Congratulations upon becoming the new Executive Director of the Port of Oakland. What’s it feel like getting the job running the region’s major seaport, with an airport to boot?

Obviously, I’m very excited. It’s a great job. It’s an exciting job. But thank goodness, I’ve been the deputy for three years because it’s a very complicated job and it’s very helpful that I’m familiar with the issues and key players in this area. It would have been very difficult for someone from the outside to come in and take over the top job. So I feel like I’ve really been well prepared for it thanks to my predecessor Chuck Foster.

The Port of Oakland has been diffident about its partnership role in the Alameda Oakland ferry service, even to the point of contemplating handing it over to AC Transit not long ago. After the important role ferries played after the terrorist attacks in New York, and with Bay Areans flocking to ferries in the wake of scares about our own bridges, are you feeling a bit more attached to your ferry service?

I think as a citizen of the area and also wearing the hat of Executive Director, we benefit from enhanced ferry service. We’re very supportive of its expansion as long as it’s viable and makes economic sense. However, that is not our area of expertise and so I think that it’s appropriate for us to play a supporting role in this endeavor and be part of the regional Water Transit Authority. We should be actively engaged with them but I think for an organization like that, one that is specifically dedicated to this project, that is where the focus ought to be.

Jack London Square, despite years of efforts, has yet to catch on with the public to anything like the extent that Port of Oakland planners hoped and expected it would. Was it a mistake from the get-go or do you think something can be done to rev up interest?

I don’t think it was a mistake. It had difficulty getting started but I think we’re doing pretty well right now. According to our statistics, we have five or six million people pass through Jack London Square on an annual basis. Not all of the retail outlets do well but we have our fair share of winners down here. What we’re doing about it is we’re in negotiations with a developer to develop what we’re referring to as Phase Two of Jack London Square. That is kind of an infill, if you will. There are areas within Jack London Square that are available for development. The new developer will come in and bring in four or five star hotels for one, and close to a million square feet of office/retail space which will bring additional vitality to a place that already is quite vital.

Harry Edwards, Director of Oakland Park and Recreation Department, caused quite a ruckus when he charged that the booster group behind the new Jack London Aquatic Center was not sufficiently diverse in its makeup. The group has addressed the criticism by adding people of color to the board but does this contretemps tell you that the Port of Oakland should be doing something more or at least different to engage the people of Oakland with their waterfront?

I think we’ve done a pretty good job of being inclusive. We are a department of the City of Oakland and we meet on a regular basis with the folks from the city and Community Economic Development Agency to talk about our plans and our issues, projects that they’re interested in and projects that we’re interested in that they‘re doing. At the Commission level, we meet on a regular basis through a fourm called the City/Port Liaison Committee. We meet every month and often times, projects of interest are brought up and discussed at that level. We certainly don’t feel like we’re out there by ourselves. We’ve gone out to the community and gotten them engaged.

The environmental community put you through quite a ringer when you sought approval to dredge the Oakland estuary to ready the Port of Oakland for the next generation of container ships. Are the goals of the Port of Oakland and the environmental community inherently at odds?

I think that there are some natural areas where there are constantly going to be some differences of opinion. That’s understandable. I think the 50 Foot Project is actually a national model for collaboration between the Port, the business community and the environmental community. The fact that there was approval and consensus in such a short period of time and such a broad base of support for the project, which included the regulatory agencies and the environmental community, is a testament to how well we were able to work together. Yes, there are always going to be tension between those that want to build and those that are more concerned about environmental issues. Quite frankly, I think that’s a healthy friction. I think that there always needs to be a balance between what’s in the best interest of the bottom line and what’s in the best interest of what is environmentally responsible. Those both have to be taken into account as we move forward.

One of the scenarios talked and written about for a potential terrorist attack is a bomb secreted deep in container ship. Is the Port of Oakland equipped to protect the community and the region from such a scenario?

Well, let me first say that this Port, the way we operate and the way things come into this Port, is no different than the way things go into any other port in the world. We don’t have any different technology than what’s available in other ports. Congress currently is still wrestling with how to put forth a maritime security bill and there’s a lot of debate in congress about what that should include. So there are a lot of unanswered questions out there. We actually have probably better security than most other ports from the standpoint that the local coast guard has been very, very proactive since 9/11 in providing security for the Port.

The Port of Oakland finds itself thrust into unaccustomed roles – environmental steward, land developer, recreational provider and now security provider. Can such a big bureaucracy adapt to all these new roles quickly enough?

We have to. That’s the bottom line.