September 2024 Ferry Fare Comments

October 1, 2024

Hello Guemes Island Ferry Community,

The public comment period is upon us, and we have until Friday, Sept. 20th @ 4:30pm to submit our comments to ferrycomments@co.skagit.wa.us & commissioners@co.skagit.wa.us to let them know what we think about the 2025 ferry fare proposal.

When sending comments, please send to both Skagit County email addresses and include guemesferry@gmail.com if you would like us to catalog your comment as well.

With the short timeframe, we’ve put together some talking points as a starting point for your public comment, if you find them helpful. They’re quick, to the point, and by no means a full list. Please take what speaks to you and go from there.

It will take all of us continuing to let the County know that we need transparency, accountability, and sustainability when it comes to ferry management and operations. Our livelihoods depend on it! Hopefully we can all agree that continuing to raise ferry rates and increasing costs are not sustainable. It threatens the diversity of the people, families, businesses, and visitors that make Guemes the amazing place that it is, by pricing them out.

Thank you for taking the time to write up and submit your comments. We know you’re tired and worn out by this constant process, but if we don’t speak up then we silently agree to whatever the County decides for us.

In Community,

The Guemes Island Ferry Committee

_______________________________________

The underlying issues

There is a need for more transparency on operations, how and why budget and operational decisions are made. It’s not clear why costs continue to go up.

There needs to be a hard look at how to reduce costs. There is no single cost increase, it’s the many small increases that continue to be made that are driving up the revenue targets and increasing operational costs.

Examples include: hiring an assistant manager, implementing a new electronic ticketing system that requires additional staffing, disproportionately allocating county insurance costs to ferry O&M, deferring maintenance of an old vessel, outsourcing vessel mechanical maintenance to a third party contractor, and relying on paid consultants for suggestions on how to operate the ferry system.

We’d like the Commissioners, Public Works, and the Ferry Division to communicate and partner with the Guemes Island Ferry community to find solutions to problems and concerns. This could be done through more public meetings, increased written communications, a collaborative community input process, and/or working with the Guemes Island Ferry Committee. One public hearing a year is not enough to gather feedback from the community.

Feedback on topics raised by Public Works at the 9/17 public comment meeting:

Proposed 2025 ferry fare schedule

Raising fares in 2025 by 30% on top of the 2024 fare increase is a huge financial impact and burden on ferry users. Families, people on fixed incomes, and businesses will be disproportionately impacted by the increased rates.

Expiration dates for single-ride tickets

Currently tickets are sold at the time of sailing and are good for that day. It’s not clear why this is an issue to be deliberated on.

Standardizing the 15% discount on multi-ride passes year-round

Keep the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes.

Eliminating multi-ride passes (thereby eliminating the expiration dates)

The multi-ride passes allow those who ride the ferry frequently to save some money on fares while commuting to work, transporting children, conducting business on the island, or going to medical appointments.

It is also more efficient for the pursers when they are collecting fares.

Changing the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days

There is no benefit to changing the expiration date from 90 days to 45 days.

Proposed charter rate for requested private trips

The proposed increased rate of $750/hr. with a 3 hr. Minimum will drive up the cost of fuel and propane on the island. The costs for propane and fuel companies to service Guemes island will be passed on to island customers, further increasing the amount that the Guemes island community (residents, visitors, and businesses) will have to pay.

Please continue to charge the propane and fuel run the cost for bringing their vehicles across according to the fare schedule.

This may seem like another revenue stream, however, it may result in those vehicles shifting to private charter instead.

Charging for parking in Anacortes

Paid parking in Anacortes, rates are proposed at $3 or $5/day in the 2023 fare target report

This puts an extra cost burden on riders, on top of the 2024 fare increase and the proposed 2025 fare increase. The projected revenue is not clearly defined in the proposal, and with the services outlined by Rachel Rowe in the presentation on 9/17, this will incur more costs – parking enforcement, security, and groundskeeping – while impacting any anticipated revenue.

Projected revenue from paid parking is elastic, just like ferry rates. E.g… rates go up, people use less service. Was elasticity taken into account here?

Proposed rate for emergency response – During regular ferry hours of operation & Outside regular ferry hours of operation

Increased rate for after hours ferry runs $500/hr, minimum of 3 hrs. = $1500 this will be an increased charge to the Emergency Medical Services fund. While this will bring in more revenue to the ferry, it is an unnecessary cost for this service.

Recently, the Skagit County Sheriff declined to respond to a call on Guemes because they did not want to pay the fee at the current rate. If the rate triples, how is that going to affect the decision making of emergency service personnel? Do we want emergency services making decisions about our safety and well being?

____________

Charmaine Johannes

Dear County Commissioners, Public Works and Ferry Manager,

It is important to us as Guemes Island residents and Skagit County residents to understand why budget and operational costs are implemented – and why costs keep going up. It is important to have transparency from our elected County Commissioners and those department heads they manage. In this day and age we can’t do this work alone. Cooperation between county government and local groups is essential in order to keep accurate dialogue and information flowing. The Guemes Island Ferry Committee has been doing this work with the county for decades. Yes, decades! Long before the currently serving commissioners and managers and public works employees, the Ferry Committee has been researching and keeping up with all things having to do with the MV Guemes. The Ferry Committee has been the only constant. Imagine if every time we started a new job, some wonderful person came in and handed us a notebook full of historical information about our job. Instead of reinventing the wheel, we could intelligently begin work and move forward.

I can imagine the difficulty of the commissioners’ job to manage a whole county ( and only three commissioners for about 130,000 residents!), to be acquainted with every region’s politics, every issue concerning a growing and changing population, and in addition, to manage the county’s department leaders. Tough job. But, a job made easier with the partnership of concerned citizens and community leaders. Guemes Islanders support and rely on the ferry committee to keep us up to date, to go through all the numbers and let us know what to expect each year as costs change and ultimately rise. We rely on them to go to meetings with the county and report back their findings and their conversations. And to report to the county our thoughts and needs. It has been a good working relationship for years. And we need it to continue.

At some point this working relationship dissolved. The results have been detrimental to the welfare and safety of Guemes Island residents. At the Sept. 17 Commissioners hearing, the ferry manager admitted to deferring maintenance of the MV Guemes! I was shocked. The proposed budget for the ferry reflects many increases in spending, and no decreases in order to arrive at a working budget. The proposal includes adding paid parking including parking area maintenance, security and landscaping! The budget includes a ferry assistant manager with a salary that could pay for vessel upkeep. There was discussion of ticketing changes and automation. All these changes make it more difficult for passengers to obtain tickets. Increases in fares for emergency and essential vehicles will create safety and welfare issues.

Guemes Islanders don’t want a “free ride.” We just want a well thought out solution to expected rate increases and changing services. The ferry is our road and our access to the rest of Skagit County. It is the county’s access to us. As voting Skagit County residents, we rely on good county government.

County Commissioners are accountable to all of Skagit County. It is the responsibility of commissioners to see that all county bureaucrats are responsible to their constituents. Accountability is built into the system so we have to look at how this system is breaking down. Maybe we start with our elected officials and let our voices speak loudly in the coming election.

Charmaine Johannes

Guemes Island

____________

Michael E. Murphy

Skagit County Commissioners,

I am writing to you regarding my concerns for the Ferry Rate Increase to the public access vehicle MV Guemes. This vehicle is used for public access to Skagit County property that is taxed by Skagit County for revenue to assist in the ongoing operations of Skagit County. Just as a bridge or a road is used to access all of the other Skagit County properties used for the same purpose.

Since Skagit County has raised property taxes by an unprecedented 42 percent in the last 3-year period, it seems only reasonable to use a percentage of that increase to help pay for ferry operations and maintenance.

The most recent proposal by the Skagit County Ferry Manager, September 17, 2024, increases ferry rates by 30 percent for the next year and beyond. I am proposing a different approach to solving this ferry cost dilemma.

Instead of using the Ferry Manager’s time and energy to find increasing revenue for the County, I propose that the Manager and the County look at ways to cut costs for the ferry Some ways this could be done are as follows:

Abandon the current proposed electronic ticketing system. Continue collecting fares by purser, as has been done for over 50 years with success.

Abandon the proposal to charge for parking – on property that Skagit County purchased for the express purpose of ferry customer parking. This proposal calls for a private contractor to oversee operations of this parking lot at a cost ( yet to be determined), plus costs for security and landscaping/grounds maintenance. This will end up costing more than the possible projected revenue. I don’t see paid parking being a successful option, because I believe Guemes Island residents and guests will simply find other places to park in the neighborhood. Currently, Anacortes city government and Anacortes residents who live close to the ferry are frustrated with the parking situation during peak and holiday times. Striping has been applied on the road to help residents who are closest to the ferry dock, but what of those two and three blocks away? It is the county’s responsibility to work with the Anacortes community to solve this problem. Adding paid parking will only make the problem worse.

Hire a full time Maintenance/crew person. The deferred maintenance of the MV Guemes, reported by the Ferry Manager on 9/17/2024, was shocking to say the least. Up until recently, the ferry had a full time vessel maintenance/deck hand available to do planned maintenance on the vessel. He was, reportedly, “pushed out” by management due to personality conflicts. The maintenance person kept the ferry maintained and running and would come in to work on the boat, make repairs, and get the vessel back in use in as short an amount of time as possible. Now we have to rely on contract labor who don’t have intimate knowledge of the vessel, who are not available immediately, and at an additional expense to the budget.

Finally, I recommend a Full Audit of the Ferry Operations and Public Works Department. Increases in expenditures have overwhelmed the budget, yet the manager and public works continue to add expenditures and defer maintenance of the MV Guemes — ultimately putting the well-being of residents of Guemes Island and public safety at risk. If County Commissioners are not willing to conduct the audit in house, I am compelled to contact the Washington State Auditor’s office and request one.

Please think about the consequences of overcharging emergency and essential vehicles for passage on the vessel. Please seriously consider the ramifications of sheriff, fire and medical vehicles that cannot respond to calls from residents and the volunteer department. It is no longer simply a matter of money — it is a matter of public safety for residents of Skagit County!

Michael E. Murphy

Guemes Island

____________

Jake and Lea Choiniere

Dear Commissioners and Guemes Island Ferry Management,

I am dismayed at the proposals for the 2025 Guemes Island ferry fares. The total proposal represents a fairly outrageous year over a year increase in total cost of ridership for those of us who live on the island and conduct business in town. It is doubly frustrating after a recent significant fare increase that was supposed to neutralize the budget. It seems that if the budget is not balanced, we should very carefully scrutinize the decisions of the current management as to why they are recently enacted plan has not worked.

Of particular concern for me and the current proposal is the notion of instituting a parking charge on the town side. This would represent a major inconvenience for those of us to do commute regularly, which will likely only introduce more complexity and problems, and not actually generate a significant amount of new revenue.

-This will push people to park on neighboring city streets, which will lead to unnecessary conflict and discord with our neighbors

-This will add to ferry congestion, we are already seeing numerous late runs, extreme long waits, etc.

-Revenue from a paid parking scheme will be offset by the cost for things like security, parking lot maintenance, machinery maintenance, etc. My suspicion is the overall net revenue will be relatively low, at the cost of worsened efficiency, significant inconvenience for islanders, inconvenience for town folks.

While I also take issue with the proposed increased fares, this parking proposal is by far my greatest concern and I hope you will consider striking this from the proposal.

Thank you for your time.

Jake and Lea Choiniere

Guemes Island

____________

Leo E. Osborne & Jane Lane

Greetings,

I have been a full time resident of Guemes Island for 31 years. My wife Jane Lane and I purchased our current home 24 years ago here on South Shore of the island.

I want it to be known in writing this, that I am NOT in agreement with most of the rises in costs for the Guemes Ferry. The increase in ticketing is outrageous, though I can see how there may be a need to increase them somewhat, but not at the extreme that is now being suggested. Increase the costs for NON_RESIDENTS to get over here, but the fulltime land owners who live here, we should be considered differently!!!!! The paying for public parking on both sides of the ferry is NOT right, as we pay extreme taxes, that have increased DRASTICALLY, that should be covering these costs for the county and city of Anacortes.

These changes will affect everyone here and mostly for those who do not make a LOT of money, like old timers as myself and wife who is retired. We live on little and live like good islanders, careful of what we spend money on, being thrifty.

I think you at the County level should be thinking this way, too…..and working to make those of us, YOUR COUNTY RESIDETNS here on Guemes Island be able to live here at a reasonable cost to being ferried over.

What was it? Some twenty years ago or so that you changed the last ferry run from 6pm to 8:30 pm, even though the island voted over 90% to leave it as it was, you changed it so that YOU could make more revenue from people commuting to Seattle for work. YOU did that, not the island, and you profited by it and now we have a lot more folks living here full time, which is giving the ferry a lot of new revenue with long ferry lines that inhibit the use by full time residents here. We had no choice and we have no choice!

So, please do not do these increases as you suggest.

With much concern,

Leo E. Osborne & Jane Lane

___________

Stephen Orsini

Time to cut costs on the Guemes Ferry

On August 21, 2024, I attended a meeting of the Skagit Transit Board and was impressed as CEO Crystle Stidham addressed the problem of continued high cost of operation in the face of a decline in ridership. She accomplished major cost reduction in management staff both by the difficult task of laying off personnel and reducing other’s job pay categories. Other steps include outsourcing their IT department. She also stated that at this time, Skagit Transit could not afford conversion of their bus fleet from diesel to electric.

For years the ridership numbers for the Guemes Ferry have remained remarkably constant while costs of the operation continue to soar well above any inflation index. In the face of these cost increases, Ferry Management has added to overhead by hiring a full-time assistant ferry manager, a new position to the operation. The salary for this position is about $83,000/yr. This addition increases cost with no increase in vehicle and passenger through-put or reduction in loading time.

For years, when I was on the now disenfranchised Guemes Island Ferry Committee, I advocated for an electronic ticketing system as a way to decrease loading times and to avoid the cost of adding a full-time purser. Instead, over a period of several years, management added a full-time purser on all shifts and now has chosen to add an electronic ticketing system, signing a five year contract, which has not worked during the Beta test phase. The set-up cost for this application was about $80,000 and maintenance fees will add another $94,000 annually. The lack of in-line credit card processing, along with installation of a planned toll booth, could actually slow loading. It is unlikely that the full-time purser position will be eliminated.

In the face of this summer’s heavy traffic, the ferry has not maintained schedule, at times missing entire runs. Meanwhile, the vessel is operated in such a way as to increase the time of crossing. This is seen in the vessel turning down current, in the absence of intervening vessel traffic, adding a wide arc to the crossing. This maneuver adds 5 to 10 minutes to the crossing time when the sailing times are already running late. It burns more fuel thus increasing airborne pollutants.

The proposed 30% fare increase for this year, along with the draconian new fares for the weekly propane delivery and after-hours emergency runs are untenable. The Board must order ferry management to institute a cost cutting program which this year should include elimination of the assistant ferry manager position, suspension of this electronic ticketing contract and operation of the vessel to regain crossing times in the historic three to five minute range to help on-time sailings and reduce fuel costs.

Thank you,

Stephen Orsini

Guemes Island

___________

Penni Sturgill

Skagit County Commissioners, Grace Kane and Rachel Rowe

After attending the Draft Ferry Proposal meeting on 9/17/2024, I feel we need to clarify a comment made by Commissioner Browning. Island residents brought up concerns about the proposed charter rate for Med calls of $500.00 per hour with a 3-hour minimum, Browning stated that everyone should get Air Care.

That comment implied that by having Air Care you might avoid any additional fees associated with a Ferry Med call.

I reached out to Chief Cole and found out the facts and how standard protocols are applied and followed within the services that we have available. Once you call 911 the Volunteer Fire Department is Dispatched and at the same time the Ambulance from Anacortes is called out. Once the person is assessed from The Island Fire Department/ Medical team a decision is made to have the Anacortes Ambulance stand down in the event of a minor medical event or continue in route for mobile transport or in the event of a life-threatening medical emergency Air Care would be called out by the Fire Chief.

I believe everyone needs to have a clear understanding of the protocols in place rather than assuming you as a resident have the right to call for an Air Evacuation on your own behalf.

With that said, I was disappointed to hear that the Commissioners did not attend the meeting held be Grace Kane and Rachel Rowe on 9/16/2024 to discuss the proposed rate increase that would affect all Med callouts associated with the Ferry.

If a fee is imposed which it (shouldn’t be) needs to only reflect the expenses incurred not a 3-hour minimum charter fee.

Penni Sturgill

GI Resident

___________

Penni Sturgill

Skagit County Commissioners, Grace Kane and Rachel Rowe

RE: Draft Fare Rate Proposal

As a resident and landowner on Guemes Island I believe you are unfairly charging us for your poor management choices.

Last year you (the County) repeatedly proposed a 14% rate increase over the course of five years, but once again you have not honored your commitments. There is no excuse for a 30% rate increase.

I, like many others, would like to request that the Guemes Island Ferry Committee be reinstated and recognized as a voice of the community. WE deserve a voice to keep you for making bad decisions at our expense:

Purchasing an electronic ticketing system, without a bidding process.
Purchasing a system that is not operational or compatible for all residents.
Charging GI for The Sheriff Dept boats, insurance and whatever else you think you can get away with.
Not refunding GI Ferry Fair box with Covid Funds obtained by the County.
Based on your draft I’m not sure how the HAZ-Mat deliveries will be handled or what the
financial burden will be 30% – 50% added to our existing expense.
2023 we spent $1,118.00 for propane
2024 to date $1801.00 for propane

We have been at our house as full-time residents both years. As you can see, we are already experiencing a significant rate increase in fuel costs. Add in the additional delivery fees and our cost to heat will be substantial.

Based on the draft you leave the door wide open to rate increases through 2028.

Still not sure why Rachel Rowe needs an assistant costing us $84,000 per year.

You the County needs to clean up act, STOP using us for your poor management decisions and black hole budgeting.

Penni Sturgill

____________

Kathy Whitman

Commissioners

Ferry Comments

Guemes Ferry Fee Proposals

As a property owner on Guemes Island for more than 50 years and a permanent resident since 2017, I have enjoyed and valued the ferry system. I appreciate the efforts to keep it running on time, year-round.

I was disappointed in the proposals that were recently introduced. The past attitude of cooperation appears to be replaced by an aggressive effort to increase every fee and look for new ones without consideration of the impacts. The focus is on income with no transparency for expenses and the decision-making process. Where are efforts to manage costs? Why enter into a 5-year contract for a QR code ticket system that has proven flaws and a very high price tag that is being tracked as a ferry expense. The justification we heard in the spring was easier tracking of data. Let’s look at the expenses and not just focus on the fares.

My Skagit County taxes have increased dramatically. The County has more funds available to provide support but has chosen to ignore that income as the efforts are focused on more fees for the one ferry. An arbitrary percentage goal should be adjusted as other county revenue increases.

With a fee increase in 2024, followed by the proposed 30% in 2025 the cost is soaring and impacting those who rely on the ferry for transportation. I appreciated the senior discount pass but this summer the lines were so long that I changed my use and could not use all of the punches in 90 days… I had planned ahead but found that a three or four ferry wait was just too long. I asked to consider a LONGER PERIOD for discount passes but was told that “I need to plan better”. You now propose to reduce the time period to 45 days which is unreasonable. That entire section of the fee proposal is out of balance and needs revision.

Health, public safety, essential fuel for homes are not luxuries and yet they are priced at an excessive rate.

Charging for parking in Anacortes will push more cars on the ferries that are already overfull… Or those cars will end up on streets near the ferry to avoid that fee.

In summary:

Allocate more general Skagit County funds to support this transportation component.

Provide transparency for expenses. Recognize that many recent changes have added to expenses with the expectation that the ferry riders will just have to pick up those costs.

Reject all of the revenue proposals. Please work with the community ferry committee on revisions.

I am sad that I need to write this letter. I hope that our voices are heard.

Sincerely

Kathy Whitman

Guemes Island Resident, Senior Citizen, Active Community Leader and ferry rider

____________

Kathy Whitman

I wrote earlier but decided this one element needed an information-based response. I think paid parking adds more complications and increases expenses when you are trying to increase revenues. I can’t see that there is adequate (if any) financial benefit for the Guemes Ferry.

I retired from Seattle Parks and Recreation where I was Aquatics Manager overseeing pools, beaches, small craft and seven public boat ramps. I implemented a fee system for the boat ramps which has many comparisons to your proposal to charge for parking at the Guemes Ferry. We also looked at possible paid parking at many parks and recreation facilities, but the complications outweighed any possible profit.

There are few details in this list but big picture issues and answers that I worked through:

The upfront cost of electronic fee machines and signage was high.
We considered simplified cash systems that were difficult to operate within high cash handling standards.
Police rarely had time or interest to enforce. To issue tickets for non-payment or parking issues, we had to have staff obtain Special Police Commission (SPC) through City of Seattle which was a lengthy process with extensive background check. Our staff could then write tickets but towing added another complication. This SPC personnel for enforcement added cost. A vehicle for them to go to a location every day added cost.
The staff with SPC were very important to the operation but even with multiple boat ramps, no one was in a full-time position. To retain them, we worked to find budgeted work during winter months. Half the year was very busy, and half was slow.
We had dual solutions allowing for cash, checks and credit/debit cards. Credit and debit simplify cash handling but even this needs extra security review. Machines indicated no cash, but they were often the target of vandalism. Repair of machines added cost. Each electronic payment added costs with a processing fee and a wireless transaction fee.
Routine operation of machines required a service contract to get prompt response when problems arose.
When needed, we had a backup system that accepted cash in a US Forest Service design drop box. Cash handling requirements had to move the insert with cash to a secure location with two people counting. The back- up equipment and two people to count added cost.
Public expectations for maintenance and security increased when a fee was charged.
Even with long boat trailers, people would park in the neighborhood rather than pay for parking. We did hear from neighbors and requested support from Seattle Police who could (by rarely) ticket if they observed a boat launching without paying. Almost all of the enforcement was in the parking lot by the park staff with SPC. Based on distance to off-site parking, some locations were easier to enforce.

I suggest you focus on the details before deciding to implement this part of the ferry fee proposal.

Kathy Whitman

____________

Kathy Whitman

I sent in my comments but then looked at notes again and just had to say that I do not support the idea to use the waiting room as a location for paid tv monitor-type advertising.

The whole point of the current bulletin board is to provide community communication to ferry users. I value the posters about events and activities. I look forward to seeing what is new. There are some business cards and some business promotion, but most is just local information. I use it frequently to post information about the Guemes Island Community Center Association and our free fitness activities, free game night organized by teens, the annual pie sale, free environmental lecture series, etc…

Thanks for listening.

Thanks

Kathy Whitman

____________

Boshie Morris

I think it is time for something w facts, legal requirements for ferries, the County, plans and a readable format for Islanders to gain knowledge on the history of the Guemes Ferry, the County management and where exactly funds come from and go to.

It would be a valuable asset to have on Linetime, especially after watching this week’s Commissionner meeting and hearing some less than accurate statements and misconceptions. Transparency/communications are poor. Unnecessarily so.

Thanks for sending me info relating to the ferry and for your time. So many misstatements could be easily avoided if there was a compilation of relevant stuff so newbies will stop saying incorrect and demeaning things at public meetings.

Thanks, Boshie- on the south side of the channel

Boshie Morris

____________

Boshie Morris

I watched the Skagit Commissionners meeting on the late afternoon slot concerning Ferry Items on Tuesday 17 Sept so I might digest all the charts / number$ / documentation and parking plot before the 3 days were up to file comments.

1. Communications: sorely need concideration and respect by both sides. IT IS possible for the presented graphs / $$ projections and expenditures to be copied to the Guemes Ferry email account IN ADVANCE so THEY can include it in THEIR communications to residents interested in Ferry business, before the scheduled Commissionners Meetings where folks are offered to input public comments. Please take the effort to do so. Also, THANK YOU for fact checking casual misstatements and explaining the not so obvious.

2. Since the documents were self admittedly DIFFICULT TO READ, by not providing this information in advance, a great disservice is done to all Island residents as well as those of us who live in the vicinity of the Ferry. Graciously, the Guemes Ferry email provides what limited information they are provided to help many of us keep abreast of proposals by the County.

3. This average 30% Fare Increase on top of the 2024 increase appears to be the result of several years of inadequate financial management regarding the Ferry, as well as Covid disruption years. In light of this need to make up arrears, PLEASE consider scrapping the UPLAND IMPROVEMENTS proposal of Toll Booth, lower parking lot adjustments/reduction and landscaping and necessary construction for a 2 lane direct ferry approach. I believe these were intended to be implemented with the Ferry Replacement which has failed at this time. NO ONE expects that costs go down or hold steady. Seriously looking to lower running costs/fares must be done other than ONLY by dipping into the ridership pockets.

4. It is time for a comprehensive document that states facts from all Wa. County operated ferries regarding their fares, practices, physical limitations (such as holding areas), distances and time travelled, discounted multi ride tickets and expiration dates, how and what % road and property tax contributes to funding ferry operations etc. Knowledge eliminates heresay. Every person who feels they should be heard must have accurate information readily available to them.

Thank you all,

Boshie Morris

____________

Sandra Prescott

Skagit County Board of Commissioners,

Thank you for hearing the concerns of the Guemes Ferry ridership at the September 17th Commissioner’s meeting. I also thank Rachel Rowe for the presentation and explanation of the costs of running the ferry.

As a full-time Guemes Islanders for the past 19 years, my family has appreciated the ferry service and how it enables families to live on the island. Given the proposes 30% rate increase, I’m concerned that families will no longer be able to afford multiple ferry trips each week.

The rate of increase is out of proportion to the cost of living and inflation. The outcome of such a rate hike will be reduced ridership as well as increased costs of other services for islanders.

Some people (and providers) will decide to move off the island as the proposed fare increase will make it financially unfeasible for them to do business on Guemes. Finally, this jewel of Skagit County will have less economic diversity and lose the culture that makes it an attractive place to live and visit.

Please consider:

Re-opening lines of communications with representatives from Guemes Island. These representatives can be tasked to help find and market ferry solutions.
Making the rate increase affordable, especially for workers and families.

Thank you for your attention,

Sandra Prescott

____________

Anya Mayo

Skagit County Commissioners,

As a long-time Guemes Island resident and frequent ferry rider, I am writing to express concerns about recent operational changes and rate increases that are impacting our community. I am a working mother of two, and since the last rate hike, I’ve purchased ferry punch cards as usual, only to find that they expire before I can fully use them. This feels unfair, especially for someone like me who rides the ferry often. Shortening expiration times discourages purchasing punch cards altogether, which seems to be the intent. We should get to use what we pay for just like anywhere else. Operational costs are rising without sufficient transparency, and there is little clarity on where these additional costs are coming from. I am left wondering if it’s related to new hires, such as an assistant manager, or the proposed electronic ticketing system that will require more staffing. This seems counterproductive and mismanaged, as we’ve observed in county meetings.

Initially, I admired Rachel’s leadership when she began working with the ferry, but over time, her relationship with the island community seems to have deteriorated, almost giving the impression of a growing vendetta against us. I believe new management would benefit both the county and the island, as it feels like the current leadership no longer represents our interests and seeming want to harm us more than anything. This should be strongly considered by the county.

Our community is fragile, with a population primarily made up of retirees on fixed incomes and a handful of young families. The rising costs are making it impossible for both groups to live here. People who have spent their lives on Guemes Island are being forced to sell their homes due to financial strain. Inflation, doubled taxes, doubled insurance rates, and expensive groceries are already burdensome. Charging for parking on both sides of the channel adds yet another financial hardship. It feels as if the goal is to turn the island into a place only the wealthy can afford, which is disheartening.

There needs to be greater transparency on how and why budget and operational decisions are made. We need solutions that reduce costs rather than continuing to charge the community. I urge you to collaborate with us and the ferry committee to find practical solutions. We understand the ferry system better than anyone because we live with it daily. Please hold meetings on the island and at more accessible times.

The rest of the county benefits from our community in many ways, including supplies and groceries, so to imply that the island community doesn’t contribute to the county is simply absurd.

Regarding the topics raised by Public Works at the September 17th public comment meeting, the proposed 2025 fare schedule, which includes a 30% fare increase following the 2024 hike, will place an enormous burden on ferry users—especially families, those on fixed incomes, and local businesses. It’s crucial to maintain the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes as they help frequent ferry riders, such as commuters and those attending medical appointments, save money. There’s no clear benefit to reducing the expiration period on these passes from 90 to 45 days, and eliminating them altogether would only increase inefficiency.

Additionally, the proposed charter rate for private trips, set at $750 per hour with a three-hour minimum, will drive up costs for essential services like propane and fuel deliveries, burdening residents, visitors, and businesses even further. The idea of charging for parking in Anacortes at $3 to $5 per day adds another cost, especially given the lack of clarity on projected revenue versus the additional costs of parking enforcement and maintenance. Was elasticity considered in this decision? The higher the rates, the less people will use the service.

Finally, the proposed rate for emergency response outside regular ferry hours is excessive. A $1,500 minimum charge will further tax the Emergency Medical Services fund. There are already instances of the Skagit County Sheriff declining to respond to emergencies on the island due to current fees. If the cost triples, it could further complicate emergency response decision-making, potentially putting our safety at risk.

In conclusion, I urge you to reconsider these changes and work with the community to develop more sustainable solutions. Our island’s future depends on thoughtful and inclusive decision-making.

Sincerely,

Anya Mayo

___________

Dawn Ashbach

Commissioners

Ferry Comments

An effective and successful government operates with transparency and accountability.

Decisions have been made with no input from stakeholders.

Who was in the room when Resolution R20230152 was adopted to achieve a 65 percent fare recovery by 2028? Graphs and pie charts do nothing to explain away a bad decision. There is a differences between the operations of Skagit County Ferry system and the Whatcom County Ferry system. Management? Accounting? Ticketing and loading processes? Both ferries support about the same population number and time of crossing.

Whatcom County

Whatcom Chief Ferry built 1958

934 Lummi Island inhabitants, US Census

Ferry Youth Fare Reimbursement by WA state 2023-2025

100 passenger capacity

21 standard vehicle capacity

Fare Increase: 4.25%

Effective June 1, 2024: 20 punch card for car and driver $244 ($12.20 per)

20 punch card for passengers $132 ($6.60 per)

Whatcom County Ferry Advisory Committee

Monthly meetings, public welcome. Zoom available.

Nine members appointed by County Council.

Function: Review and provide recommendation on proposed changes to ferry operations and fares.

Review at least annually ferry revenue and expenditures.

Assist in collecting information from ferry riders on actual and desired ferry services and

concerns.

Director Public Works: Elizabeth Kosa 360/778/6200

Ferry Coordinator: Chantelle Russell 360/305/3457

Skagit County

Guemes Ferry built 1978

738 Guemes Island inhabitants, US Census

Ferry Youth Fare Reimbursement by WA state 2023-2025

99 passenger capacity

21 standard vehicle capacity

Effective August 15, 2023: 20 punch card for car and driver $221.50 ($11.07 per)

25 punch card for passenger $84.50 ($3.38 per)

Proposed fare increase: 30%

20 punch card for car and driver increase to $281.00 ($14.05 per)

25 punch card for passenger increase to $105.75 ($4.23 per)

Guemes Island Ferry Committee formed in 1981, as requested by County Commissioners.

A Meeting between elected Ferry Committee members, Ferry Captain, Public Works

and County Commissioners have not occurred since July 2023

Director Public Works: Grace Kane 360/416/1400

Ferry Captain: Rachel Rowe no direct number provided

I respectfully request the Commissioners and Public Works to review and reconsider:

30% ferry rate increase

Expiration dates change from 90 days to 45

Haz-Mat run charges

Emergency charges: Sheriff and Ambulance

Parking charges (ridiculous)

Define Operating and Maintenance charges

Covid Funds Reimbursement

Insurance issues

Office assistant versus a ferry/deckhand mechanic

Guemes Ferry Committee meetings with Commissioners, Ferry Captain and Public

Works Director.

Sincerely,

Dawn Ashbach

____________

Douglas E Gapp

Dear County Commissioners and Skagit County Representatives

Thank you for this opportunity to submit comments on the proposed changes to the Guemes Island ferry fares. I respectfully submit these comments as not only a resident of Guemes Island, but also as a resident of Skagit County. As a general statement, I wish I had the opportunity to audit all of County’s income and expenses before commenting so I could comment more intelligently and make a more specific recommendation. I appreciate the challenge of budgeting, as each and every family in the County, and more specifically my fellow residents on Guemes must also do. All the steps you are proposing may or may not have the hoped revenue increase as people are pretty crafty at work-arounds when faced with unplanned/unbudgeted expenses to make themselves whole. For example, how are you planning to “police” the parking lots on both sides to make sure people are paying? Won’t you have to hire someone which would offset any gains right? Back to my opening statement, perhaps the County needs to look for savings rather than increasing revenue. Some of the recent changes and proposals just don’t make sense. For example, replacing the punch card system with an electronic system has not been a good use of $2 million dollars. The punch cards and individual purchases worked just fine and is actually more efficient for riders and ferry personnel alike, albeit a little old fashioned. When asked about the benefits of the new system, the response was the information gathered would be more timely, but that it provided no monetary or public benefit other than for some report up the chain. By the way, the 90 day expiration for multi-ride cards is fine the way it is. Also, the amount of money proposed to be spent on an unproven technology all electric ferry and associated appurtenances seems excessive when compared to a hybrid diesel electric ferry that is a less expensive, proven, and reliable technology as a capital expense and perhaps the subsequent maintenance of same.

In closing, I feel the County looks at the ferry as a thorn in its side. Perhaps you could look at it more as a benefit to the community. It is a great tourist attraction that benefits residents and businesses in Anacortes. If that’s not something that is tangible enough, than simply look at it as part of what makes up the county. You’re right, not everyone in the county uses the ferry, but not everyone in the county uses libraries, has kids in schools, uses all the roads, parks or other County provided facilities, yet we all pay taxes as part of a community. In the end, if you can’t cut expenses, then everyone in the county should share these increases. If you have any questions of me, please call me at the number below.

Respectfully,

Douglas E Gapp

____________

Elizabeth Svoboda

My husband and I have been full time island residents for 13 years. I commute to work everyday day to manage an Anacortes bank branch. My husband’s parents became full time island residents in 1989, prior to them both passing over the last four years.

Your current and continued proposals and pricing changes, combined with poor management and refusal for complete transparency, are going to price gauge and force all of the hard working/retired islanders off of the island. These are our HOMES!! We have a right to live here and have worked very hard to be here, on an island and a community we LOVE!! You are going to make only the ultra rich be able to afford to live here!!! That is beyond WRONG, and NOT a representation of ALL of the citizens of Skagit County!!

We pay high property taxes on top of the current ferry fees to commute to work/appointments/shop for groceries and other necessities/any other needs to commute off island.

If your current county budgets from collected county (all residents), is not sufficient to provide for equitable county needs for ALL…what about installing tolls on ALL county roads and bridges ( that we on the island help pay for, but NEVER use)…charge for parking in ALL county parking lots?? In other words, spread the costs for maintaining ALL for all of Skagit County???

You are currently DISCRIMINATING wrongly and unfairly with us Islanders!!!

My husband I agree and support all of the below noted concerns:

There is a need for more transparency on operations, how and why budget and operational decisions are made. It’s not clear why costs continue to go up.

Feedback on topics raised by Public Works at the 9/17 public comment meeting:

Proposed 2025 ferry fare schedule

Expiration dates for single-ride tickets

Currently tickets are sold at the time of sailing and are good for that day. It’s not clear why this is an issue to be deliberated on.

Standardizing the 15% discount on multi-ride passes year-round

Keep the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes.

Eliminating multi-ride passes (thereby eliminating the expiration dates)

It is also more efficient for the pursers when they are collecting fares.

Changing the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days

There is no benefit to changing the expiration date from 90 days to 45 days.

Proposed charter rate for requested private trips

Please continue to charge the propane and fuel run the cost for bringing their vehicles across according to the fare schedule.

This may seem like another revenue stream, however, it may result in those vehicles shifting to private charter instead.

Charging for parking in Anacortes

Paid parking in Anacortes, rates are proposed at $3 or $5/day in the 2023 fare target report

Projected revenue from paid parking is elastic, just like ferry rates. E.g… rates go up, people use less service. Was elasticity taken into account here?

Proposed rate for emergency response – During regular ferry hours of operation & Outside regular ferry hours of operation

Thank you,

Elizabeth Svoboda and William Keith Maloy

____________

Amy Ebersole

Dear Commissioners Wesen, Browning and Janicki and Officials Beddall and Kane,

My name is Amy Ebersole. I live on Guemes full-time with my spouse, Amy Tyler, in the family home established when my parents first semi-retired in 1995. They were working class folks, just like ourselves. In fact, we are still paying the mortgage as they once refinanced their home to help me buy a home for myself and my daughter.

I am a social worker providing behavioral health services in Anacortes and Mt Vernon. My spouse is an RN who provides skilled care for vulnerable adults in the larger community of Skagit County. We provide essential services to our larger community and do so by choice. Like many of our neighbors, we depend on the ferry for our commute. We utilize the ability to walk-on for cost and commuting efficiency and are grateful for a place to park in Anacortes to make it feasible. As you can imagine, the ferry is our lifeblood, and this topic is very near and dear to our hearts.

There is a need for more transparency on operations, how and why budget and operational decisions are made. It’s not clear why costs continue to go up with no seeming results.

Feedback on topics raised by Public Works at the 9/17 public comment meeting:

Proposed 2025 ferry fare schedule

Raising fares in 2025 by 30% on top of the 2024 fare increase is a huge financial impact and burden on ferry users. We have no other option but to take the ferry to go to work. We work to minimize this cost and burden by walking on.

Families, people on fixed incomes, and businesses will be disproportionately impacted by the increased rates.

We understand that sometimes fares need to rise, but a 30 percent increase is too steep.

Expiration dates for single-ride tickets

Currently tickets are sold at the time of sailing and are good for that day. It’s not clear why this is an issue to be deliberated on.

Standardizing the 15% discount on multi-ride passes year-round

Keep the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes.

Eliminating multi-ride passes (thereby eliminating the expiration dates)

It is also more efficient for the pursers when they are collecting fares.

Changing the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days

There is no benefit to changing the expiration date from 90 days to 45 days. It feels unreasonable and punitive.

Proposed charter rate for requested private trips

Please continue to charge the propane and fuel run the cost for bringing their vehicles across according to the fare schedule.

This may seem like another revenue stream, however, it may result in those vehicles shifting to private charter instead.

Charging for parking in Anacortes

Paid parking in Anacortes, rates are proposed at $3 or $5/day in the 2023 fare target report

This increase would make it very difficult for my spouse and I to continue to commute to work. As a mental health social worker and RN serving the broader Skagit community, we have a modest income. This proposed increase would be much more than an inconvenience for us.

Are we going to start charging for parking in all parking lots in Skagit?

Proposed rate for emergency response – During regular ferry hours of operation & Outside regular ferry hours of operation

Recently, the Skagit County Sheriff declined to respond to a call on Guemes because they did not want to pay the fee at the current rate. If the rate triples, how is that going to affect the decision making of emergency service personnel? I am also concerned that this will impact Guemes residents’ decision making about accessing necessary services, jeopardizing health and safety of those who live on the island.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Amy Ebersole

____________

Amy Tyler

Dear Commissioners Wesen, Browning and Janicki and Officials Beddall and Kane,

My name is Amy Tyler. I live on Guemes full-time with my wife, Amy Ebersole, in the family home established when her parents first semi-retired in 1995. They were working class folks, just like ourselves, not rich by any means. In fact, we are still paying the mortgage as they once refinanced their home to help Amy buy hers.

We think it’s important that you know who we are. We aren’t weekenders and we certainly aren’t rich. I am an RN who provides skilled care for vulnerable adults in the broader Skagit County community; my wife is a social worker providing behavioral health services in Anacortes and Mt Vernon. We provide essential services to our larger community and do so by choice. Like many of our neighbors, we depend on the ferry for our commute. We utilize the ability to walk-on for cost and commuting efficiency and are grateful for a place to park in Anacortes to make it feasible.

We don’t, for a minute, take for granted where we live or that there is a cost for that but it very much feels like the you, our elected leaders, think we are all high wage earners and can just nickel and dime us right off the island, making it a place only for the elite and not for those whose home it already is. There is a need for more transparency on operations, how and why budget and operational decisions are made. It’s not clear why costs continue to go up with no seeming results.

There needs to be a hard HARD look at how to reduce costs. There is no single cost increase, it’s the many small increases that continue to be made that are driving up the revenue targets and increasing operational costs.

Feedback on topics raised by Public Works at the 9/17 public comment meeting:

Proposed 2025 ferry fare schedule

Families, people on fixed incomes, and businesses will be disproportionately impacted by the increased rates.

We understand that sometimes fares need to rise, but a 30 percent increase is too steep.

Expiration dates for single-ride tickets

Currently tickets are sold at the time of sailing and are good for that day. It’s not clear why this is an issue to be deliberated on.

Standardizing the 15% discount on multi-ride passes year-round

Keep the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes.

Eliminating multi-ride passes (thereby eliminating the expiration dates)

It is also more efficient for the pursers when they are collecting fares.

Changing the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days

There is no benefit to changing the expiration date from 90 days to 45 days. It feels unreasonable and punitive.

Proposed charter rate for requested private trips

Please continue to charge the propane and fuel run the cost for bringing their vehicles across according to the fare schedule.

This may seem like another revenue stream, however, it may result in those vehicles shifting to private charter instead.

Charging for parking in Anacortes

Paid parking in Anacortes, rates are proposed at $3 or $5/day in the 2023 fare target report

This increase would make it very difficult for my spouse and I to continue to walk on the ferry to commute to work. As a RN and mental health social worker serving the broader Skagit community, we have a modest income. This proposed increase would be much more than an inconvenience for us.

Are we going to start charging in all parking lots in Skagit? Because it looks like the Guemes Ferry parking lot is being singled out.

Proposed rate for emergency response – During regular ferry hours of operation & Outside regular ferry hours of operation

Recently, the Skagit County Sheriff declined to respond to a call on Guemes because they did not want to pay the fee at the current rate. If the rate triples, how is that going to affect the decision making of emergency service personnel? I am also concerned that this will impact Guemes residents’ decision making about accessing necessary services, jeopardizing health and safety of those who live on the island.

Thank you,

Amy Tyler, RN (she/her)

___________

Megan Murphy

Dear Skagit County,

I am writing to comment on the 2025 Guemes Island ferry fare schedule.

I’m concerned that prices are being raised again with still no electric ferry (aka the money pit that keeps getting more expensive), electronic ticketing system, or meaningful improvements to service or facilities. I am concerned that the county is considering charging exorbitant fees for medical runs and propane delivery, which is not standard among any other Washington ferry system. I am concerned especially that the doctors, nurses, teachers, therapists, social workers, builders, occupational therapists, professors, and care providers who call the island home will not be able to afford to make the journey into town to help the town and county that they love thrive. Raising fares exorbitantly every year (again, with no meaningful addition other than a commonly incorrect wall map that has now been taken down, did we pay for that joke as well?) prices out the people that allow Skagit County to thrive, and that a gentrified, unaffordable, stagnant, undiverse Skagit is not who we are or who we should be.

The attitude we keep getting from y’all is “You chose to live on an island.” No, I chose to live next to my future child’s grandparents. I chose to live where my husband was born and raised. I chose to live in a place with a meaningful and committed community that takes care of each other. I chose to live in the house my husband built with his hands. I chose to live among the people that I love to serve as a nurse and a volunteer firefighter/EMT.

I don’t hear you telling people in Rockport “You chose to live an hour from Mount Vernon, you don’t get to have emergency services.” Or telling businesses in downtown Mount Vernon “You chose to put your business next to an area that floods, too bad for you but we don’t care.” Or telling people in Concrete “Well you chose to live where it snows, so no road plowing for you, deal with it yourself.” Guemes deserves the same courtesy and respect you give other areas of the county who have unique challenges due to their location. If the people running the ferry can’t seem to do what decades of previous managers were able to, perhaps a change in management would help. I continue to be baffled as to why two people who clearly hate both the ferry and Guemes Islanders are in charge of its management and future.

Please provide a yearly transparency report with how Guemes taxpayer dollars are being spent re: the ferry. Please don’t risk our lives; provide a contract and meaningful on call system for law enforcement and medical services to access the island just like they do for every other Skagitonian. Please get creative and find diverse revenue streams that don’t price out people who have lived on Guemes for decades. Please actually work with the Guemes Island Ferry Committee to show the community that you actually do care.

Best,

Megan Murphy

___________

Tim Alaniz

Commissioners,

Regarding the county”s raising the possibility of charging for parking in the ferry parking lots, and taking into account the currently somewhat adversarial relationship between the county ferry administration and the island, there is a possible (and not so unlikely) outcome that may result. That would be a system where the islanders are paying for parking and enduring parking tickets, tow-aways, and the resulting strategic and logistical difficulties, for what may end up being a rather minor benefit to the ferry administration’s bottom line.

As one of the commenters at the public meeting remarked: If the county stands to generate $110,000 or so in parking fees (that’s the figure I remember) by handing operation of the (now pay-to-park) parking lots to a private contractor who will, along with managing the parking fees, supposedly stripe the lots, clean and maintain the lots, and also supposedly patrol the lots — what will be left of that $110,000 after the contractor takes their rightful cut.

Of course the county will also be able to remove the cost of striping, maintaining, and cleaning the lots off their books, which also helps their budget. Even including this, however, does not erase the fact that the county is considering imposing significant new burdens on the islanders, especially on families with kids in school, for a minor benefit to their bottom line.

Wouldn’t this action result in many more people taking their cars over instead of walking in order to avoid the newly imposed hassles of parking in the lots? Isn’t this exactly the outcome the county should be trying to avoid? Shouldn’t the county be trying their best to encourage walk-ons, instead of implementing policies designed to discourage them?

The county ferry department’s whole reason for existence is to provide ferry service to Guemes Island. Having spent most of my career working in a city public works department, I find the ferry adminstration’s defensive and adversarial relationship with their primary stakeholders surprising and disheartening. Clearly there is some history there that I am not aware of. However, as public servants the onus is on the county to repair the breach. Delegitimizing the island ferry committee was definitely not a step in the right direction.

Thank you,

Tim Alaniz

____________

Lisa Kennan-Meyer

My name is Lisa Kennan-Meyer. I’m a lifelong Washington State resident, registered Skagit County voter, and I live year round on Guemes Island.

I support the Guemes Island Ferry Committee and their comments regarding the proposed changes to the ferry fare schedule and implementation. The process has not been transparent. The proposed changes will have huge consequences for questionable return. Many of the proposed changes will have impacts on residents that do not increase revenue yet cause hardship. There are no changes that improve the function or operation of the ferry, and many changes will have unintended consequences. The changes may impact some neighbors enough to make living on the island too much of a hardship.

I am concerned with the impact on the community, both on Guemes and in the neighborhoods of Anacortes close to the ferry dock. Parking charges will result in people parking on public streets. Besides conflict with neighbors, and safety, this will result in enforcement issues that will require funding. It appears that charging for parking could be a zero-sum issue, or even increase costs.

We are all very aware of climate issues, and many decisions, both personal and community wide, are based in part on the impact to the climate. This current proposal does nothing to address climate impact and parts of this proposal may increase the number of car trips, and have other negative climate consequences. There should be incentives to decrease the car trips by providing alternatives.

Guemes is an economically diverse community. We chose to live here due in part to this diversity. I do not want Guemes to become a place only affluent people and tourists can afford.

Ferries are a way of life in Western Washington. Residents who live in a place served by a ferry should not feel that they are victims of arbitrary budget balancing or are a profit center.

In conclusion I do not support the 2025 Guemes Ferry Fare Proposal.

Lisa Kennan-Meyer

____________

John Meyer

My name is John Meyer. I am a Guemes Island resident, and a Skagit County/WA State registered voter.

This email is provided in response to, and within the requested timeframe for, the public comment period for the Skagit County 2025 Guemes Ferry fare proposal.

I support the Guemes Island Ferry committee, and my comments (below) mirror their talking points regarding this fare proposal.

In General:

A) More transparency needs to be provided on ferry operations, especially on decisions that affect the costs paid by ferry users. As an example, notice of this 2025 fare proposal to Guemes Island residents, with only days to respond, doesn’t work.

B) Costs need to be reduced before fares are raised. There is no single cost increase, it’s the many small increases that continue to be made that are driving up the revenue targets and increasing operational costs.

C) The Commissioners, Public Works, and the Ferry Division need to communicate and partner with the Guemes Island Ferry community to find solutions to problems and concerns.

Current issues include the proposed and overly complicated electronic ticketing system, ongoing crew shortages, lack of proactive ferry maintenance, ferry replacement, etc.

Specific responses on topics raised by Public Works at the 9/17 public comment meeting:

1) Raising fares in 2025 by 30% on top of the 2024 fare increase is a huge financial impact and burden on ferry users, and raises questions and suspicions on incompetent (or worse) ferry management. This proposed fare increase should not be implemented.

2) Keep the current discounted rates for multi-ride passes.

3) Retain the current multi-ride passes. They provide a convenience for frequent ferry uses, and are more efficient for the pursers when they are collecting fares.

4) Do not change the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days, or if there is a reduction in the duration of these passes then also make a corresponding reduction in the number of rides provided with the pass

5) Do not change the charter rate for requested private trips (including the weekly “Haz-Mat” runs). Also a three hour minimum does not make any sense given the time actually spent by the ferry for such runs.

6) Do not implement a parking charge on either the Anacortes or Guemes parking lots. There are far too many questions with no answers at this point to initiate this radical change.

A discussion between Public Works and the Ferry Division operations, with the Guemes community, about why this is being proposed and how it would be established and managed, will yield a better

result with more cooperation between everyone.

7) Do not implement a new or targeted rate for emergency response services to Guemes. Retain the current practice with no minimum charge.

Ferry budgeting decisions should never have a bearing on life and safety calls for those on Guemes Island!

John Meyer

______________

Kathy Malley

To Commissioners Brown, Janicki and Wesen;

Thank you for soliciting feedback from the public regarding the proposed Guemes Island Ferry fare increase. Before I get to my input specific to the fare increase, I want to underscore the need for a better working relationship between Guemes Island residents, Captain Rachel Rowe, and Grace Kane.

I hope this was a leading takeaway from the 9/17 public hearing. There are many changes afoot for the ferry – from the potential of new boat, the redesign of the dock, and electronic ticketing – and regular and ongoing communications with the Island is desperately needed. Now is not the time to rely on a once a year public meeting, where the format doesn’t really allow for questions to be answered or have a real back and forth dialogue about this issues. Regular meetings with the Guemes Island Ferry Committee would go a long way in building trust and confidence. This is the minimum that is needed. However, seeing the frustration on both sides there may be the need for an outside facilitator or mediator, such as the Ruckelshaus Center, to help bridge the divide. While I’m hesitant to recommend the use of yet another outside consultant, this may actually be helpful.

Now to the specifics of the fare proposal and some of the others areas where you asked for input:

· The proposed increase of 30% is truly astounding. The 14% increase last August was tough enough. This kind of annual increase is unstainable and brings into question the methodology. Striving for a 65% fare box revenue seems like a reasonable goal. But the reality is it has not been met in the last 5 years (and probably longer than that). Even with the growth on the island, the ridership level has remained relatively flat over the last five years, so it is reasonable to assume under current service levels, ridership will not increase, making it hard to achieve fare box goals.

· To increase ridership, you should consider providing MORE service, not less. MV Guemes has a history making 3 runs an hour and could certainly do so now. Adding more frequent runs, especially during the summer months, would make it easier for people to get on and off the island, and people would be more likely to use their cars. Additionally it is very hard to get service providers, i.e. plumbers, electricians, window cleaners etc… to come to the island. Having talked with a few of them, there are unwilling to risk long ferry lines, even when I offer to pay them for their ferry time. With a more frequent schedule, I’m confident many more would be willing to service the island. Finally, a second 11;15 run should be normalized in the schedule (so another scheduled run at 11:45), expect on fueling days and perhaps one other day a week to allow for maintenance. Again, this predictability would make it easier for service providers, trades people and others to come to the island.

· Tied closely to revenue are expenses and transparency around what is happening. It’s not clear why costs continue to go up. The increased costs for things like electronic ticketing, management staff, and unclear budgeting practices are driving up operational costs, which then drives up revenge targets. The current fare methodology should be called the “Guemes Island open wallet” methodology. Without transparency around costs and attempts to trim the budget, this new methodology allows the county to spend as it likes with Guemes Island residents footing the bill, resulting in 30% (or more) annual fare increases!

· Keep the year-round multi-ride discount and retain the 90 day expiration date. This small savings on ferry fees is meaningful to full-time Island residents. The punch card also makes it easier for the ferry crew when they are collecting fares. Shortening the expiration window is also unnecessary will harm elderly residents who don’t leave the island as often. This will push them to the more expensive single ticket use, or they will be wasting money by letting rides go unused.

· The $1500 for a medical run is cruel and adds an additional burden to those who already in crisis. Yes, Commissioner Browning made reference to the fact that you can get insurance for emergency helicopter service, but it is my understanding that the decision to call for a helicopter is made by EMT staff and is only done in the most life threatening situations (even for people with insurance). In talking with long-term island residents, people recall a helicopter being used maybe twice in the last 20 years – one time very recently. I don’t know what happens in more rural parts of the county, but are you charging someone who lives in furthest east reaches of the county $1500 to take them to Skagit General?

· The charges for propane runs is also unreasonable, driving up costs 20-30% based on feedback from a propane supplier at the public meeting. However there might be alternatives. I’m often on the Wednesday 9:15 boat (the haz-mat run) heading to Anacortes for a class, and many times, especially in the summer, there isn’t a propane truck. A conversation with the propane fuel providers would provide clarity around their frequency on the island in summer and winter months. Based on their input it could be possible to move from a weekly schedule to something less frequent (twice a month?). With proper notification people would adjust to the new schedule. It might take the propane folks longer to serve the island, so the return boat schedule would also need to be adjusted.

· Pay to Park? Again lots of unknowns here, but I think you can be assured that this is one place where “elasticity” would certainly come into effect. As Captain Rowe said at the public hearing, people can certainly park on Anacortes streets and they would. Except for the people who are handicapped or disabled or otherwise unable to walk the distance to the terminal, so again, this policy would most likely harm elderly people or people with young families who tend to have move a lot of stuff.

Thank you for considering this input.

Sincerely,

Kathy Malley

___________

Michael Brown

Dear Commissioners,

This email is in response to the Public Works presentation on Tuesday regarding the proposed fare increases on the Guemes Island ferry run. Rather than go into to the methodology of the actual fare increases, I would like to comment on the proposed new fare charges on parking on both the Anacortes and Guemes Island sides.

In reading the KPFF report on possible rate fare increases, there was an ancillary report by Transmedia outlining possible avenues for additional revenues coming from islanders. Some, like the idea of replacing our community bulletin board with an advertising screen, are frankly insulting. We use that board to communicate island wide events, services such as yoga, music, poetry readings, chimney sweeps, and lectures, both on the island and in the county. It would only bring in $1000 a month. Not helpful.

However, the charging for parking looks to be a significant potential for revenue, but is also insulting, but for different reasons.

1. The estimates for possible revenues does not include the costs of an outside management company collecting tolls, cleaning the lots, patrolling the lots for security, etc. Any possible revenue stream coming from this proposed fee structure would be significantly negated by the costs of an outside management company collecting tolls. Since the cleaning of the lots, landscaping and providing security is to be provided by the management company, there would be no incentive go beyond the bare minimum. Since there would be a revenue split, the county would only realize 50% of any possible revenue.
If for example the county chose to charge 5 dollars for each side, an islander wanting to walk over and walk back would incur $10 in parking fees and $5 walk on ferry fee, for a total of $15. The only possible benefit would be that they would be able to walk on any ferry and not have to possibly wait for an additional run. Financially though, it doesn’t make sense. Might as well just drive on. However, by encouraging drivers, the ferry line would look worse than it already is.
The study does point out that the WSDOT ferry parking lot at the Anacortes terminal charges 8.00 per day, but that is not analogous. Those islands the ferry services all have services (except bare minimum on Shaw) available to their residents. Each island has grocery stores, restaurants, hardware stores, clinics, etc. Guemes does not. We have to go into Anacortes for any and all of those services, which means the ferry is critical for us residents. The park and ride lots both in Burlington and Mount Vernon do not charge, and none of the other county parking lots charge for parking as well.
The Transmedia presentation mentions that there would need to be a public relations effort to sell this to islanders since we have historically had free parking on both sides. So far, we have heard crickets about this proposal. If Tuesday’s presentation was the beginning of such an effort, it fell well short.
Let’s say the county decides to implement this shortsighted idea. Guemians might decide to park on city streets. What does the city of Anacortes think about that? They already have instituted parking restrictions for nonresidents near the ferry. Would they expand that? Has the county talked to the Anacortes city council and what did they say?
What are the plans for handicapped parking? Would there be a fee for that?

In conclusion, the county has not included any cost cutting ideas in their presentation, only ways to soak their constituents for more money, with a lessening of service. I am NOT in favor of this idea, and I hope you listen carefully to all of the comments coming from your constituents. We are not happy with your performance to date!

Sincerely

Michael Brown

____________

Cindy Kamp

Dear Skagit County Board of Commissioners,

Please reject the Guemes Ferry rate increase proposal.

This year’s Ferry Fare Target report proved the new resolution changing the fare methodology implemented last year has created a new set of challenges. In the absence of engaging the public in actual discussions, chasing best guess estimates while simultaneously changing the rules of accounting for operations and maintenance expenses, have put you in a position that you are actually considering to not only increase fares 30%, you are considering going after essential services that islanders rely on. Please reject this.

FERRY FARE TARGET REPORT

There are so many reasons we are all in this position, but the failure to recognize COVID as an impetus other than a short answer for why revenue was down in 2020, is a big one. The rate increase that was implemented last August was roughly the same recommended increase from the BERK study in 2020 that wasn’t. The fare revenue box estimate from a 15% increase in 2021 would have been $1.4 million. The 2023 fare box revenue was $1,250,681. If Public Work’s recommended increase in 2021 was implemented, that would have netted roughly $650,000 in additional revenue between then and now. The reason given at the time for not doing the increase then was COVID. This $650,000, in addition to other losses for failing to charge fares and selling no expiration multi ride tickets during COVID, was not reimbursed to the ferry from the federal COVID funds available specifically to offset losses on transportation services. If you were truly transparent, you would acknowledge this and if you were being fair, you would reimburse it to the ferry.

SHARING FERRY MONEY TO COUNTY

Instead, you have repeatedly told us the COVID funds were needed elsewhere in the County. We were also told we need to pay the $450k in additional insurance expenses in 2022 because we have to share in the expense from the entire county. My three year old niece likes to say, “Sharing is caring.” So we shared and shared and are now short of funds for our urgent needs and what do you do? ASK us for more money and force us to pay for essential services that no other citizens in your county are asked to pay for.

SPENDING PROBLEM

In my household we taught our children the difference between needs and wants, but I feel that lesson wasn’t learned by the Ferry Division when it comes to spending taxpayer and fare payer dollars. I am actually supportive of having an assistant manager – but only if the position is at a minimum net neutral. Does the position save more money than it costs? The same goes for an electronic ticketing system – how much money will that save annually, if any? Will a ticketing booth save money or will it require additional staffing? Do you need an electronic ticketing system to tell you the ferry is full at 5pm when you can look out your window and see that? Over complicating a very simple process with very simple needs will always cost more money.

EMS

By charging for EMS at a minimum charge of $1500, you are actually putting a financial decision in the process of deciding when to respond to a call or not to Guemes Island. The Sheriff’s office could say – is this worth $1500 for me to check out this domestic violence situation tonight or do I think I can wait and pay $20 at 6:30am? Not only will we have best guess budgeting, but we will have best guess EMS services. No other county or state ferry asks for their ridership to pay for these services and neither should we.

HAZ MAT RUN

If Skagit Farmer Supply chooses to move their propane run to the San Juan Enterprise to avoid paying your extortionist proposed charter run fee of $2,250 (up from $56 a vehicle), but because ridership is flat, this will not provide more revenue for the ferry. The same amount of people will ride the ferry on Wednesdays either way. It will, however, raise the heating cost of island residents about 30% according to Skagit Farmer Supply either option they choose. The other county ferries continue to charge their normal truck fares with dedicated runs, as should we.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

The higher costs to live on the island will drive away the working class and average families who live on the island and work throughout Skagit County. This will greatly reduce the ridership that the ferry relies on nine months of the year. The proposed fare increase as well as the additional cost for heating, could easily add $100 or more onto a family. Affordable housing is a concern for all of Skagit County citizens-even those that choose to live on Guemes Island.

PARKING

When Skagit County decides to charge for parking in all park and ride facilities throughout the county, it would be difficult to argue against paying for parking. The purpose of the lot in the first place was to keep islanders from taking away street parking from the citizens who live near the ferry on the Anacortes side, so it seems unfair not only to islanders to charge for this, but also to the people who live in the Anacortes community. Charging for the Guemes side is simply wrong. There is no actual safe street parking in the area for people to park on. You can guess where people will park to avoid paying for parking. Also, your plan to make walking an additional expense for Guemes Island Ferry riders by charging for parking is against your own Climate goals of encouraging walking in Envision Skagit 2060. You should be encouraging walking on the ferry, as well as enhancing public transportation, not creating new barriers.

MULTI RIDE FARES/LOCAL RATE

A Multi-Ride 20 Round Trip vehicle and driver commuter card for the Port Townsend Ferry is $221.70 valid for 90 days from purchase. You are considering $281 for 90 days and even reducing that to 45 days. 90 days is a good compromise between the 120 days and 45 days that will still benefit full time residents who are not daily commuters but still frequent users of the ferry. Are you as surprised as I was to see your proposed increase surpasses that of the Port Townsend Ferry?

What I would like to see investigated further is going beyond this fare structure and see what the impact would be to implement a resident/non resident rate. Fishers Island ferry manager in New York, as well as the head of the local citizens group I spoke with, indicated this was not only popular for local residents, it was more profitable for the ferry overall. The ferry manager stated that guests to their island do not care what they pay to come over to their island. Each resident is registered in their ticketing system (the same system we purchased) by providing proof of residency to buy the lower priced tickets.

DISCUSSIONS AND A VOICE

As a citizen who recently moved to Guemes Island full time despite feeling that the current governance of Skagit County has a negative view of Guemes Island Citizens, I was still shocked by Public Work’s latest proposal as were most of my friends and neighbors. This proposal and the lack of communication between the county and the residents has only furthered the divide. There are so many people willing and able to help find solutions to the financial challenges the ferry faces.

Please recognize the actual potential harm and havoc this proposal will inflict on the rural island citizens you represent and find alternate solutions. We all want to help if you let us.

Regards,
Cindy Kamp

____________

Rick SIevers

Hello,

The ferry and her crew are such a gift for this island. Without her, the mostly good and humble of means, people of this island would be stranded. Without an equitable fare structure this island would be left only for the rich and the destitute.

That being said, the ferry is also part of the Skagit transportation and road infrastructure. Like so many other areas of our most beautiful and diverse county. Sort of like a substantial bridge (like the one on Highway 20) with a crew and two props. And we are willing to pay a toll on that bridge, in addition to the substantial taxes we pay.

I have a simple solution to fulfilling our income goals for the ferry. The ‘solution’ put forth by KPFF Consulting is too complicated and hurts the middle and lower class folks that work and shop in Anacortes, Burlington, Mt Vernon, etc..

I propose that we:

– Simply raise the fares 50% across the board

– And reduce the the passes from 90 to 60 days. (45 days is too short)

It is the most equitable solution, and here is why:

– No parking penalty for the hard working people who commute into Skagit County with their (often single) cars. Our ferry is not like the San Juan Ferries. It is primarily a commuter and service ferry.

– No spillover of cars parking in the nearby neighborhoods, to avoid the fees.

– No surcharge on propane trucks, which are a Necessary Lifeline of heat for folks on limited incomes. I.e. less extreme costs passed on to residents.

– No penalty for regular passengers on this ‘bridge’ by the proposal to eliminate passes. Tourist pay more. While the passes keep the transactions simpler, and speed up the payment process in the ferry line.

– Easy to implement. No infrastructure changes or vendors for parking.

– Fairer to the middle and lower class people who still need their cars to work and spend in Anacortes and greater Skagit County.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. My hope is that we focus on simple solutions, instead of burdensome complicated reactions.

Sincerely,

Rick SIevers

___________

Heather Sievers

Dear County Commissioners,

I write to offer my input and comment to the proposed Guemes Ferry changes. First, I really appreciate the hard working ferry crews and our hard working ferry. I understand the need for additional revenue, as costs have increased in our current economic climate. However, I think some of the proposed ways to close this gap hurt the working class on Guemes Island and Anacortes the most. I have bulleted my comments for clarity:

– Ferry fees should increase. Understood. Maybe even higher if the other points are eliminated.

– Multi-passes are essential for working people. It is the only break residents get to help get to work on a regular basis. These should increase in alignment with fee increases, but should keep the discount. They also make the lines go faster.

– Multi-pass expirations – anything shorter defeats the point and again adds costs to the working class. I think they should stay the same. And if necessary, 60 days max.

– Parking fees – another target for the people that go to work regularly. I think this would make it very difficult for most people and add a huge increase to monthly expenditures. It will also make people stay on island more and therefore decrease the amount of business for downtown anacortes restaurants etc.

– hazardous materials surcharge – this hurts those that rely on propane and will include many people on fixed incomes.

I did a calculation and if things change the way proposed by KPFF, it will at least double my monthly ferry costs. Changing the general ferry fee only, will target tourists more and working class less. Please consider this.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these important decisions.

Heather Sievers

___________

Kayla Swallow,

My name is Kayla Swallow, I live on Guemes Island with my husband, Jim a second generation islander. He and his parents have owned land on the island and in Skagit County starting in 1978. My husband is a small business owner, and I work for a local nonprofit that cares for youth and families impacted by the foster care system.

We truly love living on Guemes Island and in Skagit County. With that said, we are deeply disappointed in the continued proposals to both increase the rates for the ferry, and make changes to the ferry system that would absolutely negatively effect those that live and conduct business on the island. Our greatest concerns are the proposed increase to fares of 30%, the potential to do away with the punch card system and the loss of the hazard run for propane refill trucks.

If some of the current proposals go through, it could cost us $21 each to go to and from work each day in our separate vehicles. Please note, we’re smart people, we’d love to carpool or only take one car to cut down on costs. That is obviously ideal. But ideals are not always realistic with differing schedules. Here’s some math that will be very real for many families on Guemes: For one adult to go to and from work 5 days a week is $420 a month. Times that by two adults in one household who have differing schedules that is now $840 a MONTH just to take the public transportation to their home. Each year, that family is now spending over $10,000 a year on (let me emphasis this once more) vital, necessary, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. That is the equivalent of property tax on a $1,000,000 property. For an average family like ours grossing $100k a year, this is 10% of their GROSS income, not to mention their net after taxes.

I understand that running the ferry is a financial undertaking for the County. But that is your responsibility as the Commissioners. You also have a responsibility to the citizens of your County. I do not use the word gentrification lightly, but that will be the result if things are not corrected quickly. Your choices will make it impossible for average people to live on the island, run their businesses and raise families.

It is equally important for the Commissioners to look at ways to cut costs, not just increase fees: Hiring an assistant manager – If leadership was working as it should be, is this position really needed? Implementing a new electronic ticketing system that requires additional staffing – Will this new system magically increase ridership to pay for that additional staffing? Relying on paid consultants for suggestions on how to operate the ferry system – Again, if the current leadership was doing a sufficient job, would this really be necessary? Charging for parking – there is no way this is going to net money for the county. At best break even, at worst be a money pit with more staffing and expenses.

As a young family, with a small business, this annual increase WILL BE unsustainable for us as local, working class members to commute each day. I want to make it very clear that, as it has in the past year since that last rate increases, our habits around taking the ferry will change again. Not out of spite or bitterness, but out of financial necessity.

A 30% rate increase is not sustainable. It disproportionately effects young working families. What a shame to use your position and power to put such a burden on families, instead of doing what you can to help them.

Kayla Swallow

_____________

Natalie Magnus

Greetings,

I write to you today to try to explain and provide a voice for myself and other Skagit County residents. I am unable to participate in the public comment meetings as they are during work hours. I am a single, working-class resident of Skagit County.

In early 2021, I split with my partner and lost housing due to this. At this time, I had been employed as an administrator at Skagit Valley College since 2018. I love living in and working for Skagit County. I asked around to friends and neighbors, and the only feasible option that was provided to me was a place to rent on Guemes Island. I moved to Guemes so I could continue living and working in the county I serve. Since then, Guemes has become my home. My closest people and support system are on the island. I cannot afford to purchase a home in Skagit County. I have a rent secured agreement, and even rent in other locations of Skagit County (outside of my current place of residence on Guemes Island) is tough on my salary. Therefore, I continue to live on Guemes.

I received the email about this week’s meeting and option for input. I hope this is read, and I ask that someone respond so I am assured there is an understanding and empathy for Skagit residents living on Guemes Island.

I have heard rumors (I understand rumors can be false and inflated) that some responses to concerns about these proposals come with a response of “well, you chose to live on an island.” I understand there are people who have financial security and abundance who chose to make Guemes their home or second home. However, they are not the entire population. Just like all other locations within Skagit, there is economic diversity amongst Guemes residents. I represent one of those people who didn’t choose to live on an island for an ‘island life.’ I logistically and financially did not have other feasible options, and have now made it my home and community. This is the same for many people I know on Guemes Island. The Island View Elementary School Counselor who travels to work off island daily to care for the kids and youth who need it most in the community. The Licensed Mental Health Therapist and recent mother who travels daily to work in Anacortes helping our Skagit residents in some of the toughest times of their lives. Both of these people looked to buy housing between Burlington, Mt Vernon, and Anacortes, but the only affordable option for them was Guemes. The mother who recently got displaced due to a domestic violence situation and is living with family because her and her children had no other safe place to go– they are living on the island. I want Skagit County to understand that not everyone living on Guemes is living a financially abundant and lavish life. Some of us are surviving like the rest of Skagit residents in all locations of our county.

Some of the proposals are incredibly concerning to me. In particular, charging for parking in Anacortes, increase cost in ferry fares, reduction in expiration period or elimination of multi-ride passes, and increased rates for propane and emergency response runs. I understand it is easy to picture Guemes as all well-to-do second homers who have the ability to pay for these things. However, there are many people who do not fit that mold living on and traveling to Guemes. I am concerned about island residents who are living at the margins, or our friends and family who come to visit us and are not financially well off. If they have a medical issue or emergency, will we have to ask ourselves the question of can we afford to call for an emergency response?

The proposed increased cost of ferry fares and parking would continue to put pressure on those of us who are working class on the island. Similar to all other gentrification and affordable housing concerns within the county, it adds to the push out and struggle.

I ask that as proposals are considered, that the county remember not everyone on Guemes is well off. Not everyone on Guemes is financially secure and stable. I understand it is a vacation location for many people, a second-home option for others, and a sight-seeing place for tourists. There are also working-class citizens who call it home and contribute to all of Skagit County. Please remember and consider us in your proposals. We live here too.

Best,

Natalie Magnus

____________

Linnea Mattke

To Skagit County Officials, Guemes Ferry and Commissioners,

I am writing to give some input from as a Guemes Island resident about the latest proposals that are on the table for Guemes ferry operations. Most importantly, we need transparency, accountability, and sustainability when it comes to ferry management and operations. As a small community, Guemes Island seems to be often treated as an afterthought by the County – that is until Skagit County wants to fleece us by raising rates quickly and to levels that are not on par with other similar short ferry routes in WA State. Continuing to raise ferry rates and increasing costs at the rate proposed is not sustainable. It threatens the diversity of the people, families, businesses, and visitors that make Guemes the amazing place that it is, by pricing us out. The Guemes Ferry route should be treated as the public thoroughfare that it is, and maintained at a level similar to other county roads in Skagit County – that everybody, including Guemes residents pay for.

Going after multi trip punch cards and continuing to shorten expiration periods feels punitive. And the potential proposed parking fees would effectively make the rate increases for ferry usage way more than 30%. The island community just cannot sustain those kinds of charges for our daily commutes for work, school, medical appointments, grocery shopping and volunteer work.

I request that you reconsider your policy on rate increases and align them with general cost of living increases, raise rates no more than once a year, and manage the program more cost-effectively. I would like you to retain the normal punch cards instead of the expensive electronic ticketing system, slow your rate hikes, skip the idea of charging for parking (at least on the Guemes side), and generally treat us as you do any county citizens.

Respectfully,

Linnea Mattke

______________

Scott W. Anderson and Karen P. Anderson

Dear Skagit County officials,

My name is Scott Anderson, a Guemes Island resident and property owner. My wife, Karen and I have owned a house on Guemes since 2011.

We attended (via Zoom) the Skagit County commissioners meeting on 9/17/2024 regarding the new rate schedule, and other changes, impacting the Guemes Island ferry. As requested by the commissioners, we are providing input regarding these proposed changes.

1) 30% rate hike. Raising the rate to ride the ferry by 30% in a single fiscal year is onerous at best. Many residents of the island are senior citizens or of limited means. You can bet that these residents, who have to live within a fixed or small income, never saw this coming, and are justifiably upset about it. Does this bother you? It should. A large fare increase will result in decreased ridership, and thus decreased revenue collected.

2) Elimination of multi-use ferry passes. One of the line items for which the county requested islander input is eliminating the use of multi-ride passes altogether. Why? Islanders (like me) enjoy the convenience and savings that come with purchase of a multi-use pass. Are convenience and savings for your ferry users things to be eliminated?

3) 45 Day expiry for multi-use ferry passes. Again, why would you propose to tamper with a product that islanders find useful, convenient, and (relatively) cost effective? If the county has their money paid up front by the purchaser of a multi-ride pass, how is that a bad thing, over the course of a 90-day expiry? A 45-day expiry on multi-use ferry passes will only serve to drive down demand for them, and /or the county collecting revenue for services not provided (for unused rides cancelled upon expiry). If a 45-day expiry for a discounted multi-use ferry pass is implemented, the equitable thing to do will be to cut in half the number of rides on a 45-day ticket (12 rides for a walk on, 10 rides for a car). This would help the users of a multi-use ferry pass to use up all their rides before expiry.

4) Parking fees on both sides of the Guemes Island ferry. At the meeting on 9/17/24, it was projected that these parking fees will raise roughly $100,000 or more per year. I am assuming that this projection is for gross revenue. I saw no figures presented to capture the costs associated with enforcing these fees. What is the annual cost for hiring someone to enforce this policy, process tickets, etc? My guess is that the net revenue from such a policy (if any) will be far less than $100,000.

5) Parking fees on both sides of the Guemes Island ferry (continued). On a related note, if charging for parking on county property (on each side of the ferry run) is such a good idea, why did I hear no mention of charging for parking at all county parking lots? For example, there are lots in Mount Vernon near the County administration building and the county courthouse that would generate much more revenue annually, compared to the ferry dock lots….

6) Electronic ticketing. The rollout for electronic ticketing, scheduled for early June 2024, has still not happened, with no revised start date provided. While I understand that a big change like this will take time to get right, this concept was sold to islanders in part as a way to create savings for the operation of the ferry. Where will the savings come from? Apart from operating and maintaining the ferry and its associated docks, the biggest expenditure for the ferry is payroll. Once electronic ticketing is implemented, will an employee position(s) be eliminated, due to the resultant increased efficiencies? I have heard little or no discussion from the county around this issue.

Guemes Island is a beautiful place, and an asset to Skagit County. I am proud to be a Guemes Islander and Skagit County resident. I also understand that island life brings with it its own set of inconveniences. However, the proposals floated at the 9/17 meeting all seem to have a negative financial impact for islanders and ferry users. I respectfully urge you to reconsider the proposed changed to ferry operation, in accordance with the feedback you received at the recent meeting, and from islanders by email.

Respectfully yours,

Scott W. Anderson and Karen P. Anderson

____________

Cathy Schoenberg

1). I am a permanent resident on Guemes Island. I work in town and rely on the ferry service. I am an artist so really don’t make much money, and with my social security check, I get by. I don’t need to elaborate on the issue of trying to get by on a very limited budget.

2) Aside from my own issues, the discounted punchcards are especially essential to get speedy boarding ( it takes a lot longer to make a purchase in any way shape or form) The electronic ticketing you are looking at is a nightmare for non tech people, especially seniors.

3) The raised prices will really be hard, really hard to afford on limited budget such as i and MANY on Guemes are living on. GUEMES IS NOT LIKE SAN JUAN ISLAND!! It was actually where one could go in skagit county for affordable living when I moved here in 2000! I

4) the idea of paying for parking is , pardon me, INSANE. We live in the constant possibility that the ferry will break down, go out for regular maintenance etc, then there is summer…..when the lines are too long to be able to get to the appointment, job, airport, at the time required, one has to have a car available , as to the guemes side, how can that work if you do not have public transportation as an alternative? Are you really hoping to make our lives impossible to live on this island community we so depend on? We currently have all these ways to manage and now it’s in your hands to make chaos and deprivation to your constituents

Please give us some consideration

Cathy Schoenberg

___________

Diana Tsang

RE: Input on Guemes Island Ferry

Dear Commissioners,

I am opposed to the elimination of multi-ride passes. The multi-ride passes should be continued along with the 90-day expiration date. Anything less than 90 days creates a hardship for islanders who use the ferry on a regularly basis but are not day-to-day commuters.

I am for standardizing a discount (15%) would provide an incentive to purchase a multi-ride pass for non-commuters. This is literally, money in hand for Skagit County.

I agree to considering making some changes to the schedule and fee during peak season. We can end non-peak season in mid-September as opposed to end of September. Additionally, I also believe that during peak season (when school is closed for the summer) that children should be charged for riding the ferry.

I agree to considering charging fee for bicycles for single ride tickets only. I’ve noticed more cyclists hopping over to Guemes for day trips, which unfortunately limits space for vehicles. Single ride ticket should be purchased and used on the same date.

I am opposed to charging parking for Guemes Island Ferry users seem excessive and unfair to ferry riders. I’m not aware of any other Skagit County properties with parking fees. If a fee is implemented, will funds be used to improve security and upkeep of the ferry parking?

Regards,

Diana Tsang

___________

Penni Sturgill

Skagit County Commissioners, Grace Kane and Rachel Rowe

That comment implied that by having Air Care you might avoid any additional fees associated with a Ferry Med call.

I believe everyone needs to have a clear understanding of the protocols in place rather than assuming you as a resident have the right to call for an Air Evacuation on your own behalf.

If a fee is imposed which it (shouldn’t be) needs to only reflect the expenses incurred not a 3-hour minimum charter fee.

Penni Sturgill

GI Resident

___________

Pat Richley & Gordon L. Erickson

Dear Mr Wessen, Mr. Browning and Ms Janicki,

As our neighbor Cindy Kamp said “We moved here on a set of norms long established by Skagit County. Island citizens deserve to maintain the same quality of life as everyone else in Skagit County. The goal of county government should be to better our lives-not seek to find clever ways to destroy them as we have seen since January of 2023.” In our case, Guemes’ short 4 to 8-minute ferry ride for medical services as we age, was precisely why we did not move to Decatur or Orcas, where we also found beautiful homes in a rural setting that met our specifications.

Attached, please find our revised letter with specific suggestions for resolving issues concerning the Guemes Island Ferry budget.

Commissioners, forestall the vote on the budget until a truly realistic and comprehensive budget is jointly developed with islanders no sooner than April 2025.

Tuesday’s meeting where Captain Rachel presented her budget plan was inadequate. Allowing the public 2-minutes, instead of the stated 3 minutes each,did not provide opportunity for substantive conversation and conflict resolutions to be achieved.

During the remainder of 2024 and FY2025, require that Captain Rachel:

Spends 12 hours monthly on the ferry, walking both parking lots, inspecting the two terminal buildings.
Spends 6 hours monthly meeting with a team of Guemes Island Ferry Committee Members and island residents, some with accounting backgrounds to work through grant opportunities, budgetary comparisons with Whatcom & Pierce counties, and forecasting.
Reassigns her assistant and hire a full-time mechanic to maintain the all aspects of the ferry, paint the loading docks and monitor the condition of signage, flag, terminals, exterior and interior facilities, lighting; and make urgent, intermediate and long-range recommendations. This person needs a budget, with Rachel’s oversight.
Establishs an open line of communication between the mechanic, the public, crew and office personnel.

The County must assume responsibility for persistent budget errors, particularly egregious compared to our counterpart ferry systems in Whatcom and Pierce counties. This oversight must not be shunted off to be shouldered exclusively by Guemes Island residents.

The current ferry management system is broken and has been for years. Islander’s comments are considered complaints and are disregarded. Tensions rise. It’s time to bring more people in to work on the issue. Island residents have a vested interest in seeking solutions. Let us help.

Respectfully submitted,
Pat Richley & Gordon L. Erickson

_________

Linda Lewis

Please don’t raise our ferry ticket rates by more than %10.

Please keep the current % discount on multi-use passes.

Please keep the current length of use before expiration on multi-use passes.

Please don’t charge for parking.

Please, please, minimize the cost increases to all of us, even island residents who must use the ferry.

I have lived here for twenty years, am a teacher, I can’t retire yet, don’t qualify for the senior discount yet, and I own a small percentage of my home while the bank owns the rest. All I can say is please don’t raise my rates. I just can’t survive being squeezed from one more side. I am sure you can all understand. So, just, please, pretty please with cream and sugar on top, because I can’t afford to move even if I wanted to, please minimize the cost increases of ferry usage. 🙂

Most sincerely,

Linda Lewis

___________

Let me begin by commenting that giving people one day’s notice as to what questions the commissioners were interested in hearing opinions about at the hearing was not nearly enough time, nor was the very abbreviated and somewhat vague list of subjects helpful for people to be able to sort through or even understand what is being proposed. And several of the links did not work to the needed webpages. Open communication from the county to islanders has shrunk to be generally lacking and now appears to illustrate an attitude of disrespect that borders on contempt. I realize that staff has had to withstand long periods of overtly disrespectful and hostile behavior from a very vocal minority of Guemes citizens, some of whom claim to represent all islanders. They do not. The county very much needs to be working with a citizen advisory group of adults from various perspectives who understand how government works, who understand how boards operate, who understand modern budgeting and financial responsibilities, and who are willing to work as colleagues to plan for the future life and management of the ferry and the health and well being of the lives of islanders in a cooperative manner within the constructs of county government. It’s time for the Skagit County commissioners to form and appoint a formal Citizen Advisory Committee.

Draft 2024 Ferry Fare Revenue Target Report: I agree with the formula that was adopted last year.
Proposed 2025 ferry fare schedule: A 30% fare increase is extremely steep! The 2020 census of Guemes Island lists 926 full-time residents; 59% of them are over 55 years of age. We have already been hit with huge tax increases. If these fares are adopted, there needs to be a serious needs-based program like Lummi Island has, that is based on income alone and is managed by a service agency (Opportunity Council in Whatcom County or property tax exemption) so that low-income young families, renters, and those who don’t qualify for the property tax exemption program can qualify (HUD Very Low Income Levels. See https://www.whatcomcounty.us/3604/Needs-Based-Multi-Ride-Punch-Cards-Infor). And the discount needs to be significant, such as Lummi’s is: Passenger=42%; car and driver=46%. See https://www.whatcomcounty.us/DocumentCenter/View/84265/Ferry-Fares-Effective-June-1-2024docx Lummi Island also does not have a senior/disabled discount; they depend on the needs based category. Since such a large percentage of Guemes’s population is over 65, you might consider eliminating the senior discount IF you established the generous Lummi needs-based discount that would include seniors and disabled people.
Expiration dates for single-ride tickets: Expiration dates, if any, should be the same as all other tickets.
Standardizing the 15% discount on multi-ride passes year-round. What does this mean? If it means that full-time islanders should pay peak prices during peak season and non-peak prices during non peak season, I am opposed. We have to adjust our entire lives around the influx of traffic and put up with long waits in line for medical appointments during peak season. We should at least continue to get a break on the price of the tickets for multi-rides.
Eliminating multi-ride passes (thereby eliminating the expiration dates). Lummi Island doesn’t have expiration dates. If you give us the price break on peak season for multi-ride tickets for full-time residents, that would work fine. There should be some way to verify residency through the electronic ticketing system.
Changing the expiration dates on multi-ride passes from 90 days to 45 days. There seems to be some misunderstanding about why the expiration dates were established in the 80’s to begin with. The population then was mostly younger families with children, with people working off island, before the internet was prevalent. The intent was to reward full-time islanders with a price break because they were, by necessity, having to use the ferry daily. The emphasis was on full-time islanders. Today’s full-time islanders have aged or can work remotely, but most are not traveling daily, so very few people would be able to use the multi-ride passes in 45 days. However, with the new electronic ticketing system, there will be a lot of ticket sharing so expiration dates will effectively be meaningless anyway.
Proposed charter rate for requested private trips; OK for private parties but way too high for propane deliveries. Propane is an essential service for islanders.
Charging for parking in Anacortes: This will result in more car traffic.
Proposed rate for emergency response: This just makes it more dangerous to live here. To the commissioner who said you can just get a helicopter. Insurance doesn’t pay for those flights unless a doctor orders the flight. There are many conditions that are serious enough for an ambulance but not for a life flight.
- During regular ferry hours of operation
- Outside regular ferry hours of operation

____________

Lisa Charnock
Dear Captain Rowe and Commissioners Wesen, Janicki, and Browning,

This letter is in response to the proposed Guemes Island Ferry fare schedule revisions. Based on the 2023 Rate Study and associated actions by the Board of County Commissioners, annual rate increases are not unexpected. The rate study projected rate increases of 14 percent per year for five years in order to bring fare recovery up to 65% of operations and maintenance (O&M) costs by 2028. At the same time, O&M costs were projected to increase by 2.7 percent each year except for 2025, a haul out year, which showed a 6.9 percent increase. The Rate Study did note that increases might need to be adjusted in the event of changes in O&M costs. What is surprising is that the proposed rate increase is 30 percent for 2025, not 14 percent, and the increases in O&M costs are unexamined.

You will receive many comments about the impact of these fare increases on island residents (full or part-time) – particularly families who commute on the ferry for work and seniors on fixed incomes – I echo these concerns, which should be taken very seriously. But my specific comments will focus on four elements of the proposal: (1) methodology and large unexplained increases in O&M costs; (2) the proposal for a “charter fee” for after-hours medical calls; (3) the proposed “charter fee” for hazardous materials runs, and (4) expiration for multi-ride passes.

Methodology. It appears that haul out-related costs in the calculation of Revenue Recovery Targets are significantly out of synch with historical precedent, and appear to incorrectly inflate the recovery target and thus result in higher than necessary fare increases. The 2024 Fare Revenue Target Report (FRTR) states in several places that revenue targets are based on O&M costs, and that capital costs associated with haul outs are not included and therefore do not affect fares. Further, capital costs are not reported to the State in the annual Ferry Operations Report, which reflects the same O&M costs as in the revenue target.

Figure 1 (Base Year Expenditures) reflects an annualized haul out cost of over $1.1M per year for 2024, 2025, and 2026, which is included in the adjusted O&M for these years and is presumably not capital in nature; these costs are therefore included in the 5-year average adjusted O&M, and thus the fare recovery target.

Annualizing haul out O&M is prudent, so that projected year-over-year expected O&M costs don’t change precipitously. That said, the annualized haul out O&M costs are significantly out of synch with historic costs and with the 2023 Rate Study projections, described above. According to the 2024 FRTR, haul out O&M costs have run between $500,000 and $1M in the years where there has been a haul out; annualizing these costs would indicate that about $250,000-$500,000 would be expected per year. These estimates can be validated by looking at the difference between O&M costs for haul out years and non-haul out years, using the difference between the haul-out year and the previous year’s O&M costs as a proxy for haul out costs. This approach shows that haul-out costs averaged $1,045,000, which if then annualized across two years is $522,000; if 2023 haul out costs had been annualized, the costs over two years would have been $385,000.

It is clear that the current fare proposal includes haul out O&M costs that are nearly triple what would be expected, and this increase is unexplained. Even if the haul out is expected to be a longer duration than usual for major capital improvements, it isn’t going to be three times as long. If a portion of the increase is due to contract mechanical labor costs, then the cost savings from not hiring a new mechanic should have offset them and not netted a large increase. This leaves unanswered the question of what is causing O&M to increase – have some costs that are actually capital in nature been included? These cost increases are driving the large jump in proposed fares: the inclusion of a total of $3.4M in “annualized haul out costs” between 2024-2026 rather than the projected 6.9 percent increase from the Rate Study or the cumulative $750,000-$1.5M that would be expected from historical data is having an enormous, and apparently erroneous, impact on the fare recovery target.

In addition, the 2024 FRTR shows non-haul-out O&M increases of 16 percent, with no explanation, adding to significantly higher than estimated cost increases in the 2023 Rate Study. Increases in non-haul out O&M should be in line with the 2023 Rate Study and should be more like 2.7 percent, not 16 percent. There is no justification or explanation for why costs unrelated to haul out activities should have increased by a factor of six from last year’s analysis. All of these cost increases require clarification before ferry rate adjustments can be based on them.

In conclusion, possible explanations for these large cost increases include: that capital costs are being incorrectly included in the annualized haul out O&M costs in Figure 1, which would cause audit issues with the State regarding the Ferry Operations Report; that salary savings are not being reflected in mechanical costs; and/or that there are other unexamined costs of the ferry program that require better clarification. The Commissioners and ferry riders deserve a clear explanation for why non-capital O&M haul out costs are estimated to be so much greater than historical costs. In addition, a better understanding of the 16 percent increase in non-haul out O&M is needed in light of last year’s Rate Study projections and lower annual changes in these costs in the past – and it would not be unreasonable to question whether these proposed increases could be reined in in the face of high haul-out costs.

Emergency Call Charter Charges. The proposal to charge a minimum $1,500 charter charge for after-hours emergency calls is an abrogation of the County’s obligation to protect the health and welfare of County residents. Neither Whatcom nor Pierce Counties charge a charter fee for after-hours emergency calls. This proposal is a public relations failure at the very least, convincing residents that the County is callous and uncaring. In practice, knowing that there is such a steep penalty for becoming ill or having an emergency after hours may limit residents’ comfort in making emergency calls, resulting in increased suffering.

Hazardous Materials Charter Charges. In a rural community, propane is the primary source of fuel for heat – forcing propane companies to pay charter charges, which will be passed on to consumers, will have an impact on low-income and fixed-income residents who may find heating to be unaffordable. Most local governments and utility companies in the U.S. collaborate to try to ensure that the costs of critical utilities such as heating are made affordable, whether through subsidies or other programs. Increasing the cost of propane by requiring hazardous materials charter charges as the opposite effect, if not offset by some kind of low- or fixed-income subsidy. Again, the County’s reputation takes a blow when proposals like this are made with no recognition of the impact on vulnerable populations. At a minimum, if some charter fee were to be put into place, it should be in line with what private charter costs would be for the same number of trucks and frequency. This would be at least a nod to addressing the context for such a charge, and would allow islanders and the propane vendors to decide whether to continue to use the County ferry for this vital service.

Expiration for Multi-Ride Passes. The purpose of multi-ride passes is to provide a small discount to full-time residents who ride the ferry; extending the expiration period would assist senior and low-income ferry riders to deal with ongoing fare increases. Although punch cards have had various lengths of validity, the rationale for termination dates on punch cards seems mostly to do with ensuring that when new fares go into effect (annual, not seasonal), people will be paying the new level of fares. Otherwise, people might stockpile punchcards when fare increases are expected. But other than that rationale, short duration punch cards really don’t make any sense – what they become is a discount for commuters and parents (all good) but no longer provide a discount to seniors or other full-time residents (including low income riders) who don’t travel as often. Especially in light of projected annual 14 percent (2023 Rate Study) or 30 percent (2024 Revenue Target Report) fare increases, a small gesture of goodwill would be to extend, not shorten, the duration of punch cards. 120-day punch cards would be ideal for seniors, but could, again, result in stockpiling; 90-day punch cards seems like a reasonable alternative. 45-day punch cards with 20 trips per card is simply not beneficial to riders who don’t commute daily.

Thank you for taking these comments into consideration.

Lisa Charnock

________________

Guemesferry.org

September 2024 Ferry Fare Comments

Leave a comment Cancel reply

September 2024 Ferry Fare Comments

Share this:

Leave a comment Cancel reply