Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation Shuttle topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board asks for business plan before approving BID request to fund downtown–waterfront shuttle

Peekskill Industrial Development Agency · April 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Peekskill IDA and PFDC heard a BID request to support a downtown–waterfront shuttle for the 2026 tourist season; board members, while generally supportive, demanded a detailed business plan, route map, budget and sponsorship strategy before committing funds.

The Peekskill Industrial Development Agency and its affiliated PFDC discussed a request from the Business Improvement District to help fund a downtown–waterfront shuttle for the 2026 tourist season, but board members said they will not commit money without a formal plan.

Board members heard from city marketing staff who described a coordinated Destination Peekskill campaign timed to upcoming FIFA watch parties and waterfront activations. Agency official (speaker 2) said the shuttle would connect Fleischmann Pier, the waterfront, the train station and multiple downtown stops and that buses are being wrapped and drivers would be provided by the city. The official said the BID asked whether the agency could participate because the BID had redirected budget dollars this year to destination marketing.

In public comment, Laura Adam, owner of RMS Cruises, told the board the shuttle is “very important to our business and the city of Peekskill,” noting RMS markets internationally and suggesting sponsorship and bus-advertising as partial funding sources. Adam and Captain Frank (Frank Adam) said operators carried about 7,000 passengers last year and expect more this season.

Board members pressed for specifics. One member said the agency should see a route map and signage plan; another asked what vehicle types would be used and whether capacity would match demand. Multiple members emphasized sustainability: Chair (speaker 1) said she was not willing to cover “the entire nut” and asked for a proposal showing what the BID, hotels, destination nonprofit and private sponsors would contribute.

Members also questioned the operating budget in the BID letter — board discussion referenced a $12,500 figure for driver salaries and overtime but said that without a clear budget, ridership projections and sponsorship commitments they could not justify a one‑time subsidy. Several members said the Destination Peekskill nonprofit has paperwork submitted but is not yet active and that a business plan and measurable metrics (route stop locations, schedules, sponsorship commitments, and marketing collateral) were prerequisites to funding.

City staff and Destination Peakskill representatives agreed to assemble a formal package with a map, schedule, sponsorship plan and budget and to return for a special meeting, likely in mid‑May, so the board could consider a funding decision. The board left open the possibility of participating at a reduced level if the plan shows sustainable revenue sources and clear metrics; the chair reiterated PFDC/incubator funds are constrained and urged transparency about how funds would be used.

The board did not vote on funding at the meeting and requested staff produce the requested materials and schedule a follow‑up.

The agency will consider the shuttle plan at a special meeting; in the meantime staff will prepare route maps, budgets and sponsorship proposals for review.