While basic human needs go unmet, journalist encourages & praises well-to-do for investing in fun

Primary tabs

It's always amazing to consider that, while Rochster is one of the wealthiest cities in New York, as well as in the U.S., at the same time, it has one of the highest child poverty rates in the state and nation!

Mr. Hare,

Based on your article below, you obviously believe it is quite wonderful that well-to-do people in Rochester, and I'm certain from throughout Monroe County, and probably beyond --- are willing to "put their wallets where their hopes are" relative to keeping the so-called fast-ferry-love-boat in Rochester.

It may be wonderful from your perspective and the perspectives of those who are like-minded, but as far as many others are concerned --- it's downright sickening. Of all the worthwhile, desperately needed, humanistic "community projects" that people of means could back financially --- it's amazing that you and others find the luxury cruise-boat to be most worthy or a top priority.

Do you ever wonder for example --- where was the outpouring of community support when the possibility was looming, and still exists regarding future inability to finance the basic human service of school nurses for Rochester City School District students? Where is the outpouring of Community support for the substantial numbers of homeless people in Rochester --- many of whom sleep in places such as the subway bed --- due to lack of homeless shelters and adequate services? What about money and support for the thousands of working-poor people who can't afford health care benefits; can't afford day care, or transportation,etc? Where are the people (such as yourself) who will use their institutional authority, power and tools to spearhead movements to bring forth economic help for the least amongst us?

Also, what is this crap about "if the ship goes away, so will many of the people who came here because of it --- the kind of young people the city hopes to attract?" One of the selling-points for recklessly investing taxpayers' money in the mini-love-boat was that the investment would produce hundreds, if not thousands of directly and indirectly related jobs. I am quite certain that most citizens expected that those jobs would be filled by people who don't have to come here or be imported from elsewhere, but instead, from among the long rolls of the locally unemployed populace. Surely, you're not suggesting that there are no desirable, skilled, and/or trainable young people in Rochester to fill the jobs --- or are you? Additionally, just because someone works in or for the City of Rochester, doesn't mean that they will likely live in the city. In fact, in most cases they absolutely will not. So, often it is really Pittsford, Brighton, Greece, Webster, Penfield, etc. that are "attracting" them, and benefits most from their presence --- while the inner-city-core in particular, continues to rot! What's the critical issue?: ECONOMIC JUSTICE.

I do realize that well-to-do people have a right to spend their money as they please, and I am absolutely sure that they will continue to do so. The things that they hold dear, they back financially and otherwise. Things that they don't hold dear, they simply ignore. Again, basically, that's their right. However, sir, for you to use your limited, yet important power and authority (via one of the most influential, institutional tools in the community) --- to insinuate that such well-to-do people are wonderful do-gooders, moral/ethical giants, or great philanthropists is in my view disgraceful. The truth of the matter is that many of them will give money simply because they value having another hedonistic playground for themselves, and as alluded to in your article, another socioeconomic, sociopolitical, and dominant cultural training ground for their young. Others will give money because they have every intention of tripling the value of their "gifts" (many times over) --- in profit!

Sincerely,

Howard J.Eagle


Give people a chance to help save Rochester's ferry, Mark Hare 

(December 23, 2004) — When she first dreamed of having grandchildren, says Mary Zadorozny of Irondequoit, "I hoped to be like Auntie Mame and lead them on grand and glorious adventures."

And last summer, she and grandson Jarret, age 3, began adventuring to the Port of Rochester two or three times a week. They were there when the Spirit of Ontario fast ferry arrived in April, and Jarret began collecting pictures of the ship for his "ferry book." Jarret has learned everything he can about the ferry and hopes to "drive" it when he's 4. Grandma hopes to take him on his first crossing next summer.

And, heck, yes, she'd put up some money to save the ferry.

She is not alone. I have been inundated with e-mails and calls from people who want to make the ferry service work and who say they are willing to put their wallets where their hopes are.

Bev Bartlett, who works at Rochester Institute of Technology's Center for Intercollegiate Athletics and Recreation, was born and raised in Charlotte. The ferry, she says, has been a point of pride for the neighborhood and the community.

At RIT, she says, "there is much excitement at the prospect of hosting some top-notch Division I hockey games that will surely attract Canadians during the winter months. So many of the student-athletes we have here are Canadian-born — and their families are staunch supporters of RIT hockey. I'm absolutely certain many of them would love to sail across on the ferry during the cold, wintry months instead of driving around the lake."

On Tuesday, City Council approved Mayor Bill Johnson's plan to save the ferry for Rochester, using a nonprofit organization that would borrow $40 million to buy the ship.

The ferry itself is an opportunity, but saving it presents another opportunity — to get the community involved in a project that could give Rochester a new profile. Since I first wrote two weeks ago about the possibility of selling stock in the ferry (as happened with the 1956 rescue of the Red Wings), I have been wowed by the public support. The idea would be to tap the enthusiasm of the larger community, beyond the city, to raise cash as an insurance policy to offset potential operating losses — which otherwise would have to be carried by city property taxpayers.

It's not going to be possible to sell stock, but a nonprofit organization could accept tax-deductible donations — and the city really should set up a vehicle to do just that. Certainly the ferry has many doubters and many critics. Some people just don't think the city should be in the business of running what amounts to a cruise ship; others say the math is just too fuzzy. I don't want to dismiss any of those concerns.

But there are many, many people here who really want to help.

Former Rochesterians Nancy and Skip Cribari, now of Rowley, Mass., wrote to say they'd contribute and to express their hope for success — not only for the city, but for their son, who came back to Rochester to work on the ferry.

If the ship goes away, they said, so will many of the people who came here because of it — "the kind of young people the city hopes to attract."

"This is an idea that won't die," Mayor Johnson told me Wednesday. And he promises to look into ways donors — large and small — can be a part of the project. This is a unique moment in time, a chance to make this a community project, not just a government project.

People not only want to help, they need to help.

Economy