The economic health of the port would be jeopardized, they say, with a security gate that won't make the area any safer.
By STEVE HUETTEL
Published June 14, 2003
TAMPA - A group of companies that work at Tampa's port say a new security project is bad for business and won't make the waterfront any safer from terrorists.
More than a dozen tenants and port users have asked the Tampa Port Authority to put off building a $10.8-million security gate complex until they can talk with the agency's governing board and review new federal security regulations expected next month.
The complex at Maritime and Guy N. Verger boulevards, the busiest intersection on Hooker's Point, will hold up employees, customers and contractors, the group says. That could make businesses at the port's industrial heart less competitive with companies at other ports.
"Necessary security must be intelligent security that does not put the Port of Tampa at a commercial disadvantage," said a letter to port director George Williamson on behalf of 15 businesses.
Port officials scrambled to set up a meeting Wednesday with tenants and other concerned businesses. But Williamson said state law requires the port to restrict access to waterfront facilities and the intersection is the best place to do that.
"I'm sympathetic, but it's the law," he said. "We're not able to fight security" rules.
Critics say the conflict raises another issue: how well the port authority responds to the needs of tenants and maritime users. Williamson refused an earlier request from Tampa Bay Shipbuilding & Repair Co. for a public meeting about the complex.
The port authority pressured the Propeller Club, an alliance of maritime businesses and supporters, not to send a letter approved by its directors that asked the agency to delay building the complex, according to Timothy Shusta, club chairman and an attorney for the shipyard.
"There's a feeling the port authority sort of does what they want without regard for the concerns of tenants and users," he said.
Williamson said the port contacted the Propeller Club to question whether sending the letter would be legal under the club's bylaws.
Months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the Legislature passed a law requiring beefed-up security at Tampa and the state's other major seaports. Aimed at stopping drug trafficking and cargo theft, the law required that ports designate restricted areas, fence them off and erect gates to inspect vehicles before they enter. The legislation took on new urgency with concern about the possibility of terrorists attacking through unguarded ports.
Under the new requirements, port employees and frequent visitors had to pass a criminal background check and obtain a port-issued security badge. Tampa's port issued thousands of ID badges and set up two temporary gates on Hooker's Point.
In April, the authority board approved $10.8-million for the new complex, a tollbooth-style gate with 12 lanes and a building where security personnel can issue new IDs and monitor closed-circuit cameras around the port.
Tampa Bay Shipbuilding was first to complain. The shipyard, which employs about 350 workers and has revenues of about $50-million a year, now can be reached without going through port security.
That would change with the new gate, even though the shipyard has perimeter fencing, 24-hour security guards and employee badges, and accounts for all visitors, said chief executive Joe Hartley. Ships go in empty for repairs and come out empty, he said, and nothing in the yard is at high risk for a terrorist attack.
Going through the new gate would slow down employees and visitors, including clients and suppliers, Hartley said.
"What do you do if your gas station becomes inconvenient?" he said. "You go to one or another corner. Our shipyard is an international shipyard. Our clients can go to Charleston and not be inconvenienced. They can go to Mobile and not be inconvenienced."
Florida's top homeland security official said state law requires the port to control access to all land it owns with docks. So Tampa Bay Shipyard employees and visitors need to pass through port gates with port-issued IDs, said Steve Lauer, chief of Florida's Domestic Security Initiative.
But other businesses that are not now subject to port security - and not required to be under state law - also would find themselves behind the new gate.
Maritrans, an oil shipper with a warehouse and training center on Hooker's Point, told the port this week that it wasn't consulted or notified. Legal counsel Arthur Volkle wrote that the port authority needed to work as an advocate for tenants.
Port businesses signing the letter of complaint included TECO Ocean Shipping, A.R. Savage & Son, Gulf Marine Repair and Citgo Petroleum.
They urged the port authority to hold off on construction until the Coast Guard comes out with new security rules next month. But even if those rules don't require a new port security gate, they would not supersede the state law, said Lauer and Williamson.
