Residents and conservationists urge caution as assembly considers larger dock funding and Lutak Inlet tours

The Hainesborough Assembly heard more than a dozen public comments May 12 on a proposed resolution tied to the PIDP grant and commercial tours in the Lutak/Chilkoot area, with residents urging the borough to prioritize wildlife and local needs over an expanded dock design.

Richard Buck, a Lutak resident, said Lutak is primarily a residential area and “we should not be on the to-see list of sightseeing boats.” Several other residents and stakeholders told the assembly that boat-based wildlife tours risk stressing bears and other wildlife, displacing animals, and increasing human–bear conflict.

Kip Kamoyan told the assembly that the resolution (26-05-1240) — which references $11,250,000 in available funds — conflicts with the option the assembly selected 14 days earlier (Option 1A). Kamoyan warned that pursuing a fully encapsulating dock design would likely require an environmental impact statement and could delay or jeopardize the PIDP grant, leaving the borough without funding or a dock: “Any significant change to Option 1A… would likely require EIS that would undoubtedly take months, thus jeopardizing the raised grant.”

Multiple speakers flagged a precise $37,472,390.63 estimate for a full rebuild. Eric Holly asked staff to audit the figure and noted that in 2024 a full encapsulation estimate had been posted in the $30–$35 million range; Jessica Plockta warned the $37.5 million figure “goes way beyond what we know we need” and risks compromising federal grant approvals and the public-permitting process monitored by MARAD.

Public commenters also pressed for clearer local priorities. Deborah Schnabel told the assembly that Hainesborough has underused its economic-development fund (Fund 23) and urged the borough to invest the vested Fund 23 balance in a professional economic-development position to build administrative capacity and public trust rather than “chasing a mega dock fantasy.” Sebastian Kolbeg proposed reallocating the same funding to create a local economic-development department to produce white papers and consistent analyses to guide decision-making on cruise-dock proposals.

The mayor read a May 12 letter from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game that warned boat tours “would add another layer of pressure” to bears in the Chilkoot River corridor, asked whether a 1,000-foot buffer from shore is sufficient, and questioned who would enforce any distance limits in the permit application.

The assembly did not adopt a new dock scope or rescind the earlier Option 1A decision at the meeting. The PIDP item was moved on the agenda to follow the manager’s report so the council could hear related discussion earlier in the session. Several speakers asked staff to clarify the $37.5 million figure and to summarize how any larger scope would affect grant timing and permitting before the assembly takes further action.

What’s next: The assembly scheduled additional discussion and directed staff and managers to provide clarification on cost estimates, grant timing, and permitting consequences before moving forward with changes that would broaden the project scope.