MONROE, MI – Michigan is a state nearly surrounded by four of the five Great Lakes. It has far more freshwater shoreline, 3,200 miles worth, than any other state in the union.
Thanks to the St. Lawrence Seaway, the economic potential of its maritime industry is vast, and may be almost unlimited.
Yet Michigan provides far less assistance to its ports than any other state — something that is badly crippling its economy.
The mystery is why.
There is absolutely no doubt about the facts. A new study from the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy: “The Tools to Compete: Comparing State-Level Assistance Programs for Great Lakes Commercial Ports,” lays out the damning details:.
After surveying policies in every Great Lakes state and also using the Atlantic Ocean states of Virginia and Florida for comparison, the study concludes, “states with an active role in port infrastructure investment may help spur private investment as well.”
That’s especially true in Wisconsin, and to a lesser extent in Ohio and other states. But as the study found, there are “an entire absence of dedicated programs,” in Michigan.
“Due in part to the lack of state-level assistance, Michigan’s ports are underutilized,” something that may be costing the state billions, the study concludes. “A dedicated port infrastructure grant program administered through MDOT (the Michigan Department of Transportation) would provide ports with more robust support and bolster their ability to match federal grant funds. A state-level grant program would increase the utility of the state’s ports and help to attract new business to the state.”
But Michigan has none of that, said Sam Hankinson, a student at Central Michigan University who also worked on the study and has spent the last few months as an intern at the Port of Monroe.
Michigan spends far less per resident on maritime funding than any other state –less than a third as much as Ohio and less than a tenth as much as Minnesota, and is suffering as a result.
Curiously, Michigan, for all its shoreline, has only two public commercial ports — Detroit, which, under a dubious deal engineered by former Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick is essentially controlled by the Morouns, the family that owns the Ambassador Bridge, and the Port of Monroe, which has been a too-little known success story.
Eight years ago, Paul C. LaMarre III, who had been manager of maritime affairs for the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, became the first director the Monroe Port had since 1978. Since then, the 39-year-old former U.S. Navy pilot has transformed the port.
He’s gotten rid of unprofitable leases, deepened partnerships with DTE, which provides electricity to millions, and increased commerce considerably. “We have deep-draft frontage on the River Raisin leading to Lake Erie and direct access to both I-75 and Class I rail service,” said LaMarre, who loves the entire industry and is not above climbing on ships and unloading cargo himself.
But he is totally frustrated by two things: The U.S. Customs and Border Protection Office allows every state to ship merchandise in large containers, except one – Michigan, a policy the U.S. government has refused to justify (see “No Good Explanation for Michigan Port Policy,” my Feb.29,2020 column.)
LaMarre and Gregg Ward, a close friend who operates the Detroit-Windsor Truck Ferry, met with Governor Gretchen Whitmer and told her about this in 2019, soon after she took office. “She said ‘no way!’ — she clearly didn’t know,” LaMarre said.
But then struggles over road and school funding, politics and the pandemic intervened, and nothing happened on the state level to try to get a reversal of the anti-Michigan customs policy.
LaMarre and Ward were able to secure a meeting with Peter Navarro, President Trump’s director of trade and manufacturing policy, but he didn’t seem interested or helpful.
Beyond that, Monroe’s port director is irked that Lansing seems to have next to no interest in helping Michigan’s maritime industry.
“There’s a Pure Michigan commercial that opens with a shot of a big freighter gliding though one of the lakes. Well, the martime industry is more than a postcard and more than an Edmund Fitzgerald T-shirt. It is jobs – and the potential for more jobs.
“It is the cleanest and most fuel-efficient way of moving cargo. It could give us such a cost advantage, but we don’t take advantage of it,” he said, shaking his head. “Michigan is really missing out.”
There is lots of evidence to support his claims. In Wisconsin, a huge, multi-million dollar agricultural loading facility is being built at the Port of Milwaukee; thanks to a combination of federal, state and local funding, they were able to lure private investment.
Michigan has nothing like that, said Mr. Hankinson, who both co-authored the study and has been working for the Port of Monroe. When the port needed a new $1 million crane last year, Lamarre first had to try to find a program that offered matching funds – and then go hat in hand to local businesses, trying to get them to invest.
That short-sighted thinking, the University of Michigan study concluded, is preventing state ports from any kind of long-term planning. “”Michigan ports are forced to live in the short term, focusing on one grant program or project at a time in order to improve their infrastructure. And even if a match is found, Michigan ports are competing with ports in other states with more resources.”
Why state legislators and the governors haven’t shown any interest in changing this is a mystery. But what is very clear is that unless and until they do, the state will continue to lose untold millions, good-paying jobs, and opportunities.
-30-
