Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Preservation Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission and public raise concerns about SS Nenana repairs and borough project management
Summary
Public commenters and commissioners criticized how recent work on the SS Nenana has been scoped and managed, citing water damage during waterproofing work, questions about contracting and funding, and calls to pursue alternative approaches such as foundation-led restoration or CLG grant support.
Commissioners and public speakers at the March 4, 2025, Fairbanks North Star Borough Historic Preservation Commission meeting raised detailed concerns about the management and scope of recent restoration work on the SS Nenana riverboat, urging the borough to revisit its strategy, improve contracting safeguards and consider alternative funding or delivery approaches.
Patricia (Trish) Schmidt, a volunteer with Friends of the SS Nenana, described fundraising and repair needs for the riverboat’s bow and upper decks and reported that volunteers and community donors have contributed to several projects. Schmidt said the boat is an important tourism draw and that work this season will include repairing the stern wheel and other deck elements.
A commissioner and several public speakers detailed what they said were shortcomings in the borough’s capital‑project approach. The commission heard that earlier large appropriations for the boat were reduced during project development, that the project lacked a formal scoping phase after funds were appropriated, and that two previous bid attempts were unsuccessful. The speaker stated that a later, much smaller contract reopened the cargo deck last summer at a cost the speaker characterized as about $122,000; the speaker questioned whether the larger prior scopes and bids were appropriately targeted to the immediate public‑safety and access needs.
Members of the public and commissioners also recounted an incident described as contractor work that left intact historic tongue‑and‑groove decking exposed to rain for an extended period, after which interior finishes sustained greater water damage than had occurred in decades. The commission was told the contractor removed older waterproofing layers and plywood, then left the exposed decking during wet weather; the speaker said contract specifications called for protecting construction that would remain but reported no current corrective obligation for the contractor to repair the resulting interior damage.
Commissioners and public speakers described several delivery models that had been used or might be used: (1) partnership with a private foundation (previously used), (2) seasonal Parks & Recreation crews who performed extensive work in past years, and (3) the current Public Works capital‑project approach. Speakers suggested the foundation or dedicated seasonal crews had produced more work for lower net cost in prior campaigns and recommended the borough reconsider its approach and consult preservation standards, specifically the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, where appropriate.
The commission requested better communication with the mayor’s office and Public Works, asked staff to explore arranging a field visit for commissioners to inspect the SS Nenana, and recommended the borough consider preservation‑oriented contracting language and oversight to protect historic materials during work. No formal action was taken; commissioners said they would seek continued dialogue with the administration and public works to clarify scope, costs and preservation standards.
