Port’s Decision to Sell Off Todd Assets Angers Assemblyman : Jobs: Dave Elder says the action will dash any hopes of reopening the San Pedro site for shipbuilding or repair. In its heyday, Todd employed more than 6,000 people.

A state lawmaker this week assailed the Los Angeles Harbor Department for moving forward with plans to sell off the assets of San Pedro’s old Todd Shipyards, a move that would all but dash any hope of reopening the site for shipbuilding or repair.

The ire of Assemblyman Dave Elder (D-Long Beach) surfaced Wednesday, only three days after Elder won final approval of a resolution that urges the State Lands Commission to work closely with the port to reopen the 110-acre site as a shipyard.

“It’s pathetic,” Elder said in an interview. “It (the port’s action) has the effect of killing every deal that’s out there” to reopen the yard.

Several months ago, Elder joined with former Todd workers and others in urging the Harbor Commission to postpone the disposition of cranes and other assets at the site, which closed in 1989 and for years employed upward of 6,000 workers.

At the time of the commission’s action, Elder pledged to introduce a measure that would ask the state lands panel to work with the port on finding a way to bring a new shipyard to the former Todd site.

But after his measure cleared the state Senate on Sunday, Elder learned that the port was poised, as early as next week, to seek proposals for disposing of the shipyard’s assets. And that discovery led Elder to question the port’s commitment to reopening the site as a shipyard.

“I can’t understand why they are so timid,” Elder said. “They haven’t collected a penny (from the site) for nearly four years. Why don’t they just let someone come up to the plate and try to hit a home run” by reopening the site.

Port officials have said that their efforts to find a new shipyard tenant have been foiled by the inability of several potential tenants to prove their financial wherewithal. Those suitors of the site include two fledging companies that have either former Todd managers or Todd workers as backers.

But Elder argued that those companies should be given a chance to prove they can or cannot return the site to shipbuilding or repairs.

“What is the worst that could happen? Nothing? What is the best that could happen? People would have jobs,” Elder said. “If you are going to err, err on the side of employing people.”

The veteran assemblyman said he was particularly miffed at the port’s plan to sell the assets because he and other lawmakers this week had successfully, for now, derailed a measure that would help balance the state’s cash-strapped budget by diverting some $75 million a year in revenues from California’s biggest ports, including Los Angeles.

“Here I am slugging it out on behalf of the ports and trying to keep these economic engines free from interference from the state because it has a budget crisis,” Elder said. “And the port (of Los Angeles) is sucking its thumb over the question of reopening Todd Shipyards.”

The port’s position on the sale of the assets, Elder said, was also hard to justify given this area’s unemployment and the lingering recession.

“To go forward with this (disposition of assets),” Elder said, “is to be out of touch with the economy, with the aftermath of the (Los Angeles) riots and with California state politics.”

While port officials did not respond directly to Elder’s attack, the Harbor Department’s director of commerce, Lonnie Tang, insisted that the port has done what it can to find a viable shipyard for the former Todd property.

“We have been sensitive to the needs for employment (at the site),” Tang said. “And that is the reason we have been looking for over 2 1/2 years for an employer” to lease the property.

Once the port solicits proposals from companies interested in helping dispose of the shipyard’s assets, the proposals will return to the Harbor Commission before a final decision is made on selling the heavy equipment and other items.