The Harbor Town Ferry Subsidy
A coastal town of 40,000 residents runs a publicly owned ferry linking its downtown to a job-rich island. The ferry carries 2,000 commuters daily at a fare of $4.00; operating cost is $6.50 per rider, and the town covers the $5,000 daily gap from its general fund. Ridership has been flat for three years despite population growth. A consultant notes that the island has a large hospital and two industrial parks, and that the only road alternative is a 55-minute detour over a congested bridge. The council must decide whether to raise fares to $5.50, cut two of six daily departures, or keep the subsidy and fund it by deferring $1.8 million in road resurfacing. Several council members argue the ferry is simply 'too expensive to keep.'
1. Frame the council's decision using scarcity, choice, and opportunity cost. Identify what is genuinely scarce here and what the true opportunity cost of each option is.
Read the worked answer
The scarce resources are not just money but the town's budget capacity and the commuters' time. The $5,000 daily operating gap is a real claim on the general fund, but the ferry also produces a benefit that never appears on its ledger: 2,000 workers reach the island without a 55-minute detour.
Opportunity cost is the value of the next-best alternative forgone for each choice:
- Raise fares to $5.50: the cost is borne by riders (an extra $1.50/day, roughly $3,000 of the gap closed) plus the risk that marginal riders switch to the bridge, shrinking ridership and leaving the gap partly unfilled.
- Cut two departures: saves labor and fuel but concentrates riders onto fewer boats, raising crowding and wait times; the opportunity cost is the time value lost by 2,000 commuters.
- Defer road resurfacing: the $1.8 million is not free money; deferral raises future repair costs and worsens road quality for all 40,000 residents.
The key judgment is that 'too expensive' conflates accounting cost with opportunity cost. The correct comparison is the ferry's total cost against the value of the best alternative use of those dollars and those commuter hours - not against zero. A council that only sees the $5,000 line will systematically under-provide the service.
2. A council member proposes charging island employers a payroll-based fee to cover the gap, arguing that they are the main beneficiaries. Evaluate this on efficiency and equity grounds.
Read the worked answer
Efficiency: employers capture much of the benefit - they get access to a larger labor pool and lower turnover. Charging beneficiaries aligns the cost with those who gain, which is the classic case for a benefit-based charge rather than general-fund subsidy. If employers value the ferry at more than the fee, they pay willingly; if not, the fee reveals that the service is worth less than its cost and should shrink. This is a useful information-revealing device.
Equity: the incidence matters. A payroll fee may be passed backward to workers as lower wages or forward to customers as higher prices, so the nominal payer is not necessarily the economic bearer. Low-wage commuters could end up paying twice - once at the fare box and once through wage effects.
Practical constraints: the fee requires identifying and collecting from island employers, some of whom may relocate or litigate. A hybrid - modest fare increase plus employer fee plus a smaller general-fund contribution - spreads risk and avoids loading the whole adjustment on one group. The judgment the council must make is whether the ferry is a public good with spillovers (justifying general revenue) or a private benefit to specific firms (justifying a targeted charge). The honest answer is probably both, so a blended funding structure is defensible.