The first meeting of the school year for the PTA of the Claude O. Markoe Elementary School will be held from 6 to 7 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 26, in the school's cafetorium.
Parents and guardians are encouraged to attend.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TOWN HALL MEETING
All workers in the Hospitality Industry are invited to attend a Town Hall meeting from 6 to 9 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 26, at the Windward Passage Hotel in St. Thomas.
Representatives of the Hospitality Industry will be on hand to respond to questions and concerns.
Representatives of the Hospitality Industry will be on hand to respond to questions and concerns.
BAPO'S SOFTBALL TEAM MEETING
BaPo's softball team will meet at 7:30 p.m. om Thursday, Sept. 27, at the Emile Griffith Ballpark.
for further information call manager Elmo Benjamin at 776-3618.
for further information call manager Elmo Benjamin at 776-3618.
WAPA CHIEF: HAZARDOUS-DUTY BENEFITS 'A MISTAKE'
Sept. 25, 2001 – Despite strenuous objections by Government Employees Retirement System and Water and Power Authority officials, the Senate on Monday overrode Gov. Charles W. Turnbull's veto of legislation granting early retirement benefits to certain WAPA hazardous-duty employees, expanding the number of eligible employees to 316 from the present 58.
It is a move that Joseph Thomas, WAPA executive director, calls "a mistake we'll all pay for. We will have to put a rate increase in effect to offset whatever we need to have to pay out. We have been trying to avoid a rate increase, but now our hands are forced."
Thomas said Tuesday, "It would be a lovely benefit if we were rolling in dough when anything's possible, but with the fragile situation that the utility is in, our economy is in, and GERS is in, the legislation is not a fiscally responsible decision."
Thomas said he has had his staff searching to find another utility anywhere that has a similar retirement benefit. At a WAPA board meeting earlier this year, he had said that, "Nowhere in the civilized world does such a program exist." On Tuesday he said, "We were anxious to see if one existed, but we couldn't find anywhere else that it has been done."
He added: "Everybody is aware that WAPA is struggling with cash flow; we're on the very edge. The money we are getting from the government's past due account goes 100 percent for long-term debt-related issues and maintaining rates at the current level. If we hadn't gotten the money exactly when we got it, we would have had terrible problems. Because we did get it, we no longer have a 'qualified' audit."
As far as the government's payment of its past-due accounts, he said, "We are hopeful we will have everybody current by Nov. 15."
Thomas said Laurence Bryan, GERS administrator, has claimed the hazardous-duty benefits legislation would pave the way for possible bankruptcy of the retirement system in years to come.
Turnbull vetoed the measure in August, saying he could not support legislation that would negatively impact the GERS. In a letter to Senate President Almando "Rocky" Liburd covering the veto action, the governor wrote, "The intent of this legislation is admirable, and the Legislature has seen fit to appropriate $1.9 million … to fund the mandate." However, he said, GERS had said the amount was inadequate, given actuarial calculations showing a current 6.63 percent deficit in pension contributions vs. payouts.
Turnbull also chided Liburd, reminding him that senators had been told at a July Finance Committee meeting of the possible deleterious effects the legislation could have on the GERS.
The Senate and GERS have a history of go-rounds regarding retirement funding and the system has a court case pending against the V.I. government regarding funding. The new legislation is projected to increase the system's unfunded liabilities by $1.9 million. Neither Bryan nor any other GERS officials was available for comment Tuesday morning.
Sen. Vargrave Richards, a consistent opponent of the measure, said Monday, "The $1.9 million would be a substantial increase in the unfunded liability in the fund. We've compromised the GERS system through a series of bad legislation to the tune of a $500 million, and still growing, GERS deficit. Frankly, we are talking about the pension plan for all employees of the government every time we undermine the system. We've been given warning that not enough money is being contributed to the system, and with the market slump, this is a swift way to deplete GERS investment accounts."
Richards added, "It's important to understand the integrity of the system. We've done nothing to maintain and sustain it. We may be emotionally attached to this measure, but the reality is this system is one day going to come home to roost. While I support the idea of hazardous-duty pay, I cannot support it now."
Sen. Alicia "Chucky" Hansen succeeded in getting the override on a bit of parliamentary maneuvering around the "closed rule" in effect on all the bills the full Senate is hearing in a three-day session scheduled to continue through Wednesday. When the close rule is invoked, there can be no amendments to a bill before it is put to a vote.
The override passed on a 11-3 vote with Sens. Lorraine Berry, Roosevelt David and Vargrave Richards voting against the measure. Sen. Adelbert Bryan was absent.
Cash flow, fairness are barriers to business plan
In other comments to the Source Tuesday, Thomas expressed reservations about a proposal put forth by leaders of the territory's private sector on Friday as one of numerous steps to help the hospitality sector get through the economic crisis it is facing because of the drop-off of tourists in the aftermath of the mainland terrorist attacks. The hotel associations and chambers of commerce have asked that WAPA allow businesses to defer their WAPA bill payments for four months. They have proposed a similar reprieve from paying gross receipts taxes.
"We are doing something right now that might help a number of businesses and hotels that have been producing their own water and power — to get them on our system at reduced rates," Thomas said. "We are investigating energy-conservation plans and doing things internally that might help. The only problem is that we have cash-flow problems of our own. More than 50 percent of what we receive goes to pay our fuel bill each month."
Further, he said, "The other thing is the fairness issue. We got an earful when it became clear how much the government owed us. I've ordered electricity turned off over much smaller amounts." He said he understands the hospitality industry's problem but added, "We will have to be creative in what we do to help."
It is a move that Joseph Thomas, WAPA executive director, calls "a mistake we'll all pay for. We will have to put a rate increase in effect to offset whatever we need to have to pay out. We have been trying to avoid a rate increase, but now our hands are forced."
Thomas said Tuesday, "It would be a lovely benefit if we were rolling in dough when anything's possible, but with the fragile situation that the utility is in, our economy is in, and GERS is in, the legislation is not a fiscally responsible decision."
Thomas said he has had his staff searching to find another utility anywhere that has a similar retirement benefit. At a WAPA board meeting earlier this year, he had said that, "Nowhere in the civilized world does such a program exist." On Tuesday he said, "We were anxious to see if one existed, but we couldn't find anywhere else that it has been done."
He added: "Everybody is aware that WAPA is struggling with cash flow; we're on the very edge. The money we are getting from the government's past due account goes 100 percent for long-term debt-related issues and maintaining rates at the current level. If we hadn't gotten the money exactly when we got it, we would have had terrible problems. Because we did get it, we no longer have a 'qualified' audit."
As far as the government's payment of its past-due accounts, he said, "We are hopeful we will have everybody current by Nov. 15."
Thomas said Laurence Bryan, GERS administrator, has claimed the hazardous-duty benefits legislation would pave the way for possible bankruptcy of the retirement system in years to come.
Turnbull vetoed the measure in August, saying he could not support legislation that would negatively impact the GERS. In a letter to Senate President Almando "Rocky" Liburd covering the veto action, the governor wrote, "The intent of this legislation is admirable, and the Legislature has seen fit to appropriate $1.9 million … to fund the mandate." However, he said, GERS had said the amount was inadequate, given actuarial calculations showing a current 6.63 percent deficit in pension contributions vs. payouts.
Turnbull also chided Liburd, reminding him that senators had been told at a July Finance Committee meeting of the possible deleterious effects the legislation could have on the GERS.
The Senate and GERS have a history of go-rounds regarding retirement funding and the system has a court case pending against the V.I. government regarding funding. The new legislation is projected to increase the system's unfunded liabilities by $1.9 million. Neither Bryan nor any other GERS officials was available for comment Tuesday morning.
Sen. Vargrave Richards, a consistent opponent of the measure, said Monday, "The $1.9 million would be a substantial increase in the unfunded liability in the fund. We've compromised the GERS system through a series of bad legislation to the tune of a $500 million, and still growing, GERS deficit. Frankly, we are talking about the pension plan for all employees of the government every time we undermine the system. We've been given warning that not enough money is being contributed to the system, and with the market slump, this is a swift way to deplete GERS investment accounts."
Richards added, "It's important to understand the integrity of the system. We've done nothing to maintain and sustain it. We may be emotionally attached to this measure, but the reality is this system is one day going to come home to roost. While I support the idea of hazardous-duty pay, I cannot support it now."
Sen. Alicia "Chucky" Hansen succeeded in getting the override on a bit of parliamentary maneuvering around the "closed rule" in effect on all the bills the full Senate is hearing in a three-day session scheduled to continue through Wednesday. When the close rule is invoked, there can be no amendments to a bill before it is put to a vote.
The override passed on a 11-3 vote with Sens. Lorraine Berry, Roosevelt David and Vargrave Richards voting against the measure. Sen. Adelbert Bryan was absent.
Cash flow, fairness are barriers to business plan
In other comments to the Source Tuesday, Thomas expressed reservations about a proposal put forth by leaders of the territory's private sector on Friday as one of numerous steps to help the hospitality sector get through the economic crisis it is facing because of the drop-off of tourists in the aftermath of the mainland terrorist attacks. The hotel associations and chambers of commerce have asked that WAPA allow businesses to defer their WAPA bill payments for four months. They have proposed a similar reprieve from paying gross receipts taxes.
"We are doing something right now that might help a number of businesses and hotels that have been producing their own water and power — to get them on our system at reduced rates," Thomas said. "We are investigating energy-conservation plans and doing things internally that might help. The only problem is that we have cash-flow problems of our own. More than 50 percent of what we receive goes to pay our fuel bill each month."
Further, he said, "The other thing is the fairness issue. We got an earful when it became clear how much the government owed us. I've ordered electricity turned off over much smaller amounts." He said he understands the hospitality industry's problem but added, "We will have to be creative in what we do to help."
WAPA CHIEF: HAZARDOUS-DUTY BENEFITS 'A MISTAKE'
Sept. 25, 2001 – Despite strenuous objections by Government Employees Retirement System and Water and Power Authority officials, the Senate on Monday overrode Gov. Charles W. Turnbull's veto of legislation granting early retirement benefits to certain WAPA hazardous-duty employees, expanding the number of eligible employees to 316 from the present 58.
It is a move that Joseph Thomas, WAPA executive director, calls "a mistake we'll all pay for. We will have to put a rate increase in effect to offset whatever we need to have to pay out. We have been trying to avoid a rate increase, but now our hands are forced."
Thomas said Tuesday, "It would be a lovely benefit if we were rolling in dough when anything's possible, but with the fragile situation that the utility is in, our economy is in, and GERS is in, the legislation is not a fiscally responsible decision."
Thomas said he has had his staff searching to find another utility anywhere that has a similar retirement benefit. At a WAPA board meeting earlier this year, he had said that "nowhere in the civilized world does such a program exist." On Tuesday he said, "We were anxious to see if one existed, but we couldn't find anywhere else that it has been done."
He added: "Everybody is aware that WAPA is struggling with cash flow; we're on the very edge. The money we are getting from the government's past-due account goes 100 percent for long-term debt-related issues and maintaining rates at the current level. If we hadn't gotten the money exactly when we got it, we would have had terrible problems. Because we did get it, we no longer have a 'qualified' audit."
As far as the government's payment of its past-due accounts, he said, "We are hopeful we will have everybody current by Nov. 15."
Thomas said Laurence Bryan, GERS administrator, has claimed the hazardous-duty benefits legislation would pave the way for possible bankruptcy of the retirement system in years to come.
Turnbull vetoed the measure in August, saying he could not support legislation that would negatively impact the GERS. In a letter to Senate President Almando "Rocky" Liburd covering the veto action, the governor wrote, "The intent of this legislation is admirable, and the Legislature has seen fit to appropriate $1.9 million … to fund the mandate." However, he said, GERS had said the amount was inadequate, given actuarial calculations showing a current 6.63 percent deficit in pension contributions vs. payouts.
Turnbull also chided Liburd, reminding him that senators had been told at a July Finance Committee meeting of the possible deleterious effects the legislation could have on the GERS.
The Senate and GERS have a history of go-rounds regarding retirement funding and the system has a court case pending against the V.I. government regarding funding. The new legislation is projected to increase the system's unfunded liabilities by $1.9 million. Neither Bryan nor any other GERS officials was available for comment Tuesday morning.
Sen. Vargrave Richards, a consistent opponent of the measure, said Monday, "The $1.9 million would be a substantial increase in the unfunded liability in the fund. We've compromised the GERS system through a series of bad legislation to the tune of a $500 million, and still growing, GERS deficit. Frankly, we are talking about the pension plan for all employees of the government every time we undermine the system. We've been given warning that not enough money is being contributed to the system, and with the market slump, this is a swift way to deplete GERS investment accounts."
Richards added, "It's important to understand the integrity of the system. We've done nothing to maintain and sustain it. We may be emotionally attached to this measure, but the reality is this system is one day going to come home to roost. While I support the idea of hazardous-duty pay, I cannot support it now."
Sen. Alicia "Chucky" Hansen succeeded in getting the override on a bit of parliamentary maneuvering around the "closed rule" in effect on all the bills the full Senate is hearing in a three-day session scheduled to continue through Wednesday. When the closed rule is invoked, there can be no amendments to a bill before it is put to a vote.
The override passed on a 11-3 vote with Sens. Lorraine Berry, Roosevelt David and Vargrave Richards voting against the measure. Sen. Adelbert Bryan was absent.
Cash flow, fairness are barriers to business plan
In other comments to the Source on Tuesday, Thomas expressed reservations about a proposal put forth by leaders of the territory's private sector on Friday as one of numerous steps to help the hospitality sector get through the economic crisis it is facing because of the drop-off of tourists in the aftermath of the mainland terrorist attacks. The hotel associations and chambers of commerce have asked that WAPA allow businesses to defer their WAPA bill payments for four months. They have proposed a similar reprieve from paying gross receipts taxes.
"We are doing something right now that might help a number of businesses and hotels that have been producing their own water and power — to get them on our system at reduced rates," Thomas said. "We are investigating energy-conservation plans and doing things internally that might help. The only problem is that we have cash-flow problems of our own. More than 50 percent of what we receive goes to pay our fuel bill each month."
Further, he said, "The other thing is the fairness issue. We got an earful when it became clear how much the government owed us. I've ordered electricity turned off over much smaller amounts." He said he understands the hospitality industry's problem but added, "We will have to be creative in what we do to help."
It is a move that Joseph Thomas, WAPA executive director, calls "a mistake we'll all pay for. We will have to put a rate increase in effect to offset whatever we need to have to pay out. We have been trying to avoid a rate increase, but now our hands are forced."
Thomas said Tuesday, "It would be a lovely benefit if we were rolling in dough when anything's possible, but with the fragile situation that the utility is in, our economy is in, and GERS is in, the legislation is not a fiscally responsible decision."
Thomas said he has had his staff searching to find another utility anywhere that has a similar retirement benefit. At a WAPA board meeting earlier this year, he had said that "nowhere in the civilized world does such a program exist." On Tuesday he said, "We were anxious to see if one existed, but we couldn't find anywhere else that it has been done."
He added: "Everybody is aware that WAPA is struggling with cash flow; we're on the very edge. The money we are getting from the government's past-due account goes 100 percent for long-term debt-related issues and maintaining rates at the current level. If we hadn't gotten the money exactly when we got it, we would have had terrible problems. Because we did get it, we no longer have a 'qualified' audit."
As far as the government's payment of its past-due accounts, he said, "We are hopeful we will have everybody current by Nov. 15."
Thomas said Laurence Bryan, GERS administrator, has claimed the hazardous-duty benefits legislation would pave the way for possible bankruptcy of the retirement system in years to come.
Turnbull vetoed the measure in August, saying he could not support legislation that would negatively impact the GERS. In a letter to Senate President Almando "Rocky" Liburd covering the veto action, the governor wrote, "The intent of this legislation is admirable, and the Legislature has seen fit to appropriate $1.9 million … to fund the mandate." However, he said, GERS had said the amount was inadequate, given actuarial calculations showing a current 6.63 percent deficit in pension contributions vs. payouts.
Turnbull also chided Liburd, reminding him that senators had been told at a July Finance Committee meeting of the possible deleterious effects the legislation could have on the GERS.
The Senate and GERS have a history of go-rounds regarding retirement funding and the system has a court case pending against the V.I. government regarding funding. The new legislation is projected to increase the system's unfunded liabilities by $1.9 million. Neither Bryan nor any other GERS officials was available for comment Tuesday morning.
Sen. Vargrave Richards, a consistent opponent of the measure, said Monday, "The $1.9 million would be a substantial increase in the unfunded liability in the fund. We've compromised the GERS system through a series of bad legislation to the tune of a $500 million, and still growing, GERS deficit. Frankly, we are talking about the pension plan for all employees of the government every time we undermine the system. We've been given warning that not enough money is being contributed to the system, and with the market slump, this is a swift way to deplete GERS investment accounts."
Richards added, "It's important to understand the integrity of the system. We've done nothing to maintain and sustain it. We may be emotionally attached to this measure, but the reality is this system is one day going to come home to roost. While I support the idea of hazardous-duty pay, I cannot support it now."
Sen. Alicia "Chucky" Hansen succeeded in getting the override on a bit of parliamentary maneuvering around the "closed rule" in effect on all the bills the full Senate is hearing in a three-day session scheduled to continue through Wednesday. When the closed rule is invoked, there can be no amendments to a bill before it is put to a vote.
The override passed on a 11-3 vote with Sens. Lorraine Berry, Roosevelt David and Vargrave Richards voting against the measure. Sen. Adelbert Bryan was absent.
Cash flow, fairness are barriers to business plan
In other comments to the Source on Tuesday, Thomas expressed reservations about a proposal put forth by leaders of the territory's private sector on Friday as one of numerous steps to help the hospitality sector get through the economic crisis it is facing because of the drop-off of tourists in the aftermath of the mainland terrorist attacks. The hotel associations and chambers of commerce have asked that WAPA allow businesses to defer their WAPA bill payments for four months. They have proposed a similar reprieve from paying gross receipts taxes.
"We are doing something right now that might help a number of businesses and hotels that have been producing their own water and power — to get them on our system at reduced rates," Thomas said. "We are investigating energy-conservation plans and doing things internally that might help. The only problem is that we have cash-flow problems of our own. More than 50 percent of what we receive goes to pay our fuel bill each month."
Further, he said, "The other thing is the fairness issue. We got an earful when it became clear how much the government owed us. I've ordered electricity turned off over much smaller amounts." He said he understands the hospitality industry's problem but added, "We will have to be creative in what we do to help."
STRIDIRON GETS WAPA BOARD SEAT
Sept. 24, 2001 – Attorney General Iver A. Stridiron was appointed by Gov. Charles Turnbull on Sept. 19 to the Water and Power Authority Board. He fills the vacancy left by the resignation of Planning and Natural Resources Commissioner Dean Plaskett.
The governor said that the appointment does not require approval by the Legislature.
Turnbull also said that Stridiron will not receive any additional pay for serving on the board except for a per diem rate for travel expenses
The governor said that the appointment does not require approval by the Legislature.
Turnbull also said that Stridiron will not receive any additional pay for serving on the board except for a per diem rate for travel expenses
NEW LEADER FOR UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISTS
Sept. 24, 2001 – For the first time in its 14-year history, St. John's Unitarian Universalist Church has a permanent minister. The Rev. Phillip Schulman arrived Aug. 16 to lead the flock of 22 Unitarians and about 30 non-members who regularly attend services.
"We've been working for this for years," member Ken Damon said.
Schulman, 41, comes to St. John after a career in community-based ministries, where he worked with homeless people and others needing social services.
"I tried to bring spirituality as a holistic part of mental health," he said.
With a bachelor's degree in English and social science from Rutgers University under his belt, he started his working life teaching at Passaic County Vocational School in his hometown of Wayne, N.J.
He was studying for his master's degree in counseling when his life led him to the Unitarians. He had attended anti-antiapartheid and nuclear freeze campaigns that met at the local church when he realized the Unitarian ministry appealed to him. He decided to change directions.
"I fit right in," he said.
The son of a Catholic mother and Jewish father, Schulman was raised in the Jewish faith, but saw that the Unitarians allowed him to draw from both religions as well as other spiritual ideas.
After dropping out of the master's program at William Paterson University, he went off to the Thomas Starr King School for the Ministry, associated with the University of California at Berkley. He graduated in 1989. This is his first permanent job heading up a congregation.
While still getting the lay of the land, he faces his first major task — helping the Unitarians deal with the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. He said that with a congregation that leans toward pacifism, it's been hard for the members to deal with a government plan that involves violence as the solution.
"It's not black and white. How do we respond to this? We will shape the answer together," Schulman said.
He has other tasks in front of him. He said the Unitarians want to expand the size of their congregation and to become more of a presence in the community.
"They want to be a force for tolerance and religious pluralism," he said.
Schulman has no plans to change the members' extensive involvement in church activities. Except for a few brief stints by visiting ministers, the local Unitarians have always had members of the congregation lead services.
He has nothing but praise for the members, a group he said thrives on discussion as well as song.
Since his arrival, Schulman has been trying to get settled. He has temporary housing until Dec. 1 but, like all newcomers to St. John, faces the daunting task of finding a place to live at a price he can afford.
"I'm on a tight budget," he acknowledged, noting that he needs to factor office space into the financial equation.
He's spent time meeting his fellow clergy in both St. Thomas and St. John and has put in a few hours exploring the islands' undersea life through a snorkel mask.
"I swam with the turtles at Lameshur," he said, as enthusiastic about this side of St. John life as he is about ministering to his congregation.
Unitarian services are held at the Pine Peace School Community Room at 9:30 a.m. on Sundays. Members will pick up anyone coming from St. Thomas at the Cruz Bay ferry dock. Call 693-7572 in advance to arrange for a ride.
"We've been working for this for years," member Ken Damon said.
Schulman, 41, comes to St. John after a career in community-based ministries, where he worked with homeless people and others needing social services.
"I tried to bring spirituality as a holistic part of mental health," he said.
With a bachelor's degree in English and social science from Rutgers University under his belt, he started his working life teaching at Passaic County Vocational School in his hometown of Wayne, N.J.
He was studying for his master's degree in counseling when his life led him to the Unitarians. He had attended anti-antiapartheid and nuclear freeze campaigns that met at the local church when he realized the Unitarian ministry appealed to him. He decided to change directions.
"I fit right in," he said.
The son of a Catholic mother and Jewish father, Schulman was raised in the Jewish faith, but saw that the Unitarians allowed him to draw from both religions as well as other spiritual ideas.
After dropping out of the master's program at William Paterson University, he went off to the Thomas Starr King School for the Ministry, associated with the University of California at Berkley. He graduated in 1989. This is his first permanent job heading up a congregation.
While still getting the lay of the land, he faces his first major task — helping the Unitarians deal with the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. He said that with a congregation that leans toward pacifism, it's been hard for the members to deal with a government plan that involves violence as the solution.
"It's not black and white. How do we respond to this? We will shape the answer together," Schulman said.
He has other tasks in front of him. He said the Unitarians want to expand the size of their congregation and to become more of a presence in the community.
"They want to be a force for tolerance and religious pluralism," he said.
Schulman has no plans to change the members' extensive involvement in church activities. Except for a few brief stints by visiting ministers, the local Unitarians have always had members of the congregation lead services.
He has nothing but praise for the members, a group he said thrives on discussion as well as song.
Since his arrival, Schulman has been trying to get settled. He has temporary housing until Dec. 1 but, like all newcomers to St. John, faces the daunting task of finding a place to live at a price he can afford.
"I'm on a tight budget," he acknowledged, noting that he needs to factor office space into the financial equation.
He's spent time meeting his fellow clergy in both St. Thomas and St. John and has put in a few hours exploring the islands' undersea life through a snorkel mask.
"I swam with the turtles at Lameshur," he said, as enthusiastic about this side of St. John life as he is about ministering to his congregation.
Unitarian services are held at the Pine Peace School Community Room at 9:30 a.m. on Sundays. Members will pick up anyone coming from St. Thomas at the Cruz Bay ferry dock. Call 693-7572 in advance to arrange for a ride.
JUSTICE, NOT VENGEANCE, IS THE ANSWER
Dear Source,
Climax after climax after climax — the anti-climaxes keep on coming.
I thought the U.S. walkout of the August World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances was climactic. The end of the conference on Sept. 7 was anti-climactic. The horrific attack in New York and Washington, D.C., on Sept. 11 was anti-climactic. Our abrupt landing in the Cape Verde Islands minutes later was anti-climactic. My firing on Sept. 15 was insignificant, except when viewed as an attack upon First Amendment rights. Then it, too, becomes anti-climactic.
There is so much to tell. So much we have learned and want to share. So much to think about. So much responsibility to help one another grow from the pain and horror. Where do we start in sharing?
Do we look at the pain suffered by each country represented at the world conference as they were confronted by their experiences — past and present — regarding racism and discrimination? At the conference itself, there was so much more than was reported in the general American media:
The Dalits — untouchables of India — insisting that caste as well as race be considered. The Roma — Europe's "Gypsies" — detailing generation after generation of overt and covert discrimination. Women confronting the all-male African panel of "experts," challenging their right as oppressors to speak on behalf of women discriminated against throughout the continent. The Maori of New Zealand, the Inuit of Canada, the Twa of Rwanda, Han ethnics from China, Tibetan exiles — all forcing acknowledgment of past and present imperfections and work still to be done.
Their voices were painful to hear. But hearing them started the healing. Absent were American voices. Our absence was noted, and felt, throughout the world.
The hideous events of Sept. 11 are dominating national conversation, as well they must. There is little media attention to other matters. The disappeared surplus, the Bush tax cuts, campaign financing reform, local election reform, out-of-control violence in our streets, "slap on the wrist" sentencing for perpetrators of statutory rape, the fact that the animal rights bill has been voted down and the child protective bill has not been brought up…
Immediately following the unthinkable, on Day 1, or even Day 2, did you hear anyone besides myself, in an attempt to understand (not justify) the horror, ask, "Why would someone want to commit this evil act?" Or note that in this globalized age, U.S. policy — its actions and inactions overseas (justified or not) — can easily lead to consequences at home? Was anyone besides myself, after coming out of the world conference and experiencing it up close, aware of the extent and depth of anti-American feeling prior to the terrorism?
Is it at all relevant? Deepak Chopra has asked, "What was the root cause of this evil? … Does this evil grow from the suffering and anguish felt by people we don't know and therefore ignore? Have they lived in this condition for a long time? One assumes that whoever did this attack feels implacable hatred for America. Why were we selected to be the focus of suffering around the world?"
America now knows, in the most personal way, to the depths of its civilian vulnerability, that it is a part of the world. Obviously, whoever did this must be found and put away forever. Vengeance is an understandable emotion as the body count and saber-rattling mount. But, as Derrick Jackson of the Boston Globe noted, "… it is also eerie that, suddenly, we want help on terrorism at the very time when we have been isolating ourselves from the world stage, from the environment to racism to missile defense…"
There are those who found my willingness to ask why America is hated — especially at a time of such national pain — to be unpatriotic. There are those who likened my allowing callers to say things like "The chickens have come home to roost" to Tokyo Rose. I said on the air and say now in print that the beauty and strength of America is our diversity: of people, of opinions, of life experiences.
Americans come in all shapes, sizes, races and belief systems. It was the strength of America that we could say all that — and more — on the air. It was that which made us American. Those were the freedoms which made us great. To me, the most precious of all rights in this marvelous country is the freedom to think, write and say whatever is on your mind, subject to the laws of libel. That freedom does extend to thoughts that are stupid, ignorant or incendiary.
No one needs a First Amendment for innocuous ideas or popular points of view. The majority must always protect the rights of the minority to express the most outrageous and offensive ideas. Only then is total freedom of expression guaranteed. To give up those freedoms voluntarily seems to me to be allowing the terrorists to win. We are giving them the right to silence us, to take away the very freedoms we have fought and given our lives for. We are poorer for it.
When asked what the role of the media is in times of military conflict, Prof. Jacqueline Sharkey, author of "Under Fire: U.S. Military Restrictions on the Media from Grenada to the Persian Gulf," replied: "In times of conflict, it is the responsibility of the news media to raise questions and cover controversies by presenting as many points of view as possible. Especially at a time when long-term military options are being considered, it is crucial for the news media to provide the public with an understanding of the political, historical, economic and cultural factors that have created the situation."
As our president prepares for war, students at colleges and universities throughout the nation are petitioning for peace. Alternatives are being sought.
Listen to Chopra again: "There can be no safety until the root cause is faced. In this moment of shock, I don't think any one of us has the answers. It is imperative that we pray and offer solace to one another. But if you and I are having a single thought of violence or hatred against anyone in the world at this moment, we are contributing to the wounding of the world."
Listen to the Dalai Lama: "The only factor that can give you refuge or protection from the destructive effects of anger and hatred is your practice of tolerance and patience."
Now, when jingoism and desire for vengeance are high, remember that the United States remains the greatest hope for mutual accommodation and tolerance in the world. May our leaders find the wisdom to seek out justice, not vengeance. May we confront our enemies with strength and with kindness and avoid today's global patterns in which one wrong makes a wrong makes a wrong. May we realize the need to re-engage the world. The stakes cannot be higher.
Iris Kern
St. John
Climax after climax after climax — the anti-climaxes keep on coming.
I thought the U.S. walkout of the August World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances was climactic. The end of the conference on Sept. 7 was anti-climactic. The horrific attack in New York and Washington, D.C., on Sept. 11 was anti-climactic. Our abrupt landing in the Cape Verde Islands minutes later was anti-climactic. My firing on Sept. 15 was insignificant, except when viewed as an attack upon First Amendment rights. Then it, too, becomes anti-climactic.
There is so much to tell. So much we have learned and want to share. So much to think about. So much responsibility to help one another grow from the pain and horror. Where do we start in sharing?
Do we look at the pain suffered by each country represented at the world conference as they were confronted by their experiences — past and present — regarding racism and discrimination? At the conference itself, there was so much more than was reported in the general American media:
The Dalits — untouchables of India — insisting that caste as well as race be considered. The Roma — Europe's "Gypsies" — detailing generation after generation of overt and covert discrimination. Women confronting the all-male African panel of "experts," challenging their right as oppressors to speak on behalf of women discriminated against throughout the continent. The Maori of New Zealand, the Inuit of Canada, the Twa of Rwanda, Han ethnics from China, Tibetan exiles — all forcing acknowledgment of past and present imperfections and work still to be done.
Their voices were painful to hear. But hearing them started the healing. Absent were American voices. Our absence was noted, and felt, throughout the world.
The hideous events of Sept. 11 are dominating national conversation, as well they must. There is little media attention to other matters. The disappeared surplus, the Bush tax cuts, campaign financing reform, local election reform, out-of-control violence in our streets, "slap on the wrist" sentencing for perpetrators of statutory rape, the fact that the animal rights bill has been voted down and the child protective bill has not been brought up…
Immediately following the unthinkable, on Day 1, or even Day 2, did you hear anyone besides myself, in an attempt to understand (not justify) the horror, ask, "Why would someone want to commit this evil act?" Or note that in this globalized age, U.S. policy — its actions and inactions overseas (justified or not) — can easily lead to consequences at home? Was anyone besides myself, after coming out of the world conference and experiencing it up close, aware of the extent and depth of anti-American feeling prior to the terrorism?
Is it at all relevant? Deepak Chopra has asked, "What was the root cause of this evil? … Does this evil grow from the suffering and anguish felt by people we don't know and therefore ignore? Have they lived in this condition for a long time? One assumes that whoever did this attack feels implacable hatred for America. Why were we selected to be the focus of suffering around the world?"
America now knows, in the most personal way, to the depths of its civilian vulnerability, that it is a part of the world. Obviously, whoever did this must be found and put away forever. Vengeance is an understandable emotion as the body count and saber-rattling mount. But, as Derrick Jackson of the Boston Globe noted, "… it is also eerie that, suddenly, we want help on terrorism at the very time when we have been isolating ourselves from the world stage, from the environment to racism to missile defense…"
There are those who found my willingness to ask why America is hated — especially at a time of such national pain — to be unpatriotic. There are those who likened my allowing callers to say things like "The chickens have come home to roost" to Tokyo Rose. I said on the air and say now in print that the beauty and strength of America is our diversity: of people, of opinions, of life experiences.
Americans come in all shapes, sizes, races and belief systems. It was the strength of America that we could say all that — and more — on the air. It was that which made us American. Those were the freedoms which made us great. To me, the most precious of all rights in this marvelous country is the freedom to think, write and say whatever is on your mind, subject to the laws of libel. That freedom does extend to thoughts that are stupid, ignorant or incendiary.
No one needs a First Amendment for innocuous ideas or popular points of view. The majority must always protect the rights of the minority to express the most outrageous and offensive ideas. Only then is total freedom of expression guaranteed. To give up those freedoms voluntarily seems to me to be allowing the terrorists to win. We are giving them the right to silence us, to take away the very freedoms we have fought and given our lives for. We are poorer for it.
When asked what the role of the media is in times of military conflict, Prof. Jacqueline Sharkey, author of "Under Fire: U.S. Military Restrictions on the Media from Grenada to the Persian Gulf," replied: "In times of conflict, it is the responsibility of the news media to raise questions and cover controversies by presenting as many points of view as possible. Especially at a time when long-term military options are being considered, it is crucial for the news media to provide the public with an understanding of the political, historical, economic and cultural factors that have created the situation."
As our president prepares for war, students at colleges and universities throughout the nation are petitioning for peace. Alternatives are being sought.
Listen to Chopra again: "There can be no safety until the root cause is faced. In this moment of shock, I don't think any one of us has the answers. It is imperative that we pray and offer solace to one another. But if you and I are having a single thought of violence or hatred against anyone in the world at this moment, we are contributing to the wounding of the world."
Listen to the Dalai Lama: "The only factor that can give you refuge or protection from the destructive effects of anger and hatred is your practice of tolerance and patience."
Now, when jingoism and desire for vengeance are high, remember that the United States remains the greatest hope for mutual accommodation and tolerance in the world. May our leaders find the wisdom to seek out justice, not vengeance. May we confront our enemies with strength and with kindness and avoid today's global patterns in which one wrong makes a wrong makes a wrong. May we realize the need to re-engage the world. The stakes cannot be higher.
Iris Kern
St. John
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
ENDING WATER TAXI PICKUP AT DOCKS A BAD IDEA
Dear Source,
The proposed bill that Senators White and Pickard-Samuels are sponsoring sounds as if it is an incredibly bad idea. I am a naval architect, practicing on St. Croix, so I have some idea of the size of boats and the number of passengers involved. Now, I have only read the report in the Source, not the actual bill, I'm not sure where I would obtain a copy of that. Having read the piece, I had several reactions. On one level, I detect a thinly veiled undercurrent of racism. On St. Croix at least many, but not all, of the companies are run by whites, frequently from the mainland. Perhaps there is some resentment against people seen as coming from away taking business away from the taxi van drivers.
The argument about leveling the playing field is completely bogus. Right now, the playing field is level. Passengers coming off of the ships can make a choice: take a taxi van and get a land-based tour, or get on a boat and take a tour from the water. Not allowing the water tour operators to pick up people at the piers is unleveling the playing field, not leveling it.
On St. Croix, there is one sailboat carrying 49 passengers maximum that picks up people at the Ann Abramson pier. As far as I know the Scuba West boat is a six-pack boat, so at most that is six more people the taxi van drivers won't necessarily be carrying. A typical modern cruise ship has upwards of 2,000 passengers. The remaining 1,945 passengers will most likely need taxi van rides somewhere on St. Croix. All of the rest of the dive shops and water tour operators are located in Salt River, Cane Bay, Christiansted, or Green Cay. The taxi van drivers will get all of those rides. Even the people going on the sail or diving in the morning might want a ride somewhere in the afternoon. Obviously there are more water tour operators in St. Thomas but there are far more ships, also.
It is stupid and unsafe to suggest that water tour operators pick up passengers from the ship rather than the pier. The piers are designed to allow people to safely embark and disembark from both cruise ships and smaller vessels. The high-sided ship presents a potential danger to the rigging of any of the sailing tour boats; also, a small boat will react to the swell completely differently from the large ship. Can you imagine the hue and cry if a law was passed not allowing taxi vans to pick up passengers anywhere but at two or three designated spots?
The claim that taxi van drivers would be eased out of their livelihood if the tours expanded to include water taxis is a farce. Many people are going to want to see what St. Thomas and St. Croix look like inland, you can't do that with a boat. Some people are afraid of small boats, but will still get on a large ship, or have no interest in diving or sailing. These people are still going to need rides to some location. Then, there are the people who live here who still need rides on a daily basis.
As far as getting up at 2 a.m. to get in line down at the pier in the "hope of getting passengers" – give me a break. The ships rarely, if ever, discharge passengers before 8 a.m., if not 9 a.m. Certainly many passengers will take a short walk to the waiting boats, but let's do some simple math. Underwater Safaris says that on a busy day they take 125 passengers diving. The Kon Tiki barge holds maybe 150 passengers (frequently 149 is used as a cutoff point due to a change in Coast Guard classification at 150 passengers and above). I don't know how big the Leyland Sneed motor vessel is, nor the Island Girl or Wild Thing catamarans, but let's say 200 each to be safe. That totals 600 passengers for the three of them. The 30 sailboats are almost certainly six-pack boats (6 passengers maximum), so that is 180 people. Total: 125+150+600+180 = 1,055 in round numbers. That is still less than half of a typical large cruise ship's passenger capacity, and if there was only one of those in port in St. Thomas it would not be considered a busy day. Even the Monday after the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania plane there were two cruise ships in St. Thomas with a total of 3,640 passengers on board between them.
If there is any group that is directly competing with the taxi van drivers it is the buses operated by Ann Abramson's bus service. Just one of those buses carries more passengers than the lone sailboat operating out of Frederiksted, and the bus only employs one driver for maybe 60 passengers as opposed to one driver for 15 passengers in a typical taxi van. I do not know if there is a similar large tour bus service on St. Thomas but I would not be surprised if there was.
The final point I have is: Why are the senators even getting involved with this? Having obtained my business license last year I have learned quite a bit about licensing and zoning. As I understand it, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources decides if a business is appropriate for the zoning at a particular location. The Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs then issues a business license for that particular type of business, based upon DPNR's recommendation and other considerations. Where is the need for the Senate to gum up the works? Where is Senator Alicia Hansen who just months ago was blowing her own horn about revitalizing the marine industry in the U.S. Virgin Islands? This is a direct attack on that very industry. Has it occurred to anyone that actions like this might be a big part of the reason that the charter yacht industry in the Virgin Islands is now almost exclusively located in the British Virgin Islands?
David Walworth
St. Croix
The proposed bill that Senators White and Pickard-Samuels are sponsoring sounds as if it is an incredibly bad idea. I am a naval architect, practicing on St. Croix, so I have some idea of the size of boats and the number of passengers involved. Now, I have only read the report in the Source, not the actual bill, I'm not sure where I would obtain a copy of that. Having read the piece, I had several reactions. On one level, I detect a thinly veiled undercurrent of racism. On St. Croix at least many, but not all, of the companies are run by whites, frequently from the mainland. Perhaps there is some resentment against people seen as coming from away taking business away from the taxi van drivers.
The argument about leveling the playing field is completely bogus. Right now, the playing field is level. Passengers coming off of the ships can make a choice: take a taxi van and get a land-based tour, or get on a boat and take a tour from the water. Not allowing the water tour operators to pick up people at the piers is unleveling the playing field, not leveling it.
On St. Croix, there is one sailboat carrying 49 passengers maximum that picks up people at the Ann Abramson pier. As far as I know the Scuba West boat is a six-pack boat, so at most that is six more people the taxi van drivers won't necessarily be carrying. A typical modern cruise ship has upwards of 2,000 passengers. The remaining 1,945 passengers will most likely need taxi van rides somewhere on St. Croix. All of the rest of the dive shops and water tour operators are located in Salt River, Cane Bay, Christiansted, or Green Cay. The taxi van drivers will get all of those rides. Even the people going on the sail or diving in the morning might want a ride somewhere in the afternoon. Obviously there are more water tour operators in St. Thomas but there are far more ships, also.
It is stupid and unsafe to suggest that water tour operators pick up passengers from the ship rather than the pier. The piers are designed to allow people to safely embark and disembark from both cruise ships and smaller vessels. The high-sided ship presents a potential danger to the rigging of any of the sailing tour boats; also, a small boat will react to the swell completely differently from the large ship. Can you imagine the hue and cry if a law was passed not allowing taxi vans to pick up passengers anywhere but at two or three designated spots?
The claim that taxi van drivers would be eased out of their livelihood if the tours expanded to include water taxis is a farce. Many people are going to want to see what St. Thomas and St. Croix look like inland, you can't do that with a boat. Some people are afraid of small boats, but will still get on a large ship, or have no interest in diving or sailing. These people are still going to need rides to some location. Then, there are the people who live here who still need rides on a daily basis.
As far as getting up at 2 a.m. to get in line down at the pier in the "hope of getting passengers" – give me a break. The ships rarely, if ever, discharge passengers before 8 a.m., if not 9 a.m. Certainly many passengers will take a short walk to the waiting boats, but let's do some simple math. Underwater Safaris says that on a busy day they take 125 passengers diving. The Kon Tiki barge holds maybe 150 passengers (frequently 149 is used as a cutoff point due to a change in Coast Guard classification at 150 passengers and above). I don't know how big the Leyland Sneed motor vessel is, nor the Island Girl or Wild Thing catamarans, but let's say 200 each to be safe. That totals 600 passengers for the three of them. The 30 sailboats are almost certainly six-pack boats (6 passengers maximum), so that is 180 people. Total: 125+150+600+180 = 1,055 in round numbers. That is still less than half of a typical large cruise ship's passenger capacity, and if there was only one of those in port in St. Thomas it would not be considered a busy day. Even the Monday after the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania plane there were two cruise ships in St. Thomas with a total of 3,640 passengers on board between them.
If there is any group that is directly competing with the taxi van drivers it is the buses operated by Ann Abramson's bus service. Just one of those buses carries more passengers than the lone sailboat operating out of Frederiksted, and the bus only employs one driver for maybe 60 passengers as opposed to one driver for 15 passengers in a typical taxi van. I do not know if there is a similar large tour bus service on St. Thomas but I would not be surprised if there was.
The final point I have is: Why are the senators even getting involved with this? Having obtained my business license last year I have learned quite a bit about licensing and zoning. As I understand it, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources decides if a business is appropriate for the zoning at a particular location. The Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs then issues a business license for that particular type of business, based upon DPNR's recommendation and other considerations. Where is the need for the Senate to gum up the works? Where is Senator Alicia Hansen who just months ago was blowing her own horn about revitalizing the marine industry in the U.S. Virgin Islands? This is a direct attack on that very industry. Has it occurred to anyone that actions like this might be a big part of the reason that the charter yacht industry in the Virgin Islands is now almost exclusively located in the British Virgin Islands?
David Walworth
St. Croix
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
ENDING WATER TAX PICKUP AT DOCKS A BAD IDEA
Dear Source,
The proposed bill that Senators White and Pickard-Samuels are sponsoring sounds as if it is an incredibly bad idea. I am a naval architect, practicing on St. Croix, so I have some idea of the size of boats and the number of passengers involved. Now, I have only read the report in the Source, not the actual bill, I'm not sure where I would obtain a copy of that. Having read the piece, I had several reactions. On one level, I detect a thinly veiled undercurrent of racism. On St. Croix at least many, but not all, of the companies are run by whites, frequently from the mainland. Perhaps there is some resentment against people seen as coming from away taking business away from the taxi van drivers.
The argument about leveling the playing field is completely bogus. Right now, the playing field is level. Passengers coming off of the ships can make a choice: take a taxi van and get a land-based tour, or get on a boat and take a tour from the water. Not allowing the water tour operators to pick up people at the piers is unleveling the playing field, not leveling it.
On St. Croix, there is one sailboat carrying 49 passengers maximum that picks up people at the Ann Abramson pier. As far as I know the Scuba West boat is a six-pack boat, so at most that is six more people the taxi van drivers won't necessarily be carrying. A typical modern cruise ship has upwards of 2,000 passengers. The remaining 1,945 passengers will most likely need taxi van rides somewhere on St. Croix. All of the rest of the dive shops and water tour operators are located in Salt River, Cane Bay, Christiansted, or Green Cay. The taxi van drivers will get all of those rides. Even the people going on the sail or diving in the morning might want a ride somewhere in the afternoon. Obviously there are more water tour operators in St. Thomas but there are far more ships, also.
It is stupid and unsafe to suggest that water tour operators pick up passengers from the ship rather than the pier. The piers are designed to allow people to safely embark and disembark from both cruise ships and smaller vessels. The high-sided ship presents a potential danger to the rigging of any of the sailing tour boats; also, a small boat will react to the swell completely differently from the large ship. Can you imagine the hue and cry if a law was passed not allowing taxi vans to pick up passengers anywhere but at two or three designated spots?
The claim that taxi van drivers would be eased out of their livelihood if the tours expanded to include water taxis is a farce. Many people are going to want to see what St. Thomas and St. Croix look like inland, you can't do that with a boat. Some people are afraid of small boats, but will still get on a large ship, or have no interest in diving or sailing. These people are still going to need rides to some location. Then, there are the people who live here who still need rides on a daily basis.
As far as getting up at 2 a.m. to get in line down at the pier in the "hope of getting passengers" – give me a break. The ships rarely, if ever, discharge passengers before 8 a.m., if not 9 a.m. Certainly many passengers will take a short walk to the waiting boats, but let's do some simple math. Underwater Safaris says that on a busy day they take 125 passengers diving. The Kon Tiki barge holds maybe 150 passengers (frequently 149 is used as a cutoff point due to a change in Coast Guard classification at 150 passengers and above). I don't know how big the Leyland Sneed motor vessel is, nor the Island Girl or Wild Thing catamarans, but let's say 200 each to be safe. That totals 600 passengers for the three of them. The 30 sailboats are almost certainly six-pack boats (6 passengers maximum), so that is 180 people. Total: 125+150+600+180 = 1,055 in round numbers. That is still less than half of a typical large cruise ship's passenger capacity, and if there was only one of those in port in St. Thomas it would not be considered a busy day. Even the Monday after the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania plane there were two cruise ships in St. Thomas with a total of 3,640 passengers on board between them.
If there is any group that is directly competing with the taxi van drivers it is the buses operated by Ann Abramson's bus service. Just one of those buses carries more passengers than the lone sailboat operating out of Frederiksted, and the bus only employs one driver for maybe 60 passengers as opposed to one driver for 15 passengers in a typical taxi van. I do not know if there is a similar large tour bus service on St. Thomas but I would not be surprised if there was.
The final point I have is: Why are the senators even getting involved with this? Having obtained my business license last year I have learned quite a bit about licensing and zoning. As I understand it, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources decides if a business is appropriate for the zoning at a particular location. The Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs then issues a business license for that particular type of business, based upon DPNR's recommendation and other considerations. Where is the need for the Senate to gum up the works? Where is Senator Alicia Hansen who just months ago was blowing her own horn about revitalizing the marine industry in the U.S. Virgin Islands? This is a direct attack on that very industry. Has it occurred to anyone that actions like this might be a big part of the reason that the charter yacht industry in the Virgin Islands is now almost exclusively located in the British Virgin Islands?
David Walworth
St. Croix
The proposed bill that Senators White and Pickard-Samuels are sponsoring sounds as if it is an incredibly bad idea. I am a naval architect, practicing on St. Croix, so I have some idea of the size of boats and the number of passengers involved. Now, I have only read the report in the Source, not the actual bill, I'm not sure where I would obtain a copy of that. Having read the piece, I had several reactions. On one level, I detect a thinly veiled undercurrent of racism. On St. Croix at least many, but not all, of the companies are run by whites, frequently from the mainland. Perhaps there is some resentment against people seen as coming from away taking business away from the taxi van drivers.
The argument about leveling the playing field is completely bogus. Right now, the playing field is level. Passengers coming off of the ships can make a choice: take a taxi van and get a land-based tour, or get on a boat and take a tour from the water. Not allowing the water tour operators to pick up people at the piers is unleveling the playing field, not leveling it.
On St. Croix, there is one sailboat carrying 49 passengers maximum that picks up people at the Ann Abramson pier. As far as I know the Scuba West boat is a six-pack boat, so at most that is six more people the taxi van drivers won't necessarily be carrying. A typical modern cruise ship has upwards of 2,000 passengers. The remaining 1,945 passengers will most likely need taxi van rides somewhere on St. Croix. All of the rest of the dive shops and water tour operators are located in Salt River, Cane Bay, Christiansted, or Green Cay. The taxi van drivers will get all of those rides. Even the people going on the sail or diving in the morning might want a ride somewhere in the afternoon. Obviously there are more water tour operators in St. Thomas but there are far more ships, also.
It is stupid and unsafe to suggest that water tour operators pick up passengers from the ship rather than the pier. The piers are designed to allow people to safely embark and disembark from both cruise ships and smaller vessels. The high-sided ship presents a potential danger to the rigging of any of the sailing tour boats; also, a small boat will react to the swell completely differently from the large ship. Can you imagine the hue and cry if a law was passed not allowing taxi vans to pick up passengers anywhere but at two or three designated spots?
The claim that taxi van drivers would be eased out of their livelihood if the tours expanded to include water taxis is a farce. Many people are going to want to see what St. Thomas and St. Croix look like inland, you can't do that with a boat. Some people are afraid of small boats, but will still get on a large ship, or have no interest in diving or sailing. These people are still going to need rides to some location. Then, there are the people who live here who still need rides on a daily basis.
As far as getting up at 2 a.m. to get in line down at the pier in the "hope of getting passengers" – give me a break. The ships rarely, if ever, discharge passengers before 8 a.m., if not 9 a.m. Certainly many passengers will take a short walk to the waiting boats, but let's do some simple math. Underwater Safaris says that on a busy day they take 125 passengers diving. The Kon Tiki barge holds maybe 150 passengers (frequently 149 is used as a cutoff point due to a change in Coast Guard classification at 150 passengers and above). I don't know how big the Leyland Sneed motor vessel is, nor the Island Girl or Wild Thing catamarans, but let's say 200 each to be safe. That totals 600 passengers for the three of them. The 30 sailboats are almost certainly six-pack boats (6 passengers maximum), so that is 180 people. Total: 125+150+600+180 = 1,055 in round numbers. That is still less than half of a typical large cruise ship's passenger capacity, and if there was only one of those in port in St. Thomas it would not be considered a busy day. Even the Monday after the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania plane there were two cruise ships in St. Thomas with a total of 3,640 passengers on board between them.
If there is any group that is directly competing with the taxi van drivers it is the buses operated by Ann Abramson's bus service. Just one of those buses carries more passengers than the lone sailboat operating out of Frederiksted, and the bus only employs one driver for maybe 60 passengers as opposed to one driver for 15 passengers in a typical taxi van. I do not know if there is a similar large tour bus service on St. Thomas but I would not be surprised if there was.
The final point I have is: Why are the senators even getting involved with this? Having obtained my business license last year I have learned quite a bit about licensing and zoning. As I understand it, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources decides if a business is appropriate for the zoning at a particular location. The Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs then issues a business license for that particular type of business, based upon DPNR's recommendation and other considerations. Where is the need for the Senate to gum up the works? Where is Senator Alicia Hansen who just months ago was blowing her own horn about revitalizing the marine industry in the U.S. Virgin Islands? This is a direct attack on that very industry. Has it occurred to anyone that actions like this might be a big part of the reason that the charter yacht industry in the Virgin Islands is now almost exclusively located in the British Virgin Islands?
David Walworth
St. Croix
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
