The Port of Seattle took their 2012 report and threw a meeting out there for the press to rehash it. Yippee!

It's on them to accurately describe their current state and formulate a practical plan going forward, based on facts and the larger context of their market. They continue to do neither.
From the story:

Seattle Port Commissioner Tom Albro put it this way, "We have assets other regions of the world would die to have."

But listen to maritime executives talk and you see a deeper friction point.

They are virtually united in concern about a $15 minimum wage, Seattle mandates such as sick leave and what they see as arbitrary and unpredictable regulation. They worry about the loss of industrial land to condos, offices and a sports arena.

"Regulatory incursions by our fair city ... are not always positive," said Brian Thomas, of boatbuilder Kvichak Marine Industries. "You’re putting us at risk with these legislative moves. How long can we fight this fight?"

…

Seattle Deputy Mayor Andrea Riniker told the gathering that it’s not an either-or, all or nothing choice. We can have a wonderful new central waterfront after the viaduct comes down and a world-class port. And she’s right.

Jon Talton, The Seattle Times, (Link here)

"Puget Sound’s maritime future at crossroads"

Making everything stand still until the Port defines a future based on facts is as unrealistic as the Port doubling its container traffic over the next 25 years.

Rehashing a two-year-old study that was remarkably light on actual facts doesn't help their case against the arena.