Senate OKs Knik Arm bridge bill

JUNEAU — It was once known as a Bridge to Nowhere and brought the state an instant national reputation as a freeloader.

Today, that 1.7-mile proposed bridge that would span the Knik Arm of Cook Inlet’s and connect Anchorage and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is a step closer to construction.

The Senate approved a financing plan that would no longer consider a private entity as a partner with the state. And the prospect of a federal earmark has long faded with the scrutiny that came with it.

Instead, funding could now come from a low-interest federal loan, then a mix of state bonds, federal grants and a contribution from the state’s treasury.

The Senate’s approval of House Bill 23 came on a 16-4 vote. But because the bill reflects a different financing approach than what the House approved, the legislation returns to the House for a concurring vote.

After the approval, Senate President Charlie Huggins, of Wasilla, said he believes the bridge would be a prudent long-term investment.

“This legacy project will change the entire make-up of Southcentral Alaska,” Huggins said. “This bridge exemplifies the kind of strategic infrastructure we need to bring economic growth and stability for our families and the entire state of Alaska for generations to come.”

The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Mark Neuman, of Big Lake, was ill over the weekend and not available for comment. But he provided the following written statement to the Frontiersman.

“The Senate passing HB 23 with a vote of 16 to 4 tells me that we found the right financing to move this project forward,” Neuman said. “That’s what the process is about, working with others to answer questions and find the sweet spot in which people have confidence in what we are doing.

“This legislation will provide access to more economic housing for many families and shorten commute time to and from work. More importantly, completion of this project makes our roads safer for hardworking Alaskans.”

Supporters believe the project will bring several benefits to the region, including affordable housing on both sides of the bridge, construction jobs, a shorter commute for some, and increased safety that comes with reduced traffic congestion.

Sen. Anna Fairclough, of Eagle River, added more during the floor debate.

“If people aren’t sitting in traffic,” she said, “we have a better air quality position for the people of Alaska.”

But bridge critics say those benefits aren’t enough. They point to the lack of financial certainty over revenue projections on the toll road as a reason to be wary. The potential for the huge expense of the project to channel limited money away from other more pressing needs is also a concern.

Despite the passage of HB 23, there is still no guarantee the controversial project will move forward. The Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority must first convince the federal government to provide $350 million in low-interest loans under the government’s Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act.

The government has turned down KABATA several times for a TIFA loan, and a long-awaited and overdue traffic study must be completed in order to obtain that financing, which would be repaid entirely through toll revenue.

If the loan is approved, the next part includes $300 million from federal receipts. That features $55 million in the current capital budget, which includes $5 million in state match from the general fund. The third component comes from the $300 million in bonds to be repaid by the state over 20 years, or up to $25 million a year.

Sen. Hollis French, of Anchorage, wasn’t sold. He cited the ongoing efforts at upgrading the Port of Anchorage, a project that has seen huge cost overruns.

“This project will cost twice what you think it will,” French said. “I think the toll revenue will be half of what you think it will be. The last time we’ve seen a cost estimate was 2007. Costs go up quite a bit.

“There are the unknowns of operating in the clay, the mud, the glacial silt of real estate. It’s a difficult area to work in. Ask the Port of Anchorage what it’s like to do a big construction project there. It’s hard to overstate just how much that project went wrong and how much it blew up.”

Golovin Sen. Donny Olson agreed.

“I believe this is a good project. It’s something that has to be done,” he said. “The issue I have right now is now is not the time. As we go to troubling economic times, what I see are storm clouds are not gathering on the financial horizon, the storm is already here.”

Still, some skeptics became converts.

One was Palmer Sen. Mike Dunleavy, who weighed in briefly to address the bottom line. “It’s a project that will pay for itself,” he said.

Freelance reporter Steve Quinn is a veteran Alaska journalist who formerly covered state government for the Associated Press.