended principle. During the
panel discussions, several recurring themes emerged that were common among all four
panels. These are presented here as "Shared Principles."
Once adopted, the Commission will start the next phase of implenienting these
principles in 2010. The principles of the Century Agenda will be fully integrated into 'the
Port's long-term strategy by 2011, in time for the Port's centennial celebration.






... -~ -- - -- -
Guiding Principles                                                                              3
'7
-
~-
~
.-~- -
---~~--p~
-~-
~

Shared Principles
The Port of Seattle is a public agency whose primary mission shall be to invest public
resources to advance trade and commerce: promote industrial growth, stimulate
economic development, and create jobs.
1. The Port will be a catalyst for:
'The flow of trade and commerce
'The health of its commercial maritime, com~mercialfishing, cruise
business, aviation enterprises, and Port-related real estate holdings.
The generation of economic and employment opportunities from its
core business
The maintenance and management of public assets to serve the long
term public interest
Environmentally sustainable growth
2. The Port will measure its success against economic, social and
environmental indicators; referred to as the "triple bottom line."
The panel members endorsed the Port's "triple bottom line" policy as particularly
relevant to a public agency that enhances economic growth in the public's long-term
interest and urged that Port programs continue to be measured in each of these
areas.
3. The Port's policies and programs should respond to the needs of its
customers and community in a changing economy.
Panel members recommended that the Port continue to seize emerging market
opportunities brought about by economic changes in society and the world. Given
.the host of new technologies, new markets, and new products continually emerging,
.the Port needs to adapt to the changing needs of its customers and community in
order to stay true to its core mission.

4.  The Port should provide innovative leadership by adopting best
practices and partnering with others who are committed to responsible
stewardship the health of our economy, environment, and community,
where those partnerships serve to further the needs of the Port's core
business.
Panel members agreed that adopting ~ndustrybenchmarks and best management
practices would advance the Port's progress in achieving its triple bottom line. A
culture of excellence and innovation serves the public's interest wh~leproviding a
model for its tenants, partners, and the larger community.
5. The Port is obligated to sustain the public trust through an ongoing
commitment to transparency, accountability and equity, and to
effectively communicate its core activities to industry, ttie regulatory
and environmental community and the people of King County.
Panel members felt strongly that public ,trust and accou~itabilityare crucial to the
relationship between the Port and King County communities. They were concerned
about the low level of public awareness about Port operations, and urged ,the Port to
find ways to show how its core operations benefit the wider community. Better
outreach efforts to explain and promote understanding of the Port's programs and
policies were recommended, including "reader-friendly" public information tools that
explain how the Port's activities create economic opportunity in the region.














~... . .
~
-
Guiding Principles                                                                              5
-p-pp-p-p--                       ~-. .
~

Green Port Principles
1. The Port should be a model of sustainable growth in a community that
is projected to continue growing.
The Port should research best practices that are locally appropriate and identify
emerging technologies that further enable it to demonstrate environmental
leadership.
On projects central to the Port's core mission, environmentally beneficial
technologies and best practices should be integrated into those projects as standard
operating procedure.
lmplementlng new technologies and best management practices may, at times, allow
the Port to exceed compliance standards. In such cases, metrics, objectives, and
returns should be clearly understood by all parties and stakeholders. When ~twould
be useful for tenants to exceed standards, the Port should provide incen,tives or
facilitation programs. (See decision-maklng schematic)
2.  The Port must allocate its funds to those environmental efforts that will
yield the greatest environmental benefit.
Science-based benchmarks and indicators should be used to evaluate poter~tial
environmental benefits when making project and budget decisions. Project priorities
and goals should be regularly evaluated and reconsidered.
3.  On broad environmental issues, the Port should partner with tenants,
regulatory authorities, local jurisdictions, other ports, and nongovernmental
organizations to leverage its financial and professional
resources on issues, such as cleaning up Puget Sound or reducing
greenhouse gas emissions in King County.
On broad environmental issues, the Port should join, support, and actively engage in
coalitions andlor partnerships that enable the Port to leverage its financial and
professional resources to achieve common environmental interests.
4.  The Port's environmental policies and programs should enhance the
Port's economic competitiveness.
The Port will only have the funds it needs to exerclse environmental leadership if it
generates sufficient net revenues  For this reason, the Port must remain a
competitive, job-generating organization and should not adopt policies that put it at a
competitive disadvantage.
This approach requires that finite resources yield the greatest possible environmental
return. The Port should iniplement environmental technologies and practices that
increase the volume of cargo and passengers it moves while ensuring this growth is
enviror~nientallysustainable.

Guiding Principles

The Port should provide a regular public accounting of its
enviro~imentalprograms and outcomes.
Public communications about the Port's environmental programs and their funding
sources need to be a high priority. This information will help taxpayers better
understand the Port's efforts to be a model for sustainable growth. It may well
encourage public input in environmental priority and program decision-making. The
Port's environmental initiatives should be assessed per Commission direction to
compare accomplishments with goals and benchmarks.
















- -
--- . - - -- - .-----.---.
- -- -- -
-
- -
-- --- .
Guiding Principles                                                                              7
- . .
~            ~                  ~
Social Responsibility Principles
The Port will collaborate with its employees, contractors, and business
partners to assure exemplary health and safety protection, provide
equitable compensation, foster social justice, and maximize the ability
for people to achieve their full potential.
The panel agreed that the Port should become a leader for best practices in human,
soclal, and economic rights. It should work to Improve its own practices, and
encourage ~tspartners improve their practices. The Port should prov~deIncentives to
advance soclal responsibility for its small bus~nesspartners.
The panel urged the Port to support the highest caliber of jobs possible for the
benefit of employees and the larger community. However, employment goals should
move beyond the simplistic economics of trading an hour of work for a wage, and
should help to create jobs where workers can take pride in their contribution.
Tlie Port should continue to pursue partnerships that create jobs and advance
human potential through apprenticeship programs, job ,training, community colleges,
and the public school system.
The Port will remove barriers to participation by small and
disadvantaged businesses in its contracting processes and
requirements.
The Port should leverage its role as a regional economic engine to encourage
entrepreneurship, making every effort to create economic opportunities for new and
small businesses.
The Port's contracting processes need to be "user-friendly" to small and
disadvantaged businesses, and provide support to these businesses in
understanding ,the Port's contracting processes. It should assist small businesses to
develop opportunities to work with both the Port itself and its large contractors.
The workforce of the Port should reflect the population diversity of King
County so that economic opportunity generated by the Port can be
accessed by all of its citizens.
The panel had extensive discussion on the implications of this principle. Some areas
of concern included:
Extending this principle beyond federally defined protected groups to the full
range of demographic and economic characteristics of King County.
Using this guideline to address the barriers to equal representation in job
categories currently underrepresented.
lmplement~ngthe Port's commitment to supporting the workforce training
necessary to remove those barriers.
4.  The Port will be accountable to its guiding principles by setting
measurable objectives and reporting to the public in how it has
addressed any workforce and contracting disparities. .
Although most panel members thought it useful to set specific metrics to measure
and determine disparities, some members felt less prescribed, more holistic
approach to reporting wo~~ldresult in a more accurate reflection of results.
5.  The Port of should work with community partners to take a long-term
strategic look at population and labor market trends to support the
ongoing employment pathway needs and labor requirements of the
Port's enterprises.
Along with entry-level jobs, the Port should establish pathway programs with
cornrnunity colleges and other education and training partners so employees can
realize advancement opportunities even if that opportunity is outside the Port.
Partnerships should do more than just meet the needs of the Port; they should also
serve the needs of ,the community. The Aviation and Maritime high schools are a
model for school partnerships that could be applied to other job sectors.
Other tools, such as apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs can support
career pathways. Small business contractors will need assistance in working within
such structures on an ongoing basis.











-
-..
--
- .----- -
-- --- ------.-- .. -.-- ----- ... - -
Guiding Principles                                                                              9
-- --
- -. - ..
--

Real Estate and Land Use Principles
1. Port-owned real estate assets serve a dynamic range of strategic
interests that include job creation, resource stewardship and regional
economic development. The Port should develop a tiered asset
management system to provide an operational framework to address
this range of interests.
As a special purpose government, the Port must steward and manage publiclyowned
assets for the benefit of the taxpayer. Panelists agree that the Port's deepwater
port, fishing industry, and airport are unique irreplaceable assets to the region.
The Port needs to place its highest priorities on advancing its maritime, fishing and
aviation activities because these functions are essential to the health of our region.
To help manage tensions between con-~peting~nvestmentopportunities, the Panel
proposed a tiered asset management system to weigh potentially corr~peting
~nterestswhen maklng land management policy decisions. This system, illustrated in
the chart below, separates all real estate assets into three categories: 1) direct uses,
2) indirect Iuses, and 3)  unrestricted uses. The chart below shows examples for each
category.
Tier
Tler 1 - DIRECT USES
Cruise Terminals
Commercial Fishing Terminals
Seattle-Tacoma lnternat~onalAirport
Ancillary facilities directly supporting
commercial and maritime activities
Tier 2 - INDIRECT USES                 World ~ r a d ecenter
Eastside Rail Corridor
lnterbay projerties
-
I - - - - - - -Tier 3 - UNRESTRICTED USES               ~subotaSteel Site
Des Moines Creek Business Park Slte

The Panel believed the Port should use its second and third tier land holdings to
foster industries of the future that could create jobs and prosperity in the region.
Establishing where the "bright line" falls between the various tiers will be aided by a
clear definition of the Port'score functions and mission. The Port needs to balance
its traditional focus on air and sea-related businesses with broader types of
economic activity. If it moves into other areas of business, the Port needs good
decision-making cr~teriato guide those changes.
2.  Real estate activities should take into account the effect of Port
operations on the affected land and discourage activities that would
threaten the ability of the Port to perform its core mission. Facilities
central to the Port's core mission should be identified as "essential
public facilities."
- -
Guid~ngPrinciples
- .
Panelists discussed at length whether the determination of "con-~patibility"sliould err
on the side of the Port's core mission or protect community goals. This has been
particularly problematic in the past around issues such as airport expansion, which at
times pitted local jurisdictions against Port-related development.  Panelists have
been encouraged by the Port's recent efforts to engage in collaborative discussions
about airport development and community impacts.
The Panel believes that the public would benefit from a stronger collaboration
between the Port and the City of Seattle to encourage manufacturing and industrial
growth within its designated Manufacturing and Industrial Centers, promoting further
zoning for maritime, aviation and related industrial development.

3.  To sustain the economic value of its holdings, the Port should invest in
existing or new infrastructure to support its core mission and the
operational requirements of its tenants.
Panel members expressed that building infrastructure tied to primary core uses, such
as dredging or maintaining bulkheads, is the Port's direct responsibility.
The Port's decision to invest in the cruise industry was discussed. Some panel
members felt that it drew resources away from other coniponents of the maritime
sector. Yet the cruise industry investment has paid good financial dividends to the
larger region, assisted by technological advances that made ships faster and
overflow capacity at the Vancouver Port.
Panel members discussed whether the Port should direc,tlyfund or develop
transportation infrastructure. Some members said it might be appropriate to do so if
transportation infrastructure is tied to core business and trade development. Others
expressed concern that overleveraging the Port's resources into other investments
such as the viaduct replacement or 1-5 capacity improvements detract from the Port's
ability to focus on core operations.
4.  The Port should seek opportunities to coordinate and engage in
partnerships with city, state and other government agencies to develop
infrastructure that advance trade and commerce. ~hese'facilitiesin turn
will serve the economic, social, and environmental interests of the
community.
There are many opportunities for the Port to work closely with local municipalities in
projects of mutual benefit. These include industrial business operations that
contribute to the'Portls core mission (maritime, fishing, aviation) or environmental
and economic mitigation. The Port should be making investments where a direct
community benefit can be demonstrated, especially when using the levy.
The panel suggested that additional dialogue is needed with cities to maxirl-lize the
benefits of collaboration to provide land uses that are mutually beneficial, such as
associated light industry, utilities, transportation and public transportation.

-- - - . - - --
- ...-
-- -- -- ... .. -
-.--- -- -
--
-.--
-
- -.-- ..-.---- --
p--
- .-.. .
Guiding Principles                                                                       11
- - - - ..
-
- -- -
-- .. . ---p--.--p-p--.. .... ..
-
~
- ..
~ ~
--

The publ~cinterest has benefited from past collaboration between Washington State
ports in areas such as freight mobility and environmental management-this   spirit of
collaboration can also be applied to the use of Port-owned lands and associated
infrastructure to collectively respond to changing global markets.

Funding Policy and Strategy Guiding Principles
1.  The Port should be primarily funded through the self-sustaining
enterprises that are at the core of its mission. Revenues from the Port's
tax levy should be used for activities that are not fully self-sustaining
and cannot be funded in another manner. These activities should
directly support the Port's core mission, provide for critical
infrastructure investments, or provide environmental mitigation that
cannot be funded through its enterprises.
Although panel members found the Port's mix of funding sources to be appropriate,
they noted that its spending could benefit from additional clarity and discipline.
Members recommend a focus on the Port's core businesses that provide financial
returns and/or those that spur economic development and jobs.
It was deemed reasonable for the Port to expect different rates of return for the
different funding sources, and the criteria of financial return on investment may not
include full public benefits. Transportation investments are critical to moving the
region's core businesses targets - people and goods. Environmental investments
may not have a visible direct public benefit, but these investments clearly protect
Port assets.
Large portions of the Port's activities are supported through self-sustaining revenues.
The Port's tax levy provides revenue for system-wide expenses that support the
needs of all tenants or longer-term investments that provide significant public benefit.
Examples of appropriate investments compatible with the Port's core mission
include:
Capacity investments for container facilities and freight terminals
FAST Corridor transportation projects
Infrastructure for lntermodal terminals
Non-project environmental mitigation
Job training programs
Panel members suggested the Port would be wise to consult with the public when it
considers involvement in activities that stray from its core businesses. This might
include a formal public involvement process or even a vote of the people. They also
noted that the public wants the Port to be as self-sustaining as possible. It is also
important to keep the levy predictable, rational, and consistent.

2.  The Port should demonstrate to the public that it has managed its
financial resources as a disciplined steward of the public interest,
guided by priorities set forth in its core mission statement and strategic
plan.

~- -   ~ - - --- - -
~
-
-~ .  ~-
-
-
-- ..  -..~ -~.- . -- ---
Guiding Principles                                                                             13
-. - -- - -. ~- --- .--.-
~
-
~
. -.--.-.
~p
Ultimately, the Port's long-term funding strategy is tied to how the public views the
orgarlization. There is little understanding about how the Port manages its leases or
any of the competitive issues facing the Port. The panel urged the Port to provide
meaningful, consistent public education about its competitive sit~~ation,how the Port
makes and spends money, and its contributions to the health of the economy.
Further, they suggested that the Port also include information about both public and
private beneficiaries of Port initiatives. The Port should also report not just its
accompl~shmentsand successes, but also its failures.
The Port is making progress through programs such as its Port 101 series, but it may
be more effective for outreach to focus more on particular operations, such as
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport or Fisherman's Terminal. These may
encourage a higher level of interest and engagement by the public.
The Port should foster a culture of partnership and collaboration in
pursuing public and private funding partnerships for investments that
apply to the Port's core mission, that reap shared benefits to all its
partners, and that no single entity can achieve independently.
The growing competitive environment created by major infrastructure investments in
ports at Prince Rupert and Vancouver B.C.,and improvements to the Panama Canal
increases the strategic importance of partnership and collaboration opportunities with
other ports, jurisdictions, and private entities.
Partnerships, however, take resources and commitment to be truly effective.  In
evaluating potential partnerships, the Port might be guided by criteria such as:
Tax revenue benefit
Return on investment
Contribution to regional competitiveness
Opporturlities for collaborative marketing
Northwest ports are stronger together in the global competitive market than alone.
The current global financial situation may provide an opportunity for even more
strategic cooperation between ports in managing their operations to achieve a
greater synergy, such as the development of shared assets. Examples of shared
assets might be the development of an intermodal terminal or joint environmental
agreements, such as the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy. However, the Port
should be aggressive in pushing for cost-sharing for projects where other
jurisdictions reap benefits from Port investments.




Guiding Princ~ples

Environmental Panel Guiding Principles

Inventory                     Assessment                    Transparency
1  What relevant          I           I
Review BP and tech.,   I
Share inventory
appropriate best                    define objective,
and assessment     I.Develop proposal &recommendations
practices & new                      estimate investment
with stakeholders
technologies exist?                  & quantify return
& invite comment

Is this central to
core mission?

Is pursuing this issue
Commission
Evaluate joining /forming
action                     Triple Bottom Line?
coalition.
I
Does it require
A
Port or tenant to

standard?
Does Commission            Analysis
believe issue is so               Evaluate
critical that it                   investment return                     Port:                  Tenant:
demands unilateral            against science -
Quantify              Develop
based benchmarks                  metrics,             ~ncentive
partnership be          No
& opportunity                     objectives, &        fac~litation
formed?
costs                                   returns.               proposal
.ti4p r 1 Will this put Port at
Proceed with               competitive
Yes                       Commission action          disadvantage?           ~