Template revised April 12, 2018.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
6e
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
June 26, 2018
DATE: June 15, 2018
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Eric Schinfeld, Sr. Manager, Federal & International Government Relations
Ryan McFarland, Manager, Federal Government Relations
SUBJECT: Contract for Federal Government Advocacy Services
Amount of this request: $1,500,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to advertise and execute a
contract for federal government relations advocacy services for up to five years, a three-year
base contract with two one-year options for an estimated contract value of $1,500,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Port of Seattle currently retains a federal government relations advocacy firm in
Washington, D.C., to assist the Port Government Relations staff in addressing the significant
number of federal actions that have a direct impact on the Port’s interests and business
operations. This firm acts as an advocate providing regular and consistent personal contact with
the Pacific Northwest Congressional delegation, both members and staff, as well as regulatory
agencies directly affecting Port operations. This memorandum requests authority to execute a
new contract with a federal government relations advocacy consultant to monitor legislative
and regulatory activity in Washington, D.C., and to provide strategic guidance on federal policy
and regulatory issues. The current contract for such services was competitively bid in 2015 and
expires January 2019.
JUSTIFICATION
The key elements of this work involve deep expertise in federal legislative and regulatory issues
of interest to the Port, and strong relationships with key members of Congress and the
Executive Branch. It is essential that the firm be located at least in part in Washington, D.C., to
be able to engage directly in meetings, hearings and other public forums related to Port-related
policy.
While Port federal government relations staff have strong knowledge of internal Port issues and
dynamics, staying current on Congressional processes, Executive Branch rulemaking and the
power dynamics of key federal stakeholders is difficult to maintain from afar. In addition, Port
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6e Page 2 of 5
Meeting Date: June 26, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
staff are unable to be in D.C. frequently enough to be impactful without significant financial and
logistical challenges.
The primary purpose of this request is to ensure that federal legislative and regulatory policies
are as conducive as possible to the success of the Port’s business but also to the values and
aspirations contained in the Century Agenda and implicit in the Port’s role as a county-wide
special purpose government operating on behalf of King County residents.
DETAILS
Scope of Work
The proposed scope of work is to assist Port staff in advancing federal government relations
activities in Washington, D.C., and to act on behalf of the Port at the Port’s direction to
promote and protect the Port’s interest in federal matters. More specific duties will be to:
(1) Develop deep knowledge of how federal policies impact Port operations and
competitiveness – including but not limited to aviation, maritime, trade and economic
development – and provide federal advocacy services to advance these priorities and
interests.
(2) Develop deep knowledge of, and provide federal advocacy services to advance, a
broader set of federal policy issues that are core to the Port’s mission, including but
not limited to environmental sustainability, immigration, human trafficking, small and
minority business contracting and workforce development.
(3) Build and maintain strong relationships with relevant representatives of the
Administration, Members of Congress, other federal agencies and port-related
industry associations in Washington D.C.
(4) Monitor federal policy developments that might impact the Port or its constituents –
including congressional hearings and markups – and shape the Port’s engagement in
those issues.
(5) As appropriate, serve as the face and voice of the Port at meetings with elected
officials, public agencies and industry associations.
(6) Effectively and accurately communicate the Port’s policy priorities and interests orally
and in writing.
(7) Proactively promote and protect the Port’s interests in federal matters, both in
identifying new and creative opportunities to enhance the Port, as well as acting
quickly and strategically to prevent actions that might prove harmful to the Port.
(8) Assist the Port in securing federal funding, through the competitive grant process, as
well as other relevant congressionally directed or agency driven processes.
(9) Communicate regularly with port staff and leadership on firm’s activities in
Washington D. C.
(10) Draft materials including letters, briefing materials, talking points, and public
comments for the federal regulatory process, legislation, committee hearing
testimony, and other items as requested.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6e Page 3 of 5
Meeting Date: June 26, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
(11) Develop deep knowledge of the Seattle region’s and Washington state’s economy, key
stakeholders and political dynamics in order to provide strategic guidance on how to
best shape the Port’s federal agenda to maximize benefits to, and recognition from,
local leaders.
(12) As appropriate, help develop partnerships and coalitions that can more effectively
advance the Port’s policy priorities – including Washington state-based organizations
and individuals, national associations or peers throughout the rest of the country.
(13) Conduct other work assigned, such as assisting with meetings for Port officials and
staff, interacting regularly with congressional delegations and committee staffs, and
federal regulatory agencies.
The scope of work for this contract is primarily focused on the Port of Seattle’s federal agenda;
the Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) has a separate contract for similar services. However,
there are times that the selected firm will be asked to coordinate with NWSA on federal issues
of mutual interest to both NWSA and Port of Seattle.
There is a 10% SCS/OMWBE Certified requirement on this project.
Schedule
The Port is in the process of developing a request for proposal advertisement with an expected
start of contract service date of January 1, 2019.
Estimated Dates
Advertise Solicitation
July 1, 2018
Proposals Due
September 15, 2018
Port Execute Agreement
December 31, 2018
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Do not hire a D.C.-based advocate, and rely solely on Port federal government
relations staff by increasing Port staff travel to Washington, DC.
Cost Implications: Estimated cost reduction of approximately $200,000 per year.
Pros:
(1) Reduces the overall cost to the Port for federal government advocacy.
Cons:
(1) Although Port staff are well versed in most federal issues and are able to effectively
direct the work of the contractor, they do not always have the specific knowledge
necessary to represent the Port on an issue or do not have available capacity to
perform the amount of work required for effective representation in Congress and the
executive branch. Past experience shows the Port typically has had to hire specialized
and highly skilled consultants resident in Washington, D.C., to perform this work most
effectively.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6e Page 4 of 5
Meeting Date: June 26, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
(2) While the overall costs to the Port would be reduced, there would be significant
financial outlay to accommodate increased regular travel to Washington, DC.
(3) Federal policy and regulation is more dynamic at this point in our nation’s history than
almost any time in the past. The Administration and Congress are changing our
government’s approach to issues in rapid and often unexpected ways. Not having
someone “on the ground” in DC every day puts the Port at risk of being left out or left
behind on key changes to federal laws and rules that have the potential to significantly
impact our organization.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Use existing Port of Seattle staff and budget, without increased travel to
Washington, DC over current levels.
Cost Implications: Estimated cost reduction of approximately $300,000 per year.
Pros:
(1) Reduces the overall cost to the Port for federal government advocacy.
Cons:
(1) As identified in Alternative 1, Port federal government relations staff lack capacity and
key expertise in federal policymaking and rulemaking to ensure our successful
engagement on all the issues that matter to our organization.
(2) This approach increases the likelihood identified in Alternative 1 that the Port would
decline in our ability and effectiveness to shape the outcome of fast-moving policy
issues related to our business and priorities, since we wouldn’t be present in DC to
engage often enough.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Through a broadly advertised competitive process, hire a consultant to perform
specialized and highly skilled advocacy services.
Cost Implications: The costs of maintaining a federal government advocacy firm would be the
same as current budget levels.
Pros:
(1) Maintaining our investment would maximize the changes that federal policies are
conducive to the success of the Port and the interests of our key stakeholders. Our
advocacy efforts are essential to support of our mission to create jobs, stimulate
economic development, promote industrial growth, and advance trade and commerce
in King County, the Puget Sound region, and Washington state.
Cons:
(1) Requires spending $1.5 million of Port funds over a five year period.
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6e Page 5 of 5
Meeting Date: June 26, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
The estimated cost of the agreement is $1,500,000 for five years. Services are estimated at
$300,000 per year. Charges to this contract will be from the Public Affairs department and will
be included in annual budgets.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
None.
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
Commissioners authorized the current contract on 9/22/15.
