D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Feb 26, 2009 2:24:07 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Feb 26, 2009 4:11:09 GMT -8
From the above mentioned article: This is absolutely the first I had heard about an upgrade to the Wahkiakum ferry. But I can tell you from first hand experience (I lived in Astoria for 5 years and my in-laws live just down the road from the terminal on the Oregon side) that the mighty M/V Wahkiakum has been too small for the route for many years. A newer, larger ferry would be a welcome choice for those who otherwise need to drive around to get to the other side. It is one of those cases where, during rush hours, there is a decision as to whether to do the hour sailing wait or just drive around. Looks like I need to do a little asking around. I wonder if that means the docks will need upgrading, too... ;D
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Mar 4, 2009 11:02:21 GMT -8
Islanders slam ferry plan for reservations By JEFF VANDERFORD South Whidbey Record Sports, Port of S. Whidbey Today, 8:11 AM · UPDATED LANGLEY — The director of the state ferry system took more than a few shots across the bow Saturday. When David Moseley told an overflow audience at Langley Middle School he was there to solicit ideas on the state’s plan for a reservation system for ferry riders, he was met with a chorus of catcalls. The message was clear. “We don’t want any reservations at all,” someone shouted from the crowd. State transportation planners unveiled Washington’s long-range plan for the ferry system in December, and the plan has found avid critics in ferry communities throughout Western Washington. On the South End, many ferry riders are worried about the state’s proposal to require during peak travel periods. Elsewhere, others have raised concern about the plan to keep one vessel on the Keystone-Port Townsend route and other service cuts throughout the ferry system. At Saturday’s meeting — hosted by State Rep. Norma Smith (R-Clinton) and Langley Mayor Paul Samuelson — Moseley said the Edmonds-Kingston run will most likely be first in line to get the reservation system, but added that wouldn’t happen for another two years at least. Though ferry officials have said it’s up to state lawmakers to finalize the state’s plan for ferries, some residents feel the plan is almost a done deal and state officials are asking for input that will have no effect on the future of the ferry system. Even so, many were still eager to speak out. Roughly 30 people in the crowd of more than 230 jumped to their feet when the meeting moved to the public comment period. Monica Guzman of Langley gave Moseley a petition signed by more than 500 islanders who oppose the reservations plan. Guzman and Carol Ryan had set up signing tables at two locations in Langley over the past month. “There are too many unanswered questions,” Guzman said. “What happens if the ferry fills up before those with reservations arrive? Will it go half empty? Where will cars in Mukilteo go if they aren’t in the ferry’s reservation system?” Guzman asked. Ferry officials have said reservation systems work in other parts of the world. And Moseley said that a study of current routes that utilize reservations — including the Keystone-Port Townsend and Sydney, British Columbia runs — has shown them to be effective. “Properly implemented, reservations can be beneficial to customers by providing certainty and less time waiting for a ferry,” Moseley said. “It reduces the impact of cars and makes better use of our terminals.” Paulette Becker said she finds the whole concept elitist. “I know people who can’t afford increases in ferry fares, who don’t have cell phones to make or change reservations,” she said. “That isn’t the way people here live their lives.” She told Moseley that she traveled to Port Townsend for an informal look at how merchants there viewed reservations. “Every single one was opposed, saying that the plan had been forced on them and they didn’t like it,” she said. “Frankly, I haven’t talked to a single person who wants reservations.” Others agreed. “No matter the route, there will be those without reservations who need to get across,” said Dick Robins. He said the plan for reservations was “simply unrealistic.” Donna Roddy said it was a hassle getting to Port Townsend using the current reservation process. “I was put on hold repeatedly,” she said. “I’d like the same respect for my freedom to travel as the salmon get. The state spends millions for salmon recovery and I’m just as important.” Moseley said the state ferry system faces serious challenges, however, including a $3.3 billion deficit over the next 22 years. Changes are needed because the ferry system has an aging fleet, increased overall ridership and worn-out terminals. “First of all, the changes are not going to happen tomorrow,” he said. “After the Legislature approves it and a pre-design, route-specific study has been done, the reservation system will be applied route-by-route,” he said. Rider reservations would help Washington State Ferries, Moseley said, a system that was “not financially sustainable and hasn’t been for a number of years.” “There is a gap between dedicated revenue and expenditures and it’s our belief that the reservation system would dramatically lessen the need for new ferries and terminal replacement or expansion,” he said. Moseley also said the discussion would continue. “This is just the beginning of the discussion with users, communities and the Legislature,” he said. Jeff VanDerford can be reached at 221-5300 or jvanderford@southwhidbey record.com. South Whidbey Record Sports, Port of S. Whidbey Jeff VanDerford can be reached at jvanderford@southwhidbeyrecord.com or (360) 221-5300.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 4, 2009 11:34:55 GMT -8
People are getting very creative- or is it just bizarre- in their arguments regarding ferry service. We've had people insisting that users of the Sidney to Anacortes run pump as much money into the local economy as George Bush did for Halliburton in Iraq, and now, from the above article, this little gem as an argument against reservations:
“I’d like the same respect for my freedom to travel as the salmon get. The state spends millions for salmon recovery and I’m just as important.”
I suppose she wants her own ladders and comfy spawning bed as well.
Like British Columbians, a lot of Washingtonians have spent decades feeling they should be able to get on a ferry whenever they want, and that there's something 'elitist' about reservations. In the dreadful economic times we're in, something's gotta give, and if reservations help smooth out the traffic flow and make the best of limited capacity, then people may have to get used to the idea.
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Mar 4, 2009 12:18:12 GMT -8
People are getting very creative- or is it just bizarre- in their arguments regarding ferry service. We've had people insisting that users of the Sidney to Anacortes run pump as much money into the local economy as George Bush did for Halliburton in Iraq, and now, from the above article, this little gem as an argument against reservations: “I’d like the same respect for my freedom to travel as the salmon get. The state spends millions for salmon recovery and I’m just as important.” I suppose she wants her own ladders and comfy spawning bed as well. Like British Columbians, a lot of Washingtonians have spent decades feeling they should be able to get on a ferry whenever they want, and that there's something 'elitist' about reservations. In the dreadful economic times we're in, something's gotta give, and if reservations help smooth out the traffic flow and make the best of limited capacity, then people may have to get used to the idea. I couldn't disagree more. If WSF is part of the state transpiration system then it should be treated as such. Unless the state plans on taking reservations to cross the 520 Evergreen Point Bridge or the Tacoma Narrows Bridges because of the backups that happen in commute traffic, I think it is just nuts to say that there needs to be reservations on part of the HIGHWAY SYSTEM.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 4, 2009 12:32:25 GMT -8
I could see reservations working for the Anacortes - San Juan Islands route, where you have fewer sailings spaced further out - 2 to 3 hours. And, it seems to work reasonably well on the PT-KEY route, which is 90 minutes between sailings. I am having a hard time figuring out how a reservation system will benefit, and even work, for the heavy commuter runs such as Seattle-Bainbridge, where you have vessels leaving every 45-60 minutes, or at Mukilteo-Clinton, where they leave every 30 minutes. I was at the Bainbridge Island Ferry Town Hall back in January when Moseley presented the long range plans (you know the ones: A & B). One gentleman commented on the proposed reservation system, stating why it would not work for him. Most of the regular commuters who end up driving on the Bainbridge ferry do so because they have to commute somewhere outside the immediate Seattle downtown area, somewhere where public transportation makes it inconvenient, or impossible, to get to without a car. This gentleman said that he never knows which ferry he can catch heading back to Bainbridge (in the afternoon), because traffic conditions in Seattle vary so much from day to day. With a reservation, there is no way he could guarantee that he could catch his intended sailing. This is just one example, but on runs with higher frequency, it seems like reservations would not work very well. Maybe WSF can surprise us and come up with a solution that will work - not holding my breath on this one.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Mar 4, 2009 14:01:11 GMT -8
I suppose she wants her own ladders and comfy spawning bed as well. That is funny, lets chip in and send her a load of gravel.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 4, 2009 14:32:57 GMT -8
I I am having a hard time figuring out how a reservation system will benefit, and even work, for the heavy commuter runs such as Seattle-Bainbridge, where you have vessels leaving every 45-60 minutes, or at Mukilteo-Clinton, where they leave every 30 minutes. The Seattle- Bremerton, Seattle - Bainbridge schedules, with sailings every 50-75 minutes or so, are not hugely different from our summer route 1 schedule, where reservations work quite well. I would not think of travelling on our ferries near peak times without a reservation. I was at the Bainbridge Island Ferry Town Hall back in January when Moseley presented the long range plans (you know the ones: A & B). One gentleman commented on the proposed reservation system, stating why it would not work for him. Most of the regular commuters who end up driving on the Bainbridge ferry do so because they have to commute somewhere outside the immediate Seattle downtown area, somewhere where public transportation makes it inconvenient, or impossible, to get to without a car. This gentleman said that he never knows which ferry he can catch heading back to Bainbridge (in the afternoon), because traffic conditions in Seattle vary so much from day to day. With a reservation, there is no way he could guarantee that he could catch his intended sailing. Of course there are anecdotal examples of people whose situations don't make reservations practical. Vancouver has traffic challenges as well as Seattle, and I've lost my reservation due to traffic. That doesn't make the idea inherently bad- it just means there are flaws that mean it won't work for everyone. I don't think any transportation system does. I couldn't disagree more. If WSF is part of the state transpiration system then it should be treated as such. Unless the state plans on taking reservations to cross the 520 Evergreen Point Bridge or the Tacoma Narrows Bridges because of the backups that happen in commute traffic, I think it is just nuts to say that there needs to be reservations on part of the HIGHWAY SYSTEM. It's all well and good to stand on principle and say' It's part of the highway system, so, no cuts and no reservations', but the hard reality is that we're living in an era where 'plan B' is on the table. If there is going to be a freeze, or, just as likely, a reduction in service, you simply are going to have to look at ways to insure that people who need to travel at certain times are able to get on a boat. Reservations are one option, and it's 'nuts' to reflexively rule that option out. Orcasnative is right when he says the logistics of reserving on a frequent, short run might be a problem, but I'm sure that somewhere in the ferry world there are examples that could be studied to make this work. We are not talking radical social science here.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Mar 4, 2009 14:48:26 GMT -8
I think the idea of reservations can work. As Neil has pointed out above, they seem to work well on BCF's main routes during the summer, where the schedule is very similar to WSF's Seattle runs. Reservations allow people to plan their day around being on the ferry, as opposed to having to make alternate arrangements for the event they are stuck in a ferry line for 3 hours. Also, they can spread traffic over the day better, since people can plan better.
I do not think that the entire boat should be reserved. Under normal circumstances, BCF reserves about 30-40% of the vessels capacity, which I think is about right. I also do not believe that reservation fees should be a source of income for the ferry operator. Being charged $17.50 as a "processing fee" is ridiculous. I think the fact that the fee is so high is why some people regard reservations as being "elitist". It creates a "Lexus Lane" of sorts, where the well-off can avoid the lines that regular people must face.
When the reservation system for the Port Townsend - Keystone route was brought into effect last year, I thought it was a pretty good idea. It seems to have worked fairly well, considering the drastically reduced capacity. However, I haven't used it, and haven't talked first-hand to people who have, so I don't have a lot to base that opinion on.
The article above mentions that the merchants of Port Townsend didn't like reservations. Well, that makes sense. Wouldn't they want people staying in line as long as possible, so that those waiting have time to peruse their stores? Reservations allow people to show up closer to sailing time, so they're less likely to get out of their cars.
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Mar 4, 2009 16:06:00 GMT -8
We don't need reservations! We need this to come back..... The ferry Tillikum crosses Elliott Bay on a rainy January day in 2008. Strapped for cash, policymakers are weighing whether to reinstate a vehicle tab tax to help pay for ferry operations in Washington state. Excise tax for ferries resurfaces Worried riders come up with ‘Plan C’ to fund the boats By LARRY LANGE P-I REPORTER (Editor's Note: An earlier version of this story used an incorrect rate to calculate the proposed revenue increase. We apologize for failing yesterday's math quiz.) Should annual car-tab taxes be resurrected to help keep state ferries running? The idea is being discussed again as a way to support Washington State Ferries, which estimates it will need to find $3.2 billion more in cash to meet its needs in the next 21 years. Along with annual license fees and a bigger portion of gas tax revenue, the idea is surfacing again in proposals by ferry riders and state consultants. Riders, shaken by proposals to cut service in the coming two decades, developed a long-range plan of their own that proposes resurrecting motor-vehicle excise taxes, annual license fees and more gas tax money as ways to keep service as it is and expand it as the population grows. They say they're open to a number of tax measures, not just the excise charge. "We're trying to think outside the boat," quipped Debbi Lester, a Bainbridge Island magazine publisher and frequent ferry rider. "The only alternative is to continue to raise fares and you lose riders and that's not a sustainable model." The system now lacks backup boats when ferries break down and "we're causing financial hardship to communities and we need to address this," Lester said. Riders reacted to two proposed plans -- dubbed "A" and "B" in December -- in developing their own Plan "C" in sessions initiated by Kitsap County legislators. The excise tax, unpopular with many state residents, was among several pieces of the riders' plan, which they said is designed to preserve and expand service by increasing revenue and cutting costs. The plan also proposes several changes: Imposing either an excise tax, based on the value of each vehicle, or an additional license fee earmarked for ferries. The new plan doesn't suggest what level either fee should be. A consultant to the state Transportation Commission estimated a 0.2 percent excise tax on each vehicle value would raise about $350 million every two years. The ferry system was substantially supported by a previous vehicle-excise tax before it was rejected by voters statewide and then eliminated by the Legislature. The consultant, Cambridge Systematics, estimates that an additional, uniform license tax of $30 could raise more than $350 million every two years, with lower fees raising less. Ferry riders have long complained about the steep increase in fares that has kept the system running since the excise tax was eliminated. "We need to restore things back to 1999, when there was a stable, long-term fund source for building (new) boats," said Adam Brockus, a Bremerton city councilman and committee member who helped develop the new plan. The excise tax once provided 39 percent of the ferry system's budget. But it remains a politically touchy issue. Tim Eyman, the initiative activist who helped defeat it nearly 10 years ago, said he'd oppose it again but doubts he'd have to because political leaders "know it just doesn't go anywhere." An additional 5-cent-per-gallon gas-tax allocation could raise more than $400 million every two years, according to Cambridge Systematics. Attempts to change the allocation in previous legislative sessions have failed. Earmarking part of hotel, motel, restaurant and car rental taxes for ferries once bonds are paid for Seattle sports stadiums. The citizen plan didn't estimate how much this would raise. One measure this session, Senate Bill 6005, also proposed doing this on grounds that ferries are a major tourist attraction. Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, agreed but said "that particular (tax) source is not something King County would be willing to share with the ferry system. We're not in good times ... it's not something we can look at right now." The bill died in committee. Slowing the boats on the routes to save fuel costs. Refitting two ferries, the Klahowya and the Tillikum, with new rudder systems to allow either of them on the Port Townsend-Whidbey route. Brockus said the riders group worried that fuel consumption by a new 64-car boat, now being built, will be greater than some older ferries. Limit reservation systems to terminals in communities that request them. The ferry system has started a system on the Port Townsend-Whidbey route to try and reduce long waiting lines. The system requires drivers to be at the dock 30 minutes ahead of time, perhaps 45 minutes in advance in summer, Brockus said. Riders on the Mukilteo-Clinton route, he said, don't want a reservation system there. Ferry system officials haven't seen a complete, written "Plan C" but "what we have seen is thought-provoking and some parts do have merit," said spokeswoman Marta Coursey. "We are pleased that the Plan C effort has energized the communities to learn more about the difficulties the ferry system is facing and to contribute to finding solutions." She said the system wouldn't have any more immediate comment. Rep. Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, and chairwoman of the House Transportation Committee, said she plans to use the new ideas and some from other studies to try to create savings. "I will be working on getting the plan in place before we deal with new revenue," she said, after a committee meeting that discussed ferry plans and finances. "We had a number of options given today, none of which are the answer by themselves. None of which will be done this session. Plan C has some good points and will be folded into the ferry plan that we are working on. Not all of it will be doable within the revenue we can raise," she said.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 4, 2009 16:10:32 GMT -8
Being charged $17.50 as a "processing fee" is ridiculous. I think the fact that the fee is so high is why some people regard reservations as being "elitist". It creates a "Lexus Lane" of sorts, where the well-off can avoid the lines that regular people must face. 'Lexus lane'? When I'm there it could just as well be called the '78 Impala with rusty roof racks lane'. Takes more than a reservation fee to tell the rich from the poor.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Mar 4, 2009 16:39:36 GMT -8
Being charged $17.50 as a "processing fee" is ridiculous. I think the fact that the fee is so high is why some people regard reservations as being "elitist". It creates a "Lexus Lane" of sorts, where the well-off can avoid the lines that regular people must face. 'Lexus lane'? When I'm there it could just as well be called the '78 Impala with rusty roof racks lane'. Takes more than a reservation fee to tell the rich from the poor. Obviously I was exaggerating for effect there... What I meant was that if a reservation system is to be used, it should be freely accessible to all walks of life. Yes, you're right. Most people can afford a $17.50 reservation fee once in a while. However, the demographics of most WSF users appear to me to be much different from BCF's mainline routes. There's a lot of people who use WSF to commute to work, one round trip a day with their vehicles, whereas most BCF customers travel much less often. Paying a rather large reservation fee each time would get astronomically expensive, even for a "middle class" worker. I don't mean for reservations to be used instead of funding the system properly. It is a marine highway system, and should be treated accordingly. Having said that, I don't think it's necessary to have enough ships so everybody can get across within 30 minutes of arriving at the terminal, no matter what time of day. Surely it's possible to spread some of that demand around throughout the schedule, so that the capacity can be sized appropriately. It seems wasteful to have a ship running at 30% for 70% of the day, and then 100% for 30% of the day. (yes, I know my numbers are pulled out of nowhere, but I trust you understand what I mean).
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Mar 4, 2009 17:40:51 GMT -8
'Lexus lane'? When I'm there it could just as well be called the '78 Impala with rusty roof racks lane'. Takes more than a reservation fee to tell the rich from the poor. Obviously I was exaggerating for effect there... What I meant was that if a reservation system is to be used, it should be freely accessible to all walks of life. Yes, you're right. Most people can afford a $17.50 reservation fee once in a while. However, the demographics of most WSF users appear to me to be much different from BCF's mainline routes. There's a lot of people who use WSF to commute to work, one round trip a day with their vehicles, whereas most BCF customers travel much less often. Paying a rather large reservation fee each time would get astronomically expensive, even for a "middle class" worker. I don't mean for reservations to be used instead of funding the system properly. It is a marine highway system, and should be treated accordingly. Having said that, I don't think it's necessary to have enough ships so everybody can get across within 30 minutes of arriving at the terminal, no matter what time of day. Surely it's possible to spread some of that demand around throughout the schedule, so that the capacity can be sized appropriately. It seems wasteful to have a ship running at 30% for 70% of the day, and then 100% for 30% of the day. (yes, I know my numbers are pulled out of nowhere, but I trust you understand what I mean). My point is because most of the ferries are used as you said for commuters here unlike there. I think higher car tabs they way they were before Dumb &*ck Eyman Cut the state motor vehicle excise tax. The Newer and Nicer the Car the more your tabs are. Sounds good to me. I mean as it is they aren't $30 I just got mine and paid $57. So hey why not put them back. I bet most people now would vote to bring them back.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 4, 2009 19:00:29 GMT -8
The Newer and Nicer the Car the more your tabs are. Sounds good to me. I mean as it is they aren't $30 I just got mine and paid $57. So hey why not put them back. I bet most people now would vote to bring them back. I don't agree with that approach, either. If we raise car tabs again, which I am in favour of, it needs to be applied to everyone equally, and I don't think it needs to be as high as the tabs used to be before I-695. The last time I paid for my car tabs prior to I-695, it was over $600. Granted, my car was new back then, but that's too much. If they had everyone pay $100, or even $150, for car tabs, I think that would be fair, and it would generate some of the capital that the ferry system lost. Having said that, I still believe the ferry system needs to streamline and become as efficient as possible. This is a two-way street here. Raising car tabs isn't going to solve everything.
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Mar 4, 2009 19:13:34 GMT -8
The Newer and Nicer the Car the more your tabs are. Sounds good to me. I mean as it is they aren't $30 I just got mine and paid $57. So hey why not put them back. I bet most people now would vote to bring them back. I don't agree with that approach, either. If we raise car tabs again, which I am in favour of, it needs to be applied to everyone equally, and I don't think it needs to be as high as the tabs used to be before I-695. The last time I paid for my car tabs prior to I-695, it was over $600. Granted, my car was new back then, but that's too much. If they had everyone pay $100, or even $150, for car tabs, I think that would be fair, and it would generate some of the capital that the ferry system lost. Having said that, I still believe the ferry system needs to streamline and become as efficient as possible. This is a two-way street here. Raising car tabs isn't going to solve everything. I still think that was the one tax that made scents. The more your car cost, the more you pay.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Mar 5, 2009 9:30:46 GMT -8
I still think that was the one tax that made scents. The more your car cost, the more you pay. As in 'stunk'? ;D I don't really have a stance on the subject, other than I thought the scale was grossly overweighted. I think a flat fee of $75 would probably do it. (At the state level. I can't say what gets tagged onto the fees at the county level.)
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Mar 6, 2009 2:11:08 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Mar 6, 2009 5:22:29 GMT -8
Of course they're interested... they don't want to lose the pound of flesh they're charging.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 6, 2009 10:05:27 GMT -8
from the story...
“DAVID HAHN WILL BE JOINING US. HE WILL BE PRESENTING THE BC FERRIES SIDE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES. IT WILL BE THE FIRST TIME THAT ANYONE, I CAN THINK, IN THE WASHINGTON STATE GOVERNMENT HAS HEARD BC FERRIES SIDE OF THINGS. AND THEN THEY’LL BE SOME DISCUSSIONS AROUND SOME OF THE PERTINENT ISSUES – PARTICULARLY RELATED TO THE WATER LOT LEASE AMOUNTS.”
So, if Mr Hahn can justify the rates BC Ferries is charging WSF, his American counterparts will come their senses and say, "Well, now that we see your side of it, we feel much better about the fortune that we're spending to send tourists to Canada. Of course we'll continue the service."
And there's also the gazillions of dollars that we're told the service brings to northwest Washington.
Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 6, 2009 10:24:29 GMT -8
And there's also the gazillions of dollars that we're told the service brings to northwest Washington. I'd be interested in seeing where they get their figures from, when the rest of us have been hearing quite the opposite - declining traffic on the route, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Mar 8, 2009 9:08:25 GMT -8
I remain skeptical about any 'willingness' between BCF and WSF, as well as the survival of the Sidney run. And if the region sees millions of tourist dollars as a result of the Sidney run, let's see a little of that love donated to the cause, hey?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Mar 8, 2009 11:51:33 GMT -8
Here are the numbers that I find so ridiculous:
Don Wick, the economic development officer for Skagit County, cited a 2007 study that showed the economic benefits the run brings to the region. In 2006, 131,600 rode the ferry, with 83 per cent of them travelling the full distance, between Anacortes and Sidney (the route also allows for other stops in the San Juan Islands). He said that ridership led to, directly and indirectly, 1,470 jobs accounting for a $30 million payroll, $126 million in spending, and $4.6 million in tax revenue to Washington State.
You have, according to that account, 108,000 people who actually rode the full distance between Anacortes and Sidney. We are supposed to believe that each one of those riders was responsible for $1166 in spending in the Skagit County area, and a similar proportion of the other numbers quoted.
Of course, the key in the claim is the phrase 'directly and indirectly'. I suspect that it's about 90% the latter, and very indirectly at that. Unless, of course, Anacortes for some reason is attracting a huge number of tourists who are spending like Arab sheikhs when they take ferry rides.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 18, 2009 6:54:57 GMT -8
Lawmakers scuttle state ferry naming rights idea
By Jerry Cornfield Herald Writer OLYMPIA -- Don't plan on getting ferried on the Xbox from Mukilteo to Whidbey Island or riding the PEMCO Express from Edmonds to Kingston anytime soon.
While the state Senate wants to allow the cash-strapped ferry system to sell naming rights for its vessels, House members are opposing the idea.
On Tuesday, a Poulsbo representative proposed rewriting a Senate-backed bill so ferries retain their American Indian names.
"Ferries should have tribal names and ply the waters of Puget Sound without any of that modern-day advertising on their side," Democratic Rep. Sherry Appleton said.
"I can't envision one traveling through the Puget Sound with 'Go See the Terminator' on its side or 'Use such-and-such deodorant and it will keep you dry,' " she said.
Naming rights is one of several revenue-generating options for the financially troubled Washington State Ferries suggested in a study by the state Transportation Commission.
Ferry officials predict the system will face a $3.3 billion deficit by 2030 if service is maintained at current levels, fares are increased annually by 2.5 percent and nine boats are built to fill gaps on routes and replace aging vessels. That shortfall can be trimmed to $1.3 billion if service is cut and fewer boats are built, according to department studies.
Allowing someone to pay to put their name on a boat is not considered a big moneymaker but is viewed as an extension of efforts to raise money through the sale of advertising on boats.
Existing state laws let the transportation commission name or rename state transportation facilities. For example, in 2007 the commission renamed the Clinton ferry terminal in memory of deceased Whidbey Island lawmaker Jack Metcalf.
The legislation under consideration, Senate Bill 5440, makes clear the transportation commission can name and rename ferries, and American Indian tribes must be involved in those decisions. This would become relevant when a new Island Home class ferry is launched on the Keystone-Port Townsend route in early 2010.
Senators also added wording to allow naming rights to be sold; Appleton is proposing to erase that with an amendment.
The bill and her revision were discussed briefly in a hearing Tuesday of the House State Government and Tribal Affairs Committee.
"We can live with this," Paul Marshall Parker, senior policy analyst with the transportation commission, told the panel.
Appleton, other lawmakers and members of the public did joke about seeing a ferry emblazoned like a stock car.
She quickly got serious about making the change.
"Ferries belong to us, each and every taxpayer and it should continue to belong to us," said Appleton, D-Poulsbo.
|
|
|
Post by Freeland on Mar 19, 2009 9:22:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Mar 19, 2009 17:18:52 GMT -8
I agree that this story is a good read -- take a look. Actually, the sidebar is pretty funny -- the story about the Clorox bottle: The vessel's rosterCapt. Ty Anderson depends on his crew to help get the ferry safely back and forth on its daily route. Here's a quick description of crew ranks and jobs: Captain (master): In charge of the ferryboat, its operations and crew. Chief mate: Assists the captain; shares many of the same duties but also oversees loading and unloading of vehicles. Quartermaster: Does much of the steering once the boat is underway; follows orders from bridge officer. Chief engineer: In charge of mechanical and electrical equipment; works closely with assistant engineer and oiler. Ordinary seaman and able-bodied seaman: Deckhands with numerous duties from cleaning to tying off boat at dock. When docking, keep an eye on the Clorox bottleThe modern ferryboat M.V. Tacoma has a lot of high-tech gadgets including an astonishing radar screen which, to the uneducated eye, looks like a brightly colored HD gaming device. Of course, we appreciate the technology, but it's the sensible low-tech solutions that demonstrate old-salt ingenuity. As the ferryboat gently nudged into the Winslow dock, Capt. Ty Anderson pointed below to the landing ramp under which the boat's bow would slip. Once the ferry was moored, that ramp would be lowered so cars could get off and on. "See that Clorox bottle?" Anderson said, and sure enough, under the ramp a white plastic bottle dangled from a rope, hovering over the water. If the bottle is visible, all is well. But if it's in the water, the ramp is too low for the boat's car deck and needs an altitude adjustment. Clever. Cheap. Charming.
|
|