Lummi Island Ferry - Whatcom Chief

[lifc]

From the announcements, the nature of the required repair is temporary. They have a goodly sized crew that could help, two licensed marine electric shops within a half mile of where it is located and the County Maintenance staff available too.
I never thought of a wireless setup, I thought of two USCG approved float switches per compartment, approved jacketed wire to them, watertight through bulked wire fittings, zip ties to hold the wires down, a temporary fuse to the DC system of the boat, and a large school like bell to announce. True, not a 20 minute job, but one that could be gotten done in a half day with a four people, the compartment is acessable. Back in my commercial boat days, I put some bilge pumps and alarms in some pretty tight places. When the boat goes to drydock, it gets its permanent setup, wire in rigid pipe, explosion proof fittings and all.
From my point, there are about a thousand people out here without their ferry who had no time to prepare for this. I will give the County credit, they got the passenger boat and landing floats in post haste, however I think they could move a little faster on this. They must have some kind of preapproval on this, can't see an inspector coming out on Sunday, unless they designated someone from the Coast Guard Station, less than a half mile away, to look it over.
For all the complaining about the State Ferries we do, they get on problems pretty quickly, move Vessels around, get things repaired right away. The County works in different ways, is great with temporary road repairs, not used to Ferry boats and none of the officials live on the Island. When a road gets damaged and closed, for whatever reason, usually the users can access the destination by changing their driving patterns or detours, here we have no other option. This is why the County Ferry Systems need a reserve vessel they can immediately access so emergencies are not so disruptive and costly.

Jim

[lifc]

The following article fro the Bellingham Herald sort of describes the state of our Ferry Dock Negotiations. To put it mildly they are going nowhere. The County Council is coming out here tonight to deliver the news of how much our rates are going to rise.

The County has done an absolutely abysmal job of protecting the Islanders at virtually every turn, from not including the dock site in the original road right-of-way to not making sure the last lease was signed by all parties, to folding up and acceding to the Tribe's original demand, just to have them then multiply by 84.5 times.

The Islanders are hopping mad, after being frozen out of any input to the process. Tonight’s meeting will great Theatre, if nothing else. What a mess.


www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/08/20/1579795/whatcom-county-seeks-federal-help.html

[EGfleet]

Looks like Lummi Islanders need to plan ahead for Wednesday, 1 September...and what a misleading headline, it isn't the ferry that is getting maintenance at all...

Lummi Island ferry to receive maintenance
KAPS Radio, 26-8-2010
(BELLINGHAM)— The Whatcom County Public Works Department says they need to take the Lummi Island ferry out of service next Wednesday, September 1st, so they can perform necessary inspection and maintenance to the Lummi Island and Gooseberry Point approach spans.

Public works officials say the Whatcom Chief will be out of service next Wednesday from 10:30 a.m. to about 3 o’clock, with the last morning run from Gooseberry Point at 10:10 a.m. and the last morning run from Lummi Island at 10:20 a.m.

Whatcom County Public Works officials say the inspection and maintenance work is weather dependent so the times and or the date may change.

www.kapsradio.com/kaps-radio-660am-news-headlines/lummi-island-ferry-to-receive-maintenance/

[EGfleet]

Looks like the tribe is threatening to shut down the ferry if no deal is struck by September 1st...

Lummi Island residents may lose their ferry

by JAKE WHITTENBERG / KING 5 News

Updated Tuesday, Aug 24 at 5:26 PM

LUMMI ISLAND, Wash. – Residents on this Whatcom County island are waiting to hear if their only form of transportation to the mainland will be taken away.

Lummi Nation Tribal Leaders have threatened to halt operations of the Lummi Island Ferry if county officials don't meet their demands on a lease agreement.

"We are just waiting and hoping," says Lummi Island Resident Mark Sexton. He is also the vice president of a group who call themselves the Protect Lummi Island Committee, designed to ensure the ferry continues to operate. "It is our only way on and off the island. Without it, we dry up and blow away."

The ferry also serves as the route for emergency medical personnel to respond to the island.

Whatcom County operates the ferry from Gooseberry Point to Lummi Island, but the lease for Lummi Nation land and tidelands expired in February.

The sides have discussed how much Whatcom County would have to pay the tribe in a new lease. If they don't come to an agreement by Sept. 1, the tribe has said the county must halt ferry operations by Oct. 15.

The tribe proposes a $310,000 per year lease for 35 years. The county's current offer is $200,000 per year for 25 years. Both sides appear to be at a stalemate.

Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen has asked the Bureau of Indian Affairs to mediate any further negotiations.

Kremen and other county leaders will meet with Lummi Island residents Tuesday at 6:30 p.m. on the island to hear concerns and present an update on the situation.

"This (the ferry) is our lifeline," says Sexton. "We all want the ferry system to stay, so let's make it happen."

www.king5.com/news/local/Lummi-Island-residents-may-lose-their-ferry-101419119.html
The story online has some nice footage of the Whatcom Chief...

[lifc]

Fortunately, the Sept. 1 event is only a dock maintenance time, I think the ferry is only down for about 5 hours.

The supposed drop-dead date with the Tribe is October 15.

The upshot of the County Council Meeting was that we finally had a time to talk directly to the Officials. They actually listened to our comments and I think we surprised at the push-back the residents are showing with reminders of the past County mistakes that got us into the situation. The County almost- almost came to admitting that the last fare rate increase actually reduced car traffic and an overall loss of revenue.

The bad part was the County looking to the Islanders for a Transportation Tax District to pay for the Tribal Lease fees. Then they also said that this could be used to bond a new Ferry, which they finally admit is needed. The audience didn’t say much about it, but I could tell that idea was not well received.
To the Islander’s credit, they questioned the Counties points and brought forth many ideas how to solve the problem. I think the County people went home realizing that the locals are way ahead of their own people when it came to solutions. I even proposed a Citizens Ferry Board.

The next day the Bellingham Herald wrote up their take on the meeting, as usual they emphasized the most controversial speakers included one wealthy part time resident who offered to pay more for reduced service. I think the internet outfit Northwest Citizen did a more factual job of reporting.

www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/08/26/1587013/lummi-island-residents-fear-hikes.html

www.nwcitizen.com/entry/lummi-island-the-price-of-admission

[EGfleet]

Very good article here:
crosscut.com/2010/08/30/transportation/20111/Lummi-Island-ferry-caught-in-a-snag-over-tribal-tideland-rights/

I hate to say this, but after reading this, it doesn't sound like there is going to be a good outcome on this.

[EGfleet]

Lummis, Whatcom County will seek mediation on ferry lease
JOHN STARK - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

After a two-hour discussion Wednesday, Sept. 8, representatives of Whatcom County and Lummi Nation have agreed to bring in a mediator to help them resolve the stalemate over a new lease for the Lummi Island ferry dock.

Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen said he and County Council members Sam Crawford and Ken Mann attended the session at Lummi Nation headquarters, meeting with Lummi Indian Business Council Chairman Henry Cagey and other tribal officials.

Kremen said attorneys for the county and tribe will select a mutually agreeable person to handle the non-binding mediation process. Kremen hopes that the two sides can meet with the mediator by the end of this month.
Click here to find out more!

Kremen originally called for mediation on Aug. 18 in a letter to the Bureau of Indian Affairs regional office in Portland, Ore., but received no response to that letter.

Once appointed, the mediator's job will be to help the county and tribe bridge the gap between the tribe's proposed $310,000-a-year lease for 35 years and the county's current offer of $200,000 per year for 25 years.

The tribe's proposal also seeks upward inflation adjustments in the lease payments as well as an additional $4 million from the county that would be paid when and if the tribe begins the permitting process for a new marina in and around the ferry dock site.

The county has provided ferry service to the island since the 1920s. The car ferry operating today, the Whatcom Chief, is the only access to the mainland for islanders, but its Gooseberry Point mainland dock is on Lummi Reservation.

The county's previous ferry dock lease at Gooseberry Point expired in February.

Lummi Island has an estimated 900 year-round residents and several hundred seasonal residents.

The ferry cost more than $2.5 million to operate in 2009. County law says fares are supposed to cover 55 percent of the cost, but in 2009 the fare box yielded just $1.1 million, or about 45 percent.

Lummi Chairman Cagey said he would discuss the matter with a reporter Thursday, Sept. 9.


Read more: www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/09/09/1609111/lummis-whatcom-county-will-seek.html#ixzz0z34PcG1k

[lifc]

Things here are still at impasse. The County is finally going to meet with the community group Attorneys and the Lummi's and the County have agreed to mediation. Beyond that, nothing is happening, although one of the Volunteer researchers came upon a 1928 grant from the BIA across the Tidelands for the dock in some archive.

The problem is that Indian law is very unclear with lots of exceptions and countervailing court decisions.

Meanwhile, no one can get a Real Estate Loan out here, house prices are dropping like a brick, and no-one is being too positive. The mess continues......

[EGfleet]

So by everything I've read, Lummi Island ferry service has until next Friday until it is shut down. Either there has been nothing to report on it or the Bellingham Herald lost interest in the story and wandered off...

[lifc]

A number of unanswered questions persist. Both the Count and the local Island Legal Association have asked the Lummi's if they intend to shut the service down on Oct 15, no answer so far.
The local Legal Assoc. has also released a copy of a letter to the BIA which up to now has refused to answer any inquirys. The letter entails their paid-for legal opinon that the exisiting lease, which the Lummi's claim is void, is valid and that the Road Right-of-Way grants of the 1920s again cover the right to go across the tidelands, lease or not. The original Road Right-of-Way Grant was tiled the "Road to Lummi and Orcas Islands".

Then the County Public Works has released documents requesting a substantial Ferry Rate increase, which due to the the unstable situation is not being met with approval out here.

Right now, we are not sure any negotiations are continuing at all, no one knows anything.

[EGfleet]

Lummi Islanders face higher costs for ferry; mediation with tribe looms
JOHN STARK - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

Hefty price increase appear to be in store for Lummi Island residents as the Whatcom County Council begins deliberations on 2011 fares for the ferry.

The council's preliminary discussion of ferry fares, scheduled for Tuesday, Oct. 12, will center on a memo from Whatcom County Public Works Director Frank Abart suggesting that the ferry will need a lot more money in 2011 to reach legally required levels of support from the fare box. By ordinance, the fares are supposed to cover 55 percent of costs

How much more? Abart's memo estimates that the fare box will provide about $1 million in 2010. But to cover increased costs of a new dock lease with Lummi Nation and replenish the ferry's financial operating reserve, that amount would need to rise by more than $500,000 in 2011, Abart's memo says.


That assumes a $200,000 annual payment to Lummi Nation for the new ferry lease, which the county has labeled its maximum offer. But tribal officials have said they want more, and the tribe and the county are preparing to enlist a mediator to help them resolve the financial deadlock.

An earlier Oct. 15 deadline for reaching a deal, set by Lummi Nation, has been indefinitely extended, Whatcom County Council President Sam Crawford recently reported in a letter to island residents.

The reserve in the ferry fund is now at $656,000, Abart reported, less than half what it was five years ago.

Abart's memo also notes that the county could raise about $200,000 a year from a special property tax levy on island real estate, based on a state law that allows creation of a special taxing district for ferries. But that possibility is not yet factored into Abart's calculations.

Instead, Abart offers several approaches to raising the extra $500,000, with varying combinations of per-trip surcharges and reductions or eliminations of fare discounts for bulk purchases, as well as other reduced-fare options now on the books.

The basic car-and-driver fare is now $10 per trip.

Abart's calculations of the fare revenues that would be raised from these measures assume a 7 percent decrease in ferry ridership, based on past experience after earlier fare increases.

While Whatcom County ordinance specifies that ferry fares should cover 55 percent of operating costs, Abart reports that some other counties are asking more from ferry users. The Skagit County ferry to Guemes Island has a 65 percent goal for fares, while Pierce County's target is 74 percent.


Read more: www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/10/12/1664178/ferry-fare-hikes-loom-for-lummi.html#ixzz12F7HMmoF

[lifc]

The last fare rate was counterproductive, they got less money back in fares than if they had retained the previous structure, now they want to do it again? . This whole thing is a giant mess. Basically the County has lit up the Ferry budget like a Christmas Tree with unrelated costs, and extensive overhead. Their total response is and has been reactionary with no market related, proactive foresight or allowance for unintended consequences.

Due to the last rate increase, car traffic has deceased, more people are walking on, result less revenue, if allowed to go forward, this will just make it even worse. Might be great for the “let’s all ride the bus crowd”, but bad for the bottom line. Now people have two cars, one on each side, they walk across, myself included. The simple fact is that in the world of perceived value, you cannot charge as much for a person as you can for a car, four tires on the deck mean more income than two feet in the Passenger Cabin.

What we have is a kluged-up mess based on old practices with later policies and patches, stacked upon it. The whole system needs to analyzed and reformed into a more efficient operation. Despite repeated calls for the users to look at positive solutions, the County refuses to consider any changes or reforms and responds with either cost raises or threats to service. This cannot be allowed to continue.

[SS Shasta]

Oct 13, 2010 10:31:29 GMT -8 lifc said:

The last fare rate was counterproductive, they got less money back in fares than if they had retained the previous structure, now they want to do it again? . This whole thing is a giant mess. Basically the County has lit up the Ferry budget like a Christmas Tree with unrelated costs, and extensive overhead. Their total response is and has been reactionary with no market related, proactive foresight or allowance for unintended consequences.

Due to the last rate increase, car traffic has deceased, more people are walking on, result less revenue, if allowed to go forward, this will just make it even worse. Might be great for the “let’s all ride the bus crowd”, but bad for the bottom line. Now people have two cars, one on each side, they walk across, myself included. The simple fact is that in the world of perceived value, you cannot charge as much for a person as you can for a car, four tires on the deck mean more income than two feet in the Passenger Cabin.

What we have is a kluged-up mess based on old practices with later policies and patches, stacked upon it. The whole system needs to analyzed and reformed into a more efficient operation. Despite repeated calls for the users to look at positive solutions, the County refuses to consider any changes or reforms and responds with either cost raises or threats to service. This cannot be allowed to continue.

What kind of legal powers exist for the County to increase taxes and fees on this Lummi Tribe to gain back revenue lost to their greed and lack of cooperation? Seems like the BIA should also take a more active role in solving these issues.

[lifc]

These are two different issues. The County has still not settled the Tribal issues on the Mainland Landing, now this. The County has no legal recourse to the Tribe without suing them and they would claim Sovereign Immunity.

You are right, the Landing Issue is Federal roots and needs to be addressed via the agencies including the Dept. Of Interior of which the BIA is a part. So far the Federal Agencies have refused to get involved.

The fare issue is the County’s and the Riders issue, eclusively.

[EGfleet]

Lummi ferry rate hike could be 35 percent for 2011
JOHN STARK - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD


BELLINGHAM - The price of a Lummi Island ferry ticket would rise 35 percent in 2011 and the discounts for multi-ticket purchases would drop under a proposal that passed the Whatcom County Council on a preliminary 4-2 vote Tuesday, Oct. 26.

The higher fares won't be final until the council gets an official ordinance and votes on it after a public hearing, and that process will take several more weeks. Further changes in the fare hike plan appear likely.

The goal is to raise the ferry's ticket sales income from an estimated $1 million for 2010 to about $1.5 million next year. That's what Public Works Director Frank Abart says the system needs to recover 55 percent of expenses from fares while replenishing system reserves. The 55 percent figure is set by county ordinance.
WHATCOM CHIEF LUMMI ISLAND FERRY

The county might need to collect even more than that, depending on the outcome of negotiations with Lummi Nation on a new lease for the Gooseberry Point ferry dock on the tribe's reservation. The projected 2011 budget factors in a $200,000 annual lease payment to the tribe, which the county has labeled its best offer. But the tribe has asked for $310,000, with upward adjustments for inflation every year.

That issue probably won't be decided before late in 2010, with a mediator scheduled to work with both sides some time in late November or early December.

While all council members agree that fare hikes are necessary, the six council members at Tuesday's meeting had trouble mustering a majority on the specifics. With Bill Knutzen absent, the council deadlocked 3-3 on other fare hike proposals before the 4-2 vote approving the 35 percent hike, with Carl Weimer, Sam Crawford, Ken Mann and Barbara Brenner in favor and Kathy Kershner and Ward Nelson opposed.

If the tentative proposal is enacted, the fare for a single car-and-driver ticket would go from $10 to $14, while the price of a 25-ticket book would rise from $160 to $287.

But the numbers still could change based on three other factors that council members plan to discuss:

• Continuing fare discounts to lower-income island residents.

• Shifting some ferry dock costs out of the ferry budget and into the county's road budget.

• Reducing ferry system expenses by cutting back on the current 18-hour-per-day schedule.

The needs-based discount system now in place allows a qualified low-income person to buy a book of 25 pedestrian tickets for $23 instead of the regular $40. For a car-and-driver book of 10 tickets, the low-income price is now $36, while full-fare buyers pay $72.

County Treasurer Steve Oliver told the council that verifying income levels of island residents is a time-consuming process for his employees amid ongoing cuts in staffing levels. Fewer than 100 households are now receiving the discounts.

Kershner had moved to abolish the low-income discounts as part of a fare plan that would have hit ferry riders with across-the-board $2 surcharges on tickets, instead of a percentage increase for all tickets. But Kershner's proposal died on a 3-3 vote, with Kershner, Nelson and Crawford in favor and Weimer, Brenner and Mann opposed.

On the ferry dock cost issue, Brenner sides with some island residents who argue that some expenses related to the docks at either end of the ferry run should not be included as ferry system costs when fares are calculated. Brenner said the docks are like any other bridge in the county's road system and should be covered out of regular road revenues. But no other council member appeared to share that view.

Crawford asked Abart to report back on ways that service cuts might be imposed to reduce system costs. Abart said that was worth consideration, but he also observed that service cuts likely would reduce ticket revenues as well as expenses.


Read more: www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/10/27/1688269/lummi-ferry-rate-hike-could-be.html#ixzz148aSe1Ck

[lifc]

We have started the formation of a County Ferry Board out here on the Island. The increases of costs attributed to the Ferry are totally out-of-line with any normal enterprise so it deserves independent revue which we are advocating for. From what we are seeing, many of the recently counted costs are not related to the Ferry Operation and are the cause of the budget deficit.

To put it another way, the County is broke, it has taken on too many expenditures in other activities, which they are loathe to cut. The Ferry is tasked by Ordinance to produce 55% of ti's operation in Revenue. Since the decline of building and related Permits, the Ferry is the only source in the entire County Operation that generates any revenue. Therefore by bulking up the costs of the Ferry and raising rates, the Officials think they can raise some money for the County, cynical but true. We have so far found miss-appropriation of the Gas Taxes, improper reassignment of the docks from the roads (where they have been for 70 years) to the Ferry, huge increases in Clerical and Overhead costs, just to name a few.

Certain County Officials have taken pains to create dissention of the Public by painting the Islanders as rich elitists whose lifestyles are being unfairly supported by the rest of the County.

It is also our opinion that the proposed increases will actually result in less revenue to the operation as people move away and change their riding habbits. The last fare increase did just that, this one will be worse.

What a mess.

[Barnacle]

Nov 5, 2010 10:44:50 GMT -8 lifc said:

The Ferry is tasked by Ordinance to produce 55% of ti's operation in Revenue.

Is it already generating that much money? Or will the fare increases just cover the increased rent?

[lifc]

We can't reallly tell, in one spot of the budget they have listed 200K for the lease, however it does not seem to be in the subtotals. It is becoming apparent with the finding of old BIA documents, found by the Citizens, not the County, that a right of way is already in place, reaffirmed in 1928, however the County Legal staff does not seem to acknowledge that, another problem.
From what I see is that the proposed increase is only for the operation. right now they claim the service is only generating 45% of the operating cost, with their suspect cost inclusions.

[Neil]

Nov 5, 2010 10:44:50 GMT -8 lifc said:

We have started the formation of a County Ferry Board out here on the Island. The increases of costs attributed to the Ferry are totally out-of-line with any normal enterprise so it deserves independent revue which we are advocating for. From what we are seeing, many of the recently counted costs are not related to the Ferry Operation and are the cause of the budget deficit.

To put it another way, the County is broke, it has taken on too many expenditures in other activities, which they are loathe to cut. The Ferry is tasked by Ordinance to produce 55% of ti's operation in Revenue. Since the decline of building and related Permits, the Ferry is the only source in the entire County Operation that generates any revenue. Therefore by bulking up the costs of the Ferry and raising rates, the Officials think they can raise some money for the County, cynical but true. We have so far found miss-appropriation of the Gas Taxes, improper reassignment of the docks from the roads (where they have been for 70 years) to the Ferry, huge increases in Clerical and Overhead costs, just to name a few.

Certain County Officials have taken pains to create dissention of the Public by painting the Islanders as rich elitists whose lifestyles are being unfairly supported by the rest of the County.

It is also our opinion that the proposed increases will actually result in less revenue to the operation as people move away and change their riding habbits. The last fare increase did just that, this one will be worse.

What a mess.

A while back, a Forum member who was a retired BC Ferries employee was making the point- though not entirely substantiated- that BC Ferries was inflating the losses of certain routes by loading excessive portions of administrative, management, and in some cases, purchasing costs onto them. When one looks at BC Ferries financial statements, 'expenses' on each route are not broken down, so it's difficult to get a handle on. At least you seem to be able to pick through specifics on the Lummi ferry's operations.

We have the same nonsense trotted out on the north side of the border about islanders being 'rich elitists'. I checked census data that showed that on every ferry-served island other than Bowen, the average household income is actually below the provincial average. What is the real picture on Lummi?

[EGfleet]

Latest Whatcom County plan spreads Lummi ferry increases across board
JOHN STARK - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

BELLINGHAM - Fares for the Lummi Island ferry still are likely to go up a lot, but in a 5-2 vote, the Whatcom County Council has shifted its strategy on how it wants to change the complex rate schedule to collect an additional $500,000 in 2011.

Last week, the council voted 4-2 for a plan that would have raised more of the additional money from increases in the rate for car-and-driver tickets purchased singly or in books of 25. That approach meant relatively smaller increases for pedestrians and bike riders.

But on Tuesday, Nov. 2, the council voted 5-2 for a plan that shifts more of the burden back to the walk-on and pedal-on passengers:
WHATCOM CHIEF

• The cost of a single car-and driver ticket would rise to $12, from $10.

• The cost of a 25-ticket book for car and driver would be $275, up from $160.

• The single fare for pedestrians and bicyclists would rise to $6, from $4, and the cost of a book of 25 pedestrian tickets would more than triple, rising to $140 from $40 today.

The fare plan won't be final until it is voted on again after a public hearing tentatively scheduled for Nov. 23.

Council members Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Ward Nelson, Ken Mann and Sam Crawford voted in favor, with Barbara Brenner and Carl Weimer opposed.

The plan tentatively approved Tuesday would continue a system of lower-cost tickets for lower-income island residents. But the needs-based fares won't be spared steep price hikes. The price of 25 needs-based pedestrian tickets would rise to $75, from $23. The price of 10 needs-based car fares would rise to $70, from $36.

The goal is to raise the ferry's ticket sales income from an estimated $1 million for 2010 to about $1.5 million next year. That's what Public Works Director Frank Abart says the system needs, in order to recover 55 percent of system expenses from fares while replenishing system reserves. The 55 percent figure is set by county ordinance.

Brenner has argued that it is unfair for the county to include dock costs in the ferry budget. Her motion to shift those costs back to the county road fund would have enabled the county to reach the 55 percent figure without so steep a fare increase, but that motion failed 5-2. Weimer was the only council member to agree with Brenner on that issue.

The county might need to collect even more money in 2011, depending on the outcome of negotiations with Lummi Nation on a new lease for the Gooseberry Point ferry dock on the tribe's reservation. The projected 2011 budget factors in a $200,000 annual lease payment to the tribe, which the county has labeled its best offer. But the tribe has asked for $310,000, with upward adjustments for inflation every year.

That issue probably won't be decided much before the end of 2010, with a mediator scheduled to work with both sides some time in late November or early December.


Read more: www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/11/02/1699984/latest-whatcom-county-council.html#ixzz14k5emGBc

[EGfleet]

Whatcom Council approves $3-per-ride surcharge on Lummi Island ferry
JOHN STARK - THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

BELLINGHAM-On a 4-3 vote, the Whatcom County Council has approved a $3 surcharge on all Lummi Island ferry tickets, effective in 60 days.

The surcharge means that a $10 car-and-driver single ticket will increase to $13, while a $4 pedestrian ticket increases to $7. A 25-trip car pass that now costs $160 will cost $235. That's an increase of $75, to cover the $3 surcharge on all 25 trips.

The increase in a 25-trip pedestrian pass is steep under the surcharge plan: A pass that now costs $40 will be $115.

Council members Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen and Ken Mann voted in favor. Barbara Brenner, Tony Larson and Carl Weimer were opposed.

The vote came after a Tuesday, Nov. 23 public hearing. About a dozen island residents stepped to the microphone to urge council members to either delay a vote on the proposed fare increase, or vote for a smaller one.

Some islanders argued that it made no sense to establish a new rate schedule until the cost of a new ferry dock lease with Lummi Nation is known. The first mediation session with the tribe is scheduled to take place next week.

Others said there are too many unanswered questions about the costs of ferry operation, and whether a big rate increase could reduce ridership and undercut the county's effort to raise more money.

The county hopes to raise the ferry's ticket sales income from an estimated $1 million for 2010 to about $1.5 million next year. That's what Public Works Director Frank Abart says the system needs, in order to recover 55 percent of system expenses from fares while replenishing system reserves. The 55 percent figure is set by county ordinance.

The estimate of ferry system costs for 2011 assumes a $200,000 annual payment to Lummi Nation for the lease of tribal land at the mainland Gooseberry Point ferry dock. That is equivalent to the amount the county has been paying under an interim agreement with the tribe since the earlier 25-year lease expired in February 2010.

Brenner said she thought it was a mistake to bake that amount into the new ferry rate structure. She said she agreed to the interim payment in February to avoid possible disruption in ferry service, but she doesn't believe the county should have to pay that much as part of a permanent settlement.

But the tribe has asked for an annual payment of $310,000, with upward adjustments for inflation every year.

Larson said the council needed more information on how fare increases would affect ridership, and economics students at Western Washington University could be enlisted to study that question in a systematic way.

"The reality is we have no idea how these prices increases are going to impact behavior on the island," Larson said. "I really think it's a shot in the dark."

Weimer argued that the $3 increase was too steep, and he added that island residents had raised legitimate questions about whether the costs of the ferry system were being calculated fairly.

But the other four council members were ready to make a move, after months of discussion on the matter.

"The message I think it sends is, we're in a seriouos (sic) budget crunch," Mann said. "We need desperately to make up some revenue in a manner that's fair ... We need to do something today to make up the shortfall."

The council also unanimously agreed to Kershner's proposal to establish a seven-member citizen task force to study ferry financing issues and report back to the council by Aug. 1, 2011.

The resolution establishing the task force states that at least four members should be Lummi Island residents.

Council members said they would be willing to revisit ferry rates once they hear from the task force.


Read more: www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/11/24/1737652/whatcom-council-approves-3-per.html#ixzz16J3ZwJZd

[Barnacle]

Nov 25, 2010 6:58:52 GMT -8 EGfleet said:

The county hopes to raise the ferry's ticket sales income from an estimated $1 million for 2010 to about $1.5 million next year. That's what Public Works Director Frank Abart says the system needs, in order to recover 55 percent of system expenses from fares while replenishing system reserves. The 55 percent figure is set by county ordinance.

Wow. 55 percent. I think I just heard Washington State Ferries' 22+ million users mutter a collective 'boo hoo.'

[whidbeyislandguy]

Nov 26, 2010 13:32:46 GMT -8 Barnacle said:

Nov 25, 2010 6:58:52 GMT -8 EGfleet said:

The county hopes to raise the ferry's ticket sales income from an estimated $1 million for 2010 to about $1.5 million next year. That's what Public Works Director Frank Abart says the system needs, in order to recover 55 percent of system expenses from fares while replenishing system reserves. The 55 percent figure is set by county ordinance.

Wow. 55 percent. I think I just heard Washington State Ferries' 22+ million users mutter a collective 'boo hoo.'

I like your comment!

[lifc]

This is all bull, the County has been cooking the books for years and putting a whole bunch of extra expenses into the system. They have done nothing to contain the costs of the Ferry and in fact are increasing it with non related costs, and refusing to credit the State Gas Tax support to the system. Now they totally abandoned the idea of looking for the best way to get maximum revenue and have moved into the phase of punishing the Islanders for living there. This is not a simple matter of letting someone off easy, in fact as one who is involved in the middle of this I find your comments, at best ignorant. It seems to me that Keystone/Port Townsend route has a lower return rate.

The County has for years solved problems in crisis management which always results in worse problems than before, their only answer is give us more money. You should have been at that meeting, you would be rolling your eyes at their lack of the grasp of simple business principles, of supply and demand or the unintended consequences of their actions, as in previous rate increases, this will result in less money being brought into the system. This is already the most expensive Ferry ride in the State, with this increase it will be about three times over the State average. Just ask yourself how Skagit County has a healthy system with a lower subsidy and lower passage rates. The Whatcom County management is completely incompetent.

Go read the Comments to the Herald article and you might get an idea about it.

Grrrrrrrrrr

[Barnacle]

Nov 26, 2010 16:51:41 GMT -8 lifc said:

This is already the most expensive Ferry ride in the State, with this increase it will be about three times over the State average.

Actually, at $10 per vehicle round trip and $4 per passenger round trip, it's still cheaper than anything WSF has to offer. Even after adding $3 to each of those, you're still behind WSF.