WSF Survey Results: Fuel surcharge, anyone?

||| BY MATTHEW GILBERT, theORCASONIAN OP-ED REPORTER |||

As a prelude to this week’s virtual community meetings at 12:30 p.m. Wednesday (1/11) and 6 p.m. Thursday (1/12) hosted by Washington State Ferries (WSF), it may help to review some of the results of its recently released Summer 2022 survey. (Advanced registration is required to attend (Go here). The data are drawn from two groups:

• An online community panel (the Ferry Riders’ Opinion Group – FROG) of over 5,000 members that started in 2010.
• 1,339 “recreational” ferry riders who were interviewed on multiple routes during their summer 2022 travels.

I took the liberty to cherry-pick a handful of notable findings – both general and those more pertinent to San Juan County – from the shortened version of the report [WSFSummer2022-Perfomance_SurveyResults]. In most instances, 2022 findings were compared to pre-pandemic data from 2018. As you will see, there aren’t a lot of surprises; it was a tough year for ferry travelers as the system tried to recover from an extended pandemic hangover while scrambling to keep boats afloat:

• Overall Satisfaction: Only 41% among panel members (representing a significant number of regular users), down from 62% in 2018.
• Overall Dissatisfaction: The strongest levels of discontent were found on the Fauntleroy/Vashon (82%), San Juan Interisland (76%), and Anacortes/San Juans (71%) routes.
• Overall Value: 45% said “Good/Very Good” compared to 81% in 2018. Those numbers plummeted even further here in the islands: Only 34% of riders on the Anacortes – San Juans route described WSF as offering a high value, while interisland respondents essentially threw up their hands: 77% Poor or Very Poor.

As survey analysts astutely observed when reporting on Overall Value, “This sentiment may be influencing riders’ feelings about paying for a fuel surcharge.” Yes, a fuel surcharge, estimated to be anywhere from a few cents for walk-ons on certain routes to $4—5 for Anacortes – San Juan vehicles. According to Aaron Halbert, a financial analyst for the Washington State Transportation Commission (WSTC), a surcharge option has been on the books since 2011 but not been used. The last decade or so has seen annual 2.5% rate increases to meet general revenue and rate fare goals, but escalating costs means that an extra surcharge is not off the table. The issue added considerable color to the findings (text taken directly from the report, excluding parentheticals):

• More riders object to the idea of a fuel surcharge than support one (41% to 32%). One in four are strongly against the idea.
• Only one in ten think WSF riders should pay a surcharge on their own, while a third of riders think unfunded fuel costs should be funded in part by a rider surcharge and in part by taxpayers. Two fifths would like to see the taxpayers statewide pay for any un-funded fuel costs.

“You cannot expect riders to cover your cost of fuel when you cannot even operate the ferries at a full and efficient capacity… These are Washington State ferries. Use the taxes that are already being collected. This is a utility not a business and a non-optimal functioning one at that. Fix your punctuality, fix your Captains running into docks, fix your workforce, fix your fleet. When any of that comes up to a reasonable level of service and utility the topic of fuel surcharge can be broached.”

• Seven out of ten (72%) would be willing to pay up to 2.5% and 49% would pay up to 5% more to cover fuel funding shortfalls (when presented with what they would likely pay on a particular route); however, it is important to note that 28% are adamant they should not be asked to pay a fuel surcharge at all. (That reluctant willingness was slightly lower for respondents surveyed on the Anacortes – San Juans route, but among riders on the San Juan Interisland, the knives were out: Less than half were willing to pay even 2.5% more.)

“It’s ridiculous how often we’ve been down to one ferry this year. I go to a doctor’s appointment and I’m not sure if I’ll make it home before 10pm. The Vashon route is our only way to get off Island. Roads are built with funds from the whole state. The fuel surcharge is just a chicken (expletive deleted) way to raise fares but be able to blame it on something else. Get your act together, raise staffing levels, and then ask users for more money. It’s offensive to give (poor) service and ask for more.”

• Riders who might support a fuel surcharge would like assurances that it will be temporary.

“You mentioned that a fuel surcharge would be temporary. How will you decide when to end the fuel surcharge? Is there a hard date when the surcharge would end? This is important information for me to support the addition of a surcharge.”

There was also a shift in the demographic profile of new members who joined WSF’s community panel (recruited during the “onboard intercepts”) compared to existing members – and again, no big surprises – skewing younger and wealthier. 41% were below the age of 54 compared to 23% of existing panel members, while 63% had household incomes above $100k compared to 52%.

And despite everything, a robust 98% said they would Definitely (78%) or Probably (18%) use WSF again for their next recreational or social trip (92% for the San Juans). Not that they have a lot of other options . . .

In the Meantime
Final summer season tax figures are in for the San Juans, and in the face of fire, construction jams, labor shortages, restaurant disruptions, and ferry mayhem, countywide sales tax revenue for the period 11/1/21 – 10/31/22 broke another record, up nearly 10% from last year. That figure, however, was clearly boosted by a strong building sector and across-the-board price increases on just about everything. These were significant influences given that lodging tax revenue for the county was actually down 4% compared to 2022, suggesting some pullbacks in visitor traffic. San Juan Island (excluding Friday Harbor) bore the brunt of that decline, dropping 16%, Lopez was down 5%, while Orcas defied the headwinds, up 6.6%.