Page Seventy-Five

13 JANUARY 2012

Well, hi there.

Long time, no grousing... disappeared in life and living for a while.  Going on six years by the looks of it.

But I'm back, flogging the issue that just won't die.

Got a new theme now, called  "WHY?"   That's the question and in a way, an answer of sorts for those who care to re-visit the previous 74 pages of this torrid tale of the little city that couldn't.

More importantly, shouldn't.  More of that later.

Picking up at our program already in progress:

 

 

29º | Hi 31º / Lo 19º |
 
 

No ferry service yet for Rochester

Brian Sharp
Staff writer

(January 6, 2012) —

A resurrected Rochester-to-Toronto ferry service is off the table for 2012, but the developer hoping to restart service remains committed to the project. All Harper Sibley needs is a ship.

“Everything is pretty much in place (on both sides of the lake) to move forward,” Sibley wrote in an email this morning, responding to questions about the status of his efforts. “But I was not able to get the right boat at the right price.”

Sibley said an offer he made on a 300-passenger ferry was rejected, and a smaller boat he wanted was sold to someone in Africa. He had hoped to have a passenger-only ferry operational between Rochester and Toronto in mid-May of this year.

Ferry service had a brief but unforgettable run in Rochester in 2004 and 2005, first as a private venture then as a city-backed endeavor. Both efforts failed and lost millions in taxpayer dollars.

In an earlier interview, Sibley had said he was looking at 150-passenger ships, whereas the fast ferry had room for 774 people plus vehicles.

“I am still searching for the right ferry boat,” Sibley wrote. “Rochester has had the experience of trying to launch the service with the wrong boat and I am not going to make that mistake.”

Sibley, whose ancestors founded Western Union, is the managing director of Valentine’s Resort and Marina in Harbour Island, the Bahamas.

He is not seeking city, county or state funding for the project but instead will rely on private investment, including his own.

BDSHARP@DemocratandChronicle.com

   
 
A novel twist on an old idea, Sibley's concept is private capital funding the previous failed premise under a new blueprint. Vastly smaller boat, no public cash... and the same flawed notion that such a service is either needed or financially viable for more than a season or two.  If that.

Students?  Our theme? 

"WHY?"

WHY is this needed?  What is the purpose?  All I'm seeing in this incarnation is "A smaller boat will make it work".

WHY?  The very reason the first flop failed was for a variety of reasons (and no, I'm not going to rehash them all over again) but the question of "WHY?" was never asked or answered the first time.... or this time either.

It serves no purpose.  Period.  And generally speaking, any initiative that doesn't serve any purpose doesn't last for very long.

A ferry from Rochester to Toronto is pointless.  I thought we settled that six years ago?  Big boat, small boat, row boat... the size of the vessel doesn't make an iota of difference when local Rochester area residents are largely content to stick close to home, cozy in their comfort zone with the occasional venture off to the Magic Kingdom across the lake to gawk at the sites and ever-so bizarre street people.

Emphasis on the 'occasional'.  Care to offer a guess how often the average local visits Toronto in a year?  Go ahead, ask one.  If it's less than twice a year, that doesn't bode well for a service that's more of a variety act than a practical means of traveling to Canada's largest metropolitan area.

Repeat trips are what are needed, particularly for the tiny fraction of the local population who actually travel to the GTA.   Folks who don't go to Toronto now - for whatever reason - aren't going to give themselves a headslap and immediately book passage on a smaller ferry.  If they were interested, they'd be hopping in the car already.

So again, WHY?   I don't want to hear HOW? which seems to be the main question being addressed; I want to know WHY?

WHY is this ferry concept still being considered, given that there's no reason for its need that's even been raised?  Funsies?  A cheap imitation of a cruise ship experience?  A copycat offering of a truly useful ferry service like the British Columbia Coastal Ferries?

WHY?  "How" merely makes a gigantic assumption that the need or desire is already in place when that's never been determined.

Look, with a limitless source of funding, a Rochester-Toronto ferry service could conceivably last forever.  It wouldn't generate enough revenue to cover costs, but subsidized by some deep pockets it wouldn't have to.  Unfortunately, few investors are willing to dish out cash indefinitely without realizing some sort of return and relying on a community which has ALREADY shown it won't flock to Toronto - regardless by car, train or ferry - the size of the ship isn't the issue.  It's the lack of desire, initiative or interest that will sink a ferry.

But as long as the public cash isn't on the line, spend away.