WHAT WILL BECOME OF PORT? MUCH IS RIDING ON THE ANSWER

The events of the last week at the Southeast Missouri Port Authority are alarming. Resignations by both outgoing executive director Alan Maki and his office manager signal that not all is well. But make no mistake: The trouble goes well beyond what individual has the job of running that promising facility, or whose feelings may or may not be hurt, still less with what egos are bruised or stroked.

What is on the line is the future of a $12 million-plus facility that has long held great promise for the economic future of our entire region. It is not too much to say that all the progress over the past 18 years is now at risk.

Papering over differences with nice comments to the media, or suggesting that such problems as have come to light result from board dissatisfaction with one employee, will only allow the real problems to go unaddressed. That we must not let happen.

The current moment in the history of that port is absolutely critical. Let's review:

Sensitive timing

* The state has committed to the construction of Nash Road eastward as a direct connection into the port from I-55. Right of way for this nearly $5 million project has been acquired. Construction should begin this year.

* Phase two completion of the rail spur into the port is under way after long months of planning.

* Negotiations with a short line rail operator have long been in prospect.

* Planning for sewers and utilities is at a sensitive stage.

* The dock operator has prospects he would like to begin bringing in to greatly enhance traffic, and hence revenue, to the port. He has been frustrated in this effort.

* A grain operator has signed a letter of intent and paid money for the privelege of being the first to handle that vital southeast Missouri commodity through our port.

* Finally, other industrial prospects and potential users are watching all of this. The reputation of our region as an hospitable place to do business is on the line.

Tenant dissatisfaction

The truth is that there is real dissatisfaction among current tenants at the port authority at the way they have been treated by certain factions on the board of directors. These hard-headed business people, unanimous in supporting Alan Maki for the job he has done, have big dollars invested out there. Some have lenders who share their concerns. This worrisome attitude combines with justifiable apprehension among possible tenants the port has signed to letters of intent to locate there, or whom the board has long courted to operate at our port.

Word of trouble gets around fast. Business relationships can take months and years to come to fruition and to produce the jobs and opportunities we all want to see. As with an individual's reputation, though, those relationships, built up so painstakingly, can be ruined overnight by one untoward act. The port board has worked with certain promising business and industrial prospects for years. Certain of those prospects are getting understandably nervous about what they see as board interference in micromanaging the affairs of the port authority.

I don't like discussing this in the public prints. But it's time to face facts, however unpleasant. A good man has been run off from a good job where he has worked long hours to great effect, in the process earning a statewide reputation as a pro in port and economic development circles. Micromanagement seems in full flower among certain board members, who seem to have nothing better to do than pick at nits and pursue personal agendas.

This is regrettable. Worse, it has certain current and future port job creators worried sick about who is managing the facility, for what purpose and according to whose agenda.

So, who really is in charge? Ultimately, the county commissions of Scott and Cape Girardeau Counties must take responsibility. The port is a joint creation, under state statute, of an agreement between the two counties. It has worked for nearly 20 years to marvelous advantage for our area. Remarkable progress has been made, much of it under the last four and one-half years with Alan Maki at the helm. But it's all at risk now.

Port Authority board members are appointed by the two county commissions and are answerable to the people of both counties through those elected leaders. Do our two respective county commissions have the leadership capacity to stand up and take control of this situation? The people of both counties and a lot of potential job-creating industries who could go elsewhere are watching.