Old contractors and old designs are out on the Lutak Dock; a new adviser bearing a new plan may soon be coming in.
Roughly a month ago, the borough terminated its contracts with Turnagain Marine and owner-adviser R&M Consultants. As the two firms went out the door, so too did Turnagain’s design for the dock and plan for moving through the project.
Now the Haines Borough is putting the owner-adviser position out for competitive bid — a position that will play a key role in getting the borough to a new design and builder. That’s a change of plans after the borough assembly had approved discussing a contract for the position with engineering firm Moffatt & Nichol.
The manager had recommended bypassing competitive bidding in favor of direct negotiation with Moffatt & Nichol due to the firm’s qualifications and limited time available. Assembly members and harbormaster Henry Pollan were broadly in agreement with her recommendation.
“It’s my opinion and the opinion of everyone I reached out to that Moffat and Nichol is the most equipped in our area to do this and has the best record of doing so for design builds,” harbormaster Henry Pollan said at an assembly meeting last week.
At some point since last week’s assembly meeting, after speaking with MARAD, the federal agency responsible for much of the dock’s funding, borough decision-makers reversed course.
“We looked at what MARAD had in their competitive bidding exemptions, and in our initial conversations (MARAD) said it was doable, but it became clear that it would be too cumbersome,” Pollan said Tuesday.
“For public clarity, and to move forward as quickly as possible, we will put it out for public bid.”
Borough manager Alekka Fullerton did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
Pollan said he had finished a draft of a request for proposal that could be advertised to potential bidders as soon as it had approval from Fullerton.
Moffatt & Nichol vice president Shaun McFarlane said Tuesday his firm did not submit a fee proposal before the borough changed course, and plans to enter a bid once the request for proposal goes public.
By code, the borough is required to select the lowest bidder in competitive bidding, unless that bidder was overruled by assembly vote, with specific justification based on the bidder’s qualifications.
At the moment, that makes it seem likely that Moffat & Nichol could still end up as the borough’s advisors, given that borough staff have been adamant they are uniquely qualified.
Once a bid is accepted and a contract is signed, the process of redesigning and rebuilding the dock can begin, though this time with less time and less money.
While a future advisor won’t design or build the dock, they’ll be responsible for much of the work needed to get the dock to an eventual designer and builder.
The borough plans to follow a specific new process called “design-build” procurement.
When speaking at the recent borough meeting, McFarlane laid out what that process could look like, at least if Moffatt & Nichol is chosen.
The advisor and borough would first develop a concept that “contains all the must-haves (for an eventual dock) but doesn’t get to the point of saying how it will work structurally,” McFarlane said.
“What’s going to be important to the community is how the dock performs and the utility of the dock, not the size of the tie rods — leave that up to the designers,” McFarlane said at the same meeting.
The concept will be informed by “community engagement” opportunities, though borough officials have not said exactly what that will entail.
That will be the main point residents will have to weigh in on; a key difference between design-build procurement and the previous process with Turnagain — called progressive design-build — is opportunities for borough intervention in the design.
“Progressive design-build allows the owner to have some additional input into the concept along the way,” McFarlane said earlier this month. “That can be a bit of a double edged sword. There’s often an appetite that develops to go back and rethink things that could’ve and should’ve been put to rest at the concept development stage. I think given the different ideas that you have with the community, a more straightforward design-build is the best way forward.”
Once complete, the advisor’s concept would be put out for another round of competitive bidding to other firms. The winning firm in that bidding process would be responsible for a design to move the concept to a structural plan. Then they would build their design.
There has been some early indication about where Moffatt & Nichol, at least, stands on the range of plausible designs. McFarlane, the Moffatt & Nichol Vice President, told assembly members at their committee-of-the-whole meeting two weeks ago that encapsulating existing dock sections could be a way to take advantage of what McFarlane called “remaining life left in the structure.”
McFarlane also spoke to ship sizes, which has been a point of contention in the community. “One of the things that probably goes away is the opportunity to handle much larger vessels,” he said, in response to a question about whether building a new dock was possible, given the limited time and money.
Some in the community have said plans in the old Turnagain design to accommodate much larger barges were to facilitate mineral-ore shipment.
How much money
and how much time?
There isn’t a definitive answer to either question, just that both are dwindling.
The pot of money originally dedicated to the project in 2021 totalled roughly $25,600,000. That comprised just over $3.2 million in state funding, $2.4 in municipal funds, and then the heavy-hitter — the $20 million federal RAISE grant awarded to the borough that year.
While the $20 million federal grant has been held aside for the borough, the money hasn’t officially been handed over. Now, there’s worry the entire sum could disappear.
“There’s about 10 or 12 different ways this gets derailed and we lose the $20 million,” mayor Tom Morphet said two weeks ago. “There’s about a million ways someone who wants to sink this process can sink it, and that’s because of the federal process. It’s not like the State of Alaska hands us $23 million. It’s a whole different ball game.”
“If we lose 23 million, I will leave this town with my tail between my legs,” Morphet added. “That’s the damndest thing that could happen to us.”
The borough won’t officially receive control over the money until it has a signed grant agreement in hand. That agreement is currently sitting in draft form. Before it can be signed, a number of “holes” in the agreement have to be filled, borough manager Alekka Fullerton said.
Filling those holes, Fullerton said, will start with settling on a new dock design and submitting documentation to MARAD outlining its specifics and budget for construction. Then, the borough will have to complete the permitting process for the design, including the already two-and-a-half year-long Section 106 review.
Under the conditions of the grant, all those tasks have a hard deadline of Sept. 30, 2027 – 22 months from now. If the grant agreement isn’t signed before that deadline the money will be taken away.
Twenty-two months could mean a sprint to finish before the deadline. Once the borough conducts its public process and settles on requirements for a design, it would take Moffatt & Nichol three to four months, as estimated by McFarlane two weeks ago, to then put those specifications out to bid. The winning bidder will then have to develop their design for the dock, which is a prerequisite for some of the permitting, Fullerton said.
Once the permitting does start, control of the permitting timeline is in the hands of federal agencies. The inner workings of those agencies seems to be somewhat of a black box to borough decision makers.
McFarlane, too, cautioned assembly members to expect delays with permitting. “Don’t get me started on MARAD,” he said, speaking about recent MARAD permitting on another recent Moffatt & Nichol project in the state.
Fast-forward 22 months — even if the grant agreement is successfully signed, the borough won’t have the full $25,600,000 to put toward construction.
According to a memo from borough harbormaster Henry Pollan, a significant chunk — one-fifth of the available funding — will be set aside for contingency funds.
In addition, $310,000 has already been paid to former dock contractor Turnagain Marine, including for some permitting which will likely have to be redone for a new design and paid for again — at least in part. Fullerton said she hopes the borough can “recoup some costs and just amend (the existing permitting) rather than completely start over,” but it “depends on how much the scope changes.”
The borough has also paid $148,949.89 to former dock owner-advisor R&M Consultants, borough finance officer Jila Stuart said, and will have to dedicate an as-yet undetermined amount to the new dock owner-advisor.
For the money and time already spent, decision makers have at least gotten something in return: a sense of the challenges ahead.
“I don’t know that we fully appreciated when we started this project that it was a community project much more so than just a borough project,” Morphet said recently. “This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to get this dock fixed… let’s not let what’s perfect get in the way of what’s good.”