Skagway committee backs ferry concept but disputes Haines’ 5–2 schedule, flags dock and charging costs

Skagway’s ferry advisory committee on a virtual call on an unspecified date heard a briefing from Caitlin Jared of Southeast Conference on a proposed high‑efficiency (HE) shuttle ferry and agreed to back the ferry concept while urging more equitable service for Skagway and additional investment in docks and shore‑side charging.

Jared, a transportation planner with Southeast Conference, told the committee that the project is split into three parts — vessel design, community outreach and a blueprint integration plan — and that the DOT design study is complete and the vessel design is roughly 10% finished. “The goal is to keep this boat under a 100 tons,” Jared said, noting that staying under that tonnage affects crewing and capacity and that batteries add complexity to the design.

Why it matters: the committee was responding to a Haines Borough draft letter that proposed five days a week of direct service to Haines and two days to Skagway. Committee members said available summer traffic data and route distances suggest a more equitable split is appropriate and urged the mayor to press for compromise language that supports the ferry while leaving schedule details open for later negotiation.

Jared described the funding and timeline constraints the committee should consider. She said the project has an FTA award of about $48,000,000 with a required 20% local match for construction funds, and that the vessel is not expected to be available until about 2028. Jared also told the committee that utility work and shore‑side charging are central unknowns: Skagway’s grid has some overnight charging capacity but currently lacks fast midday charging, meaning the vessel may need to operate in hybrid mode or rely on shore‑side energy storage to support multiple daily runs.

Committee members pressed operational and equity questions. Brendan, who provided a quick navigational distance check, argued the two direct routes should be treated differently because Oak Bay–Haines measures roughly 62 miles while Oak Bay–Skagway is closer to 71 miles; he said that distance and historical demand make a 5–2 split “not really equitable to Skagway.” Committee member Dennis Busan summarized the data review by saying the traffic split in summer is about 42% to Skagway and that a unilateral 5–2 schedule would not mirror historic summer patterns.

Infrastructure costs were raised repeatedly. Jared said an estimate used for a PIDP (Port Infrastructure Development Program) application to add a stern‑load dock in Haines was about $48,000,000, and she gave an approximate figure of $88,000,000 for replacing Skagway’s float. She also noted earlier shipyard cost estimates in the range of $90,000,000 for an IFA‑style vessel in today’s market and mentioned an example of Puerto Rico building smaller diesel vessels for about $40,000,000 each.

The committee discussed docking configurations after Jared explained that Skagway’s municipal plan to add large dolphins for Coast Guard and cruise‑sized vessels could leave too little room for the commuter ferry to back in; DOT’s current approach under discussion would add a stern ramp in Haines while Skagway would remain a side‑load facility unless the float/layout is reconfigured.

No formal vote was taken on the Haines letter. Chair Jan Rentmore said she would refine committee bullet points into a draft position for the mayor and the assembly and circulate it for comment. “I will finesse this and talk with the mayor,” Rentmore said, asking members to send edits and traffic backup (Dennis agreed to verify the traffic numbers).

What’s next: the chair will produce a revised set of bullet points and a draft response for the mayor and the assembly; the committee recommended supporting the ferry concept while urging negotiation on schedule details and noting the need for explicit planning and funding for dock replacement and shore‑side charging.

Sources and attributions: quotes and technical details in this article come from the committee’s virtual meeting and the briefing by Caitlin Jared of Southeast Conference (speaking transcript entries SEG 049–SEG 191 and related discussion). Other participants who spoke in the meeting are identified by name where given (Jan Rentmore, Dennis Busan, Brendan) or by functional role when no full name was provided.