On Wednesday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a previous ruling that prevents construction on a highly debated access road project.
Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder opined that the Juneau Access Improvement Project failed to consider alternatives for improving the existing ferry service, a decision ruled by Judge John Sedwick of the Alaska District Court in February 2009.
The project in question involves a nearly 51-mile road along Lynn Canal and the construction of a new ferry terminal.
Six environmental groups were the plaintiffs against the State of Alaska plus the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Wednesday’s ruling affirmed that the Environmental Impact Statement violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to consider plans for improving and making use of the ferry infrastructure already in place as an alternative.
“We’re very encouraged by the court ruling. They applied the common sense approach to their review, evaluating and taking a hard look at the ferry service,” said Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Executive Director Lindsey Ketchel.
“It is the right decision. The Federal Highway Administration and the Forest Service failed to look at the most obvious alternative, which is to improve access to Juneau using existing ferries,” SEACC Grassroots Attorney Buck Lindekugel said in a release. “Why should we build an expensive and unnecessary road — which will still require a ferry connection — when improved ferry schedules, fares and other service could meet community needs?”
Improving the existing ferry system is something the plaintiffs hold as a better answer than the new road.
“The decision reaffirms the State’s obligation to seriously consider for the first time the one alternative that could improve access and save hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars: better ferry service in Lynn Canal with existing boats,” Eric Jorgensen, an Earthjustice attorney in the case, states in the release.
“They erred in not considering improved ferry service, and clearly, this half a billion dollar road was going to pull money from many communities that need improvements,” said Jan Wrentmore, chair of the Skagway Marine Access Commission. “It was very reaffirming that the court saw the process was flawed, and we testified year after year on this issue that they were not considering giving improved marine access the consideration it deserved.”
Wrentmore said the group has been working on this issue since 1997.
The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities states the road project is intended to provide easier, less expensive access to the capital. The fate of the project is not yet known.
“The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities is disappointed in the ruling, but we will be exploring our options with the Federal Highway administration and the governors office. It is too early to say what that course of action will be,” said Chef Communications Officer Brenda Hewitt.
“In the end it should be grounded in economic reality. We think we’re reaching a time when federal spending needs to be frugal. We feel by investing and improving and encouraging the current ferry system, we’ll be meeting the state’s needs quicker and at a price tag the state can afford,” said Ketchel.
• Contact reporter Jonathan Grass at 523-2276 or jonathan.grass@juneauempire.com.
Comments (44)
Add commentReality
This opinion is "about" the road, of course, but the real point of the opinion is that Frank Murkowski's administration and the State of Alaska Department of Transportation bungled the requisite decision making requirements and violated federal law. Once again the goat ropers in charge of Alaska's future had a chance to make something happen and blew it.
We have become a state run by highly opinionated individuals that too often lack the skills to make anything happen. We get what we deserve, which is constant fighting and too few tangible results.
Instead of carping about the Greenies or taking turns telling each other where to move, doesn't it make more sense to ask why the folks that ignored the decision making requirements that have been law for 40 years keep getting repeated chances to fool around with transportation policy?
Whatever...
Move the capital and transfer the state and federal and state jobs out and watch these dirt eating, tree hugging, bear humping hippies leave here in mass. They would then have to have a competitive economy, not just a black hole where state and federal tax dollars go to take care of a community that isn't even willing to take care of itself. They would have to find real jobs in a place where they have suffocated all the real jobs out of.
There is something missing
Road road advocates lost this round because DOT didn't consider ferry alternatives.
Why didn't they?
I keep hearing that building this highway is vastly cheaper than spending a similar amount of cash on ferry service. If that is the case, where is the analysis to back that claim?
I am not opposed to a road but I am opposed to shoddy analysis. Had DOT actually considered ferries in their alternatives analysis they very well could have found that a highway was better. With that analysis in hand, SEACC wouldn't have had a leg to stand on. Perhaps, the state will actually go back and do a decent analysis so that we can actually weigh the options. Right now we simply ask ourselves if we prefer boats to cars with very little consideration of costs or terrain.
DOT's highway analysis was shoddy as well. Estimates of highway construction by DOT and that by state contracted engineering firms varied by as much as $500 million.
As I see it isn't the lack of road that hurts Juneau. A road would be nice but I think it's the bickering over ferry service that hurts us. Even if we started tomorrow, a road to Skagway is a decade away if not further. Given that fact and the fact that Southeast will always need ferries, ALL Juneau residents should be clammering for improved ferry service.
A trip of similar distance is
Alaska Marine Highways operates at a loss. Though it is heavily subsidized with Federal highway funds, State general funds and exorbitant passenger fares, it operates at a loss.
So, I get on the ferry in Auke Bay (the Juneau ferry terminal). I know that the trip I'm about to take to Haines is heavily subsidized with Federal highway and State general funds. However I'm required to pay well over $200 for a 60 mile trip because there's no alternative. I'm also limited to the days and times that I can travel and I very well may not be able to travel because the Marine Highway doesn't have the capacity to handle the demand. It may be days, weeks or months before I can use this highway.
A trip of similar distance is from Houston to Anchorage. Someone who lives in Houston gets in his or her automobile and drives to Anchorage, attends to their business and drives back to Houston. It doesn't cost them a dime to use the highway and the Parks and Glenn aren't in danger of being closed because the operating budget has been exceeded.
The initial capital expenditure for the highway between Houston and Anchorage was great. Adjusted for inflation, probably similar to the proposed road from Juneau to Haines. But that's a one time expenditure that will continue to be used for a hundred years or more to come. Once you make the initial expenditure on a blacktop highway, the operating costs are relatively small.
This doesn't even take into consideration that ships are environmentally unfriendly. They find dead humpback whales that have been hit by a ship somewhat frequently around here. Ships burn a lot of fuel and the exhaust isn't regulated like on an automobile. The paint that they use produces toxic vapors while it is curing. And they have to do something with the oily water in the bilges. Having worked on commercial vessels for about a decade of my life, I know they aren't the environmentally friendly option that the hippies that love and use them would like us to think they are.
So, to those that say a road is too expensive, keep in mind that the AMHS operating budget is about $140 Million and those who use it are still required to pay fares. That doesn't take into account the operating costs exceeding the budget, and they regularly do.
That's what I mean by lower cost option. Amortized it will be less expensive through the life of the asset. Do the math. And not the hippie math that puts a greater value of the novelty of going for a boat ride.
One more time
There will be no road to Skagway. The Department of the Interior weighed in several years ago and ruled that a road could not cross its land above Skagway. When the DOT was last in Skagway, they pulled out a plan to come off the side of the mountain and across a overpass at the end, right in front of the White Pass shops, of this 4 by 23-street town, taking out a block of houses.
This project is so greed-driven that DOT keeps throwing tax-payer money at it. And the Murkowski administration tried to kill it with unreadable schedules, inadequate service and cronies like Robin Taylor (remember the "cheap" move of the ferry admin to Ketchikan) and Torgerson -- that little oinker who keeps getting political appointments for reasons we can only guess at, but never understand.
Like any form of transportation in Alaska, sometimes you just can't get there. For instance, the road to Whitehorse was closed many many times this winter due to avalanches and whiteouts. You guys in Juneau have no idea what driving that road is like in the winter. It's no Egan Drive.
I say, put a one-armed bandit in the ferries's bars and help fund the ferry with the proceeds.
HHHMmmmmm, I seem to remember
HHHMmmmmm, I seem to remember that SCOTUS overturned the 9th circus and got the Kensington up and running? They are, after all, the most overturned court in the land.
9th Circuit's decision on Juneau Access was entirely predictable
I'm with Hiker on this. Where was the analysis? Anyone with some historical understanding of the 9th Circuit would understand where the decision was heading. So why didn't the state go the extra mile, instead of wasting so much time by not providing a stellar analysis? Maybe some in charge at the time didn't really want the road, and put in these political road mines?
Part of this issue is the diminishing returns on what was invested politically. Everyone sees the region is shrinking politically in influence, so why put up a fight where the next stage (if and when the state prevails) will be making this a bridge to nowhere fiasco?
The bottom line is that the region is yesterday's news - while shrinking economically and politically. The present administration gets no benefit other than giving the corridor lip service support.
For the record Congress did provide the state a right-of-way between Skagway and the northern terminus of the proposed corridor in the last federal highway act. However, there is no political gain in adding it to these other contentious issues at the moment insofar as this observer can see.
You're right
Oceans don't become impassable, just tsunamis. I lived in Juneau for two decades, and left. I encourage everyone to take the advice of these "no roaders" and move down South, or up North. When there is no one left in Juneau, and the Capital moves, and the tourists stop coming, and finally, when there is no more money, they may think of the word retrospect.
I'm sick and tired of all
I'm sick and tired of all this "ferries go all the way", "don't extend the dead end" and other various bs statements about why we should rely on our ferry system. how many times do we have to read articles about the ferry system having problems because a boat has to be pulled out of service or a dock needs repairs or some other reason? how many times are they going to jockey ships around so they can pull another one of these latest, greatest fast ferries out for repairs again? tell me more about how great our ferry system is.
I just tried to book a 3 day weekend trip to Skagway. $500 for a family or 4 with a vehicle! Add to that the fact that you can't leave Juneau until 3pm and you arrive in Skagway at 9pm, wasting an entire day. Then you have to get on a 7am ferry on Sunday, losing another day. So you're essentially paying $500 to spend 1 day out of town. Of course this is all subject to the ferry actually running.