.

GUEMES ISLAND FERRY COMMITTEE

Response to the Scope of Work for the

Guemes Island Ferry Implementation Plan

Revision II   1/26/03

 

 

GENERAL COMMENTS:

 

The GIFC would like to see a breakdown of estimated costs per task including the number of hours projected for the successful accomplishment of each task and the hourly rates at which each of these hours will be paid. Also will ferry operations be charged for this study in some way?

 

The Committee is unclear if the maximum consideration for this Scope of Work is $159,000.00 or if reimbursable expenses are in addition to the $159,000.00 figure listed as the amount of compensation.

 

The Committee is concerned that the Scope of Work is not geared toward developing and increasing the County’s internal capacity to accomplish these and similar tasks but rather that it builds dependence on outside resources to accomplish this work.

 

The Committee is concerned how  the activities of defining the Commissioners and Public Works roles and responsibilities as outlined in the Management Analysis Summary (Items A, B, E and F) will be addressed.

 

 

ITEMIZED RESPONSE:

 

Task 1A:

The Charter adopted by the participants at the public meeting held on 1/4/03 retains the name Guemes Island Ferry Committee.  We request that this name remain intact.

 

Task 1B:

Exactly what data will be used for projecting growth of ferry usage?

 

Growth Management is introduced in the Scope of Work here for the first time.  The committee would like to know where the Sub-area Plan fits into this task.

 

The committee finds this section to be ambiguous and would be better able to provide feedback if the tasks were more clearly specified.

 

Task 1C:

Exactly what sailing schedule does the task of updating the posted sailing schedule refer to?  Does this refer to the current schedule or to a revised schedule (see page 65 of draft Management Analysis) that has yet to be approved?  Does the County have the internal capacity to accomplish this task without the support of an outside resource?  We are also concerned that development of sailing times from Guemes Island may in fact prematurely limit the ability to increase the number of sailings per hour should a final decision be made to make this increase.

 

Is pre-ticketing a labor issue that needs to be included in the contract with the Inland Boatmen’s Union and have the ticketing procedures for the Lummi Island ferry been considered?

 

Where in the Scope of Work is the need to address increasing foot passenger usage addressed?

 

The committee is concerned that the Scope of Work in this area jumps to solutions that are narrowly drawn rather than exploring and analyzing alternatives to the issues.

 

 

 

 

Task 2 A and B:

The committee enthusiastically endorses the need to obtain accurate and detailed ridership statistics.  We would like to see this information compiled on a per run basis.  The committee suggests that the Scope of Work be changed to define the role of Berk and Associates in this area as assisting the County to develop the system that will be used to compile this data.  The County would then be responsible for actually implementing the system by which this data will be collected.

 

The committee is unclear what is meant by the following task; “Review and assess changes to the cost structure related to new labor agreements and costs associated with implementing key recommendations of the Management Analysis”.

 

The committee is concerned that 10-year ridership growth projections may be based on inaccurate data. In particular material in Capital Facility Plan 2001-2015, chart 3.1 and 3.2, showing only 19 single family residences on Guemes in 1950, as well as the use of existing land parcels as a basis for future potential growth.

 

Task 2 C:

Does this section include Walk-on traffic?

 

The committee suggests that heavy load vehicle impact on facilities and deck space be examined related to fares.

 

Task 2 D:

The committee would appreciate a more detailed delineation of this model.  The questions that this section brought to mind are:

 

Task 2 E:

The committee suggests that accurate ridership and revenue data need to be compiled before this task can be successfully accomplished.

 

Task 2 F:

The committee suggests that this task also include the addition of parking facilities on both the Anacortes side and the Guemes Island side. 

 

The committee suggests that the condition and life expectancy of the vessel and the facilities be considered since this was not well defined in the Facility Capital Plan.

 

Task 3 A:

The committee views this task as a low priority for County funding.

 

Task 3 B:

The committee would like to see representation from the ferry crew in this task.

 

The committee feels that we currently have incomplete data to accomplish this task.

 

Task 3 C:

The Committee would like to include the Pro-active Management Plan among the briefing materials provided.

 

The committee is concerned that our work should not be limited to the work scope outlined by Berk and Associates but is interested in incorporating this outline into the committees overall work plan.

 

Task 4 A:

The committee would welcome an initial, limited consultation between Berk and Associates, the Committee and the Public Works Department.  This consultation should include: developing a system of effective communication outside of regularly scheduled meetings, developing a framework and format for conducting regularly scheduled meetings, agreeing on a time and location for these meetings and developing a method for summarizing and disseminating the work accomplished at these meetings.

 

The committee further welcomes and suggests that all materials and documents generated by Berk and Associates as outcomes to this Scope of Work be provided to the Committee and the Public Works Department to be used at these regularly schedule meetings.  These documents may be provided in draft form and may contain recommended talking points and specific requests for feedback to Berk and Associates.

 

Task 4 B:

Does the County have the internal capacity to accomplish this task?

 

Task 5:

The committee welcomes this support and requests that the County Commissioners attend these meetings.

 

Task 6:

Does the County have the internal capacity to successfully accomplish this task now? 

The committee suggests that any support the County needs to accomplish this task be geared to increasing the County capacity to do this internally rather than relying on an outside resource to do this work. 

 

The committee recommends that the ferry crew is best suited to develop the operations manual under the supervision of the county. The result will create ownership of the procedures.