Page Thirty-Nine  

05 DECEMBER 2005

There's too much of this going on....

Ferry board members meet behind closed doors   12/5/2005 10:00 PM (Rachel Barnhart, WROC-TV) At least four of the eleven members of the Rochester Ferry Company Board met behind closed doors at City Hall Monday afternoon. Don Cormier, Vice President of operator Bay Ferries, Ltd., and members of the city's legal staff were also in attendance. The two-hour meeting was not open to the public. One city official said the "executive committee" of the ferry board was meeting. The ferry board is subject to the state's open meeting laws. Although there are several legal reasons a meeting can be closed, the city attorney would not comment on why Monday's session was not open or publicized in advance. After the meeting, City Councilman and board president Ben Douglas would not give details on the session, saying it was, "just a regular ferry boat meeting...We're simply doing our regular planning." Several sources tell News 8 the board is getting ready to ask city council to borrow more money to keep the fast ferry afloat. The request could come this week. Sources say the city is looking for another $10 million to keep operations going in 2006. The city's $8 million reserve fund has little or no money left. Council President Lois Giess, a member of the ferry board, did not attend Monday's meeting. When asked about a possible $10 million loan to the ferry company, she said, "I haven't seen the legislation." City council members were briefed last week on several options to obtain the cash. Sources tell News 8 one option is going to the Australian government and asking for an extension of the city's $40 million line of credit. Another option is to borrow $50 million from another lender, pay off the Australians, and move forward with a restructured debt. In either scenario, taxpayers would be placed at greater risk, because the city would have to guarantee the loans. (We keep seeing this.  Do we still believe the ferry's not going to cost the taxpayer a cent?) "Any money the ferry borrows must be repaid either by ticket sales or by the taxpayer. If they can't sell enough tickets, the taxpayers pays it back," said financial analyst George Conboy of Brighton Securities, who closely follows the ferry project. "I don't think in the end they can run it through ferry revenues." The city is expected to unveil its 2006 ferry plan this week. It is expected to include a demand-based pricing system. It may also call for sending the ferry to warmer climates during the winter months. The ferry board's make-up will change in 2006. The board is losing at least four members due changes in City Hall administration and on city council.

Just why is it so unimaginable the ferry service would completely fall on its face once and for all?  It's not like it hasn't happened before and regardless of who's running the operation, the plain simple fact of the matter is there isn't -- and never has been -- sufficient demand to support a business of this magnitude.  Why is that being fought tooth and nail?

Perhaps the problem is one of self-image; after all, the Rochester area fancies itself an educated, urbane and pretty neat community, so why WOULDN'T non-residents be interested in checking out this locality?

Well, from many Toronto residents' perspective -- as interesting as the Rochester area might be -- it's no New York City.  A world-class city, Toronto is in the same league as New York City while Rochester, surprisingly enough, isn't.  That's not some flippant bashing of the Rochester area, it's just the truth.

Rochesterians would snicker at the thought of a cherished weekend in interesting Troy New York.  While there are no doubt many unique attractions in Troy and Troy residents may be justifiably proud of their community, the appeal is somewhat lacking.  Troy is to Rochester as Rochester is to Toronto.    Put another way, Toronto is to Rochester as New York City is to Toronto.

Why don't Rochesterians clog the Sheraton Hamilton Hotel reservation lines to enjoy a stimulating weekend in downtown Hamilton Ontario?  There really is a lively night life along with a number of fairly interesting attractions to see (parts of Anne of Green Gables was filmed in Whitehern in downtown Hamilton) and Greater Hamilton has a wealth of things to see for all interests.

Just take a look at the list of attractions for Hamilton.  There's even a Tribal Class Destroyer, HMCS Haida, moored at Hamilton Harbour to tour.

A port city on the same lake, Rochester offers little to nothing of historic or heritage significance related to its lake connection.  True enough, the Haida doesn't have much relevance to Hamilton itself -- but the point is the recognition of a unique historic maritime vessel which reinforces heritage and acts as a tourist attraction.

Rochesterians bypass Hamilton on their way to Toronto the way Torontonians bypass Rochester on their way to New York City.  Rochester area resident: "Hamilton?  Big woo."   Toronto area resident:  "Rochester?  Big woo."  It's not a hard concept to understand.

To the ferry supporters and Rochester boosters, it's just a hard concept to accept.

Hard to believe there actually ARE Joe and/or Jane Citizen on the ferry Board, isn't it?  One might be tempted to toss the term 'tokenism' into this smug city government gesture, but that would be a pretty sour assessment.  True... but not especially generous.

'Tokenism'?  Wha... whaddya mean by THAT?

Should the City of Rochester borrow more money for the fast ferry?   The votes so far:  11%  Yes  89%   No  As of 5:03pm 06 DEC 2005

Well, since the Ferry Board/Ferry Corporation amounts to little more than a sub-committee of the Rochester City Council with no legal power to manage its own money, the members of the Ferry Board are just that... members of a committee which reports directly to the City Council with its findings and suggestions.  The citizen members have a say within the committee -- a 'vote' if you will -- but ultimately it's up to the City Council to either accept or reject the suggestions and opinions of the Ferry Board.

The Ferry Board has to ask City Council to approve the request for an increase in its credit limit from EFIC.  The Ferry Board could be honest and simply say, "It's time to pull the plug on this cash pit" but the City Council is perfectly empowered to reply, "Thank you for your report.  We disagree.  On to New Business...". 

Thus, despite the INPUT of less than a handful of 'citizens' (and how were THEY selected?) this magnanimous display of public involvement in their government is largely ceremonial and lacks the teeth to have much of a serious impact.  But it makes the peasantry feel like they actually have a say in how their taxes are being spent and some might say, "It's better than nothing."

To which I reply, "Prove it."

Ferry to run 7 months next year   12/6/2005 4:00 PM (WROC-TV) The fast ferry will run only seven months next year. Bay Ferries, Ltd. and the Rochester Ferry Company announced the reduced season Tuesday. The ship will run from March 31st through October 29th. "This allows us to respond to the demonstrated consumer demands while enabling the opportunity for other alternate revenue generating uses for the vessel during down time," a press release said. Schedules and pricing will be released by the end of the month.      The city is expected to need a $10 million loan to keep operations going in 2006. It is not clear how a 7-month schedule will affect the bottom line; the city has not released its 2006 budget and operating plan.

Hey, you been following the Airbus versus Boeing battle lately?  France's Airbus A380 is taking on the U.S.-based Boeing 787 Dreamliner in a corporate match of strategies.

Airbus A380: 555-seats max, double-decked, max range 8000 nautical miles (15,000 km), 239 ft (73 m) long, 79 ft (24 m) high.  Mach: 0.89

Boeing 787 Dreamliner: 290-seats max, dual-aisle single deck, max range 8,800 nautical miles (16,300 km), 206 ft (63 m) long, 56 ft (17 m) high.  Mach 0.85

Airbus thinks it's more profitable to go with fewer very expensive aircraft as opposed to Boeing thinking it's more profitable to sell more less expensive units.  Airbus feels carrying more passengers will offset having more Boeing 787 flights carrying a lower number of passengers... and airline companies will opt for the bigger plane.

Boeing thinks fewer passengers but more bells and whistles on the smaller plane will compel better sales for the airlines.  More people will have a better chance at flying on a Dreamliner because there'll be more of the 787's in service to more cities.  Regional airports like Rochester will be able to handle the 787; a plane the size of a small shopping mall can't get into the smaller cities but is a real sweet way to get between the larger cities on the long hauls.

It's going to be interesting to see which strategy pays off better.

Naturally, these planes ain't cheap and airlines need to keep them in operation in the air as much as humanly and mechanically possible in order to generate the revenue to pay for them.  Planes, like commercial shipping trucks, make no money sitting still and as any commercial truck owner/operator will tell you, the monthly payment to the bank still comes due every month whether the thing's been used or not.

The operating cost may be smaller the less the vehicle is used, but it doesn't make up the difference to offset the monthly payment.   It's far better to have a higher operating cost with a higher revenue than no operating cost and no revenue.

Planes, trucks.... ferries.  While it's true the operating costs will be considerably lower if the ferry stays tied up at port, so will the revenue -- there's no way weddings or corporate functions can match the revenue from passengers.  If they could, it only makes sense to use the ferry as a floating party house.

A few thousand dollars from party rentals (which would barely cover the cost of staff and utilities) -- it doesn't take an accountant to realize there's a serious negative cash flow going on.  More is going out than coming in.  It's simple.

Slashing the ferry operating season is shooting one's self in the foot.  If the ferry can't turn a profit being used for the purpose it was built for in as much scheduled operating time as possible, how does cutting the length of the season make any sense?  That would be like Air Canada grounding an Airbus A380 for five months of the year and renting it out for a really novel restaurant/party house.  AC would still have to pay Airbus for the plane, but would have relatively squat coming in to cover the monthly payment.

<Sigh>  The sheer idiocy just never ends.

Here's Plan B:

23º | Hi 30º / Lo 18º |

OK.  Now the City of Rochester in in the ferry rental business.  Guess the ferry party house concept didn't seem like a great idea when charging something exorbitant like $50,000 for a special on-board 'do' was kicked around.  Absurd?  Well, how much do you think the monthly ferry loan payment on $42 million is?

Like so much else of this ferry bad idea, I'll believe it when I see it.  Like renting out a luxury house, the landlord has a hefty mortgage which needs to be paid and when the renters realize they're doing nothing but paying someone else's mortgage payment and ending up with diddly to show for it, the appeal becomes marginal.  Maybe sending the ship to Trinidad and Tobago on the off-season works for Bay Ferries, but Bay Ferries is both operator AND owner of the ship itself.

The proof, Dear Reader?

Bay Ferries Limited ("Bay") and Northumberland Ferries Limited ("NFL") are wholly owned subsidiaries of NFL Holdings Ltd of Charlottetown Prince Edward Island. NFL Holdings is a private company owned by thirty (30) individuals, most of whom are descendents of four (4) families who originally founded the business in 1941. The founding principles of safety, efficiency, quality, community and innovation remain the cornerstone of our corporate philosophy today. NFL was incorporated in 1939 in Halifax and commenced operating the Wood Islands, Prince Edward Island to Caribou, Nova Scotia ferry service in 1941. This company has continued its eight (8) month per year operational contract with Transport Canada to this date. For over 60 years, we have continuously provided safe and reliable ferry services between Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia. Bay had a successful beginning in April 1, 1997 on the Bay of Fundy, having been chosen as the successful proponent to take over the Bay of Fundy services previously operated by Marine Atlantic. This followed a formal Request for Proposals conducted by the Government of Canada in which local and international companies participated. The Saint John - Digby service has been operated since 1997 with the mv PRINCESS OF ACADIA which was recently the subject of an extensive renovation. The mv PRINCESS OF ACADIA is a conventional ferry which serves a combination of local, touring and commercial truck traffic. The Yarmouth to Bar Harbor service was served by the conventional ferry mv BLUENOSE in the summer of 1997. In 1998, Bay acquired "The Cat", a new 91 metre high-speed ferry constructed by Incat of Tasmania. This was North America's first high speed ferry of this type. In 2002 Bay Ferries introduced a new high speed ferry to North America by acquiring a 98 meter Evolution 10B design fast ferry, the largest and most modern vessel ever built by Incat. At a cost of US $50.2 million this new CAT renewed our commitment to stay on the leading edge of technological developments and innovation in marine transportation. The Digby - Saint John service operates 12 months per year while the Yarmouth/Bar Harbor service operates approximately six (6) months per year. Because of its six month season on the Yarmouth/Bar Harbor service, Bay has had the opportunity to introduce new high-speed ferry service to the Bahamas in 2003 - 2004 (under contract with the service operator Bahamas Florida Express Ltd.) and to Trinidad and Tobago in 2004 - 2005 (under contract with the Port Authority of Trinidad and Tobago). Our companies operate ferries, maintain ferries and ensure that they meet the highest of standards of safety and environmental protection. This work is accomplished under the direction of a small but capable multi-functional management team, with assistance of our more than 300 direct employees and with the strategic use of specialized sub-contractors. Our group of companies is recognized throughout North America as an efficient and competent and innovative ferry service provider.

http://www.catferry.com/about_us/index.php

And ONCE AGAIN... yes, ONCE AGAIN... the Rochester contingent uses the It-Worked-There-So-It'll-Work-Here methodology.  Local independent and innovative thought is hard to find in the Rochester area.  Conservative, traditional... and uninspired are the 'safe' and 'manageable' ways to go.  Not necessarily workable, but certainly not wildly avant-garde in its approach.

Bay Ferries only OPERATES the Toronto-Rochester ferry... it does NOT own it and that makes all the difference in the world.  Bay Ferries has cut out the middle-man in its off-season operation in the Caribbean, whereas Rochester has added the middle-man by employing Bay Ferries as the operator.  As all we consumers know, the more hands that get to fondle the product or service, the more people who get a cut in the action.  That means a higher end cost to the consumer and smaller profit for each of the organizations involved.

The city of Rochester owns the ferry and is responsible for repaying the lenders, EFIC.  If Rochester wants to pay someone else to operate the ship, that's no problem to EFIC but it means the amount paid to the operator is that much less being available to pay the lender.  It's like having a chauffeur to drive your Mercedes because you don't have a license to drive... you still have to pay the bank for the Mercedes and you still have to pay the chauffeur to drive the car.  Renting out the car means instead of driving the car yourself and keeping all the rental fee, you have to use some of that rental fee to pay the chauffeur.

Bay Ferries loses nothing by operating someone else's ship... it's all profit as they get paid whether the ferry's turning a profit or not... at least that's the theory.  If it allows the city to defer payment, then they're idiots and I seriously doubt they would allow some dud of a route to bring down the rest of their company's operations.

Ironically, the only way to make the ferry profitable is to end the service and stop bleeding red ink.  The city of Rochester won't MAKE money, but they also won't LOSE money as they have been.  That's not exactly 'profit' defined, but it sure as hell beats the alternative.

Sorry guys.  Sending the ship away for a winter tan isn't going to help the bottom line.  It'll still need the oil changed and other routine maintenance as well as be subject to the typical wear and tear from thousands of other passengers.  By the time it chugs back to Lake Ontario, those glossy surfaces and lovely carpeting and upholstery are going to be looking a tad tired.  Less resale value for the inevitable sale of the ship.  More final cost to the Rochester taxpayer who's not only paying for the 'set of wheels' someone else is using and benefiting from, but who doesn't even see the thing for almost half the year.

This entire debacle can end any time the city of Rochester says so.  A vote of 'no' to the request for more funding would end it.... instead, the pit gets deeper and deeper even though all the signs pointing to failure are wildly blinking.

"We ARE amused."

.

December 6, 2005 9:27 PM :

Ferry Season To Run March Through October (Rochester, NY) 12/06/05 -- Operators of the fast ferry announced that the seven-month 2006 operating season will begin on March 31, and run through October 29.   They have plans to offer more than 500 round trips between Rochester and Toronto. “The CAT realized close to 100,000 passengers in its first 3 months of service in 2005,” said chairman of the Ferry Board, Ben Douglas. “The Board is confident that the positive experiences and reliability of the product in 2005 has established a strong base for growth in 2006.” The Bay Ferries Great Lakes company is working on the timetable for the 2006 schedule and will release the information before the end of 2005.

“The Board is confident that the positive experiences and reliability of the product in 2005 has established a strong base for growth in 2006.”

"Positive experiences" refers to the  0.3% of the passengers surveyed and of those 300 or so people, around 285 of them said they'd take the ferry again.  Ben Douglas is basing his assessment on the response of 285 people (out of 100,000) who were still pumped after having just taken a novel boat ride across the lake.

"Reliability of the product" means they had a good on-time record and few breakdowns.  That speaks higher of the operator, Bay Ferries, than it does the city's ferry plan and is small consolation to the ferry passengers who had their plans trashed by a cancellation or having to hop on a bus.

"They have plans to offer more than 500 round trips between Rochester and Toronto."

Let's see here:  seven months of operation is about 210 days... which averages out to be more than TWO round-trips per day... each and every day of the operating season.

Did we do that this season?  No?  Actually, by the end of this season, there were days when the ferry didn't make ANY trips per day.  And why not?  Because there wasn't enough demand.  But next year... oh yes indeed... there's going to be far greater demand because... because... "because we're going to offer reduced fares on days that even Aunt Beulah and Cousin Maudie don't want to take.  Yeah!  THAT'S it!!"

500 round trips in the 2006 season?

Just how much Prozac ARE these guys taking, anyway?

Tuesday   December 06, 2005

The season begins at the end of March. Ferry To Become Seasonal Operation   by Seth Voorhees File Photo Published Dec 06, 2005 Rochester's fast ferry will stay idle until the end of March. After that, the boat will operate on a seven month schedule -- from March 31st to October 29th. Bay Ferries. the company the city hired to run the service, announced the 2006 schedule Tuesday. Bay Ferries says it's a plan that makes the most sense for the boat's future. “I think we've come to the realization that the seasonal service is the best thing going forward,” said Don Cormier, vice president of operations. Cormier says the idea of making the ferry service seasonal has been under consideration for “some time”. As ridership -- high during the summer months -- dwindled after Labor Day ferry operators cut the schedule. They say it's more viable for the financially struggling service not to operate during winter months. Cormier admits “The Cat” has been a challenge -- in part, due to the black cloud that hung over the vessel's previous operators. “The challenges of getting support from people were less than forthcoming because of the experience from the previous operation,” said Cormier. “Now that we have a year under our belt and they know what sort of results can be produced, I think there's a different feel.” Announcing a seven-month schedule of operation now lets the city come up with a budget and a business plan for 2006. That likely will mean millions in subsidy, at least in the short term. Cormier says people must be patient. “The objective is for the project to be self-sustained without public funds,” said Cormier. “Having said that, I think it will take some time for the project to take some traction.” The other boats Bay Ferries runs are also seasonal operations. Cormier says they are a success, meaning there is a good business model in place for those operations. Bay Ferries says the Rochester Ferry Company has accepted the seasonal plan. Numerous calls to ferry company leadership were unanswered, and messages left went unreturned. Cormier says Bay Ferries will look at other revenue-generating uses for the ferry during the off-months. That could include renting the boat out to operators in warm-weather areas, such as the Caribbean. Fast Ferry

Back to basics.

Why has it been decided to move to a seasonal operation when the original plan called for year-round operation?  Why?

Why did ANYONE say it was going to operate on a year-round basis?  Why?  If the ferry wasn't going to operate on a year-round basis, then why was the public told it was?  Why?

The reason?  Not enough demand = not enough passengers = not enough Torontonians and Canadians are interested in a dedicated means to get to Rochester.  Residents around Lake Ontario pay modest attention to the lake during the summer months then generally ignore (or curse it) the rest of the year.  Anything having to do with Lake Ontario is done between Memorial Day and Labour Day -- any other time, any lake activities are FAR from the collective consciousness.

That most definitely includes some boat ride in November or December.  But then, we knew that even before the ferry idea was first presented for consumption and it really shouldn't be much of a surprise to learn passengers prefer the cozy confines of a personal auto to that of dodging the elements while dashing between connections to/from the ferry.  Wow.  What a stunning revelation.

So why was the ferry proposed to be a year-round service in the first place?  Seems to me everything about this ferry project was the botched, hackneyed product of people who had the business acumen of a palm tree salesman in Greenland.  These 'professionals' make the Cookie Monster look downright savvy.  'Rochester's finest', indeed.

Covering all bases here:

"Cormier says he does not have any specific southern routes in mind just yet."

Ah, yes.  Hope springs eternal, eh, Don?  Is the city of Rochester supposed to bank tens of millions of dollars on a 'maybe'?  "We MIGHT be able to find someone who'll rent it?"  What the hell good does that do US?

Sheesh.  This thing's falling apart faster than Saddam's defense team and I don't mind telling you I smell ugliness in the air.  The crowd is becoming annoyed at the antics of public officials and inept business decisions.  I get around to some of the local online forums where the ferry fiasco is being discussed and I have to say, the mood is less than gracious.

City Newspaper, the free alternative weekly supermarket pickup, has (strangely) been a proponent of the ferry project all along.  While it has periodically taken an obligatory critical view of the ferry proceedings -- natch -- it hasn't offered any insight on the buffoonery since November 9.

Why so silent, my 'activist' friends?  Has it finally sunk in that the ferry deal is as viable as planting geraniums in December?  Has the voice of Rochester-style 'liberalism' been chastened by the sheer overwhelming evidence the ferry has no chance of ever succeeding?

Speak up Mary Anna Towler.  DO tell us how the ferry can be a community asset worth saving.

 

Q :  What's the difference between a Rochester liberal and Paris Hilton?

 

A :   Paris Hilton mouths off and at least you know she exists.

07 DECEMBER 2005

Fruits of their labours.

23º | Hi 27º / Lo 17º |

"City Councilman Wade Norwood said the plan cannot be simply more marketing, more money. He wants to see a significant change in the direction and structure of the business plan."

OK.  Just how will 'changing the direction and structure of the business plan' translate into more Torontonians and Canadians wanting to come to Rochester on the ferry?  How about a coupon for a free sandwich in Hornell?  Would THAT compel more Rochesterians to visit that community?  Would discount tickets to the local movie theatre increase the draw of Rochester area residents to Rome NY?  How about a free car wash at the local Suds-N-Go in Central Square?  Would that have much of an effect on inspiring Monroe County residents to visit that community?

No?  Why not?  That's what ferry organizers are thinking will pull Canadians onto the ferry to visit the burg on the south shore of Lake Ontario.  Discounts, perks and other enticements are fine, but unless the destination is in demand no amount of free-gift-with-every-purchase is going to have a significant effect.  Neither will discounted rates for times when even retirees ignore.

 "City Councilman Bill Pritchard agreed and said he wants less involvement by city employees, with more business professionals on the board."

Oh GAWD.  Not that.  'Business professionals' are who got us in this mess in the first place and to look to them for solutions involving the Canadian public's tastes and demands is truly a case of the blind leading the blind.  Rochester 'business professionals' are so far removed from the Real World of the ticket-buying consumer, we end up with such grand slams like Kodak Disc and Advantix cameras, sports fields collecting snow and empty gentrified entertainment districts.  Rochester 'business professionals' are far more form than substance and lack the knowledge, experience or interest in the people they seem to think they can control.

In their pathological quest to prove 'leadership', Rochester 'business professionals' have completely lost sight of the fact that there are no leaders without followers.  In this case, it's the followers who hold all the trump cards and regardless of how much these 'professionals' think they can play the game, it's completely up to the buying public to determine whether this project sinks or swims.  The 'professionals' have absolutely no control over that and that's frustration to the point of dysfunctionality.

The Canadian public has the upper hand and to American 'business professionals', that's a double slap in the face.  Tough noogies, boys.  That's the way it is and the sooner you guys accept that fact, the less money you'll end up losing.

It's a great time to be Canadian.  It's always a great time to be Canadian, but when the rare opportunity to ridicule the pompous blusterings of clueless American 'business professionals' presents itself, it's time to wave the Maple Leaf.

December 7, 2005 3:16 PM :

Johnson's Final State Of The City Address (Rochester, NY) 12/07/05 --  Rochester's Mayor Bill Johnson spoke about the fast ferry and optimism Tuesday night. In his final "State of the City" speech, the mayor called the ferry's problems "a blemish" on an otherwise beautiful community, but urged that the service be continued. "In the words of Bill Clinton, 'We must mend it, not end it,'" he said. (Oh brav-O, Bill.  Next thing we know, we'll be treated with some idiot's trite "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit".) Johnson also encouraged residents to adopt more positive attitudes about Rochester. "Let us re-examine our psyches and let us be proud of what we have. Instead of cursing the darkness, let us light more candles…for our children's sake…in our optimism, let them find hope," he said. The mayor called his 12 years in office a "remarkable journey." He also thanked the people and urged them to support Mayor-elect Robert Duffy.

"Johnson also encouraged residents to adopt more positive attitudes about Rochester."

Sorry Bill, but there's far too much self-congratulatory back-slapping going on in this area.  It's time to sit down and honestly examine what's wrong, not blissfully emphasize what's right.  Rather than drown out the critics, it's time to take off the rose-coloured glasses and listen to what they're saying.  Obviously, whatever the direction and course of action, something's not working.

The Rochester area is in serious economic and social decline and has been for the past twenty years; to deny that is to ignore the warning signs of a community on the verge of collapse.  Overly dramatic assessment?

Well, when the city of Rochester homicide number is the same as a community across the lake with over three times the number of people in all of Monroe County, I'd say it may be past time to get dramatic.  When the area's largest employer for the better part of a century becomes a mere shadow of its former self within ten years, it may be time to ring the alarm.  When the city council buys a failing business and promptly loses tens upon tens of millions of dollars with no end in sight, it might be time to start to worry.

It's a very fine line between 'positive attitudes' and 'blissful ignorance'.  It's time for a brutally honest community evaluation, not more pompoms and confetti.... there's been too much of that already.

As another saying goes: "Ignore at your own peril".

Ferry to run 7 months next year   12/6/2005 11:00 PM (Rachel Barnhart, WROC-TV) The fast ferry will run only seven months next year, a far cry from the year-round service to Toronto citizens were promised when the taxpayer-funded vessel first sailed into town. (Not much editorial license here, is there?) When the city purchased the vessel, it planned a 10-month season. Bay Ferries, Ltd. and the Rochester Ferry Company announced the reduced season Tuesday. The ship will run from March 31st through October 29th. The move was approved behind closed doors by the Rochester Ferry Company board. "This allows us to respond to the demonstrated consumer demands while enabling the opportunity for other alternate revenue generating uses for the vessel during down time," a press release said. Bay Ferries will seek to lease the boat elsewhere next winter. The company already leases one of its ships in Trinidad-Tobago. The ferry will not run at all if city council does not approve more borrowing to keep the operation running in 2006. Sources say the city is seeking a $10 million loan. The mayor confirmed the city is in negotiations with lenders, but would not specify the amount the city wants to borrow. The ferry operation is already $40 million in debt. "If we default on the loan, it will cost taxpayers money," Mayor William Johnson said. "Why don't we try to determine its viability. If we walk away from this venture right now, the city would be obligated to pay off the debt. This city, this ferry board, is doing everything it can to avoid that possibility." It is not clear how a 7-month schedule will affect the bottom line; the city has not released its 2006 budget and operating plan. "It's better for the bottom line, yes. It marries two things conveniently. It marries the way people take the boat, the way they travel, plus it also controls the expenses," said City Councilman and ferry board president Ben Douglas. Schedules and pricing for 2006 will be released by the end of the month.      Johnson said the ferry needs to book 300,000 tickets next year to break even. He says, given the number of trips the ferry will take, that amounts to one third of all seats for sale next year. "Three hundred thousand seats only have to be sold to make this venture work for the 6 million people that live in the two communities. If we can't sell to 5 percent of the population, then we know the venture's not viable," Johnson said.

"If we default on the loan, it will cost taxpayers money," Mayor William Johnson said."

Oh, I see.  So with mere days left in his tenure, Mayor Bill finally admits this debacle is going to soak the taxpayers Big Time.  "IF we default" certainly leaves the door open to the possibility this ferry business is doomed.  

 "Why don't we try to determine its viability."

We already have.  CATS found it wasn't viable.  The first quarter report of the city-run operation found it wasn't viable.  Reducing the service from year-round to ten-months to seven-months says it isn't viable.  Every sign in the book says it isn't viable.  Just what will it take to convince ferry supporters the service isn't viable?  What more proof do they need?

"If we walk away from this venture right now, the city would be obligated to pay off the debt."

Well, DUH.  Like we all didn't know this all along, Bill.  That's why it's not a good idea for the public to buy a failed private business.

"This city, this ferry board, is doing everything it can to avoid that possibility."

No, it's not.  If the Rochester City Council and ferry board wanted to do everything possible to avoid forcing the taxpayers to pay for this fiasco, it would have initiated a law suit against CATS instead of rushing in to grab the business away from it.  They didn't.  They blindly wanted the business for its own... for whatever reason.  Now the taxpayer is paying the price of that misguided 'professional' decision.

And now, city council members are calling for more 'business professionals' to assume more control?  These clueless hometown hicks think anyone in a Lexus and a suit constitute a solid trust of judgement. 

That's OK.  Canadians will trash THAT perception in very short order.

I know it's not just me who's got their knickers in a knot over this ferry farce.   Mayor Bill doesn't appear to be losing much sleep over this but if it were me, I know I'd be sweating bullets over being the primary proponent of wasting tens of millions of dollars of other people's money.

And Joe and Jane Suburbanite are getting vexed about an extra hundred bucks' worth of property taxes?