Page
Forty-Eight
Page
Forty-Eight
25 DECEMBER 2005
How about one more plan of action?
# 50. 12/8/05 9:36 AM by Richie -
Rochester
Bob, I almost always agree with you but can't on this issue. There are
times that doing the wrong thing is better than doing nothing.
(Sage advice.) Rochester is
in such a state of decline that I think some civic projects are really
needed. The Fast Ferry is one of those. I've taken the ferry. Its a nice
ship and an enjoyable trip. It seems to be a good idea but run by a bunch
of business idiots.
I totally agree that Johnson sold the public a "bill" of goods. Nobody in their right mind should have believed the ferry would make money. I always thought it would require subsidies. Now it a matter of how much pain the public is willing to endure. Make no mistake, Rochester will be saddled with debt, the question is if it worthwhile. I agree with #10 and #37. I think we need to get some people who know how to run a business in charge of the ferry. (So -- even though 'no one in their right mind' should believe the ferry would make money, you think putting people who know how to run a business in charge is the way to make money? And you're from Rochester, are you?) Stop promoting it as transportation to Toronto (obviously Toronto doesn't care about the ferry nor do they need it) and start promoting it as entertainment. (Does 'entertainment to Toronto' work better for you?) Use it for to ferry service for certain occasions, like Yankee games when it sold out. In addition use it for corporate charters, day cruises, gambling cruises, and yes trips through the Welland canal to Cleveland or Detroit or trips to the 1000 Islands. I think we need to give it more than one year to mature before pulling the plug. |
Why yes... yes, of course. It's all making sense now.
Invest well over $50 million in a ship which is so highly specialized it requires customized docking facilities to load and unload passengers and vehicles. Con any port city -- which will ante up the cash -- to build a highly specialized terminal equipped with a two-story high gangway and tell them their tourist trade will mushroom from all the Rochesterians who'll come for a day... maybe spend a night or two at the local Holiday Inn.
Then run a few weeks worth of cruises -- along the way, modifying the schedule to suit the operators' needs -- and don't bother asking the residents of the conned city if they so much as prefer a city bus or grubby taxi upon arrival at the home port. Be sure to tell them to "Stick to the recommended tourist trail in the city for your own safety, if you catch my drift <<sly wink>>".
After butchering the promised season schedule -- originally planned for year-round operation -- let the conned city cover their own asses by laying off their ferry terminal employees just around the holidays and lock the doors until March. That way, the ill will generated will have residents of the destination city line dancing with joy when the next year's season starts up. IF it starts up.
Upon finding the whole shebang is so far over your heads it makes stringing a cable car to the conned city look attractive, tell the taxpaying residents of the home port they're about to roll the dice one more time and win Fabulous Showcase Number Three which the lovely Janice is about to show. Don't forget to slip Suited Marketing Experts Inc. a generous cut in the action for... oh, I don't know... 'Services Rendered'. Yeah, THAT'S it... 'Services Rendered'.
After an appropriate amount of misappropriation and incompetence has passed, put on the best sad puppy faces you can muster and tell everyone you tried your very best but it was the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune which conspired to work against you.
As a clincher, blame Canada. It worked for 9/11 and sick cows, so it'll work for any American blunder under the sun.
Finally, after the destination city has thrown up their hands in exasperation and told you to go play with your toy somewhere else, hurl invectives and insults at them, clench your little fists, stomp your little feet and run off to find the next community which will agree to put up with your petulant and bizarre business practices. Tell THEM you've got a great way to boost their tourist trade and repeat the whole process.
Is that about it? Just want to make sure I understand how a professional ferry-operating city like Rochester demonstrates it knows what it's doing. Now that it's impressed the business community in the world-class city of Toronto, it's time to regroup and segue into Act III: 'Hey, Look. Now We're A Party Barge'.
Looks like Rochester is just filled with the mirth and glee of the holiday season.
Can't wait to see what the New Year will bring. </sarcasm>
35º | Hi 44º /
Lo 32º | |
|
City chatter
Regionwide, there's evidence that people
care about Rochester
(December 23, 2005) — At Christmas parties, waiting in line at the supermarket, or just chatting it up with friends and family on the phone or online, the talk lately in these parts is about Rochester's high-speed ferry. And it's not just city residents, who are liable for $41 million in current ferry debt, doing the talking. There's widespread interest in the ferry in the suburbs and around the region. Evidence of that are the samplings of letters printed on the Speaking Out page almost daily about the ferry and the city in general. A large portion of those letters are written by non-city residents. All of this bodes well for the Rochester region. It's a sign that the once-pervasive perception that people outside the city couldn't care less about its future is just that — a perception. A misperception at that. None of the concern about the city's future should be surprising. After all, many suburbanites once lived in the city or they work here. They know that the stronger the city becomes, the better off the entire region will be. With this mentality becoming more predominant, it's critical that leaders such as Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks, Mayor-elect Bob Duffy, the City Council, the County Legislature, town supervisors, village mayors and their boards find new ways to work more cooperatively. With the new year just around the corner, local leaders should make tearing down artificial boundaries in this community among their top priorities. We really are in this together. (Not quite. The buck stops at the city line.) |
Not to rain on this songfest of regional cheer, but the Democrat & Chronicle is assuming criticism equates with caring. It suggests the towns, villages and counties surrounding the city of Rochester have suddenly reversed the thirty-plus years of neglect and are now filled with the spirit of bonhomie.... ready to embrace the city and -- most importantly -- its debt.
WRONG. I don't live, work or vote in Monroe County and frankly, if city and Monroe County residents want to turn downtown Rochester into a giant greenhouse with palm trees on Main Street, that's fine with me. As long as I'm not paying for it, I really DON'T care.
Don't be trying to haul me or my county into the equation; we were never asked, never consulted and were never given the opportunity to say 'no'. In my book, that means we didn't matter at the time. Now that the juicy bounty has turned sour, suddenly it becomes "We really are in this together"? I don't think so, folks. You guys are in it alone this time, you guys brought this on yourselves, you made the mess... now you clean it up. Don't hand me the mop and say it's my turn.... I wasn't even at the bar drinking.
No, I don't care. I stopped caring when the mayor of Rochester told us naysayers to shut up and sit down when we came forward with a critical view of the ferry project. It's hard to feel sympathy for a community which places greater value on ersatz tourist attractions instead of school funding, hospitals and a staggering child poverty rate.
Fortunately, my income is in no way, shape or form tied to the local economy and the majority of it is spent outside the area and country. That's just the way it works out. With national retailers steamrolling local businesses one by one, SOMEONE in the Rochester area must be supporting these non-local businesses... so don't tell me I'm the one to blame. And don't try to pick my pocket telling me I need to support projects I never agreed with in the first place.
Frankly, I seriously doubt the Rochester area would be very happy with me running the show. Sprawl, guns and the 'Ol Boy Network would be the first to go. Then we'd take a look at private projects funded by public money, school taxes paid by residents who never set foot in schools and the insidious brand of 'polite' racism which pervades the community.
Of course, there'd only be a handful of residents who didn't move away after all that was addressed.
Maybe the ones who couldn't handle changes like those are truly the ones who don't care.
Just a thought.
| Merry Christmas - Joyeux Noël | ||
| from | ||
 |
The Native Canadian! |
 |
26 DECEMBER 2005
What's this got to do with the ferry? A tax tirade; read on...
37º | Hi 37º /
Lo 27º | |
|
Credit outlook 'negative'
Standard & Poor's says Monroe rates among lowest N.Y. counties (December 26, 2005) — A new report by Standard & Poor's credit agency says that while the state's economy is improving overall, Monroe County has the lowest credit rating of 17 counties in New York tracked by the agency. And Monroe is one of two counties from
this group of 17 that has a negative forecast. Oneida is the other.
Erie was given a credit rating of BBB
with
a stable outlook. That is one notch below Monroe County's rating of
BBB+.
Monroe County's low credit rating and negative outlook reflect the failure to come up with a strategy to balance the county's books without resorting to special measures. "They need stability in their finances," said Harold Burger, an associate in public finance for Standard & Poor's. He wrote the report with Robin Prunty, a director in public finance for the agency. Steve Gleason, chief financial officer
for Monroe County, said County Executive Maggie Brooks was addressing the
problem. The report notes that Monroe County was among the counties that had gone years without raising more revenue from property taxes to close budget shortfalls. (Courtesy of that great former County Executive, Republican Jack Doyle who County voters elected, re-elected and re-elected because he promised.. you guessed it.. no tax hikes.) "This is very problematic when costly social service programs, such as Medicaid, result in annual spending growth that exceeds inflation," says the report. Monroe County's failure to provide sufficient revenue resulted in Standard & Poor's dropping Monroe's credit rating by five notches between February 2002 and August 2004. Brooks, who took office in January 2004,
had said as a candidate that she would not increase the total revenue
raised from property taxes. Brooks said that even with the county's lower credit rating, the county is borrowing at a rate lower than it had in recent years because interest rates have in general been lower. She also said the county hasn't fared well in its credit rating because those doing the evaluation want the county to raise its property tax rate. |
"Monroe County was among the counties that had gone years without raising more revenue from property taxes to close budget shortfalls."
There you have it in a nutshell. For about ten years, until the last few days of his tenure, Monroe County Exec Jack Doyle won the applause of county voters on a platform of not raising property taxes. Although the cost of everything was naturally going up due to an unknown phenomena known as 'Inflation', slack-jawed county residents never made the connection to their government.
Government, strangely enough, faces the same nasty impact of inflation as you and I do. The cost of fuel rises as does the price of building and property maintenance and insurance. Re-roofing the leaky roof costs homeowners more today than it did ten years ago. And don't talk to me about the 'relative cost' gig; $5000 today is still $5000 no matter whether it could buy umpteen times more product ten years ago or not. People's incomes haven't kept pace with the price of consumer products and neither has the county's income.
Jack Doyle's unrealistic plan to hold the line on taxes was met with great accolades by county voters who seemed to think government was immune to the effects of inflation. Instead of smaller tax increases over the years, now county residents are facing a huge increase over a relatively short period of time to close the gap left by no tax increases for years.
Tax Theory Explained.
Wasting money raised by taxes is something which gets the taxpayers incensed on short order... as well it should. Waste, in any form, should be kept to a minimum as resources, in any form, are limited. Some waste is to be expected... a household which produces zero waste is one with no occupants.
I've never minded paying taxes. ("That's easy for you to say; you get tax breaks as a by-product of being a Status Native.") In Canada, yes I do. However, in the States, I've been paying every tax as anybody else for forty years. Sales, income, FICA and Federal Excise taxes have all benefited from my income and my Canadian Native status has had no effect on any of them.
Regarding taxes: To me, what you pay is less important than what you get in return. In the States, if somebody asked me if I minded paying an additional $1000 a year in taxes, but would get... say, 90% of my health costs completely covered... eliminating the need for private health insurance, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. If a Monroe County homeowner was told their annual property tax was going to increase by $100, but they would get free trash pickup instead of having to contract out to a VERY costly private refuse company, one would think they'd vote for the tax increase.
Neither of the above examples was ever on the table for discussion. The point is: What goods or services are being returned to the taxpayers as a result of them paying taxes? Paying a lot in taxes but getting literally nothing in return is the extreme example... residents receive a great deal from their government in the form of roads, schools, social programs or even protection... both foreign and domestic.
Paying A LOT in taxes, but getting A LOT in return is a relatively fair deal and ferry-advocating community 'leaders' have tried to show where the ferry will return much to the community in the form of tourism, jobs and civic pride. It has done none of the above and has had a poor return on investment for the taxpayers.
If Monroe County used 100% of it's tax revenue to pay off its debt -- and nothing else -- residents might have a tough time getting anywhere in January as the roads would be impassable from no snow or ice removal. With no County Sheriff's department, DWI's would flourish, B&E's would go unanswered and residents would have to fend for themselves. County Health Department? Gone. Needy seniors? No county social programs to give assistance. Parks and their facilities left unattended and unmaintained.
What you get from your taxes is more important than what you pay. Local residents only look at what they're paying... not what they're receiving or not receiving. Tax-supported projects like the ferry, undomed sports stadiums and other ill-conceived initiatives are returning nothing to the general tax-paying public... the ancillary spin-off benefits are either marginal at best or non-existent at worst.
In the case of the ferry, residents will be facing a $51.5 million bill. True enough, it's the city residents who'll shoulder the majority of that cost, but the cuts in other programs will have to be subsidized or picked up by the next level in government, the County of Monroe. The New York State taxpayer has tossed millions into the project as well.
And what do these taxpayers have to show for spending their money on the ferry project? Diddly squat.
Monroe County residents, in a move to save money, have in fact wound up costing themselves far MORE than they've saved. That sort of mentality has led to a pathetic credit rating for a county which used to be an economic star. The ferry project, once touted as not only a boon to tourism but to community pride, has turned into a source of civic embarrassment.
Who's to blame? Who voted for a short-sighted policy in deference to long-range planning? Who voted for the same political agenda which drove the county to its present credit rating? Who voted for town councils which pursued the self-centered interest of suburban sprawl over pragmatic and sensible development? Who voted for the city councilors who passed the ferry buying proposal? Who voted to unrealistically hold the line on taxes while the cost of government increased? Who voted for the politicians who catered to a select group of local private businesses instead of examining external sources with a wider vision and experience?
People get the government they deserve. And in the case of Monroe County and Rochester, voters got what they asked for.
'The good of the many comes before the good of the few'; that's a fundamental difference between Canada and the States. Had that principle been followed, the ferry project would never have gotten off the ground as CATS would have never had enough compelling reasons for the public to support its self-serving agenda.
"After the report was written, however, Standard & Poor's started rating Erie County for general borrowing, and it was lower than Monroe."
Is that supposed to make Monroe County residents feel better? Is there some reason why insecure Monroe County residents always feel the need to compare themselves to Buffalo and Erie County?
Which county's credit rating has fallen the fastest in the past ten years? Which county has seen the greatest percentage of job losses in the past ten years? Which city is blowing tens of millions of dollars on an unrealistic, unnecessary and doomed public project which has done nothing but fail since it was first conceived? Which county has the greater advantage of being an international gateway by land along with the proximity of a permanent international tourist attraction? Which city isn't just flapping some flabby jowls about a downtown casino, but have real results in the making?
Rochester area residents may have had reason to feel smug in the past, but those days are long gone. Instead of comparing themselves to success, Monroe County residents compare themselves to what they perceive as failure and say, "See? We're doing good".
And so it goes.
|
35º | Hi 37º /
Lo 27º | |
|
Not so fast
New mayor deserves more breathing room on
ferry loan
(December
26, 2005) — Should city taxpayers,
already indebted $41 million for the high-speed ferry, be placed on the
hook for an additional $11.5 million to resume Lake Ontario trips between
Rochester and Toronto next spring?
Only if a better operating strategy can
be found. Under legislation adopted last week by the council, Duffy will have only until Jan. 5 to essentially veto the council's approval of the loan. Because Duffy will be sworn into office Jan. 1, that hardly seems like adequate time to thoroughly assess the merits of the council's bailout plan. (Why? It's not like he hasn't hasn't heard of it already.) After all, this is the same team that got taxpayers into the current mess in the first place. Because that's so, and council members insist that an extended delay could jeopardize the ferry's future, Duffy should get into contact with the Australian lender immediately. Even if he has to travel to Australia himself (a phone call would suffice), he needs to explain that his administration is on record as supporting the ferry project (is it?) but that he must have more time to ensure that the right decisions are made about its future. ("Take all the time you want. Just make sure the February payment is on time.") Not only is that a reasonable request, but it's also one that the lenders ought to appreciate. The more stable the project becomes, the more likely it is that the lender recoups its investment unencumbered. (That amounts to last-ditch rationalization and nothing else.) Foremost, Duffy should explain that the project has suffered because of poor marketing and that it's imperative that a new strategy be devised that he fully supports. Yes, the current ferry board has unveiled
a new marketing plan, but it needs work, a lot of work. The ferry project is worth saving. But it must be done in a way that values public confidence as much as it does the lender. |
Stuff 'n nonsense, all of it. It's hard to imagine any lender falling for that sob story.
EFIC and Bay Ferries have bent over backwards to accommodate this entire ferry fiasco; from extending credit to a ferry project which showed little promise in the first iteration (a real red flag if ever there was one) to an operator picking up the tab to cover the last $2 million needed to close out the season. Now the D&C is suggesting the mayoral personal touch to grease the skids for more time to arrive at the conclusion the service is over? Fat chance, Milhouse. Save the airfare. It's not going to make any difference.
Being ridiculed by one foreign nation is bad enough. Why encourage another?
As for 'Not so fast', that February due date is rapidly approaching and there'd better be at least $2 million ready to be mailed out on time. Where that $2 million or so is going to come from -- especially if the final City Council final bond approval is voted down -- makes scrambling for dollars to fend off a loan default an immediate priority. Mayor Bob better have some fast cash available... arranging that needs to be considered immediately and not put on hold until after the holiday eggnog has been finished off.
Until EFIC has formally offered an extension on the loan due date, the city had better plan on making the payment on time. It would be irresponsible to wait until the last minute to figure out where the money's going to come from... not to mention Bay Ferries may be putting the squeeze on for THEIR $2 million as well.
Speaking of Bay Ferries, suppose they break their contract with the city because the terms were violated by their client, the City of Rochester? They may be fed up with the rank amateur antics of a bungling ferry corporation and are looking for the easiest way out of the agony. Who'll step in and run the show?
Better yet; who'll WANT to?? Who needs the headache? It's not like the thing has ever made any money... and that's a real negative to any operator looking to make a profit.
Go figure, huh?
27 DECEMBER 2005
The Who's of Whoville speak...
|
31º | Hi 38º /
Lo 28º | |
|
Letters to the editor
(December 27, 2005) — Imagine what $11.5M
could buy
I am one of the occasional riders of the ferry. I'm the typical suburbanite who occasionally attends a Yankees game in Toronto. The thing that I liked best about the ferry was arriving fresh and energetic instead of exhausted from the Queen Elizabeth Way traffic. (I know what you mean. It's SO physically exhausting to sit on your butt for three hours, isn't it? Lazy son...) Now I couldn't possibly buy a ticket without a lot of guilt. The guilt comes from thinking $11.5 million could buy things the city needs. How many school nurses, psychological counselors, books and computers could $11.5 million buy for city schoolchildren? How many cops would be added to possibly prevent the city kids from killing each other? No. I won't be buying any more ferry
tickets. (I see. But the $40 million the
city spent to buy the ferry was fine at the time, wasn't it?) Children lack necessary health and educational programs because the city lacks the financial wherewithal. Still we are somehow able to subsidize boat rides on Lake Ontario. I believe I heard someplace that children
(not fast ferries) are our future. T.P. McGUIRE Why not offer to rent the ship while in winter dock to RIT for the former mayor to hold classes on? Just think of the wonderfulness of it all. There would be students coming and going and spending money at the port businesses; tours could be held so the taxpayers who are not going to use the ship at least get a close look at where their money is going; and Mr. Johnson could reign supreme over his creation on which he didn't have to spend a dime of his own money. Johnson's attitude seems to echo the statement made by Ronald Fielding, senior vice president, Oppenheimer Funds, in the Democrat and Chronicle on Dec. 18. "The fact that they're going to throw the money away to keep this ferry going for a year is of no consequence to me. ... I only care if they have enough money to pay me back." I thought Mr. Johnson liked the city of
Rochester. Oh well, think again. |
I've got an idea. As part of the 'marketing strategy', why doesn't the ferry board set up a website and call it 'WeHateTheQEW.com'? The purpose of such a site would be to slag off and bash anything having to do with the Queen Elizabeth Way.
"It's too fast for my sluggish mind", "Why are all these cars headed to Canada's largest city?" and "Straight, flat, well-maintained, well-marked and three lanes wide isn't good enough for me" could be the bylines to persuade prospective drivers to use the ferry. Leave the NYS Thruway out of the equation even though it's in worse shape, costs more, is moving just as fast and has one less lane in each direction. That's different. It's in the States and we don't go all to pieces every time we see a sign for the speed limit or distance.
The strange unfamiliarity of Canada only intensifies when some Rochester area residents are actually within Canadian territory -- they feel naked, out of place, vulnerable and generally a bit ill at ease. I don't really know what they expect will happen to them; maybe crazed American-scenting moose are prowling around Southern Ontario ready to attack the first New York plate they see. Maybe the terrifying spectre of a more liberal society is too much for their conservative sensibilities or something... I'm not quite sure.
Whatever the compulsion, I chalk up QEW-hating as a case of smalltown folks who think a five-minute slowdown on the local expressway is reason enough to be broadcast on all the media outlets' traffic reports. These are people who see traveling any faster than 60mph in a car as death-defying acts of lunacy performed only by speed freaks and Canadians. Like cats on the way to the vet, these poor souls are agitated beyond control if they see the needle approaching 70 on the speedometer. Nevermind that if they'd simply keep up with traffic and enjoy the passing scenery, the speed they were going would be almost irrelevant.
In many ways, the very creation of the ferry concept was to provide Rochester area residents with an alternative to driving the QEW.... it's feared that much here in Whoville. It's sad, really, to think a community would resort to a costly and irresponsible measure such as a ferry to avoid having to drive a perfectly typical and modern limited access highway. But there you have it.
To listen to locals brag of how short their commute to work is, or how few miles they have on their cars or how they moan mightily about having to drive W A Y over to the other side of the city (maybe ten miles or so)... you'd think this is a community which absolutely despises driving. Why that is, I haven't a clue. I suppose when the primary vehicle is a chrome-laden, gas-swilling big honkin' SUV, it might get pricy to run all over hell's half acre... but when superficial image is more important than functionality, it's understandable.
Makes no sense at all, but it's understandable.
So there you are, ferry 'marketers'; 'WeHateTheQEW.com'. A freebie, courtesy of the Native Canadian.
|
|
And just for poor 'ol Ed Sarney of Greece, who'll sadly have to arrive at his Yankees games all 'exhausted' from driving the QEW, here's a link to the traffic cams along the QEW from the border all the way to the Spadina exit in downtown Toronto. This way, he can see for himself that the QEW isn't the horrific, onerous ordeal he thinks it is.
Of course, whining about imaginary fears is a lot easier than discovering facts. And he might have to move and click a mouse which is undoubtedly 'exhausting' to someone who'd rather be carried to Toronto than drive. Something tells me this guy has generous padding on his posterior due to the desire to do as little exertion as possible, so sitting should come naturally to him.
Indulgent pampering is one thing. Abject laziness is quite another.
The following may add voter support for PM Martin's proposed handgun ban. As Ontario goes, so goes Canada... that's just the way a democracy works.
|
|
|
|
|
Police cordoned off the site of the shooting, on Yonge Street in the core of Toronto's downtown shopping district |
Police officers said they arrested two young men and seized a gun. They weren't immediately sure whether the gunfire was linked to the gang violence behind a number of fatal shootings in Toronto in 2005.
Explain to me again how simply increasing penalties for crimes committed with handguns would have prevented this atrocity? I'm not ready to simply shrug and concede "Well, it's going to happen anyway"; I want government officials to take whatever small steps may be necessary to ensure it never happens in the first place. If a ban on handguns takes out only 100 guns, that's 100 less chances of someone being killed.
Including a 15-year old teen who's only mistake was being at the wrong place at the wrong time. There are no guarantees that a ban on handguns would have prevented this tragedy, but obviously even the harshest sentence -- such as the death penalty -- wouldn't have kept the killer from pulling the trigger. It's questionable that even the promise of torturing the convicted would have acted as a deterrent.
Rochester, of all places, certainly has no room to be pointing fingers considering this year it's had more murders (54) than a metropolitan area (52) more than ten times its size. Anybody want to explain to me why THAT is, also?
|
Among other things, Rochester area residents still can't figure out why hoards of Torontonians and Canadians aren't hopping on board the ferry?
Yet another ferry 'plan':
|
40º | Hi 44º /
Lo 37º | |
|
Letters to the editor
(December 28, 2005) — Sell stock in ferry
company
If the city is so intent on keeping the fast ferry, (That hasn't been determined. "If the city COUNCIL is is intent on keeping the ferry.." is more the case.) wouldn't it make sense to go public with the venture and sell shares in the ferry company? The city could retain 51 percent
ownership and anyone who supports the ferry could own part of the
business. City taxpayers would not go deeper in
debt as they would with the sale of bonds and as Mayor Johnson puts it,
"be off the hook." |
Once again, vague theory meets stubborn reality. Robert needs to ask himself if HE'D be willing to invest in a company which has failed before and is in the process of failing again. Knowing there would be no compensation, would HE be willing to lose any amount of cash invested in such a proposal?
It all sounds good on paper, but as the ferry project has clearly shown, ignoring facts in favour of theoretical postulating is highly unpredictable, irresponsibly risky and generally the route of people clutching at straws. It relies far too much on assumptions instead of solid facts.
"If a public offering of $19 million in shares were achieved..."
And if it WASN'T achieved, then what? Robert Tripi makes the great leap of assuming a public offering of $19 million in shares is realistically attainable. Maybe it is; maybe it isn't... but from a pragmatic perspective, the idea that the public will jump on the chance to be a part of a failing business venture is a bit far fetched. "Read the prospectus carefully before doing any investing" isn't just a catchy phrase, it's a serious warning.
Some investor who's never heard of the Toronto-Rochester ferry and reads the history of the ferry since Dom Delucia first showed up would only smile and move on to the next portfolio. There's absolutely no indication of profit in the venture... only promises and problems.
Scraping together $19 million in public shares may sound good, but has as much of a chance of working as the ferry project itself. That assumption-as-fact way of thinking is what got the ferry project in trouble since Day One as ferry organizers never entertained the thought -- or made plans -- for "What if it doesn't?"
City 'leaders' who leased the $16 million ferry terminal to Maplestar for 40 years at $1 per year obviously never entertained the thought that there wouldn't be sufficient public demand... it simply assumed there would. Did anybody bother to ask "What if there isn't?"
Sure. Lots of people did, but they were labeled negative naysayers and told to shut up. Any serious investor who read about the lease agreement would immediately wonder why there was no provision made for the very real possibility of the yet-to-be tested venture failing. That alone should send a high level of skepticism about the business savvy of those doing the organizing.
$19 million in public shares? A stretch by anyone's imagination.
Writing's on the wall.
|
40º | Hi 43º /
Lo 29º
|
|
Duffy will decide ferry's fate next week
(December 28, 2005) —
The future of the high-speed ferry may ride on a decision next week by
Mayor-elect Robert Duffy. "We are being asked to make a decision relatively quickly, but I intend to abide by those constraints," he told the Democrat and Chronicle. City Council voted last week to recommend that the city-run Rochester Ferry Co. sell bonds to pay off at least $10 million in debt incurred by the ferry service during its shortened season this year. The legislation doesn't take effect until Jan. 5, giving Duffy time to weigh in and name four appointees to the 11-member ferry board. A new City Council would approve his appointees to the board on that day; then the ferry board would vote the next day, Jan. 6, on final approval of the loan. Duffy had requested that a decision on
the loan be delayed until after he took office Jan. 1, possibly until
mid-January. But will that decision be? Duffy said "premature" to say whether he will agree with City Council to approve the loan, saying he's still reviewing the matter with members of his administration. Without the loan, the ferry service would likely not resume March 31 and the city would be forced to sell the boat – possibly for about half of the $40 million it paid in February. Taxpayers would incur the rest of the debt. "My thought is to keep gathering
information and be prepared to articulate my position" at the meeting, he
said. |
The dangers of assuming -- instead of actually seeking facts -- are coming home to roost.
Keeping an open mind isn't just an good idea, it's an imperative where a business relies on the public's response in order to succeed. Second guessing what the public needs or wants is a formula for failure.
I'm not going to place the blame for the ferry's failure under the city's auspices completely on Mayor Bill Johnson, although he certainly deserves the lion's share of the fault. It was his dogged determination to keep the service going when all the signs were in place which pointed to letting the thing die a natural death.
At any point, his plan for the city to take over the operation could have been -- and should have been -- outvoted by the City Council. In an example where personal mandates and political posturing outweighed rational planning, the ferry was nonchalantly rammed through the approval process and suddenly, Rochester area residents became saddled with a debt that will take decades to fully pay off. Worse yet, the damage to the area's credibility has taken its toll and the snide comments which locals have aimed towards their northern lakemates hasn't ingratiated them to Toronto and Canadian interests.
When the face falls off, it really makes a thud. Canadians are seeing the REAL motivation behind the 'warm and friendly' Rochester ferry façade was little more than a superficial ploy aimed at siphoning desperately needed cash to the south shore. The references to 'Canukistan' as well as comments aimed at denigrating Canadian liberalism in the face of American conservatism haven't helped either. Certain local folks know who I'm talking about.
There's bound to be a thick air of bitterness once the ferry is laid to rest. Blame-mongers will go into overdrive with their flurry of fingerpointing and accusations and it's a safe bet Torontonians and Canadians are going to be hit with some of the crap for not reacting in the intended and assumed manner. From criticizing Canadian Customs regulations to slamming the slow response to building the Cherry Street terminal to simply not showing sufficient interest in the pet project, the Canadian side of the equation is going to take some heat.
More juvenile opinions will go one step further and rip into Canadian society in general in a childish reaction of lashing out in anger for not wanting to play their ferry game. That's not really going to be taken to heart as one has to care what somebody says in order for the sting of its message is felt. The Rochester area, for all its self-aggrandizing pomp, is seen as just another community in a series of communities sharing the same lake by Canadians.
For all practical purposes, the Rochester Ferry Corporation is toast and this five year exercise in futility is over. That much is abundantly clear as the public cannot and will not continue to subsidize such an enormous liability for very long. What remains to be seen is how gracefully Mayor Bob Duffy will be able to back out of the mess with the least amount of damage to Rochester's reputation and bank account.
I smell a concession in the air where the request for $11.5 million isn't going to be approved, but a lesser amount WILL be approved -- either in bonds or the general fund -- in order to stave off a loan default and pay Bay Ferries its due. The Ferry business will be dissolved and the ship will be put up for sale. Something like that.
In another move, a Ferry Corporation bankruptcy filing might be in the works to protect the city from its creditors until some sort of payback arrangement can be reached.
But frankly, nothing at this point is going to surprise me as I never believed the ferry project would actually be given the credence it has received since the CATS proposal. Candidly, when I first heard of this idea it struck me as being so ludicrous and baseless that I didn't believe anyone would take it seriously. I was wrong and have no hesitation in admitting as such.
The classy and diplomatic way of backing out would be for Mayor Bob Duffy to offer a public apology to Torontonians, Canadians and Rochester area residents for the city's overzealousness. It's a bit difficult to see that happening -- mea culpas in government don't come around too often -- but for the sake of damage control and in the interest of public relations, it wouldn't be a bad move.
I almost feel sorry for Bob Duffy. Almost. He's in a no-win position even before he officially takes office, but such are the breaks of aspiring to the dizzying heights of fame and career. He knew the job description before he applied.
It's easy to bash retirees after they've cleaned out their desks and received the gold watch, but I've rarely seen where they've particularly cared very much after they've left the company. Bill Johnson will be out of the picture (just as Dominic Delucia and CATS have faded from recent memory) and those left behind in places of public visibility -- the remnants of Bill Johnson's city council -- are about to hauled on the carpet for a well-deserved dressing down.
I've got my ringside seat reserved for the 2006 season of public mud-slinging which is about to begin. If nothing else, it should at least be entertaining.
|
Yeah, that's what can happen when the only source of revenue is mothballed; as if that was some huge surprise when deciding to stop service for the winter. The original plan was for year-round service and there were no provisions made for what to do for income if the ship didn't sail. Haven't heard of too many wedding receptions or corporate shindigs being held on board since the ship was tied up. Like a waiting cab, the meter's ticking merrily away and the cost can do nothing but rise.
"Critical cash flow problem"? That's putting it delicately... it's more like massive hemorrhaging going on with no end in sight and the ferry is financially bleeding to death with each passing day.
Just to add insult to injury, what does the Rochester Ferry Corporation suggest Toronto do with its new ferry terminal when the service is declared defunct once and for all? Even though there may have been great misgivings about the viability of the plan, Toronto came through and built the highly specialized terminal just for the ferry... so what's it supposed to do with it now?
"Toronto Sues Rochester For Ferry Terminal Compensation" It'll never happen, of course, as Toronto could have said "No" at any point and have saved itself the cost, headache and embarrassment of dealing with rank amateurs in the ferry business. But the Toronto terminal WAS built in good faith and now that faith has been thrown on the floor and puked on.... probably not a very good legal basis to recover the construction costs, however.
Plus, as much as C$10 million is nothing to
sneeze at, with respect to the annual city budget of Toronto, it amounts to
cobbling together some scrap wood for a doghouse. Hardly worth pursuing in
some international legal flap. The real damage has already been done as
the Rochester area's credibility in Toronto circles just sank below the surface.
Package deals to Rochester? For what? What sort of guarantee is
there that what's been promised is what'll be delivered?
Canadians aren't too thrilled to discover they've been scammed by their 'friends' across the lake.
