“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” – Milton Friedman.
Over the past few weeks, ever since my “No Audits, No Increase” article exposed the Virgin Islands Port Authority’s (VIPA) disastrous financial condition and chronic lack of transparency, Virgin Islanders have been calling loudly for real accountability in government. The message was simple: before the Port Authority digs any deeper into the pockets of residents or businesses, it needs to put its books on the table and operate transparently.
Yet despite that call, VIPA went ahead and approved a slate of new fee increases at its October 29th board meeting.
Now, new concerns are emerging that suggest the transparency and oversight problems may be even larger than initially thought.
Following a closed-door meeting with tourism officials last week, multiple industry insiders are warning that the financing structure for the St. Croix airport redevelopment could include airline fee increases of up to $100 per passenger. In other words, Virgin Islanders and visitors alike may be asked to pay an additional $100 per ticket, essentially in exchange for jet bridges and other cosmetic upgrades. If true, this change would dramatically alter the economics of air travel to the Virgin Islands and have immediate consequences for tourism, affordability, and the overall competitiveness of our islands. And what’s most alarming is that these discussions appear to be happening quietly, out of public view, and without the basic vetting that usually accompanies the financial terms of a major airport public–private partnership (P3).
Is VIPA Trying to Kill St. Croix’s Economy Completely?
A $100-per-passenger fee hike would be devastating.
For airlines, it makes flights to STX less profitable.
For tourists, it makes trips to the island less affordable.
For residents, it makes travel even harder in emergencies.
For the economy, it poses a threat to investment and growth.
Air service is the lifeline of an island economy. You don’t strengthen the Virgin Islands by making it more expensive to get here.
Why This Matters
Access to the territory by air is already expensive, limited, and fragile. With only a handful of entry points and a few carriers serving the territory, most of us must make at least one connection to reach almost any major U.S. city. And because St. Croix lacks morning departures, travelers often leave in the late afternoon, connect in Miami, and don’t reach their destination until close to midnight.
That’s the starting point — and now VIPA wants to make it more expensive.
When I lived in the States, I could cross the country for under $300 round-trip. As a Virgin Islands resident, I routinely pay more than $500 to leave the territory – even if I am just going to Miami. A recent scan of the St. Croix–Miami route, a three-hour flight, shows American Airlines pricing economy fares at $596 for March 2026 — and that’s before any new airport fees.
And the situation is getting worse. According to industry insiders, airlines are already cutting routes, reducing winter schedules, and hesitating to expand into St. Croix. For hotels and tourism businesses, winter traffic is the backbone of their annual revenue. When flights disappear, jobs disappear.
Tourism leaders are warning that a sudden spike in airport fees would:
• Push fares even higher
• Reduce flight frequency
• Make competing islands more attractive
• Deter airlines from expanding service
In fact, one major carrier has reportedly cooled on a potential new St. Croix route because of the proposed new fee structure.
That’s not a minor issue. That’s a significant structural threat to our economy — one that we cannot afford to ignore.
According to sources, the proposed $100-per-passenger fee would apply specifically to St. Croix, but what happens here rarely stays here. VIPA is losing $30 million a year and is effectively broke — the money has to come from somewhere, and that “somewhere” is new fees. Whatever VIPA implements on St. Croix will almost certainly become the model for St. Thomas, driving up prices, adding economic risk, and sending ripple effects across the entire Virgin Islands.
A Concerning Lack of Transparency
In the same vein as previous decisions at VIPA, this rumored decision is accompanied by a frightening lack of transparency. What’s particularly troubling is how little of this has been shared publicly.
According to multiple respected sources:
• The proposed fee increase has not been fully disclosed to the tourism industry
• Some VIPA board members were reportedly unaware of the magnitude
• The governor addressed the proposed fee increase in a recent public meeting after hearing about it for the first time; and
• When concerns were raised, they were met with resistance and secrecy rather than openness
If true, that’s not how you build trust. That’s how you destroy it.
Given that VIPA has not produced an audit in four years, the idea that they are moving forward with a multi-decade airport P3 deal — in the dark — should concern every Virgin Islander.
And here’s what makes it even worse: I personally asked VIPA about this issue at their public meeting, and they explicitly opted not to share any details. They repeatedly chose secrecy over transparency, even when asked directly in an open forum. That is not the behavior of an agency that understands its obligation to the people it serves.
What a Properly Vetted Airport P3 Would Have Looked Like — and What We Didn’t Get
And this is where the pattern becomes impossible to ignore. Just like the public meetings about the fare increases — lots of talk, lots of fluff, but no real details — the SkyCity website is polished and glossy, yet almost empty of substance. Marketing language, press clippings, and flowery articles are everywhere. Hard numbers, financial models, fee impacts, risk assessments, and airline commitments are conspicuously absent.
That lack of substance mirrors VIPA’s process.
The most troubling aspect is that the Port Authority has already selected a P3 team and effectively committed the Virgin Islands to a long-term partnership before taking the fundamental steps that make these deals credible, transparent, and financially responsible. The deal is done. What’s happening now is the quiet after-the-fact negotiation of the financial terms.
For comparison, look just a few miles west to Puerto Rico. Our sister territory maintains a fully transparent Public-Private Partnership Authority, and its website provides the public with comprehensive information on every P3 project: audits, procurement documents, feasibility studies, financial models, contract terms, board decisions, timelines, status updates, and long-term performance metrics. It functions as a true data warehouse, allowing residents, businesses, and lawmakers to see precisely what will be built, how it will be financed, and what the projected impacts are. That is what modern transparency looks like. Here in the Virgin Islands, VIPA has offered none of that—no public repository. No disclosures. No documentation. No sunlight.
Every major airport partnership around the world follows the same basic process.
VIPA skipped most of it.
1. Public procurement and competitive bidding
San Juan, LaGuardia, Kansas City, and Newark airports all began with open RFQs and multiple competing teams. In contrast, VIPA issued an RFQ in December 2022 and, by April 2023, had shortlisted four proposers:
- daa International
- Vantage Airport Group Ltd.
- VINCI Airports
- VIports Partners — a consortium of AvPorts LLC, Aecon Group Inc., J. Benton Construction, and Tikehau Star Infra
That’s where transparency appears to end. None of those documents, scoring criteria, or evaluation summaries has been released publicly. And although three of those shortlisted firms — Vinci, Vantage, and daa — are world-class airport operators with decades of international experience, none were ultimately selected.
Instead, the contract went to SkyCity, a rebranded version of the VIPorts Partners consortium — anchored by construction firms and AvPorts, an operator whose experience lies mainly in small municipal and regional airports rather than major commercial hubs.
2. Selection of top-tier airport operators
World-class airport operators typically lead significant airport concessions, drawing on decades of experience operating complex terminals worldwide. These include firms such as Ferrovial, Vinci Airports, Groupe ADP, Fraport, AENA, MAG (Manchester Airports Group), and Aerostar in Puerto Rico. These companies operate some of the busiest and most sophisticated airports in the world — Heathrow, Gatwick, Paris–Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt, San Juan, Lisbon, Santiago, and dozens more.
They were all eligible. In fact, Vinci and Vantage showed up — and neither was chosen.
Instead, VIPA awarded the most consequential infrastructure project in the Virgin Islands to a ‘special purpose company’ with no record of delivering a project of this scale, led by firms incentivized to build big, not operate efficiently.
3. Airline consultation before awarding the deal
Elsewhere, airlines are involved early because their financial commitments determine whether the project works. In the Virgin Islands, it appears that airlines were brought in late, if at all, and it is rumored that at least one major carrier has already backed away from potential St. Croix service after hearing the early numbers.
4. Transparent financial modeling before approval
Normal P3 processes require the public release of cost projections, debt loads, and fee impacts before any vote. VIPA approved a P3 team with no public financials, no impact analysis, and no explanation for how passenger fee increases fit into the financing structure.
5. Independent feasibility studies
Major airport redevelopments typically come with traffic projections, risk assessments, and long-term economic modeling available for public review. To date, VIPA has released none.
6. Public hearings before commitments are made
Communities typically have the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed terms.
Here, the public was given a glossy concept, a done deal, and no substantive details.
When you stack all this together, the gaps aren’t minor — they are the foundation of the process, and VIPA skipped most of it.
When the Fox Designs the Henhouse
Another major red flag in the proposed P3 is the makeup of the private partnership itself. Two of the key partners — Aecon, the development lead, and J. Benton Construction — are construction companies. That alone should give the Virgin Islands pause.
Construction firms profit when projects get bigger, more complex, and more expensive. So, when a construction company is at the table shaping the vision and financing of the project, the incentive is obvious: build the largest, most elaborate version of the airport possible, regardless of whether it makes economic sense for St. Croix.
And the public has every reason to scrutinize those incentives. J. Benton Construction is currently redeveloping the David Hamilton Jackson housing project — an “affordable housing” project with a price tag exceeding $1.1 million per unit. If that is the benchmark for what constitutes a “reasonable cost” under this development team, imagine what happens when the same players help define the scope of a billion-dollars worth of airport projects.
It’s a textbook fox-watching-the-henhouse moment — with the construction-driven SkyCity consortium playing the fox, pushing for a massive project, and Virgin Islanders left as the hens who get stuck footing the bill through higher ticket prices.
That’s precisely why transparency is non-negotiable. When the same entities stand to profit from influencing the project’s size, cost, and design, the public has a right to know who benefits, who pays, and whether this is genuinely the airport we need — or simply the airport someone wants to build.
Results Over Intentions
As I put the finishing touches on this article, WTJX reports that the government can’t even manage simple leases — losing track of payments, subleases, and basic oversight at its properties. How can we possibly trust the same managers to handle the far more complex, multi-decade administration of a public-private partnership worth hundreds of millions? At this point, can we trust VIPA with anything? I wouldn’t trust them to manage a johnnycake.
Milton Friedman said it best: “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” Sure, we’d all love jet bridges on St. Croix. But nobody wants jet bridges if the price of a ticket to Miami jumps to $900. At that point, keep the jet bridge — I’ll walk outside. Most people will. Affordability beats cosmetic aesthetics.
I have visited more than 60 countries — from Europe to Australia to Asia — and not once have I chosen a destination based on the jet bridge at the airport. People travel for the experience, the food, the beauty, and the culture — not for the architecture of the terminal.
If there were ever a moment for intervention, oversight, and leadership, it’s right now. It seems that we have not yet learned our lesson. The Vitol deal – the worst deal in Virgin Islands history – was also done in similar secrecy and confusion. And, it took years, hundreds of millions of dollars, and a bailout from the federal government to extricate ourselves from that goat rodeo. We cannot afford to repeat that mistake with our airports.
If VIPA is truly heading down a path that jeopardizes air service, raises fares, and threatens the very backbone of our airport-dependent economy, it is a grave concern for us all.
Where is the Legislature? Where is the Governor? Will they intervene?
I’m waiting. The entire Virgin Islands are. Let’s see what happens next.
Correction (Nov. 13, 2025):
An earlier version of this article incorrectly attributed management of leases to the Virgin Islands Port Authority. The lease is managed by the Government of the Virgin Islands through the Department of Property and Procurement. The reference has been updated.
Leave a Reply