Our view: Port project

Rep. Les Gara wrote to the mayor and Assembly members this week asking for clarification after he spent two hours talking with port director Bill Sheffield. The reason? While the mayor and Baker said they wanted $350 million -- and no more -- to finish the north phase of the project, Gara said, and Sheffield confirmed, that Sheffield intended to pursue the entire port project, estimated at more than $1 billion, after the north phase was done. Lawmakers and the rest of us wanted to know: Which is it?

On Tuesday, the mayor was emphatic: Sullivan wanted $350 million to complete the north phase; his administration has no intention of asking for more. Earlier, Baker had said the north end completion would satisfy the city's port needs for 40 or 50 years. Anything beyond that was work for a future mayor and not the business of this administration. Later, Baker said he didn't know where Sheffield was getting the notion about the bigger project.

Both the mayor and spokeswoman Sarah Erkmann said Sheffield was only discussing possible future needs and suggested that some -- read Gara -- were trying to make political hay out of the contradiction. But Gara's question was legitimate for the simple reason that this port project has been a mess of leadership, design and construction woes. Cost estimates have continually risen. Millions of dollars of work has had to be redone. It's a poor recommendation if the mayor and his port director aren't on the same page.

"I'm concerned we're still looking at a $1 billion project, just in three separate pots of money," Gara said. "I'd rather they just come up with a more efficient design for the whole project so we know how much it's going to cost."

Lawmakers, while favorably inclined to enhancing Alaska's gateway for most of its goods, already have expressed their dissatisfaction with the project to date. Last session, they cut a $320 million request by 90 percent, down to $30 million -- enough to keep the project alive while city and federal officials and shippers met to put the endeavor back on a sound basis. There's a management agreement in place and an Army Corps of Engineers audit in the works.

It's good for the mayor to put confusion to rest, because this project has had all the confusion it can stand. But the port expansion still needs a thorough vetting. If lawmakers are going to include $350 million in the next capital budget for this project, they'll need to have confidence that Anchorage has a realistic port plan and clear-eyed leadership to carry it out. If the project goes before the voters in a statewide bond package, that confidence factor will have to be even higher.

The Port of Anchorage serves most of the state. Alaskans need to know who's in charge and what they're doing before they agree to pick up the tab.

BOTTOM LINE: No more confusion on port project.