Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pier 27 Revenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port staff outlines Pier 27 revenue scenarios; ILWU raises concerns over America's Cup labor
Summary
Port staff presented low and high revenue scenarios for the James R. Herman Cruise Terminal at Pier 27, estimating total port revenues between about $4.3M and $5.4M and a low‑scenario subsidy of roughly $611,000 versus a high‑scenario profit of roughly $528,000; public commenters from ILWU urged that longshore labor agreements be honored amid America's Cup preparations.
Port staff presented two scenarios for projected net revenues from the James R. Herman Cruise Terminal (Pier 27), highlighted the key drivers that affect port receipts, and described the procurement steps for selecting a terminal operator.
Deputy Director Elaine Forbes and her finance and maritime staff told the commission that the port modeled a low scenario (about 66 cruise calls, roughly 209,000 passengers) and a high scenario (about 80 cruise calls, roughly 253,000 passengers). The presentation assumes an incremental passenger facility charge in the illustrative models (a $5 low case and $6 high case in addition to an existing $12 per passenger charge). Using those assumptions, staff estimated cruise‑line and operator fees and forecast total port revenues in a range of roughly $4.3 million to $5.4 million annually.
Staff said the terminal carries $3.5 million in fixed annual debt service and other fixed costs; under the low scenario the modeled outcome was an annual subsidy of about $611,000, while under the high scenario the model showed a profit of about $528,000. Staff emphasized that utilization—how many days the facility is booked for cruise calls versus special events and parking—greatly affects net results. For example, staff modeled a baseline special‑events occupancy rate drawn from an AECOM 2009 analysis at 52%; staff said increasing special‑events occupancy to 65% and shortening cruise turnaround time from three to 2.5 days could materially improve the bottom line.
Peter Daly and other maritime staff described operational levers: average cruise call net earnings and special‑event revenues (staff cited an average cruise call value of about $19,000 per day versus about $15,000 per day for special events in the model) and parking revenue sharing (staff assumed approximately 60% of post‑tax parking revenue would accrue to the port).
Staff also explained procurement steps: the selection process for the terminal manager follows Chapter 21 public procurement rules; an empaneled panel of experts will score written and oral proposals and recommend a highest‑ranked proposer. Two respondents will give informational presentations to the commission; staff then will seek commission authorization to negotiate with the recommended proposer and will return with a proposed management agreement for approval. Staff said public comment at commission meetings is allowed but will not be used to influence panel scoring.
In public comment, labor representatives from ILWU raised concerns about use of non‑union labor during recent America—s Cup preparations and asked the commission to direct Metro Stevedoring and staff to honor longstanding agreements with longshore unions. Ed Farris (ILWU Local 10) and David Hill (Local 34) said the port and prospective terminal operators should ensure that longshore work remains performed by ILWU members. Executive Director Moyer said staff was meeting with the unions and agreed to report back to the commission.
