In 2010 I directed my office and the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF) to “defederalize” the new Alaska Class Ferry project.
Back then, I said: If we can build an Alaska ferry with all-Alaska dollars, we’ll have a better shot at building it with an all-Alaska workforce.
The state subsequently returned the federal dollars for the project and embarked on a new approach to get Alaska Marine Highway vessels built at home.
Our challenge now is to get vessels built in Alaska, by Alaskans, while being wise stewards of public dollars.
Recently, it became clear that building a 350-foot Alaska Class Ferry for the budgeted $120 million is simply not feasible. Between design, engineering, project management, and construction, the cost for one ferry of that length will run between $150 - 167 million.
That realization gave us an opportunity to rethink the needs of the system, and look at alternatives for improving ferry service with the dual goals of building ferries at home while also staying on budget.
Last week I announced a new direction to achieve both goals.
I directed DOTPF Acting Commissioner Pat Kemp to have department personnel engage in discussions with Vigor Industrial and the Alaska Shipyard on how more than one ferry can be built with the $120 million appropriated by the Legislature. I requested they look at smaller, more efficient vessels than have been discussed to date.
In fact, we believe we can build at least two smaller ferries, and by doing so, improve service throughout the region while staying within the original budget.
The state has an obligation to be smart with the people’s money, while bringing the very best service and product possible. With declining oil production and, consequently, declining state revenue, Alaska has to be even more careful with available funds.
I have supported and will continue to support the increased service currently scheduled for mainliners from Bellingham all the way out to the Aleutians. However, this desire must be balanced with the reality of increasing costs for the maintenance of our aging fleet.
That’s why we need to expand our fleet strategically. The benefit to this new approach is clear: smaller ferries mean shorter building times, bringing them online more quickly, and allowing the system to run them more frequently, and at a lower cost.
Smaller ferries can reduce port time and provide greater redundancy in the event of a mechanical problem with another vessel. In addition, smaller vessels can be more easily deployed to respond to special community events in Southeast.
This new approach can keep Alaska shipwrights busy for years to come. In the future, we also will need to build a new Gulf-crossing ferry to replace the Tustemena, and we’ll need to continue to modernize our fleet. Growing our workforce capabilities to build and maintain these vessels will provide pathways of opportunity that can grow spinoff enterprises throughout the region.
Since 1963, our Alaska Marine Highway System has traveled these waters, safely transporting hundreds of thousands of Alaskans. My commitment to the system remains strong, and the direction we are taking affirms the importance of our marine highways.
• Parnell is the governor of Alaska.
Comments (37)
Add commentOne bad move after another.
If we had accepted federal money and the project were put out to bid, we would have gotten a better price for it. And it would be done by now.
If the project is to be built in Alaska, no matter what, we need to be willing to pay the price.
Unilateral decisions about what is best for SE by someone who never rides the ferries and has no idea about weather conditions or capacity needs for Upper Lynn Canal make Sean Parnell look like the poor leader that he is.
Small ferries, like the LeConte and Fairweather are routinely cancelled and/or turn into barf rides through the Upper Lynn Canal.
Cancelling the original plan is the most short-sighted decision ever.
We need the mid-size, 350-foot, Alaska-class ferry for safety, reliability, and flexibility throughout the entire AMH system as older mainline ferries break down and/or are retired.
It is not a cost to build what is needed; it is an investment in the sustainable economies and health of our SE Alaska communities.
It doesn't matter where it is built. It doesn't matter if there is a cost overrun. We need to get back on track with the original plan.
Small ferries, like the Fairweather and the LeConte, are already proven failures in the Upper Lynn Canal.
Grounds for recall of a govenor in Alaska:
"Lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption (AS §15.45.510)"
Let me get this straight
The State is experiencing declining oil revenues...so Governor Parnell returns the federal money he ALREADY HAD IN HAND.
And now that the project is over budget (like every State project) he severely guts the project, giving us pipsqueak ferries instead, and then has the gall to tout his own 'leadership' in the process. So far all I'm seeing is incompetence. Please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
OK, governor, you get your two smaller ferries. But do the smaller ferries need half the crew of the larger boat? I'm betting not. How about fuel? Will they move as many car-miles per gallon of diesel? Of course not. Maintenance cost half as much? Unlikely. Will they be faster? Definitely not.
The end result is that you'll short the ferry system somewhere else, of course claiming it's due to higher operating costs and "declining oil revenues".
Answer me this, governor: How many ferries could you build and operate with the $2 billion per year you'll give away to the oil companies?
Hey Sean, maybe you can save
Hey Sean, maybe you can save some money by not suing the federal government every time you get your feelings hurt or need to pay back some oil company...
Very disappointing
Terrible decision by a terrible governor. Sad to say but true.
Good plan,Governor.
Full speed ahead!
Governor Zero:
What does taking fedral dollars have to do with work done in ketchikan?
What good are day boats for replacing aging mainline ferries?
Will you refuse federal highway dollars for road work done in the railbelt?
Have you ever ridden on a ferry?
Good for the owners of the shipyard.
Good for the owners of the shipyard. Period.
Costs roughly 25% more.
The high paying jobs are going to go to imported workers; unless there are a lot of ship building engineers, and such, lounging around waiting for the right job to be created.
Is creating 1,500 part time (assuming that the ferries are not going to be continually coming off the line) jobs worth $150 million dollars. That is roughly $100,000 per position.
I am not all against giving back federal money, but this plan is suspicious at best.
And smaller ferries than we had previously not considered? That is not "built Alaskan tough".
What a crock......
This "plan" to build smaller, less capable ferries for coast efficieny is a charade. It is another bad investment that will cost more over the long run.
I agree with kmkci that Parnell has never had to ride the Lynn Canal roller coaster...nor have ANY of his leadership - nor have they crossed Dixon Entrance, nor Queen Charlotte Sounds - not to speak of Hinchenbrook & Kennedy Entrances to the west. They simply don't understand Alaskan sea conditions...remember the fast ferries??
The 350 ft Alaska class ship wasn't going to have cabins anyway - a bad call from the start....this ship was to have filled in for the ailing mainliners, as well as sailing the shorter routes. Without cabin space, and a full galley - if that ship was built, our citizens would have been very disappointed in the level of "service" that they would have gotten...like sleeping on the deck, and eating convenience store microwavable foods.
Cost overruns? Show me ONE state project that has met it's cost goals.
Alaskan shipwrights? Give me a break - most of the staff at Vigor's new Ketchikan shipyard are NOT Alaskans....except for the laborers...the skilled labor moves in and out with big projects...like the Susitna borough's "ice-class" fast ferry that they can't use or sell.
The bottom line is that when we should have been designing/building new mainliners, we built fast ferries at exorbitant building and operating costs...and the "spoke-hub" plan fell on it's face. We are now well on the downside of the operating cost/maintenance curve for ALL of the fleet except for Kennicott and the fast ferries. This means that the State will hemorrhage money until these old ships are retired.
We need new ships yesterday....BIG ships capable of dealing with our environment....with REAL crews capable of dealing with situations that arise at sea - and yes Governor - that includes Southeast Alaska....don't forget the Columbia fire, nor the Leconte grounding...short-staffing would have endangered those passengers.
You made a huge error turning back Federal dollars....have we EVER given back Federal road dollars so we can build "purely Alaskan" roads? I think not.
Sean - get real - and give Southeast it's due share of the big money being spent on roads elsewhere in the state - these ships ARE our highway.
And don't forget - you get what you pay for....50 years ago some very smart guys built the fleet we have today. That fleet wasn't built cheap - but it was built very well - by professional shipbuilders...not a Ketchikan bicycle shop.
It is time to invest in the future - just ask your oil industry buddies - they'll tell you how !!
Alaska ferries are good for Alaskans
1. Ferries built in Ketchikan with millions of dollars of jobs for a sister Southeast community...and some think this is a bad thing?
2. Smaller ferries can dock in Hoonah, Angoon, Gustavus...Kake and Tenakee...and some think this is a bad thing?
3. More ferries serving more Alaskans (instead of building love boats)...and some think this is a bad thing?
4. Faster turn around in Lynn Canal with two vessels serving this route than one big vessel which also frees more ferries up to serve underserved village communities...and some think this is a bad thing?
5. Two smaller more effective ferries save the State $30-$50 million that could be more wiser spent on other SE transportation needs, ferry terminal maintenance...and some think this is a bad thing?
Based on some of the self righteous and arrogant comments from some posters on this issue it is no wonder that some of our fellow SE communities have become less and less emphatic about keeping the capital in Juneau. Perhaps Juneauites should defer to what the rest of SE Alaska thinks and be more supportive of jobs and economic development in Ketchikan and other SE communities. Redistricting comes every 10 years. Capital move votes come every 20.
just the facts Ma'am......
Velveeta - building ferries in Ketchikan doesn't necessarily equate to the money staying in the town. There isn't much produced in Ketchikan that is used in building new ships. The raw materials...and the labor....are imported. The profits aren't going to stay in town with Vigor at the helm.
Most of the larger ferries can already dock in Hoonah, Gustavus, and Kake...they just aren't scheduled there. Angoon and Tenakee are issues, but the fast ferries can and do call in Angoon now. How much service is truly needed?
Don't forget - the ferries have to get to the smaller communities before they can dock. That means nothing smaller than Leconte to deal with winter conditions...and that can be marginal during really bad storms.
The reality of the AMHS budget (look online for the annual traffic report) is that the summer-time traffic from the lower 48 pays a large share of the system's costs...not the short haul runs within Southeast.
Cost efficiencies revolve around larger car decks, and more passenger capacity. It is a balancing act to keep the system stipends as low as possible, while still providing service to the smaller communities. The crews like serving the smaller communities, as this is REAL Alaska, and they can see the benefits that the ferries bring to the small places.
another blunder in Juneau
Years of planning and developing a schedule to add or replace vessels in the ferry system fleet is now all time wasted. All so we can support an out of state owner of the in state shipyard. I'm suppose to believe in all this process the latest cost factors just appears without warning.
The Alaska fleet is aging and costing millions to upgrade and keep up with various safety regs. The Tusty sits in a yard at Seward for six months of overhaul becasue it replacement will not be built. Meanwhile the resident in South Central have limited service to a few of the ports serviced by the Tusty as the Kennicott can not dock at many port in South Central. Service out the chain is nonexistent for six months of the year while the major crab fisheries in Dutch go on.
Now the plan is to built two ferries that will never be able to serve more than a portion of the vessel needs as these two smaller ships will not have ocean going ratings. This sure does not appear to be a way to expand ferry services to coastal communities in other than South East Alaska.
He next step will be to start all over again in another five year process of designing a larger vessel for the fleet. This will certainly cost millions for the design phases and with every year the construction cost of such a vessel will increase. In those five year the cost the 350 foot vessel being put off today as a cost savings will be surpassed by the added cost for one in the future. Five years from now the cost issue will be no better than it is today: it never saves by putting off till the future what needs to be done today.
villagevelveeta...
Well said! Thanks!
He won't be around for this
He won't be around for this project regardless so he shelving it. It makes him look good to hard lines conservatives by giving money back and not pulling the trigger on this project. He's setting up for his senate seat race. Sorry gov, no need to explain your positions, we don't trust you at all after the last two years. I'm still waiting to hear him address the outright lies his office was spreading about oil production and the life time frame of our pipeline...
I sure hope he runs for senate, even if he wins at least he'll be in DC and not here.
Look at the latest census, almost every single southeast alaska city is shrinking while juneau is growing. People are realizing that there is nothing in hoonah of other small villages. You can't keep your children there and why would you want to? Each time a ferry stops in kake I've never seen more then 10 people get on or off. I'm pretty sure making that stop at all is not worth the $2000 their tickets are worth. So ramping up and providing more service to these small communities aren't really a concern as long as we do provide some service.
Woohoo velveeta! Sometimes
Woohoo velveeta!
Sometimes it's hard for the sanctimonious to see the forest for the trees...
AMHS bumper sticker....
"This is the earliest we've been late."
Interesting
Only a month ago the Parnell Administration was telling the Marine Transportation Advisory Board that the project is "keeping on track for a July design completion". What happened?
I have a hard time believing that in such a short time they discovered that the budget was blown and had already come up with the 120 foot plan. No, they had already jettisoned Plan A and were working on Plan B while they were blowing smoke up the MTAB's ___.
Additionally, just last month AKDOT was saying that Alaska Ship and Drydock had first dibs on the project, but the final selection of the shipyard wouldn't happen until the design was complete, and that it would be built anywhere that offered the best value. This seems to directly contradict Parnell's claims that he turned down federal money so he could guarantee that the project was built in Ketchikan.
And Velveeta, the entire justification of the project was to serve 'intermediate routes' like upper Lynn Canal and Ketch to Prince Rupert. If they had intended for these ferries to be used solely for Angoon and Hoonah, then why did they do a 350' design inn the first place? No...Parnell's trying to rewrite history, with the help of his loyal shills (that would be you).
You see, Empire, THIS is the kind of story that warrants some investigative journalism from the leading newspaper in Southeast. This switcheroo stinks to high heaven. Parnell's story has more holes than my Chinese Xtratuffs. But given the obvious leanings of your masters in Georgia, I won't hold my breath.
Lat is right
The smaller ships, Aurora and LeConte, are not the ones most in need of replacement...it's the Taku (which was pegged for decommission back in '03) and the Malaspina (which can't meet SOLAS requirements). The Taku (352' long) already visits Hoonah and Kake, so the 350' Alaska class will easily dock in those ports as well as Gustavus which is now taking the Kennicott.
What smells most in everything is the way all this is being pushed toward Vigor. Vigor taking the Ketchikan Shipyard gives them an edge in bidding for the contract, but there's no guarantee they would actually use Ketchikan to build. I suspect that Parnell's rejection of federal money has more to do with steering the contract than it does pushing for Alaska jobs...
Lattie
Its raining!!
Smaller does not necessarily
Smaller does not necessarily equate with 'more efficient'. If small boats cannot do the job, then 2 small boats probably can't either. We need to scrap these so called plans and start over. Traveling between Ketchikan and Juneau takes about 22 hours. That means these boats need staterooms. At a minimum, they should have reclining chairs. Not the airline type chairs some current ferries have. What is this governor thinking?
Challenging senate seat after
Challenging senate seat after he secures the unreasonable inexcusable money gift to big oil. That's what he's thinking.
@Paul Nowlin
Oddly, those "imported workers" you speak of have been in Ketchikan actively operating a thriving shipyard for a number of years. I suppose that just like you, they were "imported". Unlike you, they have probably been here a while.
The labor to complete this sort of project is already in place and for the large part, has been for quite a while. As far as costs go, trot yourself out to Auke Bay and have a look at that Marvel of modern inefficiency that is lashed to the dock every night and on many days during the winter season. It was "federally funded" and built by Derecktor Shipyards in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The list of problems with this ferry is so long that it is almost unbelievable and its fuel burn rate per passenger mile is astoundingly high.
Agreed, AH HA
Keeping jobs in Southeast is a positive goal. But building the wrong ferries is not, as you stated above. So build the 350' ferries that we need, and build them in Ketchikan.
Governor Parnell shouldn't punish Southeast because he made a political decision to return the federal money.
@AH HA
If I am mistaken and that ship yard can already build a large ferry, then I apologize for my ignorance. My only problem was I hate to see the jobs outsourced, so I am very happy that I am incorrect and the money would go into an all-Alaskan workforce. Believe me Alaskan jobs are important to me, I would like S.E. to continue improving for my little nephews and nieces that are getting older everyday. However, you are incorrect about me. I am not an import, I have been here since birth, and my family has been here since before statehood.
I still disagree about the plan to create smaller ferries for Alaskan waters, but I stand corrected on the need to import employees. Admittedly in hindsight it was foolish of me to comment on that when I am not too familiar with the Ketchikan shipyard's capabilities. However, you could try and be a bit more cordial, we are all part of the same community here, S.E. Happy Holidays neighbor.
My appologies
I get a little tense when I start hearing the same folks who were active proponents of the two fast ferries try to trash the governor over this proposed ship. Knowles cost the state millions buying those two boats even though it was well known that they would never be able to serve the intended purpose.
Maybe this is not going to be everything we wished for but it's going to have to be pretty awful to be as bad a deal as Knowles got us into with the two fast ferries.
Great move Sean
@AH Ha:
I too remember the Knowels mess. Robin Taylor tried to get people to understand that the fast ferry design was a failure in the waters of British Columbia. Not many listened.
Now we are saddled with 2 boats that work 5 months of the year, turn back in minor windy weather and can't keep their special engines running between design service periods (engines that has to wait for repair parts to be machined). In addition to that there is the new expense of a law suit filed against the manufacturer and the continued wasteful fuel use.
Sounds like Sean is on the right path to improving SE transportation and our local economy all in one more. Now, if we could just get a road out of town...
I also like the idea of returning the Federal dollars. I like to see us off the Federal teat altogether and look seriously at independence.
Fast ferries were indeed a failure for the Upper Lynn Canal.
Lots of folks were to blame for that.
And the LeConte routinely gets cancelled because of weather in the Upper Lynn Canal. That's why we need no new experiments with "smaller" ferries.
A 40-vehicle capacity as proposed for these "small" ferries is insane for the busiest route in the system that is always full in the summer, frequently full in the off-season, and pays for itself operationally. And how can Parnell know costs for the new small ferrries when they haven't even been designed yet???
With two mid-size, Alaska-class ferries, we were on the right track to investing in a reliable, safe, flexible AMH system for the long-term.
Turning down federal money caused a huge delay and led to increased costs because the project couldn't be put to bid. This move by Parnell smells of back-room deals with contractors.
Face it. Parnell doesn't know squat about ferries and doesn't care about SE either.
Communities in SE from Haines to Skagway to Sitka to the villages to Ketchikan need to unite and send a strong message to the Governor and to our SE legislators, all of whom, Republican or Democrat, I'd wager are way more competent and actually interested in public service than our Governor. The united message needs to be we need to get back on track with the 350-foot, Alaska-class ferries as originally planned.
Only the mid-size, 350 foot ferries will be safe and stable in SE weather. They also can access most smaller villages, just like the Taku can. The LeConte and Aurora can be used for those villages that need a smaller vessel. Newer mid-size vessels frees up the smaller ferries for improved service to any communities requiring smaller ferries.
@AH HA
No worries. And I in no way was trying to Parnell-bash. This is actually the first time I ever said anything negative about something he was doing. I have mentioned this before, but I met him briefly at his picnic and I thought he seemed like a good guy. I honestly do not follow his actions that closely, only occasionally when articles pop up in the paper. I disagree with the small ferries being the answer, but I do not dislike the man that came up with the plan, just because I disagree.
I understand the passion behind your words, it is a frustrating topic in S.E. I know the town is split on this as well, but I think building the road would save money. That would also free up some ferry time to be distributed to the smaller towns/villages in our community. But I understand that some people find comfort in our isolation (land-wise).
Either way, I really hope you and yours have a Happy Holiday. Take care, AH HA.
And Happy Holidays to everyone else reading these comments.
smaller ferries serve "all" communities
kmchi & lattitude. I remember the fast ferry concept being explained in one of the villages and an elder remarked that all a fast ferry did for the villages was to allow ferries to pass by the villages faster. Insightful...isn't it?
Big Ferry promoters knowingly are discriminating against smaller villages who need the ferry service not as a convenience but as their lifeline .Fair isn't it?
Two ferries for the price of one keep jobs in SE Alaska and serve Alaskans twice as much.Wise isn't it?
Besides, it is politically naive to suggest that Rep. Peggy Wilson, who chairs the House Transportation is going to vote for any plan that has the slightest possibility of taking jobs away from Ketchikan. Reality ...isn't it?
Why pit Juneau against the people of Ketchikan? Me thinks opponents to the Governors plan already lost. From these vantage points it is difficult to argue against...isn't it?
Wrong, VV
Smaller ferries do not serve ALL communities. They can't travel to many of them in the winter.
You're on drugs if you think the smaller communities are going to see more frequent service.
Build larger ferries that can serve everyone's needs. Build them in Ketchikan. I'm sure Peggy will get behind that.
Governor Parnell should go back to President Obama, hat in hand, and respectfully request that he be given the money he returned in 2010 in order to fully fund the appropriately sized ferry to serve Southeast's significant transportation needs.
But this is all turd polishing by Parnell and his shills (you)...isn't it?