Template revised January 10, 2019.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No. 8m
ACTION ITEM Date of Meeting February 11, 2025
DATE : January 13, 2025
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Delmas Whittaker, Director, Marine Maintenance
Shannon Zink, MM Senior Manager, Fleet and Facilities
Levi Clark, MM Fleet and Transportation Manager
Shayla Fortin, MM Fleet Asset Project Manager
SUBJECT: 2025 Maritime and Corporate Surplus Fleet Assets
Amount of this request: $400,000
Total estimated project cost:
$400,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to approve disposal of 32 fleet
vehicles and tools that have reached the end of their useful life. These assets, with a current
estimated value of $400,000, no longer meet operational standards and are considered obsolete
or excess to the Port’s current and future needs. This disposition aligns with the Port’s ongoing
commitment to sustainability and operational efficiency as outlined in the Sustainable Fleet Plan
and the Maritime Climate and Air Action Plan (MCAAP.) This estimated surplus value could
fluctuate depending on the secondary market conditions at the time of auction.
The Maritime and Corporate Divisions have carefully evaluated these assets and determined that
they are beyond repair, are no longer efficient, or lack a continued purpose within Port
operations. Their removal from the fleet will reduce unnecessary maintenance costs and create
additional space for newer, more efficient assets. The proceeds from the sale, estimated at
$400,000, will be returned to the General Fund which will help finance future fleet assets,
contributing to a cycle of continual improvement and modernization.
JUSTIFICATION
The Port of Seattle’s Sustainable Fleet Plan encourages “right-sizing” the fleet to ensure that all
active assets meet functional, environmental, and cost-efficiency standards. By identifying and
removing underutilized and obsolete equipment, the Port can better align its fleet with
operational needs, reducing the environmental impact of operations and enhancing resource
efficiency. This action also aligns with the Maritime Climate and Air Action Plan (MCAAP), which
sets forth the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to a sustainable fleet
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8m Page 2 of 4
Meeting Date: February 11, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
model by 2030. Through this strategic management approach, the Maritime and Corporate
Divisions are working to eliminate vehicles that contribute to emissions and replace them with
fuel-efficient or alternative energy assets wherever possible.
These 32 assets, which include various vehicles and specialized tools, have been marked for
public auction. This method of sale is in accordance with Policy AC-13 on the Disposition of Port
Property and Washington State law, which mandates competitive bidding for the sale of public
assets to ensure transparency and market-based pricing. By adhering to these guidelines, the
Port can be confident in obtaining fair market value for the assets, while also maintaining its
commitment to fiscal responsibility and public accountability.
Diversity in Contracting
No WMBE goal was established at this time.
Schedule
Schedule of Disposition to Align With the 2025 Fleet Procurement Schedule, as new asset must
be in service, before the obsolete asset is removed from service. Some incoming Fleet Assets
may have a factory order lead time of 12-18 months from receipt of PO.
Commission Authorization 2025 Q1
New Equipment Received 2025 Q2 through 2026 Q3
Obsolete Equipment Removed from Service TBD, upon receipt of incoming new
replacement asset.
(2025 Q2 – 2026 Q3)
Obsolete Equipment Sent to Auction TBD, immediately after removal from service
and decommissioning is complete.
(2025 Q2 – 2026 Q3)
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Take no action and retain obsolete fleet assets.
Cost Implications: There would be no revenue generated from sale of equipment through public
auction. There would be a loss of an estimated resale value of $400,000, along with the increased
annual maintenance and repair costs of maintaining obsolete and aging fleet assets.
Pros:
(1) Cost Savings on New Purchases: Keeping existing equipment avoids the initial expense
of purchasing new assets, which can help maintain budget flexibility in the short term.
(2) Availability of Backup Equipment: Older assets can serve as backup options during peak
operational periods or in case of emergencies, adding resilience to the fleet.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8m Page 3 of 4
Meeting Date: February 11, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
(3) Maximized Asset Lifespan: Retaining equipment allows the Port to fully use each asset’s
lifespan, which may be perceived as a more sustainable option by maximizing existing
resources.
Cons:
(1) Higher Maintenance Costs: Older equipment generally requires more frequent repairs
and maintenance, which can increase operational costs and result in more downtime.
(2) Missed Sustainability Goals: Continuing to use fuel-inefficient or high-emission
equipment may counteract the Port’s sustainability objectives and climate action goals,
especially if alternative, cleaner models are available.
(3) Increased Risk of Breakdown: Equipment nearing or beyond its intended lifespan is
more likely to break down, leading to unpredictable interruptions in service and higher
emergency repair costs.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Dispose of 16 fleet assets and retain 15 assets.
Cost Implications: There would be revenue generated from sale of the equipment through public
auction. There would be a loss of an estimated resale value of $200,000, along with the increased
annual maintenance and repair costs of maintaining obsolete and aging fleet assets.
Pros:
(1) Cost Savings on Maintenance for Surplused Assets: By disposing of 16 assets, the Port
can reduce maintenance costs and direct resources towards the upkeep of remaining,
higher-priority assets.
(2) Revenue Generation from Surplus Sales: Selling 16 surplus assets can generate revenue
that can be reinvested into Port improvements or other operational needs, providing a
financial boost without significant fleet downsizing.
(3) Supports Right-Sizing and Sustainability Goals: This approach helps to right-size the
fleet and reduce emissions from the oldest, least efficient assets, aligning with
sustainability objectives and fleet management best practices.
Cons:
(1) Continued Maintenance Costs for Retained Assets: Keeping 15 older assets still
involves ongoing maintenance and repair costs, which may increase over time as the
assets continue to age.
(2) Reduced Fleet Modernization: Retaining 15 outdated assets limits the extent of
modernization and may restrict the Port’s access to the latest technology, efficiency
gains, and safety features that come with new equipment.
(3) Lower Resale Value Over Time: If the remaining 15 assets are kept for too long, their
resale value may decrease, reducing potential revenue when they are eventually
surplused.
This is not the recommended alternative.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8m Page 4 of 4
Meeting Date: February 11, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Alternative 3 – Authorize all 32 obsolete assets to go to surplus.
Cost Implications: There would be an estimated resale value of $400,000 and no further
maintenance or repair costs for the obsolete assets.
Pros:
(1) Immediate Cost Savings on Maintenance: Eliminating all older vehicles reduces the
need for ongoing repairs and maintenance, freeing up significant budget resources that
would otherwise be spent on aging assets.
(2) Revenue from Sale of Assets: Authorization to surplus 32 assets could yield a
substantial amount from public auction or resale, which can be reinvested into
purchasing newer, more efficient assets or supporting other operational needs.
(3) Alignment with Sustainability Goals: Removing outdated, fuel-inefficient vehicles
directly supports the Port’s sustainability and emission reduction goals, contributing to
cleaner air and a lower environmental impact.
Cons:
(1) Significant Upfront Replacement Costs: Authorization to surplus 32 vehicles means the
Port would likely need to make a large capital investment to acquire or lease new assets.
(2) Loss of Backup Assets: Removing all older vehicles eliminates any backup options,
which could leave the Port vulnerable to operational disruptions if the replacements
face downtime.
(3) Dependency on Rentals or Leases: If replacements are not purchased outright, the Port
may need to rely on rentals or leases, which could introduce unpredictable costs and
limit availability during high-demand periods.
This is the recommended alternative.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
None.
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
March 12, 2024 – Commission authorized Surplus of the 2024 Maritime and Corporate Fleet
Assets.
