The Haines Borough Assembly last week revisited the question of burying utility lines downtown, in regards to the upcoming rebuilding of Third Avenue.

The assembly had a similar discussion last summer after Alaska Power and Telephone relocated several large power poles during reconstruction of Front Street, leading some residents and assembly members to complain about view obstruction.

The assembly voted 3-3 at its Jan. 28 meeting to incorporate the burial of lines into the design of the Third Avenue project, which will resurface the road from Main Street to the Old Haines Highway.

Mayor Stephanie Scott broke the tie, opposing what would have been a step toward burial of the lines. Assembly members Dave Berry, George Campbell and Diana Lapham were also opposed.

Alaska Power and Telephone quoted burial of all the utility and communication lines from Main Street to Old Haines Highway at $575,000, while burying the conduit alone would cost about $230,000, said public facilities director Carlos Jimenez.

Adding design of the utility burial to the bid advertisement would likely cost 8 to 10 percent of the total, putting the design cost at about $57,000, Jimenez said.

The $1.2 million project currently doesn’t have enough funding for the two “add-ons” that have already been designed: re-pavement of the administration building’s parking lot and improvements to areas around the Senior Center. Those would run about another $700,000 combined, Jimenez said.

In an interview Monday, Scott said she just couldn’t justify the expense at this time.

“It’s not the expense per se; it’s the expense relative to all the other needs in the community. I’m just so aware of all the other needs and everybody’s desire for relief from taxes. I just don’t know if this is the will of the community, to spend the money,” she said.

Assembly member Berry appeared confused as to why the assembly was even having the discussion, because he said the price tag was clearly outside of what the borough can afford.

“We don’t have the money, so how are we going to justify to the populous of this wonderful borough that we’re going to spend money we don’t have?” he asked.

Assembly member Debra Schnabel said she was “truly disappointed” the assembly wouldn’t vote to merely design the burial of the lines and receive a more accurate estimate from companies who decide to place a bid.

“I am willing to pay $50,000 to at least have something to consider when the bids come in… Then is the time to say we can’t afford it, in my opinion. Not now,” Schnabel said.

Assembly member Jerry Lapp agreed, and said in an interview Monday that now is as good a time as any to spend the money, since the road will already be torn up for the road improvement project.

“If you don’t bury them right now, you’ll never get them buried,” Lapp said.

Scott researched the issue of above-ground versus below-ground utility line costs and came across a report by Hi-Line Engineering, which offers planning, mapping and design services to the electric utility industry throughout the country.

She forwarded the report to chief fiscal officer Jila Stuart, who found the economic analysis of the two systems – overhead and below ground – particularly interesting.

“It’s no contest. It’s definitely more expensive to bury the lines. You can’t make an economic argument to bury the lines. It’s aesthetic,” Stuart said.

According to the report, even when taking into account the reduction in tree-trimming costs, reduction in vehicle accidents (from hitting power poles) and reduction in outages and storm damage, burying lines doesn’t come close to justifying itself economically.

“All the states that have recently studied and analyzed the cost compared to the savings have the same conclusion: undergrounding cannot be justified based on economics,” the report said.

Stuart said she isn’t for or against burying the lines one way or the other, but she wants elected officials and residents alike to maintain perspective when making big financial decisions.