Port Officials’ Travel Costs Nearly Double in 6 Years : Government: Records show sizable entourages went on trips around the globe. Officials call journeys essential.

In a period of tight Los Angeles budgets, travel expenditures by the port have nearly doubled in the last six years as city officials, commissioners and staff shuttled around the globe for trade missions, conferences and conventions.

The travel spending of more than $600,000 last year surpassed all but one of the West Coast’s other major ports--Portland. Most cities spent far less, and San Francisco rarely pays for trips by elected officials.

Records show that the port regularly took sizable entourages of staff and officials, including Mayor Tom Bradley, City Council members or Bradley’s commission appointees, on swings through the Far East, Europe and South America. The port director was on the road one out of every five days.

Three years ago, when the port spent a record $1.1 million on travel, two dozen officials and staff gathered in Honolulu for a weeklong meeting that included a $2,500 dinner reception and a lunch that cost nearly $800.

Other travels include annual golf tournaments, and a stream of conventions, seminars, conferences and industry gatherings from Cancun to Barcelona, Spain, and from Brazil to New Delhi.

The travel money comes from the port leases and other revenue sources. It does not come from city taxes and is separate from funds used for services such as police and fire protection.

During trips, city and port officials meet with shipping concerns, manufacturers and government officials and establish ties with other ports. Officials say travel and entertainment spending is essential to be competitive with other ports and has helped Los Angeles become the nation’s largest harbor in terms of the volume of cargo handled.

Los Angeles last year passed New York when it handled 1.44 million cargo containers, compared to 1.2 million for New York and 1.17 million for Long Beach. The value of shipments passing through New York remained higher than Los Angeles, $117.8 billion to $101.4 billion.

“Such a ranking could not be achieved without a very aggressive campaign to market and promote the harbor’s facilities,” said Bill Chandler, spokesman for Bradley, who recently returned from a port-sponsored trip to Japan and China.

“Believe me these are not junkets and vacations,” said Al Fierstine, the port’s director of marketing who arranges much of the agency’s trips. “We are the No. 1 port in the United States. . . . It takes a lot of travel; this is an international business.”

But in a period of tight budgets when perks at many levels of government--from Congress to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors--are coming under increased scrutiny, critics say the port travel and entertainment spending at times appear overboard.

Deputy City Controller Anthony Miera, whose office acts as a watchdog on expenditures, said his staff challenges expense statements from officials at the Harbor Department more frequently than those from any other city agency.

Ray Green, a chief auditor, said, “Quite a few times I see them as excessive.” Among the expenses currently being questioned are a limousine for a commissioner on a trip to Japan and dinners in the United States that cost between $62 and $74 per person--more than 50% higher than the city standard of $40 per person.

Joel Fox, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., said: “It seems to be a plague that runs through (public officials). . . . They all seem to have the same excuses. They can’t do their job (without) consulting with their colleagues at a nice resort.

“It’s public money. Taxpayers are cutting back on side trips during these tough times, it seems they have have an obligation to cut back. . . .”

Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, who earlier this year turned down a Harbor trip that would have cost several thousands dollars, said “it’s unseemly, it’s unthinkable that any department in the city should be going on an orgy of travel expenditures” at a time when other departments are cutting services.”

“It isn’t right and it doesn’t look right,” he said.

Records show that the port’s travel expenditures, including air fares, hotels, meals and receptions, went from $330,000 in 1985-86 to $615,000 last year, and hit a record $1.1 million in 1988-89.

Most other West Coast ports spent in the range of $50,000 to $400,000 on travel, although Portland spent slightly more than Los Angeles.

Fierstine said travel expenses have risen because officials are traveling to more parts of the world--particularly Southeast Asia and Europe--in search of business, and the cost of travel overseas has increased.

It is difficult to compile the actual costs of trips for individuals because payment records for plane tickets, charges on credit cards and other expenses are scattered throughout the city bureaucracy.

Many of the expenses for Bradley, who joined at least six overseas port trade missions since 1988, are picked up on credit cards by other officials, records show. Still, it appears that the mayor’s trips in recent years, including visits once or twice a year to Japan, Singapore, Korea, Indonesia and other Pacific Rim cities, have cost at least $15,000 to $20,000. The Times previously has reported that Bradley has taken more trips than other big-city mayor in recent years.

Several thousand more dollars have been spent ferrying Council President John Ferraro and Harbor-area Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores on business development trips and annual gatherings in Washington to meet with political leaders, records show.

Ferraro, who attended Harbor Department-paid trips to Washington and Tokyo in the last year, said, “They tell me they have to be aggressive in shopping for business.”

Ferraro said the trip to Tokyo, for the 50th anniversary of the Port of Tokyo, was a “courtesy” to a sister city and he noted that Japan is Los Angeles’ biggest trading partner.

The Port of San Francisco, which spent less than $55,000 on travel last year, rarely funds trade missions for elected officials and limits trips by port commissioners, said Ben Kutnick, the port’s fiscal officer. “It’s something that just does not play well with the public,” he said.

One of the most tireless Los Angeles fliers has been port director Ezunial Burts. Records show he has averaged 10 weeks a year on the road, traveling through the Far East, Europe and the United States. One around-the-world trip in 1988 included two weeks at a summer conference in Rotterdam with his wife, records indicate.

Burts was out of town and not available for comment. But other officials said his travels are indispensable for the port.

“It’s hard for any of these organizations to truly have successful conventions or seminars without him,” said Harbor Commissioner Floyd Clay, whose travels in recent years have included London, Spain, Japan and the Bahamas.

“(Burts) is out there getting the word out about the port,” said Fierstine.

Burts, Clay and other port officials sometimes take along spouses, who stay in city-paid hotel rooms. But they said there is no added cost to the city and that air fare and other expenses incurred by spouses are paid by the officials.

Asked why spouses are along on the business trips, Fierstine said: “The individuals want to take their wives.” He said the presence of spouses does not detract from the purpose of the trips--business--and that the spouses attend events only when requested by host governments and companies.

Clay quipped that wives join the trips “probably to keep an eye on their husbands.” Regarding the Honolulu gathering of port officials in 1988, Fierstine said it was held there because many participants were returning at the time from travels in the Far East. The $2,500 dinner included many representatives of Matson shipping lines, one of the port’s oldest tenants.

When asked if the level of travel spending and its growth are appropriate, City Council President Ferraro said only, “What’s Long Beach spend?”

Long Beach spent less than half as much as Los Angeles spent on port travel last year.

Times staff writer Frederick M. Muir and researcher Cecilia Rasmussen contributed to this story.

Travel Costs by Port

Travel expenditures by the Port of Los Angeles have nearly doubled in the last six years as city officials, commissioners and port staff traveled around the country and the world for trade missions, conventions and meetings. Following are annual expenditures:

YEAR FOREIGN TRAVEL DOMESTIC TRAVEL LOCAL TRAVEL 1985-86 $152,000 $178,000 *** 1986-87 $190,000 $211,000 *** 1987-88 $274,000 $309,000 *** 1988-89 $327,000 $776,000 $22,000 1989-90 $183,000 $265,000 $87,000 1990-91 $255,000 $271,000 $89,000

YEAR TOTAL 1985-86 $330,000 1986-87 $401,000 1987-88 $583,000 1988-89 $1,125,000 1989-90 $535,000 1990-91 $615,000

NOTE: *** Local travel figures were included in domestic travel from 1985 to 1988.

For comparison, here’s a look at the total operating budgets and total travel expenses for some major West Coast ports:

PORT YEAR OPERATING BUDGET TRAVEL EXPENSES Portland 1990 $73.6 million $664,000 Los Angeles 1990-91 $79.3 million $615,000 Oakland 1990-91 $50.2 million $456,670 * Tacoma 1990 $37.4 million $405,432 Long Beach 1990-91 $58.8 million $280,690 Seattle 1990 $39.9 million $265,000 San Francisco 1990-91 $34.7 million $ 54,341 San Diego 1989-90 $5.9 million $ NA

* Figures also include operating and travel expenses for the airport.

Note: Some cities operate on a calendar year and others on a fiscal year. NA indicates not available.

Compiled by Times researcher Cecilia Rasmussen