For those of you that read my columns with any frequency, you might have a sneaking suspicion that I’m not the greatest fan of government waste. The mere fact that any government entity is even considering a five million dollar feasibility study to dredge the cut coming into Key West harbor has me oscillating between laughing and crying. Laughing because it is clearly fodder for a John Stewart segment, and crying because I know government is just stupid enough to do it.
First, let’s put all those “if you don’t support dredging the channel you are anti-business” arguments to bed. Quite the contrary. Many of the opponents of this proposed five million dollar displacement of our tax dollars are business owners themselves, and recognize the need for a diverse economic base. It’s that word diverse that I would like to stress, a word that characterizes a healthy, sustainable economic base.
Let’s take a look at the rationale behind this disastrous determination to dig. The argument is that the cruise ship industry is moving towards larger ships, and that current sections of the channel leading into Key West Harbor will not be navigable to such vessels. In the end, it is theorized that due to this constraint, the cruise ship industry will be forced to choose other ports of call, abandoning Key West, and destroying our local economy.
The current proposal to authorize a five million dollar feasibility study is based off of the findings of a November 2010 “Reconnaisance Report” produced by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District. (Available online at www.kwtnblue.com) The report calls for the next phase to be the five million dollar feasibility study, to be followed by the actual dredging project estimated to cost a mere THIRTY FIVE MILLION.
One local business owner opposed to the project is charter captain Will Benson. He and and his brother Jolly, were born and raised in the Keys, and offer some critical insight and analysis from different perspectives. Will, widely known for his skills as a fishing guide, sites a serious decrease in the presence of Tarpon in and around Key West. He attributes this to a great degree to the dredging that took place back in 2003-04, as a result of the destruction of sea bottom that fosters aquatic life including bait fish. Further he sees silty out flows on a daily basis that he feels are adversely affecting the reef. Benson’s clients usually visit for multiple days, and stay, dine and shop in Key West, providing a similar, if not greater type of economic trickle down from his industry, as opposed to cruise ship passengers.
Jolly Benson, a playwright and lighting designer, looks at it from an analytical approach. He differs with the Reconnaissance Report’s assumption that cruise ships are growing in length, and suggests that in fact it may be more realistically “tonnage.” Many cruise line’s new ships may still be able to navigate the challenges of our cut. But Jolly goes on to note that cruise ship passenger satisfaction surveys suggest that travelers enjoy the smaller to medium size vessels more. With insight he points out that perhaps the Keys should also be looking to appeal to smaller, more luxury oriented cruise ships that carry a diverse clientele into the lower keys. Perhaps these types of ships and passengers may support a different type of Keys business, allowing for longer stays, and the chance to dine, hire a charter boat, shop for art, or catch a play. Further more, Jolly argues, aside from the feasibility study, to dredge in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary would require an Act of Congress, literally. A two thirds majority of the US congress would be required to overturn Executive Order 13089 that protects our reef. Jolly also points out the obvious costs associated with a potential legal battle with the Marine Sanctuary which is opposed to this.
The Bensons are all about the Keys and have a great respect for the environment, and it’s obvious correlation with a healthy economy. They are both cognizant of the benefits we all share from the cruise industry, and in no way want to eliminate cruise ships completely.
Additionally, it is widely known that many cruise ship passengers return to their ports of call for longer durations, and no one can deny that benefit, and few would want to deter that. However one would expect that the incentive to return is greater because Key West offers attractions such as a healthy reef, great fishing, and idyllic scenery. That incentive for future visits might be diminished should the dredging adversely affect those appealing characteristics.
One of the other assumptions in the Reconnaissance Report I differ with is the economic benefit analysis, which basically can be placed into the “If you build it BIGGER, more will come,” category. You know, the kind of governmental business analysis that reasons if you have a ship that towers THREE stories over Key West that dumps ONE bazzillion people onto the street at once, clearly it would be twice as awesome to have a SIX story ship that dumps TWO bazzillion people. Where does that kind of logic end? Hell, if a four lane highway would double the influx of tourists, let’s build an eight lane highway! Maybe with the fill from the dredging we can build a parking lot on top of the reef too.
In the report the Feds seem to prioritize the term NED way too much, or National Economic Development. They suggest because Key West competes solely with foreign ports of call, that this project has a National Economic Benefit. I question the Fed’s ability to understand the dynamics of our local economy, or our fragile environment, especially when they’ve been such fine stewards of our national economy.
Locally, Commissioner Clayton Lopez suggests that at best the City would be on the hook for $1.5 Million of the feasibility costs. He acknowledges he has flipped on the issue and is now against it unless the study doesn’t cost the City any money. However, he is careful to note that more information is provided every day, and he reserves his right to flop.
Newly elected Commissioner Tony Yaniz doesn’t pull any punches. He states, “I find it incredulous that we claim to be cash-strapped for minor expenses like parks, lights, and recreational facilities but yet are considering spending 1million + for a very unpopular study. I am not opposed to cruise ships, but on our terms. I do believe in tourism but not at the expense of our reef, our fishing industry, our environment, and our family based community.”
Commissioners Billy Wardlow and Teri Johnston are both opposed to the idea. Johnston doesn’t feel we should utilize anyone’s money on the study, and Wardlow is quick to remind us that it is still our tax dollars, be it the City’s or the Fed’s.
That point is the ever ignored elephant in the room that I am constantly harping about. Uh, in case no one noticed, WE’RE BROKE. In fact, we are in hock up to our eyeballs and have burdened future generations with our inability to control the purse strings. No, the City doesn’t have money, the State just found out they are $1.5 Billion behind projected revenues, and for all those who somehow think that Federal money is free, think again. Close your eyes and imagine Greece.
I can hear the pundits now, “But Matt, your reasoning is so shortsighted. With this mere five million, (To be followed by the thirty five million in actual dredging costs) the economic benefit to the Keys will far outweigh the costs.” In fact, the Reconnaissance Report suggests a potential Benefit to Costs ratio of between 2.4 to 29.3. You gotta like pin point accuracy. Yuh, and I kind of remember the Feds saying that the War in Iraq would only cost thirty billion, and that our Federal debt would be paid off by 2010.
But for those that want to ride that train that thinks government spending leads to private economic prosperity, here is an alternative. Instead of spending five million dollars on a dredging study, how about giving FIFTY grants of $100,000 to small businesses that want to enhance or develop non-tourist related business in the Keys. Imagine, maybe someone would set-up an eco-friendly sponge farm, or find a way to manufacture something out of residential recyclables. Who knows? Call me a dreamer, but if you really want to throw five million dollars we stole from our grandchildren out the window, how about developing economic diversity while we’re doing it?
Because think about this folks. Let’s say we fund the study, and then actually dredge, and Key West enjoys the “boom” from Royal Caribbean Freedom Class cruise ships pulling into port. We’re selling countless T-shirts and Margaritas to three hour tourists, and the good times are rolling. But then, in one fell swoop the cruise industry leaves Key West. Maybe our reef isn’t as nice as it once was, or the fishing sucks for some “odd” reason, or maybe there are more pristine ports of call the cruise passengers are demanding, or maybe Cuba opens up. Who knows, but then what are we left with? One messed up eco-system, a big hole in the ocean, a boat load of debt, and a bunch of boarded up Tee shirt shops.
First, let’s put all those “if you don’t support dredging the channel you are anti-business” arguments to bed. Quite the contrary. Many of the opponents of this proposed five million dollar displacement of our tax dollars are business owners themselves, and recognize the need for a diverse economic base. It’s that word diverse that I would like to stress, a word that characterizes a healthy, sustainable economic base.
Let’s take a look at the rationale behind this disastrous determination to dig. The argument is that the cruise ship industry is moving towards larger ships, and that current sections of the channel leading into Key West Harbor will not be navigable to such vessels. In the end, it is theorized that due to this constraint, the cruise ship industry will be forced to choose other ports of call, abandoning Key West, and destroying our local economy.
The current proposal to authorize a five million dollar feasibility study is based off of the findings of a November 2010 “Reconnaisance Report” produced by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District. (Available online at www.kwtnblue.com) The report calls for the next phase to be the five million dollar feasibility study, to be followed by the actual dredging project estimated to cost a mere THIRTY FIVE MILLION.
One local business owner opposed to the project is charter captain Will Benson. He and and his brother Jolly, were born and raised in the Keys, and offer some critical insight and analysis from different perspectives. Will, widely known for his skills as a fishing guide, sites a serious decrease in the presence of Tarpon in and around Key West. He attributes this to a great degree to the dredging that took place back in 2003-04, as a result of the destruction of sea bottom that fosters aquatic life including bait fish. Further he sees silty out flows on a daily basis that he feels are adversely affecting the reef. Benson’s clients usually visit for multiple days, and stay, dine and shop in Key West, providing a similar, if not greater type of economic trickle down from his industry, as opposed to cruise ship passengers.
Jolly Benson, a playwright and lighting designer, looks at it from an analytical approach. He differs with the Reconnaissance Report’s assumption that cruise ships are growing in length, and suggests that in fact it may be more realistically “tonnage.” Many cruise line’s new ships may still be able to navigate the challenges of our cut. But Jolly goes on to note that cruise ship passenger satisfaction surveys suggest that travelers enjoy the smaller to medium size vessels more. With insight he points out that perhaps the Keys should also be looking to appeal to smaller, more luxury oriented cruise ships that carry a diverse clientele into the lower keys. Perhaps these types of ships and passengers may support a different type of Keys business, allowing for longer stays, and the chance to dine, hire a charter boat, shop for art, or catch a play. Further more, Jolly argues, aside from the feasibility study, to dredge in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary would require an Act of Congress, literally. A two thirds majority of the US congress would be required to overturn Executive Order 13089 that protects our reef. Jolly also points out the obvious costs associated with a potential legal battle with the Marine Sanctuary which is opposed to this.
The Bensons are all about the Keys and have a great respect for the environment, and it’s obvious correlation with a healthy economy. They are both cognizant of the benefits we all share from the cruise industry, and in no way want to eliminate cruise ships completely.
Additionally, it is widely known that many cruise ship passengers return to their ports of call for longer durations, and no one can deny that benefit, and few would want to deter that. However one would expect that the incentive to return is greater because Key West offers attractions such as a healthy reef, great fishing, and idyllic scenery. That incentive for future visits might be diminished should the dredging adversely affect those appealing characteristics.
One of the other assumptions in the Reconnaissance Report I differ with is the economic benefit analysis, which basically can be placed into the “If you build it BIGGER, more will come,” category. You know, the kind of governmental business analysis that reasons if you have a ship that towers THREE stories over Key West that dumps ONE bazzillion people onto the street at once, clearly it would be twice as awesome to have a SIX story ship that dumps TWO bazzillion people. Where does that kind of logic end? Hell, if a four lane highway would double the influx of tourists, let’s build an eight lane highway! Maybe with the fill from the dredging we can build a parking lot on top of the reef too.
In the report the Feds seem to prioritize the term NED way too much, or National Economic Development. They suggest because Key West competes solely with foreign ports of call, that this project has a National Economic Benefit. I question the Fed’s ability to understand the dynamics of our local economy, or our fragile environment, especially when they’ve been such fine stewards of our national economy.
Locally, Commissioner Clayton Lopez suggests that at best the City would be on the hook for $1.5 Million of the feasibility costs. He acknowledges he has flipped on the issue and is now against it unless the study doesn’t cost the City any money. However, he is careful to note that more information is provided every day, and he reserves his right to flop.
Newly elected Commissioner Tony Yaniz doesn’t pull any punches. He states, “I find it incredulous that we claim to be cash-strapped for minor expenses like parks, lights, and recreational facilities but yet are considering spending 1million + for a very unpopular study. I am not opposed to cruise ships, but on our terms. I do believe in tourism but not at the expense of our reef, our fishing industry, our environment, and our family based community.”
Commissioners Billy Wardlow and Teri Johnston are both opposed to the idea. Johnston doesn’t feel we should utilize anyone’s money on the study, and Wardlow is quick to remind us that it is still our tax dollars, be it the City’s or the Fed’s.
That point is the ever ignored elephant in the room that I am constantly harping about. Uh, in case no one noticed, WE’RE BROKE. In fact, we are in hock up to our eyeballs and have burdened future generations with our inability to control the purse strings. No, the City doesn’t have money, the State just found out they are $1.5 Billion behind projected revenues, and for all those who somehow think that Federal money is free, think again. Close your eyes and imagine Greece.
I can hear the pundits now, “But Matt, your reasoning is so shortsighted. With this mere five million, (To be followed by the thirty five million in actual dredging costs) the economic benefit to the Keys will far outweigh the costs.” In fact, the Reconnaissance Report suggests a potential Benefit to Costs ratio of between 2.4 to 29.3. You gotta like pin point accuracy. Yuh, and I kind of remember the Feds saying that the War in Iraq would only cost thirty billion, and that our Federal debt would be paid off by 2010.
But for those that want to ride that train that thinks government spending leads to private economic prosperity, here is an alternative. Instead of spending five million dollars on a dredging study, how about giving FIFTY grants of $100,000 to small businesses that want to enhance or develop non-tourist related business in the Keys. Imagine, maybe someone would set-up an eco-friendly sponge farm, or find a way to manufacture something out of residential recyclables. Who knows? Call me a dreamer, but if you really want to throw five million dollars we stole from our grandchildren out the window, how about developing economic diversity while we’re doing it?
Because think about this folks. Let’s say we fund the study, and then actually dredge, and Key West enjoys the “boom” from Royal Caribbean Freedom Class cruise ships pulling into port. We’re selling countless T-shirts and Margaritas to three hour tourists, and the good times are rolling. But then, in one fell swoop the cruise industry leaves Key West. Maybe our reef isn’t as nice as it once was, or the fishing sucks for some “odd” reason, or maybe there are more pristine ports of call the cruise passengers are demanding, or maybe Cuba opens up. Who knows, but then what are we left with? One messed up eco-system, a big hole in the ocean, a boat load of debt, and a bunch of boarded up Tee shirt shops.
boarded up t shirt shops..... do you mean ripoffs.... let the buyer beware... the thief of key west patromony and bulldozing of human lives will never stop as replacement suckers keep coming, investing their lives only to be replaced... theron lyda
ReplyDelete