JUNEAU -- The Walker administration told legislators Tuesday it plans to continue working on the new 50-mile road out of Juneau despite putting the $574 million effort on a earlier list of megaprojects it was halting.
Department of Transportation Commissioner Marc Luiken said that by completing the ongoing studies of the Juneau Access Improvement Project, it would take the proposed highway to its "logical next step" but make no commitment to going any further.
"It will give some time to do a really thorough analysis one more time before we come up with a final decision," Luiken said.
DOT released a draft of a new environmental impact statement last fall for the project that would shorten the ferry trip between Juneau and its Lynn Canal neighbors of Haines and Skagway.
The release of the draft EIS resulted in an outpouring of public comment, and the department is now reviewing the information in those comments as it prepares a Record of Decision, the final step in the process.
Luiken said completing the Record of Decision, and the information it would provide, would be the logical stopping point. It will cost about $800,000, already appropriated, and take about a year, he said.
House Transportation Committee Chair Rep. Shelley Hughes, R-Palmer, was dismissive of the volume of comments.
"Were many of those out of state?" she asked.
The department said more than 36,000 of the approximate 42,000 comments came as electronic form letters generated by Earthjustice, a San Francisco-based environmental group with an office in Juneau.
Walker administration budget director Pat Pitney agreed that continuing to the "logical pause point" of a Record of Decision was a good idea.
"What that does is preserves all of the work today and allow us several years to decide" the future of the project, she said.
Luiken said that an Army Corps of Engineers permit obtained by Alaska expired Jan. 31 without the road being constructed. But a completed EIS will remain valid for several years, during which time the state would be able to go forward with the project, he said.
At the Transportation Committee hearing Tuesday, the usual supporters and opponents of the road turned out. Juneau appears somewhat evenly divided on the road, while opposition is stronger in Haines and even stronger in Skagway.
Early on in the decades-long battle over the road, environmental concerns were a main point of contention, but as state finances dwindle, the cost of the road has come under new scrutiny.
Economist Gregg Erickson, working for the Skagway Marine Access Commission, questioned the cost benefit of the road, pointing out that studies commissioned as part of the EIS showed a cost benefit ratio of 0.28, meaning that for every dollar the government spends on the project there is a public benefit of 28 cents.
Such analysis is used to compare projects to one another and prioritize which should be built, but that nothing below 1.0 should be built, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Erickson said.
"Here we have a project that's so far below 1.0 that it's almost amazing that it's still on the table," he said.
Skagway Mayor Mark Schaefer said the road shouldn't be a priority.
"Maintaining our existing roads and replacing mainline ferries should be the department's top priority," he said.
Juneau business leaders and union representatives spoke of the economic boost the construction period and the road itself would bring to Juneau, which Erickson acknowledged.
Wayne Jensen, chair of Juneau's Alaska Committee, the city's official group supporting the capital, said the road would make it easier for Alaskans to get to their capital.
Former DOT official and Juneau road advocate Murray Walsh said that it made sense for a new administration to pause to review the big project, but urged that opponents not be allowed to use cost concerns to stop a needed project.
"Don't let them hijack an understandable need for review," Walsh said.
Luiken said total funding available for the project is $202 million, of which $154 million came from the federal government and $48 million was appropriated from the state general fund.
Luiken said that by completing the EIS, Alaska could reduce the chances the federal government could demand a refund of money that's already been spent.
"If we don't continue with the EIS, how much are we talking about needing to pay back?" Hughes asked.
"We could be looking at a $27 million bill," Luiken said.
Juneau road opponent Emily Ferry said it was unlikely the state would be required to refund any federal money to the state if a project is determined to not be cost-effective. That's the whole ideal behind requiring the EIS to look at such issues, she said.