EXCUSE ME, But the WSDOT people JUST DONT GET IT! Hot on the heels of the successful passage of I-695, they are now floating another non cost-effective proposal to spend YOUR money. From Yesterdays Seattle Times:

http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/ferr_19991107.html Posted at 10:12 p.m. PST; Sunday, November 7, 1999

Lake Washington may get ferry by Peyton Whitely Seattle Times Eastside bureau A passenger ferry could be running across Lake Washington between Kirkland and the University of Washington by next fall. Metropolitan King County Councilwoman Jane Hague said a series of developments in the past few days may turn the long-discussed idea into reality. Voter approval of Initiative 695, which overnight stalled countless highway projects, has made other transportation concepts more appealing, Hague said. In addition, a surge of support has developed in Kirkland, where the Eastside ferry landing would be placed.

Under the proposal Hague outlined Friday, two passenger ferries, each carrying up to 149 passengers, would run at relatively high speeds across the lake, making the crossing in 20 minutes or less and having a turnaround time of 30 minutes, including loading and unloading. Stopping at the UW would avoid slowdowns through the Montlake Cut and wave damage that has curtailed passenger-ferry service on some parts of Puget Sound. The ferries could be built by next fall, Hague said. Initial funding reviews show the vessels could be run for about $2.5 million a year, with a $2 fare and a projected ridership of 700 passengers a day. The ferries could be run as a public-private partnership, with publicly owned boats leased to a private operator.

NOW LETS REVIEW THE BIDDING: Gonna have to build a ferry terminal on each side. Going to have to have waiting areas for buses, etc., on each side. Maybe even a park n ride in Kirkland. Oh, yeah probably going to need at least one (1) boat as well. Once THOSE capitalization costs are paid for, these are the PROJECTED operating expenses:

$1400/day * 250 days/year = $350,000 per year user fees

Lets see, that only leaves us $2,150,000 a year SHORT. For 700 people using this service annually, WE THE PEOPLE will be subsidizing them to the tune of $3071.00 annually, AFTER CAPITALIZATION EXPENSES HAVE BEEn PAID. Now somehow, I just dont think that the majority of the people commuting between Kirkland and the UW are going to be impoverished people with minimum wage jobs. Kind of sounds to me like WELFARE FOR THE RICH. Yo, Jeff. You gonna ride this boat?

+

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 08, 1999

Answers

1. This is funded by federal grants, which are use or lose sorts of things. Since there's "not enough" to cover highway improvements, the WSDOT and SoundTransit are "getting creative."

2. 700/day ridership is probably a vast underestimate. The 520 corridor will be such a disaster by the time this thing goes live that I wouldn't be surprised to see ten times as much. Washingtonians love boats even more than they like their cars.

-- Chuck Kincy (ckincy@aa.net), November 08, 1999.

[1. This is funded by federal grants, which are use or lose sorts of things.] An excellent reason to decrease DOT funding at the federal level. Grants and matching fund plans that subsidize you to do things that are STUPID are not in the public interest. I pay federal taxes too. Id like the money spent wisely.

[Since there's "not enough" to cover highway improvements, the WSDOT and SoundTransit are "getting creative."] This is Lottery Logic. I dont have enough money to invest wisely, therefore Ill spend it on something with a low return. ANYONE who agrees with this logic ought to be PERMANENTLY banned from program management.

[2. 700/day ridership is probably a vast underestimate.] Or it may be a vast overestimate.

[The 520 corridor will be such a disaster by the time this thing goes live that I wouldn't be surprised to see ten times as much. Washingtonians love boats even more than they like their cars. ] One would expect that they have done their homework, but maybe not. If you tell me that these people can not estimate well enough to get demand any closer than one order of magnitude, I dont know why I should trust them with MY money at all.

But suppose you are right? We do NOT see the economies of scale in government that we see in private industry. Unit costs frequently go UP as volume rises (witness MetroKC transit). So instead of a $2.15 million shortfall in operating revenue, you suggest itll be maybe $25 million? And Im supposed to find reassurance in this statement? And this, I would assume, would drive capital expenses even higher, since the volume would require more than two boats, the park n ride (on waterfront property) would be bigger, etc.

I detect in your posting the government attitude that when you lose money on every transaction, you can make it up in volume. You dont, you just lose more money. And I AM NOT WILLING TO PAY TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR YACHTING.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 08, 1999.

"-- Chuck Kincy (ckincy@aa.net), November 08, 1999. " AA net? Anyone who thinks we should subsidize a ferry for rich people NEEDS to be in AA. I think you got the DTs, Chuck. One day at a time, brother.

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), November 08, 1999.