TRANSPORT / PORTSBIG and LITTLE collaborationPorts discuss arrangement to expand Oakland’sreach, revive Sacramento’s flagging finances.Sacramento, Calif. is known more forits action hero-turned-governor thanfor being a major shipping destinationfor global cargo, but a linkup betweenthe fast-growing Port of Oakland and thesmaller, struggling Sacramento port maychange all that.In December, officials at the two portsinked a memorandum of understanding todevelop a plan to revive the fortunes of thePort of Sacramento, which sits upriver fromOakland, and which has posted losses eachof the last five years.Oakland’s interest is clear. Officials at theBay Area port, which handled 2.27 millionTEUs in 2005, want to develop Sacramentointo an inland port and distribution complex,simultaneously easing container congestionin Oakland’s terminals and allowing Oaklandto more effectively tap into California’scentral region.That’s how it’s all supposed to work out,at least.“Everybody right now is excited aboutthe opportunity,” said Ray King, generalmanager of marketing in the Port ofOakland’s maritime division. “We’ve gotstars in our eyes.”For the past five years, the Port of Sacramentohas been in what executive directorJohn Sulpizio calls a market trough, tusslingwith its nearby competitor, the Port ofStockton. He said the port, which handlesbulk cargoes, was in a period of transitionas it moved away from reliance on exportedtimber and toward growth in dimensionallumber from New Zealand and importedcement and aggregate.But the numbers spoke loudly. Fromafar, Sacramento appeared a losing proposition— $5 million in losses over thosefive years.So, in the summer of 2005, with rumorsof bankruptcy swirling around the 42-yearoldport, Sacramento officials decided on anew direction. The port would privatize itsterminal operations and act as a landlordport. Immediately, one of the first namesBY ERIC JOHNSON“The combined legislativeclout of Sacramento andthe Bay Area legislatorson port issues could bepowerful. And that couldripple back to Washington.”John Sulpizioexecutive director,Port of Sacramentoto pop up as an interested party was thePort of Oakland.For Sulpizio, an industry vet of more thanthree decades, the chance to link up withOakland provided credibility and clout tohis corner of the trade world.“The Port of Sacramento is a small port,”Sulpizio said in a February interview. “Ourchairman likes to say it would be difficultfor us to get hit by a bus if we were standingin the middle of an intersection. This givesus a linkup to a large port and the exposurethat comes with that.”But for now, he’s guarded in his optimismabout the arrangement.“The (local) press has made more out ofit than it really is,” he said. “We basicallyhave signed a memorandum of understandingthat we’re going to work together to seeif we can define a relationship and what itmight cost.”The two ports have jointly put out a requestfor qualification for terminal operators totake over operational duty at the inlandport, which sits near the confluence of theSacramento and <strong>American</strong> rivers, about 80miles northeast of San Francisco.By the end of March, Sulpizio said, theports expect to have responses from interestedoperators. If the bidders are qualified,the MOU calls for an 18-month operationsphase, eventually leading to an eight-yearcontract with the Port of Oakland that couldbe renewed for a further 10 years.“They may be able to augment ourmarketing effort and they can definitelyenhance our legislative advocacy,” Sulpizioadded. “The combined legislative clout ofSacramento and the Bay Area legislatorson port issues could be powerful. And thatcould ripple back to Washington.”For instance, Oakland was recently stifledin its attempt to secure $100 million fromfederal sources to expedite completion of achannel deepening project that would allowpost-Panamax ships to call at the Bay Area’smajor port. Oakland received $43 million,meaning the channel deepening won’t becomplete until 2008.Sulpizio suggested that the weight ofSacramento coupled with the Bay Area mayhave induced Washington to be more freespendingon the dredging project.Then there are the purely financial benefitsof attaching the Port of Sacramento tothe Oakland brand. Oakland’s TEU volumegrew faster than any other U.S. West Coastport in 2005.“From a financial standpoint, we’reobviously looking for increased tonnageand revenues from this,” Sulpizio said.“We also would envision more funding forinfrastructure from in-state sources.“We’re an underutilized facility. We’vegot acreage to develop. But our revenuesare depressed and we’re posting losses sowe’re looking for increased revenue andincreased volume.”Benefiting The Region. King said thearrangement is complementary to the interestsof both ports, and could act as an economicstimulus for Northern California.“They’re breakbulk and we’re containers,”King said. “Our relationships with beneficialcargo owners and ocean carriers and terminaloperators can be spaced out to them withouta lot of extra cost. This is an example of howwe can leverage our expertise to benefit theentire Northern California region.”King said the land surrounding the Portof Sacramento should be attractive to companiescrossing the Pacific and calling atOakland.“That land could be a very valuable componentto the supply chain, because you needwarehousing space and cross-dock facilities,”he said. “Orders need support. Sacramentocould serve as an inland port.”And by inland port, King means a destinationto which terminals could quickly bargecargo after arriving at the Port of Oakland.The concept of inland ports is gaining tractionin Southern California, where TEU volumeis more than six times that of Oakland,88 AMERICAN SHIPPER: APRIL 2006
ut Bay Area leaders see the sameconcept as crucial to expansion ofthe Oakland port.In this case, Sacramento couldliterally and euphemistically bean inland port.“You have the potential to gettrucks off the road,” King said.“As the port here grows, we haveto take on issues that address environmentalstewardship, and thiscould potentially accomplish thatas well as put Northern Californiaon a higher growth path in termsof global trade.”Port partnershipThe ports of Oakland and Sacramento are looking to link upto promote common interests — Oakland to expand its reachinto California’s central valley, and Sacramento to survive financially.Over the next few months, the ports will work to:• Improve operating efficiencies.• Create a synergistic marketing strategy.• Extend Oakland’s maritime industry relationships andalliances to Sacramento.• Consolidate and leverage governmental, business andprofessional alliances.• Development new sustainable business and new revenuesbetween the two ports.• Reduce pollution through a possible waterborne cargobarging operation.• Eliminate operating losses at the port of Sacramento.• Develop and fund needed infrastructure at the Port ofSacramento.• Develop environmental enhancement and mitigationprograms at the Port of Sacramento using successful programsdeveloped by Oakland.End Of The Road. Of course,if all goes according to plan, Sulpiziomight not be around to seeit. If the two ports are successfulin attracting a terminal operatorto manage the port’s five berthsand bulk handling equipment, itwill mean a significant downsizingof port staff.Sacramento has been run as an operationalport since its inception in 1963, so themove to privatizing operations representsa paradigm shift, Sulpizio said.“Port staff would be downsized to anominal group and folded into the city,”he said.It will likely be run by Mike Luken, theCity of West Sacramento’s port manager.“We’re hoping the relationship will providea steady stream of revenue,” Luken said.“From a city standpoint, it would be greatto see the port have success. It doesn’t doanybody any good to have a vacant industrialfacility in the middle of the city.”Aside from management, the governanceof the inland port is also due for a radicalchange. For years, it has been a politicalfootball, tossed around between four governmententities — the cities of Sacramentoand West Sacramento and the counties ofYolo and Sacramento.The port lies entirely within the city ofWest Sacramento and Yolo County, but thosefour agencies shared seven seats on the portboard — and, ironically, Sacramento cityand county had the board majority.That changed in September, when theSacramento-Yolo Port District Commissionvoted to dissolve the four-party board.Currently, West Sacramento has fourseats on the board, and Sacramento andYolo and Sacramento counties each haveone. Soon, Sacramento city and countywill withdraw.Sulpizio said the more streamlined boardwill only make the port more attractive toprivate terminal operators.“The wild card is whether terminal operatorssee this as a revenue opportunity toprivatize,” he said. “We hope that the politicalstability (on the board) and the Oaklandname will give us some clout.”King said Oakland will determine overthe next few months whether Sacramento’stransport insurance plus innovationInsurance for:Transport and logistics operatorsPorts and terminalsCargo handling facilitiesShip operatorsContact TT via your brokeror at any point in the networkNew JerseyTel +1 201 557 7300San FranciscoTel +1 415 956 6537LondonTel +44 (0)20 7204 2626www.ttclub.commarketing@ttclub.comTRANSPORT / PORTSfinancial problems are, indeed, ahindrance to consummating a portpartnership.“Our view is that’s more behindthe Port of Sacramento now,” Kingsaid. “The arrangement betweenthe two ports should contributeto the health of Sacramento. Ofcourse when you start the relationship,you have to work out thedetails. But we’re focused on thefuture of the two ports rather thanthe administrative and economictroubles.”Longtime Target. And that’sbecause Oakland officials havelong eyed the City of Sacramentoand its surrounding suburbs as apotential growth market.“I don’t think you can considerthe Port of Sacramento as a competitorto us,” King said. “We’vealways thought of Sacramento,because of its proximity to theCentral Valley, as more or less withinour sphere. But we never really thought,let’s have an arrangement with the Port ofSacramento.”That changed when the governance andfinancial problems in Sacramento forcedAMERICAN SHIPPER: APRIL 2006 89