KARIN VON VOIGTLANDER 2005 file photo Toronto's terminal for the high-speed ferry opened just before The Cat's season began June 30. A Port Authority official says the $10.35 million (U.S.) terminal still has "various potential uses."

(January 12, 2006) — TORONTO — News that ferry service has ended from Canada's largest city to Rochester came as a disappointment to some of its residents, and a surprise to others that there even was such a service.

"I'm sad," said Mary Jatto, who owns the Cherry Street Diner, within walking distance of the Toronto terminal where The Cat used to dock. She saw her business improve after the ferry started service in 2004.

"I expected (the ferry) to do better," she said. "I saw the potential."

At the Cherry Street terminal, the gate was locked and a sign said the season had ended and service was expected to resume in the spring. "Rochester Ferry" road signs miles away near the CN Tower still pointed motorists to the terminal.

"The ferry, it's very good for everybody," said cab driver Ahmed Abdulmana, 46, before learning it was being discontinued. He often made three or four trips carrying fares to downtown hotels when the ferry arrived last summer.

"I don't understand how they lose money. It was always full."

Abdulmana's wife and son took the ferry in 2004 and stayed overnight in downtown Rochester. He said they had a wonderful time and especially enjoyed Strong Museum.

It seems unlikely he'll be taxiing fares from the terminal this summer.

Ken Lundy, chief of operations and engineering for the Toronto Port Authority, said he was surprised and disappointed by Rochester Mayor Robert Duffy's decision.

"We did over a quarter-million people," said Lundy, who had hoped the ferry would be better marketed in Ontario this year. "I cannot argue with the economic benefits to our area."

Late starts to the ferry's two seasons in 2004 and 2005 meant it missed many travel magazine deadlines.

Lundy said no Canadian money earmarked for a $17 billion waterfront revitalization project over the next 30 years had been used to promote the ferry.

As for whether Rochester will owe the Port Authority $250,000 for 14 years, as mentioned in a contract discussed by Duffy this week, Lundy said it is too early to say. He called his relationship with the previous administration in Rochester City Hall "excellent." He had planned to meet with Duffy and former Mayor William A. Johnson Jr. in December to discuss marketing efforts for the ferry, but the meeting was canceled because of a snowstorm.

Even without ferry service, Lundy said there are "various potential uses" for the Toronto terminal, a $10.35 million ($12 million Canadian) facility opened a week before The Cat's 2005 season began June 30.

"It's still an international border crossing. And we have over 40 charter and tour boat operations here" during the boating season, Lundy said. "It has a fabulous view of the city, there's plenty of parking and you're right in the city."

He said the Port Authority had received inquiries about using the terminal over the past 12 months. Those possibilities weren't entertained because "it was committed to use by the high-speed ferry."

Richard Van Boxmeer, 47, of Toronto walked his dog Wednesday near the closed terminal. He saw the ferry come and go last summer but didn't realize the plug had been pulled until told by a reporter.

"I was surprised that it lasted as long as it did," he said. He never considered riding the ferry.

"I've been to Rochester a few times," he said. That was when his brother, John Van Boxmeer, coached the Amerks hockey team.

GLIVADAS@DemocratandChronicle.com

"It is like telling your children 'no' for something they desperately want but you cannot afford to buy or keep."

— Vincent Ortolani, 64, Greece

Duffy "made the wrong decision. Rochester's biggest problem is our inability to think big."  (No, in the case of the ferry, Rochester is guilty of thinking TOO big.  It's a small city, not a big city.)

— Martha Bush, 49, Mendon

"I understand the mayor's necessity to curb spending. It just breaks my heart that Rochester ... walk(s) away from yet another vision for the future."  (You're right.  Let's run the debt up over $51 million... what were we thinking of anyway?)

— Thomas Warfield, 43, Rochester

"Absolutely, it was the right decision. ... Use the money on the basics and more important things, like safety, education and revitalization of business."

— Heidi Hu Ames, 43, Webster

"I fully agree that it is time to cut losses. Perhaps the rejuvenation of the port as well as the ferry service options can be reviewed and resumed in a more sustainable form." The ferry worked to connect to international flights  (Huh?), but "it was out of my budget as a regular feature."  (Well then, you were never the targeted market anyway.)

— Tina Patil, 44, Brighton

"Mayor Duffy's actions are an abomination. ... (It) will demonstrate to students like myself that unless your business can turn a profit within the first year of inception, you're a lost cause to the Duffy administration."  (Billy, when you grow up and actually discover that 'Not Enough Income = Failed Business', maybe you can demonstrate you're an adult.  Until then, shut up and sit down.)

— William Cassidy, 24, Rochester

"Mayor Johnson wanted the fast ferry to be his legacy, and failed to pull it off. Mayor Duffy refused to allow the fast ferry to become his albatross, and made the difficult but correct decision early on. The fast ferry ... was too grandiose, poorly funded, badly planned — a future (business) school case study of government going where it should never be allowed to go."

— George Coolbaugh Jr., 60, Groveland, Livingston County

"Finally, someone at City Hall made the right choice. Thank you, Mayor Duffy, for not throwing any more of my tax dollars in the toilet like Bill Johnson and Rochester City Council did. ...My only concern is for the poor business owners locked into contracts inside the ferry terminal." (It's hard to find sympathy for people more driven by money than common sense.)

— John Waudby, 34, Rochester


"While we may be sad in the short term that the ferry is gone, we are better off in the long term that we were not made to suffer through its demise for another few years."

— James Shafer, 44, Irondequoit


"The mayor has pledged fiscal responsibility, and his decision on the ferry is simply a matter of standing behind his promise to act in the best interest of the citizens of Rochester and Monroe County. When I go shopping for a car, the Cadillacs look nice, but my budget reminds me that I must confine myself to a compact car with simple basics. This should have been the case with the ferry, whereas a smaller boat may have proven to be a wiser choice."

— Ray Grosswirth, 56, Rochester


"Sadly, I must agree with his decision. Rochester has many needs, and holding on to the ferry would be like needing a new roof and foundation for your home but having a Mercedes with a huge payment sitting in the driveway. I've been on the ferry and loved it. It would have been nice to keep, but it seems like it is a luxury we cannot afford." (You're just arriving at that conclusion NOW?)

— Melanie Lewis, 42, Rochester

"Yes, Mayor Duffy made the right decision because any further support of this Titanic mess would put Rochester at risk of national embarrassment and derision that used to greet citizens of Cleveland, Ohio, in the 1970s. (Too late, Mike.  People from Australia to Istanbul to the Caribbean know about the foolishness of the city of Rochester.) (The secretive negotiations) and the way we let Toronto and Australia get the best sweetheart deals on Earth shows the deep corruption in the former Johnson administration."

— Michael Meggison, 38, Rochester

"I have been pro-fast ferry all along, but who can fault what Mayor Duffy has said? ... As for Toronto ... it seems that we have been doing nothing more than trying to convince that city that this is a good idea. ... We asked for materials on Toronto and they had none. We were told that they (had run out). How half-hearted! ... You can't just hope that things will get better."

— Lori Skoog, 62, Sweden

"I'm deeply, deeply sad. I love ferries and have used it. ... Mayor Duffy did the right thing, though. It's been a mess from the beginning. It wouldn't recover. ... Maybe we could sell it to Homeland Security for $100,000,000 and they could cruise around and collect suspects!"  (Who says there's no drug problem in the suburbs?  Crack is whack, Lori.)

— Laurie Ditzel, 50, Perinton

"I was in favor of the ferry initially. Now that the true facts have been published, I must side with the new mayor. Apparently we have been sold a bill of goods by the former mayor.  (Nothing can be sold without a buyer.) Too much secrecy, too much undercover negotiations."

— Eugene Pizzoli, 75, Greece

"The kind of careful study done by Mayor Duffy and his staff was long overdue. A lot of people, self included, had serious doubts about the efficacy of this doomed project from the beginning. ... As the project foundered, there was too much personal emotional investment to even consider admitting failure."  (I'd much rather lose the emotional investment than the financial investment.  The 'emotional investment' is worthless.)

— Ben Bergman, 71, Geneva, Ontario County

"I think Mayor Johnson and many of us were caught up in the "romance" of the ferry. ... It was easy to rationalize that it could be made successful if only we threw more money into it, advertised more, etc. However, the time has come to face facts: The dream wasn't working, and it won't." (Why now?  Why not immediately after CATS closed shop?  It was obvious there wasn't enough passenger demand for the CATS' business; what changed once the city of Rochester took over?)

— Mary Jane Schmitt, 72, Henrietta

"I applaud Mayor Duffy for taking the time to delve into the problem with the ferry head-on and making the very tough decision to let it go. I am sure we as a city can come up with a plan involving the private sector to utilize the ports and terminal in the future in a way that is more viable and cost-effective for our area and not a huge burden to the taxpayers."  (And if you're wrong...??)

— Linda Fullerton, 50, Rochester

"I don't think he made the right decision. ... He is not a businessman; he's a politician, thus apparently is not comfortable with taking calculated business risks, only political ones. ... I think he should have given the boat one more year, then at that point sell it and purchase a smaller, more manageable boat or work to have a private interest take over the service. (The decision to buy the ship) was made before he got there, and he should at least uphold it. Quite frankly I'm ... disappointed that I voted for him." (Mmm-hmm. And what of the best-case scenario where millions more would be lost in the 2006 season?  Who's going to pay for the $51.5 million debt?  Obviously Karl's no businessman either.)

— Karl Marsiglio, 34, Rochester