Captain David Clark, Golden Gate Ferry Boss, Back in the Saddle

Retakes Helm after Heroic Four-Month Cancer Fight

An interview by Wes Starratt

Yes, for four long months, the manager of the Ferry Division of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District was caught up in a personal medical catastrophe. Now back on his feet once more, and raring to go is the leader not only of the Golden Gate Ferries, but a driving force in the regional ferry system. Sorely missed by everyone, we say, “Welcome back, David” and “Stay in good health!”

It wasn’t easy, but we finally caught up with David Clark at home and on his cell phone, as usual. He was happy to talk with us about the Bay Area ferries and where they are going.

We are delighted to see you back after four long months in the hands of the medical establishment. How does it feel to be back?

Fortunately, I am feeling very strong and anxious to get back into the fray and participate in the ongoing operation and future development of ferry services … not only the Golden Gate Ferries, but also of the regional ferry plan.

Speaking of the future of ferry service on the bay, have you had an opportunity to review the Water Transit Authority’s recently released Implementation & Operations Plan (I&OP) for a regional ferry system?

It is certainly a beautiful document with great importance for the future of water transit in the Bay Area. We look forward to working in conjunction with the WTA to support the plan and help the system move forward in today’s economic environment.

What do you think about the possibility of funding the system in today’s economic climate?

I hope that the complex political issues associated with bridge-toll increases for the other Bay Area bridges can be resolved so that water transit can get its share of the revenue and move the WTA proposal forward. Certainly, the extensive work that has been done by the WTA should put it in a good position to be able to get strong interest and support. With such a great document as the I&OP and the forthcoming Environmental Impact Report, I would think that they have as good a chance as possible to be able to sell the program to the state legislature.

What about selling it to the public?

That is going to be complicated. There are many interest groups. It seems to me that they’ve done a great job of being receptive to the various interests and to giving every group something to feel good about. So, hopefully, between the interest groups and the other agencies in the region and the general public, the program can gain momentum and move forward as the vision originally intended. If they can overcome the, hopefully, temporary economic environment, they should be able to move the plans forward.

Rider-ship on ferries and other transit systems has dropped since the year 2000. Does that send out any alarms that the public may not accept a regional ferry system?

No, I don’t think it does. The year 2000 was a banner year, and it was also an unrealistic year to compare with future rider-ship, whether ferries or transit in general. We are better off to compare current rider-ship to earlier years. Golden Gate Ferries is now seeing rider-ship stabilize as of the first few months of the 2002 fiscal year, with rider-ship actually creeping back up a bit. It is a big mistake to point to 2000-2003, which as everyone knows, was a false bubble in the economy

Nevertheless, do you think that there needs to be a stronger marketing program for ferry service?

Some may find it surprising that WTA included little, if anything, for marketing in its plans.

That was actually one of my comments to the WTA on the I&OP a couple of days ago. More details on marketing would be beneficial to the program…not only marketing, but we need to take a strong look at the design of the ferry systems to see how it works with the individual customer…how effective it is when it comes to the rider’s departure point in the morning, the connection on the city side, and the return in the evening. All ferry systems compete with other modes of transportation, from the bridges to buses and rail, and must provide as efficient a transit system as possible.

How is the Golden Gate Ferry system doing in the current economic picture?

The Bridge District, even with the toll increase on the bridge, is facing a significant financial shortfall over the next five years

Is that due largely to the high cost of seismic upgrading on the bridge, which the district must largely bare on its own with little state or federal help?

The problems are multifaceted. They are certainly impacted by the cost of the seismic retrofit of the bridge. They are also impacted by the rising costs of the ferry and the bus transit divisions…in combination with the reduced utilization of all three: the bridge, the ferries, and the buses. All combined, they have created a financial situation similar to that faced by most public agencies these days…where we are all going to have to be as creative and aggressive as possible to improve our efficiency and our financial performance as we preserve as much of our service as possible.

Has the heavy cost for seismically upgrading the bridge had a heavier impact on the Bridge District than on other ferry systems?

Well, I am not so sure. The new East Span of the Bay Bridge together with the seismic upgrading of the other Bay Area bridges are multimillion dollar projects that could dramatically impact the potential for other ferries, as well as the WTA, to receive a portion of the bridge toll increases. So, I think the other transit systems are facing the same issues, although perhaps our case is more direct. There are no sales taxes only bridge tolls that support the Golden Gate Bridge District and its three divisions.

What about some specifics, such as parking fees at Larkspur Landing and charging for feeder buses?

Our Board of Directors in November will be considering a first service cut that will not dramatically effect the Ferry Division until the Winter of 2003 when they may decide to eliminate some mid-day winter service to Sausalito. We have an Advisory Committee comprised of board members and staff members who are looking at how we can go beyond the first level to enhance efficiency and provide the best possible service for lower dollar amounts in future years. It will probably be a five-year plan to refine and redesign our bus and ferry services to best serve the community.

Some of the feeder bus routes are likely to be discontinued, while the focus remains on the more heavily used feeder routes. A fee-based parking system, which should have a very reasonable fee, is likely to be implemented within the next five years. But, the Bridge Board is very sensitive to the fact that the cost to our loyal ferry customers has to be carefully considered.

The fact is that we do need to enhance our bottom line through increased efficiency, controlled costs, and reasonable fare increases. Right now, the fares on the Golden Gate Ferry on a per passenger mile basis are between 20 and 30 percent below the other current fares in the Bay Area, and some of those fares are scheduled to be increased within the next few weeks, as I understand it. So, we are significantly below the norm in our current fares.

What interest does the Bridge District have in establishing North Bay ferry service at Port Sonoma at the mouth of the Petaluma River?

Depending on the funding that is available, I believe that the Golden Gate Bridge District would be very willing to discuss the potential for ferry service out of Port Sonoma. The board members that I have talked with, as well as our General Manager, seem to be genuinely positive, but certainly there are large economic issues to be resolved. It is a fact that Port Sonoma is in our primary corridor, unlike any of the other proposed ferry routes. So, I think that, if there is a single route where we could be a partner with the WTA, it would be Port Sonoma, which is a very dynamic and exciting future ferry route that could serve the community in a dramatically beneficial way.

Do you have any comment on the future of Bay Area ferry service after we get through the current decreased level of patronage?