Two things need to happen to right the ship at the Port of Galveston.

First, Port Director Rodger Rees needs to stop making mistakes with public money. Second, wharves board Chairman Ted O’Rourke needs to stop trying to run Rees off.

The Daily News would never criticize anyone for vigilant oversight of public finances. But there’s a line, fine perhaps, but discernible, between responsible government oversight and hacking somebody to bits.

And the whole show lately has been distracting from the larger picture and bigger issues that should be dragged into the light of day — such as how much public money will go toward building a third cruise terminal?

What’s the traffic control plan for said terminal? Will the third cruise terminal pay property taxes? What is the landlord port doing to diversify cargo and tenants so it doesn’t have all its eggs in the cruise industry basket?

There’s no doubt Rees has made some missteps since he began his job at the port in January 2018. Some of it could be chalked up to a learning curve. Some not so much.

On Tuesday at the regular meeting of the wharves board, which governs the port, Rees admitted he used a port credit card for personal expenses and used public money to give dozens of employees untaxed Christmas bonuses without board approval.

In the spirit of the benefit of the doubt, we’ll accept that Rees, who at $240,000 a year is well paid enough to buy his own groceries, made an honest mistake when he used a port credit card instead of his own at Kroger.

Rees apologized for the mistake and that should be enough.

There’s so much wrong with the $100 Christmas bonuses it’s best to just say everything was wrong with it.

There are specific rules governing bonuses for public employees. The port is a utility of the city. State law forbids city governments from giving bonuses to employees for past work. And cities can’t give holiday bonuses to employees unless such bonuses are included in the personnel policy at the beginning of the year. But city governments can give extra pay for expectation of increased productivity.

There also are problems about accounting for the money and reporting the income to the IRS.

In the past, when port directors sought to give bonuses, it was with the blessing of the board. Rees after the meeting told The Daily News he would seek board approval for any employee stipends such as the $100 holiday bonus.

There have been other issues, including Rees’ approval of a $64,000 consulting contract that was canceled because it violated port rules limiting the director’s spending to $50,000 without board consent.

One of the most interesting and rich notions from the meeting came from Trustees Elizabeth Beeton and Richard DeVries, who questioned whether it was proper for Mayor Jim Yarbrough and O’Rourke to review the minutiae of the port’s financial documents.

Rich, because Beeton is a well-known and respected watchdog of public funds who has been known to comb through reams of documented minutiae when she believes it’s warranted. Those who have fallen under her scrutiny have suffered more than Rees has.

The appropriate thing is for Rees to stop giving his enemy a stick with which to beat him. Perhaps “enemy” is a harsh word to describe O’Rourke, but the relationship is not amicable.

If this can’t be sorted out, it would be a crying shame. The wharves board hired Rees for his business acumen and Rees has delivered.

In 2018, the port posted operating revenues of $43.5 million and operating expenses of $35.5 million.

Since his appointment, port revenues have increased by 15.2 percent and expenses reduced by 6.7 percent compared with 2017. Net position increased by 5.5 percent for the same period.

Although it belongs to the residents of Galveston, the port is a self-supporting operation that doesn’t rely on tax money.

Until recently, it hadn’t lived up to its potential as a significant economic engine for the city. But the port has shown promising progress under Rees’ leadership.

It’s always appropriate to watch public assets with a sharp eye. But the port and the public would be better served if O’Rourke, with his passion for the public docks, and Rees, with his strong business sense, combined forces. Now, that would right the ship.

• Laura Elder

 Laura Elder: 409-683-5248;

(3) comments

Don Schlessinger

I think it’s interesting the port and its director can live under a giant magnifying glass where public money spent can be scrutinized penny by penny, and the Park Board can spend what it wants without that same magnifying glass pointed at it. The PB just spent $167K of OPM and bragged in the GDN they can so without Galveston city government oversight. No one seems to care. Are the rules regarding spending OPM (PUBLIC MONEY) for the PB and Port different?

Miceal O'Laochdha

Laura, overall, I think your editorial here is on target but, I must ask this: you credit the director for his “business acumen” and his “strong business sense”. In a previous newspaper story, the director states to your reporter that the reason he exceeded his independent financial authority in issuing that $64k contract to his consultant was because he did not READ the contract before signing it. As someone who has executed many US Government and commercial contracts in my career, I can assure you if I had ever made a statement like that, no one would praise my business acumen and business sense during the 1 hour that I remained still employed in that position.

AJ LeBlanc

Thank you, Laura, for another good article. I would very much like to see both of these gentlemen direct their collective enthusiasm and intellect toward more meaningful port affairs. Perhaps a few missteps here and there, but certainly nothing even approaching criminal or malicious. And yes, financial accountability and oversight is paramount and non-negotiable, but I'm growing a little weary of this petty (cash) discussion. Please, let's all acknowledge the obvious, agree to avoid a recurrence (or similar mistakes), and get back to work. Carry on.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.