Eastport Port Authority and CBP wrangle over office space lease

The Eastport Port Authority is one of many ports around the country that is being caught up in an effort by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to offload its costs and responsibilities onto local ports while threatening closure of its offices for noncompliance. In response to the move, a bipartisan bill, the Securing Ports and America's Commerce and Economy (CBP SPACE) Act, is being sponsored in the U.S. House that would prevent such actions while seeking to improve the relationship between CBP and local ports.

In Eastport, CBP is planning to no longer pay for its office space in the port authority building and is threatening to close the office if the port authority does not agree to its terms.

"Maintaining safe and efficient seaports is a tall order and especially for rural communities like Eastport," says Chris Gardner, executive director of the Eastport Port Authority. "At the local level, CBP has always been a great partner in that effort, but now administratively the agency has repeatedly moved to seemingly shift every possible cost onto small municipalities like ours. This approach has only added challenges from a government agency that is meant to facilitate commerce, not burden it. In rural economies, this can make all the difference."

Gardner notes that the port authority built the customs office space in the port authority's building 10 years ago at CBP's request. "We wanted to make sure that they kept the office here. It's good for everyone." The port authority charges the agency $1,700 a month for the space under a 10-year lease agreement.

Recently, though, CBP officials called to say they want the port authority to sign a 20-year lease at no cost to CBP. "They said, as a seaport, you have to provide an office free of charge," Gardner relates. The port authority had been dealing with the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) for the lease of the space, so Gardner was surprised by the call from CBP. "I refused to sign a 20-year lease," he says. "And they said you will lose your inspection services."

However, Gardner points out that the CBP office in Eastport serves not only the port authority but also the aquaculture industry, the local airport and commercial and recreational vessels that clear customs through the port. "This is a multi-use office," he says. "We didn't ask them to locate here. There's been a customs office in Eastport since time immemorial. The post office is still referred to as the customs house."

The CBP regional director in Boston said he was unaware that the local office served other users, according to Gardner. CBP did not respond to a request for comment.

Gardner emphasizes, "This has nothing to do with the local CBP officers. They have been fabulous. This is an administrative push from D.C. They want to hijack these offices and take them for themselves."

The port authority director contacted the state's congressional delegation, and Congressman Jared Golden then signed onto the CBP SPACE Act that was already being sponsored by a Florida congressman. "Ports such as Eastport's are critical infrastructure for rural economies, and dumping the federal government's financial burden on their laps is a recipe for disaster," Golden says. "I'm proud to join the bipartisan group of lawmakers cosponsoring legislation to ensure local budgets and national security aren't caught in the crossfire of administrative spats -- especially with the increased funding CBP has received in recent years."

Gardner agrees, stating, "CBP should be funded through its budget, not piecemealing funds together through its users."

"We want to work it out," says Gardner of the leasing arrangement, with the current 10-year lease ending next June. Of the new lease proposal by CBP, he says, "It was perhaps well intentioned but poorly executed. We shouldn't be subject to giving customs an office."

The office lease is not the only cost the CBP is shifting onto local ports. The agency recently indicated that it may halt operations unless seaports cover the costs of screening equipment -- expensive technology that has historically been the responsibility of the federal government to fund. Shifting the burden onto local budgets would squeeze already‑strained local budgets, Golden points out. Moreover, the congressman says that limiting CBP operations at local ports could jeopardize national security.

The Eastport Port Authority has already wrangled with CBP over the screening issue and has now invested in expanding its internet capabilities to serve CBP needs when clearing passengers from cruise ships, not only at the breakwater but also for ships anchored out in the bay. Gardner notes that the port authority is signed up for the CBP Reimbursable Services Program, so the port authority can be charged if officers have to come to the port to clear the passengers. The program enables partnerships with private‑sector and government entities to provide additional inspection services on a reimbursable basis. "They want to bill us" for the officers who come to the port, he says. "They want us to pay for everything. At some point -- what the hell? Don't we pay enough on April 15?"

The CBP Space Act would seek to resolve the leasing issue, which is the result of a legal constraint that prevents CBP from securing long-term leases, by granting the agency the authority to directly lease necessary space from port authorities or private entities. The legislation also improves coordination with port authorities to strengthen U.S. supply chain security.

The bipartisan bill, originally introduced by Congresswomen Laurel Lee of Florida and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, is also backed by Reps. Vern Buchanan of Florida, Julia Brownley of California and Troy Carter of Louisiana. Port operators across the country, such as the American Association of Port Authorities, and local leadership in Eastport also support the legislation.