Handling of ferry situation inept

To the editor,

I am so frustrated by the entire M/V Susitna debacle. The borough trusted Ketchican Drydock to build a catamaran style ferry allegedly capable of withstanding heavy weather conditions, big tides and ice. Once the borough started hemming and hawing about cost overruns, general feasibility and functionality, the vessel was left at the shipyard, now sustaining major engine room damage from water pouring down the stacks. Where is the shipyard's culpability in not covering the stacks? It's common practice, when a vessel is docked for an extended period of time, to use buckets to keep rain from causing damage like what happened to the Susitna. In case nobody has noticed, average annual rainfall in Ketchican is 150+ inches a year. I’m sure the yard has security people whose job is to, at least, weekly walk though the engine room, putting engines on line, checking gauges, general troubleshooting. I think Ketchican Drydock should be held liable.

Also, why is this boat, literally, being gifted to Philippines Red Cross at a great loss, yet our Alaska Marine Highway System is in desperate need of at least two ferries to accommodate SE routes?

One more thing, anybody that stands in Anchorage and looks at Point Mackenzie as a stone's throw away? Please drive from Point Mac to Wasilla on a dark January night. Please remember, there are essentially no basic services for many miles. Hope you got gas in Anchorage, have a spare tire, a jack, a heavy coat, maybe even an extra battery. At least, you need jumper cables. I think our borough needs some jumper cables to give a brain boost.

Barbara Jean Dinneen

Wasilla