I believe there’s a role for cruise ships, and I believe it’s one we (as a city) ought to be constantly evaluating and negotiating.
This is a broad question. But generally I would say that while I support cruise tourism in Portland, I also have concerns.
From where I stand, the quantity and size of cruise ships that visit Portland has evolved over the past 20-30 years. Back when I first moved to Portland, in 1994, there was no Ocean Gateway, and there were no giant ships!
Cruises into Portland Harbor have become a part of the city’s, the region’s and the state’s economy.
I am aware of the importance of revenue streams into the municipal budget.
The most recent annual revenue to the operating budget that I can find (FY25) was $3.86M.
I’d want to look into the costs to the city in terms of docking operations and maintenance to understand the full revenue and expenditure impacts, especially if and when we navigate the question of how many calls to port, and how many people disembarking.
Again, as for the role cruise tourism plays - I think it’s part of the overall tourism picture. Portland welcomes people by plane, train, bus, car and boat, and I think there are important impacts to consider when evaluating each of those points of entry.
Generally, tourism is a valuable economic driver for both the City of Portland, the region, and the whole State of Maine. Anecdotally I have heard that someone may be “introduced to Portland” via cruise ship, and then they come back to the city, region or state because they ‘fell in love’!
All this said, the environmental impacts (discharge, air pollution, crowds) are very real and I am in support of assessing and responding in order to protect our city, our environment and our harbor from harm.
Yes. I am in support of an amendment to Rule 8 of the Portland Port Terminal Tariff that would require ships to switch to cleaner distillate fuel for the ~8 hours they're docked.
I think the recent increase in tariffs, and discounted rates, described in this article are a move in the right direction.
But I don’t think it’s sufficient to address the concerns regarding use of heavy fuel oil, exhaust gas cleaning systems, and the resulting air pollution.
I am supportive of requiring ships to switch to cleaner distillate fuel (like marine gas oil) for the time they're docked in Portland.
No.
We have an anti-idling ordinance that we can’t enforce 24/7 on all streets because of staff capacity. But in the case of charter-bus idling in predictable locations, I believe we can and should enforce our local ordinance.
I believe we have a lot of work to do to make Portland a safer city for pedestrians and cyclists.
I am prepared to lead and advocate broadly for meaningful increases to funding in our local budget in order to expand and accelerate safety and infrastructure investments on streets, sidewalks, crosswalks - for walkers, runners, bikers.
Yes.
But while a municipality doesn’t have direct regulatory control over a ship’s public health status, and responsive protocols (I understand that specific protocols and requirements come from state and federal level CDC) I do believe that the work currently undertaken by Portland’s Department of Health and Human Service to offer local response and communications is good work.
We all want to do all we can at every level of government to keep people safe and informed. I think there is a lot we can do at the local level. And, I think it’s critical to understand the various layers of work and response from the Federal level to the state level to the local level so that we can leverage, coordinate and optimize public health and safety.
I care deeply about our environment.
The highest priority for cruise ships in Portland Harbor, in my opinion, are any and all negative impacts to air and water.
Thus my stated support prohibiting the discharge of exhaust-gas scrubber washwater into Casco Bay.