[0:01] Call the meeting to order. Are you with us on the phone?

[0:08] Okay, we're expecting one other person to call in. Maybe we'll see if he's there when we get the item three. So, the quick, is this mic, the palace? Okay, we're going to do the voluntary pledge after the roll call and then we'll get to the informational presentation. Thanks on the clerk. Call the roll, please.

[0:32] So, here.

[0:34] Jen Hellerle?

[0:35] Yes.

[0:35] Jen Ho?

[0:36] Here.

[0:37] Kurt?

[0:40] Nancy?

[0:40] Yes.

[0:41] Cindy?

[0:42] Here.

[0:42] And Mark?

[0:43] Here.

[0:44] Okay, and it's now time for the voluntary pledge of allegiance.

[0:47] A

[0:51] pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for

[0:57] which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

[1:03] Okay,

[1:14] we're going to have an informational presentation on the cake access

[1:19] to the intertype projects.

[1:21] Riffus this evening on the chambers of Andy Hughes, the last of the Department of Transportation,

[1:27] Mark Schemman, Cephas Manager for the intertype project, Jason Anderson, and Tom Parker from the

[1:32] Forest Service as well as Mike Profales from Federal Highways and he's on the phone.

[1:38] Are you still with us, Mike?

[1:41] Okay, and I think what we'll do is start off with maybe an explanation from Jason Anderson

[1:48] and yourself on the federal side of things, so

[2:00] I'm going to go ahead and do it from

[2:10] here since it might be hard to hear you from the phone.

[2:12] Jason Kasey, one more thing.

[2:13] We just all came about with just, I think there's some confusion with all the interaction

[2:18] between all the agencies and I thought if we could get everybody together in one city

[2:24] and just give a presentation without questions from the public, it might clarify things a

[2:29] little bit.

[2:29] So I think if any assembly members have any questions on the status of things they should feel

[2:35] free to chime in, but we'll keep it just to that for questions at this point.

[2:40] So K. Jason, thanks.

[2:41] So my hope was just to really kind of lay out where the federal involvement is on both

[2:47] the two projects and maybe first and foremost try to address what comes up commonly about

[2:51] whether or not the two projects are connected.

[2:54] You have both looking at a similar corridor as well as other alternative routes.

[2:59] So just to sort of set the stage for more technical questions of the individuals like Mike from

[3:04] Fed Highways or Mark from Commonwealth Associates, I just wanted to lay out sort of the groundwork

[3:09] for the environmental analyses that are happening now.

[3:12] You've got two separate projects in the form

[3:14] of the CAKED Petersburg Intertile.

[3:16] That's the electrical transmission line.

[3:17] You've also got a separate project in the form

[3:19] of the CAKED access, the Federal Highways proposal.

[3:22] They have different underlying purpose and needs.

[3:24] One is to provide reduced cost power to the community of CAKED.

[3:29] The other is to improve transportation opportunities

[3:31] between or to the community of CAKED.

[3:34] Those two separate underlying purpose and need,

[3:36] when you look at the federal regulations for implementing NEPA, in other words the translation

[3:41] about how to comply with that law, it talks about three reasons why you would connect

[3:46] an action into a single environmental impact statement. Those reasons are one, if one action

[3:54] triggers the other, two, if one action cannot proceed unless the other action is taken previously

[4:01] or simultaneously, or three, if both actions are interdependent parts of a larger action

[4:07] and depend on that larger action to move forward.

[4:11] As our discussions occurred around the table with Federal Highways, the Commonwealth, the Proponents of SEPA,

[4:18] as well as the State Highway Department of Transportation.

[4:22] Sorry, let's scratch my throat.

[4:23] I don't think Glow will give you a drink of water.

[4:27] Okay.

[4:28] Oh, yeah.

[4:32] Perfect timing.

[4:35] So as we had a discussion, what we concluded is that none of those three provisions have

[4:42] been really triggered with the two projects, even though they share that similar northern

[4:46] corridor, which is in our forest plan, thank you.

[4:49] We have a transportation utility land use designation across the north end of the island which is specifically for utility and transportation systems but that's just

[5:00] One particular alternative and the forest plan does not dictate that it has to be used for either the two projects. So, from a connected standpoint, I think we've met the test that the two actions are not connected based on those different underlying purpose and needs, the direction and the implementing regulations. From there, there's a whole list of questions about coordination between the projects. Certainly the two projects and the analyses are going to have to be communicating at some point in time to

[5:31] deal with the indirect effects and potential cumulative effects of having two actions going forward in the near time, you know, sometime in the next three to five years, actually implementing actions on the ground.

[5:42] So there's going to be that discussion in the analysis. There's a great Q&A that Mike had put together. I don't know if Mike, do you want to add anything more to the presentation at this point from connectedness and relationship standpoint?

[5:53] point. No. The Q&A is in the back. I think Andy brought about 40 copies. Really useful

[6:01] information for understanding the relationship between the two projects. As the analyses

[6:05] carry forward, both, you know, with right now, the CAKed Feetersburg Intertide project is sort

[6:11] of out of the gates first. As those analyses become, you know, closer to drafts and eventually

[6:16] final environmental impact statements, you'll have a lot more technical data about the projects

[6:21] next design, costs, environmental impacts, economic impacts, et cetera.

[6:27] All right, any questions from the assembly of Jason?

[6:32] Has the Forest Service already decided that they're going to support the northern route?

[6:36] I got the impression that...

[6:38] Well, thank you.

[6:39] That's actually...

[6:40] Actually, no, our decision hasn't come forward on which one we'll support.

[6:45] Really, what it comes down to is we've already concluded in our forest plan that that is

[6:48] an acceptable location, that land use designation is acceptable location for utility and transportation

[6:54] systems.

[6:55] The four supervisors role in these two projects for the cake to Petersburg inner type project

[7:02] is to issue special use or, yeah, be a special use permit or an easement to seep for the installation

[7:10] of that line.

[7:11] So ultimately it's a decision about land use and where that land use would occur.

[7:16] So the alternative, looking at both the corridor to the north, the south central route, and

[7:21] other alternatives that the proponent is developing, the forest supervisor will ultimately

[7:27] have to weigh in on which decision or which pardon me, which alternative he feels most

[7:32] comfortable picking in terms of how it meets the purpose and need of reducing the cost of

[7:37] power to cake.

[7:39] So as far as which decision he'll pick, it's ultimately going to come down to the final

[7:43] In fact, statement, public comment, and the ability of the project to meet that particular expressed need.

[7:49] Does that answer your question?

[7:51] Mm-hm.

[7:52] Okay.

[7:53] Any other questions?

[7:54] I do have one other question, and I'm looking at the Total Project Snapshot report, which is from the state legislator in 2012.

[8:02] And they made a sort of a checklist of which agency could take the lead on which projects, and it looked like at that time

[8:10] that the anticipation was that Federal Highway and the Forest Service and State Highways would all be partners in this project.

[8:23] Why did you choose not to go in that direction?

[8:26] For the cake access project, I believe that is actually the case.

[8:31] We are selling on as a cooperating agency to the Federal Highway Administration and the Environmental Impact Statement.

[8:37] the express nature of the rest of the state is less clear to me on the kick-access.

[8:43] Thank you, Dr.

[8:46] McPome, please, Andy, indicate your name and who you represent.

[8:52] Andy Hughes, Alaska DOT, Southeast Region Planning.

[8:59] The snapshot document that's referred to here is the legislative backup document for

[9:08] for the appropriation of $40 billion.

[9:11] And that document besides identifying the

[9:18] purposes of the project and the potential justification

[9:22] for the project, it also identified several alternatives

[9:28] as to how you could go forward to proceed

[9:33] through the environmental process.

[9:34] And one of the assumptions was, well, if folks felt, if you didn't use any federal aid

[9:48] and you stayed on either one of the two easements that were conveyed already to the department

[9:57] And they're referred to as

[10:00] Section 44-07 easements. As long as the Department stayed within those easements, that we possibly

[10:07] could avoid NIPA, a federal NIPA action, however, folks at were thinking along those terms,

[10:18] was overlooking the fact that there was still a remaining federal action, and that would be

[10:23] the need to get an Army Corps of Engineers wetland permit.

[10:29] And so in the case of constructing a road in southeast, generally in the Thomas National

[10:38] Force, we usually have several federal actions, one of them being the wetlands permit, another

[10:47] one being an easement through the forest, and the last one, usually we use federal aid

[10:57] in constructing most of our road facilities.

[11:00] So in this case, we evaluated the three different courses of action, whether we went with the

[11:07] Army Corps of Engineers as a lead agency, the Forest Service as a lead agency, or federal

[11:13] highways as a lead agency and we chose to use some federal aid, highway aid, to get

[11:22] us through the NEPA process. We're actually leveraging the 40 million with federal highway

[11:30] dollars as well. And so federal highways is the lead agency in this case. Cooperating agencies

[11:38] are the Army Corps of Engineers and the Forest Service.

[11:43] So all three agencies are involved in this EIS.

[11:49] Does that answer your question?

[11:50] It does.

[11:51] It still seems like it's an expensive way

[11:53] to, because you're ending up running two separate processes

[11:56] instead of doing it as one project,

[11:58] but that's the agencies for it to decide.

[12:02] Okay, any more questions of pet highways

[12:04] or US Forest Service or DOT, yes?

[12:07] Okay. I guess there's no more presentation from those three entities. We'll have Mark

[12:14] Shinman from Commonwealth, give an overview of the intertie.

[12:20] This is the information that

[12:22] was presented as well as the K-Petersburg Intertie Steering Committee meeting in K-K-K-A

[12:27] week or so ago. I believe, isn't that correct? Yes. My name is Mark Shinman. I'm with Commonwealth

[12:32] both associates, and I'm representing SEPA.

[12:35] I'm their project manager for the cake Petersburg Intertie.

[12:40] I want to just take a few minutes to talk

[12:42] about the project itself.

[12:44] Give you a little bit of information about it

[12:46] and kind of talk you through it.

[12:48] There should be handouts available

[12:49] with copies of these slides, I think around the tables,

[12:53] so there should be available for everybody.

[12:57] The, there is a definite need for the Intertie.

[12:59] Okay, cake is an isolated electric system.

[13:03] They're completely, their only source of electricity is diesel power.

[13:07] They have no hydro.

[13:09] They're a small entity, I think their population's about 550 people.

[13:14] But with just diesel for their source of power, their electric rates are really high.

[13:19] They're about 60 cents a kilowatt hour.

[13:22] It just really hurts their economy.

[13:25] We had a meeting there a week ago that the mayor mentioned when we walked into town

[13:30] We walked into the meeting place and it was a huge gymnasium and there's one light on and the rest of the lights

[13:36] They didn't turn on because of the cost of electricity and we were early enough. We were helping them set up chairs and things

[13:42] We were going into this room and all the tables all the chairs were in this room

[13:47] And I had to use my cell phone to be able to see but apparently the people in cake are used to going around in the dark

[13:53] But and it's all because of the price of electricity they really need some low-cost power

[13:58] We have about five million dollars of funding available for the inner tie. That's enough money to get it designed to get it construction ready

[14:07] It is not enough money to build it. This money is from two grants that came from A.E.A

[14:13] So we do have enough money to get it construction ready and we're working in that direction

[14:21] We've made a lot of progress.

[14:23] There's been an MOU signed by SEPA, AEA, and IPEC,

[14:28] which is the local utility in cake.

[14:30] It basically provides that SEPA will agree to own the inner tie.

[14:36] They'll own it, they'll build it, and they'll operate it.

[14:39] Provided that there's enough funding available to get the work done.

[14:44] There's an MOU between Metle Katlin cake that has to do with hydro power,

[14:48] which will be part of the source of low cost power for cake.

[14:53] There's been a project management office established that's us to coordinate all the aspects and get it moving.

[15:00] The environmental impact statement is underway, Tetra Tech is the consultant doing that, and D-Hiddle is a consulting engineering firm. They basically have done a feasibility study, and they're in the process of updating that. So the project's moving along. The project itself, we're looking at single pole overhead wood pole construction, similar to the picture there. It'll either be 69,000 volts or 138,000 volts. We'll make that decision down.

[15:29] on the road a little bit.

[15:31] We plan to follow existing forest service roads where possible.

[15:35] There will also be a fiber optic cable installed on these poles,

[15:40] so that will enhance.

[15:42] That will be used to help operate the transmission line,

[15:45] and it will also enhance the communication sum for cake.

[15:48] We anticipate a two to three year construction process.

[15:53] The EIS is underway.

[15:55] There were public scoping meetings in April and May of 2010.

[15:58] Again, we completed the environmental field work in the fall of 2010 in the summer of

[16:04] 2011, and we submitted draft resource reports to the Forest Service in May and June of 2012.

[16:12] There are a lot of resource reports covering a lot of subjects, wildlife, aquatics, botany,

[16:18] wetlands, et cetera, et cetera.

[16:19] The Forest Service reviewed those reports and provided its comments, and we've worked with

[16:25] the Forest Service and dealt with their comments.

[16:30] We've continued to move forward.

[16:33] We've drafted chapters one and two of the draft EIS.

[16:37] That's the purpose and need and the alternatives.

[16:40] We submitted those to the Forest Service and we got some comments back.

[16:45] Their comments were really in four areas.

[16:47] They said regarding Petersburg Creek, they suggested we look at other alternatives.

[16:53] We've had a lot of input since I've been on the project. We've had a lot of input from the community about Petersburg Creek

[16:58] Seep has had a lot of input and I think the burls been involved in that so we have looked at other alternatives

[17:06] For roadless areas inventory roadless areas. We're originally planning to build rough pioneer roads

[17:13] The forest service has taken a look at that. They've said no. We have to we can't do that

[17:19] we have to use what they call shovel trails, so that means we have to use more

[17:24] helicopters for the construction, so we're moving ahead with that as an

[17:28] assumption. The Forest Service also, I think we had like eight alternatives, the

[17:33] Forest Service said to help the analysis, we need to narrow that down, fewer

[17:37] options, so we've done that, and they asked us to define a proposed action. That

[17:44] doesn't mean that's going to be the solution, but they want to propose action so

[17:48] they compare that against the other alternatives so we have defined a proposed action.

[17:54] The route alternatives, I think you're all fairly familiar with, one of the route alternatives

[18:00] we call the center south route, it's here's Petersburg, here's cake up in here, one of the

[18:06] alternatives is the center south, it goes across, it goes across Rangel Nero's Duncan Canal

[18:14] and then on up the cake, and that's one of our options.

[18:17] We've also have the northern route which leaves Petersburg and goes up north on Guperneth Island and then over to cake.

[18:26] And that's in a sense is another option.

[18:30] But the northern route has got two sub-options, you might want to call it.

[18:36] One option is when we've been looking at all along, here's Petersburg, here's the airport.

[18:41] We tap into the substation in Petersburg, which is down in here,

[18:46] come south across the southern end of the airport, and go over to the park here,

[18:53] and then lay a submarine cable up the prowlery point.

[18:58] That's one option that we're still considering, that's been an option all along.

[19:02] We've developed a new option, a new option that we've called our proposed action.

[19:09] We like this option the best.

[19:10] at this point in time. And this option would be to put in, comes out to the south end of the airport

[19:18] like we planned on the submarine route, and then put in an underground line in red. It would be an

[19:24] underground 69,000 volt line or 138,000 whatever we decide to do. It would be an underground line along

[19:32] Sandy Beach Boulevard there, and we would underground the existing wires that are already on that road. So

[19:38] So everything along there would be underground.

[19:41] We'd go up to Outlook Park, which is about here, and then we would use technology they

[19:45] called directional bore.

[19:47] It's basically a big machine that would bore under wrangle narrows, and as they board

[19:54] it under, board under there, we'd put in a 10 or 12-inch conduit, something size big enough.

[20:00] For the transmission line, for the fiber optics, and also for some distribution, should we, somebody want electricity on that side. So that's our, our new option. That's our preferred option. We've dropped the option. We were looking at an option crossing Petersburg Creek and going through Kupernoff or behind Kupernoff. We've dropped that. That's not being considered at all now. So basically is we're moving forward with the EIS. We have four alternatives.

[20:30] Alternative 1 is no action.

[20:32] Alternative 2 is the northern route with directional bore.

[20:36] That's our proposed action.

[20:39] Alternative 3 is the northern route with a submarine cable.

[20:43] Alternative 4 is the center south route.

[20:46] So those are the four alternatives that we're looking at as the EIS moves forward.

[20:52] Here's some mileage links for the different options.

[20:56] It tells you how long they are, how long some of the water crossings are that you read

[21:01] that at your leisure.

[21:04] And we're in the process of updating our construction costs too.

[21:09] Our costs were last estimated in 2010, they were done in 2010 dollars.

[21:15] And the project at the earliest would be built in 2015-16.

[21:19] So we're redoing the cost estimates assuming that many years of inflation.

[21:27] The cost estimates didn't include as much helicopter work as we have to do now with the shovel trails.

[21:34] So the cost estimates are going to go up because of the shovel trails.

[21:37] We've also contacted a lot of the vendors.

[21:40] And vendors have told us that the inflation rate for construction seems to be higher than anything else.

[21:46] but it's actually running four to five percent a year, so we've built that into the cost

[21:51] estimates.

[21:53] And the price of the submarine cable for that option has gone up too.

[21:56] We've contacted some of the submarine cable manufacturers, so we've taken a look at all

[22:00] of this and we've redone the cost estimates.

[22:02] These are the current estimates, alternative two, which is our proposed action.

[22:08] It's about $66 million.

[22:11] And so this is how much money we need to move ahead.

[22:16] this assumes it's already designed. The 5 million for design purposes isn't

[22:21] included in this. And these numbers are moving a little bit too. When we were in

[22:26] cake last week, it dawned on me that the substations five miles out of town and

[22:33] nobody, it didn't seem like anybody planned a way to get the power from the

[22:37] substation into town. So we had a gap there. So I talked to IPEC, the local

[22:43] electric utility and they said they didn't have any money to do it so we need to

[22:48] include that as a part of our project so we're looking right now at moving the

[22:51] substation closer to town so these numbers will go up I did some back of the

[22:56] envelope calculations maybe three million dollars. The next steps we're moving

[23:04] forward on the EIS that chapters one and two have been redrafted taking in the

[23:10] the last round of Forest Service comments.

[23:12] We've submitted them to the Forest Service

[23:14] for additional comments for chapters one and two.

[23:18] We're in the process of drafting chapters three and four,

[23:21] which will be the complete EIS.

[23:24] If the schedule holds, and I'm not sure it's going to,

[23:28] because of review processes, but the original plan

[23:31] if the schedule holds is we'd have the draft EIS

[23:34] available for public review in October this year.

[23:38] We hold public meetings in November of this year.

[23:42] We're planning to have a meeting here in Petersburg, and a meeting in CAKE, the two ends of the inner tie.

[23:48] And then the final EIS would be published in May of next year.

[23:55] As already has been talked about, we think the inner ties are a separate project.

[24:00] And I think Jason talked about a lot of this already, they can proceed independently of one another.

[24:06] They have specific, each has their own specific purpose and needs, the two projects,

[24:13] you know, the road, the cake access project, the inner tie project, or considering different alternatives.

[24:18] We have different time schedules, so we definitely agree they should be separate projects.

[24:24] So, any questions?

[24:28] question, because I have heard over and over again that, and it may be incorrect.

[24:34] So I'm asking you to state it now, that the power line project cannot go forward,

[24:39] unless the road project also goes forward.

[24:43] These are the costs assuming the road does not go forward.

[24:48] Okay.

[24:48] The project, the inner tie, can be built without the road, and these are the costs without

[24:54] the road.

[24:55] But it will affect the maintenance costs down the line.

[24:58] Yes.

[24:58] Okay.

[25:00] If the road were to go forward on the northern route, and our EIS process chose the northern route,

[25:07] it would bring these costs down. And it would lower our maintenance costs. But we're doing

[25:12] our EIS and the costs, assuming there's no road.

[25:19] Any other questions? The alternative for

[25:23] South Central Route is cheaper, but you don't prefer that?

[25:29] We don't. And maybe we're betting

[25:31] on the come, we're thinking that the road will come, but if the road doesn't come along,

[25:40] we may end up going that route, and that's why it's still part of the EIS and still being

[25:46] considered.

[25:47] Okay.

[25:47] And is there an alternative, the self-central route, is that in any way, go across Peter's

[25:53] Blue Creek?

[25:54] No.

[25:55] No.

[25:55] That's what I thought.

[25:56] You know, cross-rangles narrows to the south-east, and it shows it's south of the Petersburg

[26:02] sub-station quite a ways where it will tap into the existing transmission line there,

[26:08] then cross-rangle narrow, and then we'll have to cross pumpkin canal, and both of those

[26:12] will be underwater cross.

[26:13] Okay.

[26:14] That was okay.

[26:15] Thank you.

[26:15] We haven't decided if there are going to be submarine cable or a directional bore, but we'll

[26:20] have to get underneath there somehow.

[26:22] Okay.

[26:22] Thank you.

[26:25] Thank you for coming and talking to us about this and it does make a lot clearer.

[26:35] I do have a lot of questions and not all of them go to you.

[26:39] The road just seems like an impossibility because of the cost and we don't have anyone paying for the ferry service to get from here to the road.

[26:47] And I really appreciate Senator Studman who got us

[26:51] a 40 million for the road because I know the transportation,

[26:58] state transportation wants to go.

[27:00] Small fairies road, small fairies road,

[27:02] just to connect all southeast rather than having

[27:05] these big guys going around.

[27:07] So I know he was looking out for us doing that.

[27:09] But when with the road it keeps going up in cost,

[27:15] the northern route and I know it will help you out who we don't have a ferry to get to the road

[27:20] and that's in no one's budget. So it makes that kind of hard. The other thing we don't have

[27:26] is power to send a cake. So if you build this line at 60 billion plus there is any surplus power

[27:36] to send to them and your study have you found a way to get surplus power to send a cake and I know

[27:45] I don't know where I'll come from.

[27:48] There's several options and several things going on.

[27:52] MetlecatLA is moving forward with a couple of small hydro projects.

[27:57] There's already an MOU's been signed between MetlecatLA and CAKE

[28:01] that they'll work together and try and take advantage of that power.

[28:06] Should MetlecatLA be able to develop it?

[28:08] So that's one option for power.

[28:10] CEPA is looking at a couple different things too.

[28:14] They're looking at raising the Swan Lake Reservoir, they're trying to move ahead with

[28:18] that and it's ongoing and they also, and I can't remember all the right words, but

[28:27] they have gone out and advertised and asked people to bring projects to them.

[28:32] They've made a request for offers and they've sort of sent out to the world.

[28:38] you know, what can you develop? We want to buy more power. So there's a couple options in there

[28:44] that hopefully will bring more power, you know, so it's available for cake. Right now,

[28:50] there is a little bit of surplus at certain times of the year and that surplus would definitely help

[28:55] cake and turning off those diesel generators part of the time. And that's the thing because we're

[29:02] looking at between year cost, you know, depending which way you go, you know, 70 million

[29:07] plus 60 plus million for the road, plus probably another 30 million for the very terminals

[29:12] that they ever get built from one side to there.

[29:15] You know, we're easily talking 200 million to, and well, it's not the sole purpose, but

[29:21] to send power to cake.

[29:22] As your company looked at any other options that might be less than 200 million to get power

[29:27] to them.

[29:28] I'm involved in it, it's just the inner tie.

[29:31] Okay, and I don't know the cost of the road.

[29:34] We're just involved in the inner tie

[29:36] and Cephas just involved in the inner tie.

[29:39] Do you know if anyone's looking at that

[29:41] to get more inexpensive power faster to cake?

[29:46] I actually have in my hand a newsletter

[29:50] that is a Department of Energy newsletter

[29:53] and there are some planning processes in place to look at different sources of power.

[30:00] Above and beyond this power line. They're not actually at a design phase yet, but they are looking at various options. So to answer your question, yes. There are. That triggered something in my mind. Cake itself is looking at some small hydro generation. And that's a possibility. There's some lakes up behind cake, and that's a possibility. They've talked about solar. And you know, so there's lots of options. And it might not be just one thing.

[30:29] that solves the problem. It might be a little bit of hydro over the inner tie. It might

[30:34] be more efficient diesel generators or it might be, you know, cake installings to some

[30:41] small hydro. Thank you. Any more questions? Andy, would you like to?

[30:47] Could you answer any of Mr. Haverlick's questions on the road? Then we'll, we have some more

[30:57] Well, to take your questions answered.

[31:01] My main concern was, you know, the 60 million per the road is just an initial cost.

[31:08] You know, is this gentleman just managing construction costs going up 45% a year?

[31:13] So I know we're looking more than that.

[31:15] And yeah, I know the state's plan is road ferry road ferry.

[31:19] So you're really pushing that, but one, can we afford it, two, we know we can't maintain

[31:25] it in the winter because we can't take care of our present roads and we have a great crew here,

[31:30] but still you just don't have the money in three. Would you build a road if you don't have the

[31:36] money to build the fairies to get us to the road? And that should be what, about 30 mil?

[31:45] Well, first of all, as far as the overall project goes, overall project obviously will include

[31:54] a small ferry and two ferry terminals.

[31:59] Think in terms of catch can airport ferry type, only smaller ferry.

[32:05] As far as cost estimates go, we don't have any current cost estimates at the moment.

[32:13] We've, you know, we've, we've cost the things out in the past, but when it comes to cost estimates,

[32:20] that's an exercise that we will be going through after we get through the

[32:25] purpose and need and alternatives assessment process. So we're just FHWA is

[32:35] just initiating the EIS process. We're just in the beginning of scoping

[32:40] and purpose and need statement formulation and yet to come is the evaluation

[32:48] process of alternatives and costing them out, and I believe a couple two, three months possibly as much as four months, we will be back with that kind of information.

[33:06] So it's just a little premature to sort of out numbers because at this point it would be guesstimates.

[33:14] You

[33:17] think you can get the money to do this at this point? Yes, we do. Otherwise, we would

[33:23] agree. Yes. Okay. Yes. And as far as I might address, as far as maintenance goes,

[33:33] we don't see, we wouldn't be going forward with any proposal if we didn't think we could

[33:41] maintain it year round. We have, our department has vast experience in maintaining roads throughout

[33:50] the state from the Proto Bay South and in Southeast probably our most challenging road

[33:59] is the Klondike Highway. So I think we're in a good position to come up with some very good

[34:07] realistic estimates but we're not there we haven't had the time to do that

[34:15] yet we intend to and hopefully in the next three to four months we'll have

[34:21] those answers for you as far as I know you're that flush if I may the state

[34:30] draft transportation plan actually paints quite a different picture about your

[34:35] deferred maintenance backlog and your ability to attract federal money. And I'm

[34:40] curious to know how you think this road would rank on a priority list for funding

[34:45] for state and federal money, given that you've already identified you have a

[34:49] shortfall. And it's right on the web.

[34:52] Oh, that's true.

[34:58] Okay. Any other?

[35:00] Question you have a response? As far as funding goes.

[35:07] At this point, you know, that's the feature we'll tell, we anticipate that funding will become tighter. At this point, at least in Southeast Alaska, our priorities are such that we feel that we can fit this point.

[35:29] project end. Any

[35:35] more questions Mr. Hughes?

[35:39] Okay thank you. Thanks everybody for coming.

[35:41] Mr. Trafalis, do you have anything to add to this? Are you still with us?

[35:47] I'd just like to add to

[35:51] our staff for the need and any other agencies and public

[36:04] appreciate that.

[36:15] Okay thanks everybody for coming and giving this presentation and I'm sure

[36:19] will be involved in the whole process so okay

[36:27] let's take a five minute break and then

[36:32] I'm going to work from back up this stuff here in Mr. Shenman.

[41:22] Okay, we'll call the meeting back to order. Are you still with us, Kurt?

[41:30] Mr. Wal-Hunter?

[41:33] Oh, okay, I didn't mean to wake you up. Okay. Okay, we're item four on agenda approval of the minutes. There are no approval of the minutes. Yeah, amendment to the night's meeting. Is there any amendments to the night's meeting agenda?

[41:55] Could I get under a simply discussion item?

[42:13] All right. All right. We'll do that.

[42:15] So we need approval of tonight's agenda, there's no more amendments to entertain a motion for that.

[42:23] Second.

[42:23] Okay, it's been moved by Member Loginakis, seconded by Member Flint, all those in favor of approving tonight's agenda.

[42:30] Say aye.

[42:31] Aye.

[42:31] Okay.

[42:32] Now we're on to public hearings and bitter wars. We have two public hearings tonight.

[42:36] The first one is on ordinance 2013-11.

[42:39] and ordinance providing for chapter 3.18 of the municipal code entitled finance

[42:44] department, updating current language to reflect rural incorporation and providing for

[42:49] the disillusion of the finance committee for the city of Petersburg. Anybody in the audience

[42:55] want to comment on this?

[42:59] Public hearing is closed and we're on to item B and another public hearing

[43:05] on ordinance 2013-12 and ordinance providing for chapter 4.35 of the municipal code entitled

[43:13] Property Development Fund, updating current language to reflect borough incorporation

[43:18] and designating that funds from the sale or acquisition of state entitlement lands to

[43:23] be deposited into or to disperse from the Property Development Fund. Anybody in the audience

[43:31] have a comment on this? Okay, seeing none. Public hearing is closed. Is there any

[43:38] visitors views related to tonight's agenda?

[43:43] Mr. Kaye, I'm Daryl. You want to come up and...

[43:48] Mr. Mayor, I'm just here to answer any questions with the Kellop one on the phone.

[43:52] Okay. Okay, so we'll note that.

[43:56] Thank you.

[43:57] Mr. Baby, would you like to comment on your?

[44:02] Good night, thanks.

[44:05] Thank you, my name is David BB and City Councilman and would like to respond to some of the

[44:13] issues and concerns that were raised by tonight's presentation.

[44:20] This is sort of off the top of my head, so bear with me as I try and recall a fairly extensive

[44:26] of very useful and productive and appreciated presentation.

[44:36] I would have to call into question if Commonwealth associates is regarding themselves as independent

[44:45] and yet counting on, I think the term was betting on the Northern Route road that it does

[44:56] is calling the question, the...

[45:00] The independence of this EIS.

[45:05] That's perhaps one of the most striking aspects of the presentation

[45:10] that left out at me tonight, as well as the fact that prior descriptions of this dual

[45:23] current EIS process as being coordinated. And not to contradict Mr. Shinman, but I have

[45:40] an opposite anecdotal experience as a commercial fisherman who sees the city lights of cake from

[45:51] many, many miles away and it's always occurred to me that given the size of the

[45:58] community at night that they can somehow afford to leave those lights burning

[46:04] when I mean we know what the street looks like here at night in the wee hours of

[46:13] the morning and how those lights can be justified burning. So I wonder about

[46:21] Whether or not the proper lighting for this out of town visitor is somehow connected with a very different perception coming from a commercial fisherman who sees lights burning when they probably aren't necessary.

[46:41] And I am also very delighted to see that the northern route of the Intertai is going to be

[46:57] taking an underwater route. And however, as I have mentioned before, it still is sort of being

[47:06] bet upon the existence of the road which sets into motion a whole other set of circumstances

[47:14] that are clearly as, as Burrow remember, Lockerdock has pointed out, inconsistent with the

[47:23] presentations, conclusions of an annual road maintenance schedule, you know, for a community

[47:32] of 550 by the community of 3,000, it's counterintuitive and at the minimum breeds cognitive

[47:42] dissonance.

[47:45] And lastly, I wonder if there will be alternatives that truly treat the

[47:55] cake inner tie as as the possibility of having an option for alternative energy.

[48:05] Mr. Seaman didn't point out that there are also cake title.

[48:12] I should say wind power proposals being studied and see Alaska incorporated has also completed

[48:23] a study of one of the River Cathedral Falls, and so there's, you know, a great deal of

[48:31] opportunities that also include conversion of diesel-generated electrical power to natural

[48:38] gas, which is what British Columbia has pulled off already for the ferry system, et cetera.

[48:46] So this is, you know, just a minor snapshot of some of the concerns that were raised by

[48:52] tonight's presentation and I thank you for this opportunity to speak.

[48:56] Any questions?

[48:57] Thank you. Any questions of Mr. Beebe?

[49:00] Okay, thanks Dave.

[49:01] Okay, Karen, if you have a please step to the microphone and state your name please.

[49:08] My name is Karen McCullough and I just wanted to thank the borough assembly members and also

[49:15] Barry Bracken for all the work that you've done on the pesticide issue and that you're continuing

[49:20] to do.

[49:22] This is the 20th, August 13th was the 20th year anniversary of the death of my husband at that time, Gary McCullough, who was an agent orange veteran, and I'm now a grandmother, and he's very cute.

[49:40] And it's really good to know that maybe we don't have to make some of the same mistakes all over again.

[49:46] So thank you.

[49:47] Thanks. Okay, any more visitors, views related to the agenda this evening? Okay,

[49:55] seeing none, any visitors, views unrelated to the agenda. Okay.

[50:00] We've seen none of those. We'll move on to board commission and committee reports. There's none. No consent agenda, no reports of other officers and brings us to the mayor's report. And we're seeking letters of interest to fill a vacancy. The borough is seeking a letter of interest from interested residents to fill a vacancy on the hospital board. The pointee to the vacancy will serve until October 2014.

[50:27] We got an email from Bob King.

[50:29] legislative aid from Senator Begich in regards to the Annacapa being moved from Peter Spurg.

[50:37] If they were going to build 154 foot cutters, it doesn't sound like the funding's available.

[50:44] It sounds like the Annacapa is going to be here as far as he knew for this time indefinitely,

[50:50] so that's good in my mind. And then we have an attorney's opinion on the uncompensated assistance

[50:59] from a burrow assembly member, maternity Brennan,

[51:03] as his opinion is there's nothing inappropriate

[51:06] in the burrow assembly delegating one of its members,

[51:10] a particular task or task within the member's skills

[51:12] along as final decisions are reserved to the assembly.

[51:18] There's also nothing in the Alaska rules

[51:20] of professional conduct that prohibits assembly member hold

[51:25] from providing legal assistance to the burrow.

[51:28] There was one concern about insurance coverage.

[51:34] That's the only thing that I saw that was sparking the concern for me.

[51:45] But I think we should at this point just make a decision since we're talking about it,

[51:49] whether they simply would like Mr. Hogue to represent us in these issues.

[51:54] Is that Mr. Mayor?

[51:57] Yes, I would move that Mr. Hoek represents on these issues.

[52:01] Is there a second?

[52:02] Second.

[52:03] It's been moved by Mr. Havelich, seconded by a member of Flint, to let Mr. Hoek continue representing the bill without compensation, I guess you put in there for,

[52:18] I know the, I don't know how it would do us to that, I guess, to help on grievances in the discussion.

[52:26] Mr. Mayor, I just wondered do you have that insurance that you're talking about?

[52:32] No, the Arizona missions.

[52:35] No, because when I was, most of my practice in Oregon, we had mandatory insurance for

[52:41] the Oregon State Bar.

[52:43] Alaska does not have mandatory insurance.

[52:47] 80% plus of my work is for the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault.

[52:53] they provide insurance for all of those cases. I do very, very little besides that. I have just for

[53:01] giggles fired off to internet applications from out practice insurance. When I went to the

[53:11] Alaska Family Law Section meeting in April, the one agent that showed up said we don't

[53:16] to ensure part-time lawyers.

[53:21] The humor is that the applications I sent off today, the deductible that I would assume

[53:31] on any malpractice insurance would be far greater than the financial risk to the borough

[53:37] of any case I would handle.

[53:39] So in essence, I would be under any circumstance of self-insuring in my malpractice insurance.

[53:44] And Kathy, you have a comment?

[53:48] I think because he isn't elected official, he's going to be covered under the city's

[53:53] liability, just like any of your decisions, because he's working on behalf of the body.

[54:01] Remember Lagerdakis?

[54:03] Although he wouldn't be working as an elected official in that capacity, he'd be working as no.

[54:12] And so I don't know that that would be true.

[54:13] Are we talking, though, for the purpose of this vote, just for the grievances process and not beyond that, that we would discuss any further representation for the burrow at a separate time?

[54:29] Well, I had that word. I guess that wasn't in Mr. Haverlick's motion.

[54:39] I'm in support

[54:41] of Mr. Hoag representing us for the labor negotiations that he did with IBW. I know there's

[54:46] some concern from some of the employees from the borough, but I think he's doing a good

[54:51] job. I know it's saving us a lot of money, and if he's more or less appointed to do this

[54:57] by the assembly, I would think.

[55:00] I think he would be covered by, he's taking an action that the assembly asked him to do, and I would think he would be covered by the insurance. Do you see it that way? Kathy, you know more about it than me. I knew on that, because doing the work you're asking him to do, and the manager is asking to do it. City, it's probably related. It's not something up there that we're going to offer any kind of council. Well, if I can add for humor on labor relations issues, which would be both grievance and negotiations, the humor is, it's almost impossible for a lawyer.

[55:29] to commit legal malpractice to the only way you could, I've never heard of a legal

[55:36] malpractice case in a labor issue except for blowing a deadline.

[55:40] And since Steve and Kathy are responsible for the deadlines, I simply don't see it as

[55:49] an issue.

[55:50] Members, ground.

[55:51] It seems to me that if the city's insurance would cover any volunteer who was doing legal

[55:56] work for us, whether they were an assembly member or not, or if it would cover somebody

[56:05] who was not an assembly member, then it surely would cover somebody who was volunteering

[56:10] who also happened to be an assembly member.

[56:13] I might add, I volunteered a number of years ago with a prior city manager to when things

[56:18] were going particularly ugly to provide assistance and it was clear to me that he was uninterested

[56:24] that didn't be, frankly, I don't think he understood labor relations.

[56:29] Mr. Mayor.

[56:30] Yes.

[56:30] The main purpose besides asking John to do this, which I really respect him taking the

[56:39] time to do it, was that on covering in the insurance, if we voted through a motion that as

[56:47] It's a council to ask him to do this, that it seems like we would be covered.

[56:55] That makes sense to me.

[56:58] Any more discussion on this issue?

[57:00] Remember to log about this?

[57:01] I'm just trying to clarify exactly what we're voting on.

[57:04] Are we only voting on him continuing on the work that he has already done to cover the

[57:09] grievance action?

[57:10] Or are we saying in perpetuity he will work without any more discussion with the assembly,

[57:15] he would represent the borough.

[57:18] John, are you volunteering in perpetuity?

[57:22] As long as I'm comfortable with the direction of the burrow, I will do the labor relations

[57:29] upon requests.

[57:30] Well, it seems to be like just voting on this particular situation.

[57:35] The way we can bring it, obviously it's up to the manager, but labor relations are with

[57:41] PMAA, you're going to realistically start after the first of the year with a sophisticated

[57:46] wage and benefit survey to prepare and in initial discussions with PMEA they're

[57:52] going to be invited to give us input on benchmark classifications for which

[57:59] to do the survey on. I mean this is an essence of dance has been ongoing for

[58:05] some time. And I'm not debating that I'm just trying to clarify what the motion is.

[58:10] Well, maybe if I could restate it, that move to request the Councilor Hogan's

[58:17] assistance with labor relations and that would include the grievances.

[58:22] Does the second agree to that?

[58:23] Sure.

[58:24] Okay.

[58:26] So, does that clarify what we're voting on?

[58:29] I don't know.

[58:29] I guess.

[58:30] Correct.

[58:30] Are you hearing all of this?

[58:35] Okay.

[58:36] All right.

[58:36] All right, so any more discussion?

[58:39] Will the clerk call the roll?

[58:44] John Hall of Rock.

[58:47] Yes.

[58:49] How do you get first?

[58:52] Kurt?

[58:55] Kurt?

[59:00] You can hear you now.

[59:01] Cindy?

[59:02] No.

[59:04] John Henrylett?

[59:05] Yes.

[59:06] Mark Johnson?

[59:07] Yes.

[59:08] Sue?

[59:09] Yes.

[59:10] And Nancy?

[59:10] Yes.

[59:11] Okay, it passes 6 to 1.

[59:15] Okay, that, where are we now?

[59:17] We're on the item D at the Mayor's Report.

[59:20] Mayor's letter to James Balciguer, National Mean Fisheries Service.

[59:24] Mayor Jensen's August 9th letter is in the agenda here.

[59:27] I won't go bother reading it.

[59:30] Expressions extreme disappointment.

[59:31] National Mean Fisheries Service unrolliness to take an active role

[59:35] in removing a very dangerous stellar sea line from our harbors.

[59:38] The borough will continue to monitor the situation, but encourage his residents and visitors

[59:43] to contact Mr. Balsinger's office in Juneau to express their concerns, or for issues related

[59:50] to property damage or injury due to the animal, and that would also add to that.

[59:54] But if anybody sees any activity in the heart with it, seems dangerous.

[1:00:00] Distinguished by the sea lions, if they could contact the harbor master, so she could document the incidences, then we could pass them along, not only to Mr. Ball Singer, but his assistant has called us, um,

[1:00:30] Try to pick a date for that Mr. Mayor I could comment for the harbor master that I would

[1:00:36] not have wanted to be putting an airplane on the float today the sea lions were having

[1:00:40] a good time fighting with each other on the end of the airplane float.

[1:00:44] Well that's one to document them yeah okay um the night of the end of the mayor's report

[1:00:50] a work session reminder the hospital bill envelope assembly will conduct a joint work session

[1:00:54] on August 22nd at 9 a.m. in the assembly chambers and work session will focus on the

[1:00:59] on finances of the hospital and how borough formation may affect hospital funding and governance.

[1:01:05] The public is invited to attend.

[1:01:09] Southeast Conference will be held in Sitka, September 17th through the 19th.

[1:01:14] Similar members are asked to register and make their own reservations if they plan to attend

[1:01:18] this event.

[1:01:19] I won't be able to attend, but it sounds like a number of occupants is going to have to go.

[1:01:23] Is there anybody else?

[1:01:25] Let me go to Sitka.

[1:01:27] I know we're on to the managers report.

[1:01:30] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:01:31] The line crew has been working with ADOT clearing the right

[1:01:35] away along the highway between three and seven miles.

[1:01:40] Let's see if the guys out.

[1:01:42] New helicopter pad at the crystal lake hatchery is complete

[1:01:45] and done thanks to a lot of folks who have helped work on that.

[1:01:49] We're still monitoring the Rasmus Inge Bridge replacing

[1:01:53] plants as needed. Chris is working on finalizing the material rest that's going to include the

[1:02:01] decking bore rails, hand rails and some stringers based on what we find when we get underneath

[1:02:09] it. And then ADOT did a kind of a quick pass through and we may have some pile caps and

[1:02:17] pylings that are also not good so we'll see it's going to be a work in progress.

[1:02:26] Question caller working with Dow HKM on plans for the pump station one forced main project.

[1:02:33] Plans will be submitted to DOT for incorporation in the South Nordic repaving project which is

[1:02:39] scheduled for next year.

[1:02:42] A ADC grant application has been submitted to hopefully get funded it will fund 70 percent

[1:02:49] of that, otherwise we're looking at probably using our long funds for that.

[1:02:55] We're just kind of a heads up having a little bit of a problem with the recycling drop-off

[1:02:59] behind the community cold storage.

[1:03:01] Many, most people use it correctly.

[1:03:04] We've had some people who have chosen to just dump stuff,

[1:03:10] which makes it really difficult

[1:03:12] when garbage is dropped into the recycle.

[1:03:15] Our guys have to manually either try to sort it or call it all garbage.

[1:03:18] So if we can't get that figured out, we'll probably have to remove those recycling from that location

[1:03:24] to somewhere else that's better supervised.

[1:03:29] Scrapper, no removal contractor.

[1:03:33] I think I said he's been delayed, but we just think heard he's going to be in town this week.

[1:03:38] Calls nodding, so I'm thinking that's good news.

[1:03:42] So we're closer to meeting our deadlines there.

[1:03:45] We're not sure how fast we'll be able to get start working, but we know he's contacted

[1:03:50] us. He's going to be here. Just as a heads up for the community during the time frame

[1:03:56] that they're working up there, and the dreads while hauling is taking place, there'll

[1:04:02] be no salvaging allowed in the landfill. We don't want extra people up there. Well, we've got

[1:04:08] basically 4,000 loads of dreads material going back and forth, heavy equipment spreading it

[1:04:14] as well as the hauling off of the metal prior to that.

[1:04:18] So salvaging will be stopped during that period.

[1:04:23] Gun range improvements project is the most part complete.

[1:04:28] We've got some punch list items and we've got a hydro seed, the pistol range berm.

[1:04:33] And we've got a great job on that.

[1:04:35] The riding gun club is working on finding a caretaker for the facility to keep an eye on

[1:04:41] it.

[1:04:42] Alaskan Industries has completed the gym floor and finished the last coat

[1:04:48] Sunday, so we're just waiting for it to cure. And Daniel let us know when we can

[1:04:55] start using it again.

[1:04:58] Library of shelving material

[1:05:01] Again, an update from what's in my report. We got to notice today that the material has been completed and shipped. Now, I can tell you that I don't trust it. Yeah. Well, what I didn't trust about is that they finished it. It was going to be picked up today from their factory, which is on the East Coast, and they thought it would be in Petersburg this week. So that's my that's my hesitation.

[1:05:28] So it's from your Nigerian friend, but it is at least leaving their factory headed

[1:05:35] this direction which is, again, that's goodness.

[1:05:41] The Petersburg Library Art Committee has selected the artist for the new library, 20 proposals

[1:05:47] received from artists as far as way as Washington State, and the selection process was a bit

[1:05:52] of a challenge due to a large number of very, very good outstanding proposals.

[1:05:56] Public Art in the new library is funded by local donors and pieces will be installed

[1:06:02] to the fallen winter as the artists complete their work.

[1:06:06] The local committee members selected nine local artists for the awards.

[1:06:11] They are Beth Floor, Paul A. Keneman, Joe Vignicki, Susan Christensen, Russ Nanook, the third

[1:06:18] Doris Olsen, Paulie Lee, Debbie McMahon, and Pierre Riley.

[1:06:22] So congratulations to all of them.

[1:06:25] Congratulations to Officer Ben King, he has successfully completed his field training.

[1:06:30] So he is on his own, which I have to make Kelly's job a little easier.

[1:06:36] MRV, the Architectural firm that the Assembly awarded the structural analysis on a couple

[1:06:43] of buildings, they've received the agreement, they've actually got the work done, and they

[1:06:54] That kind of the first stage of evaluation, it appears that the Read Marine Warehouse is not a viable candidate because of the modern standards basically the building would have to be totally rebuilt.

[1:07:10] on the other hand this building may still be on the table. They believe it's

[1:07:18] possible if we can find a way to fit it that this building could be retrofitted to work.

[1:07:24] Again, that's just on a conversation on the telephone. I do not have the report in front of me

[1:07:28] and I would like to see it before I get too excited but it's on its way. P&D, Westman,

[1:07:37] Dockham Bridge, Carl and Glo met with the Corps of Engineers in a pre-construction teleconference

[1:07:42] last week on the North Harbor.

[1:07:45] Everything seems to be coming together.

[1:07:47] The Dredge contractor think Glo has been in contact with?

[1:07:51] Contractor has left Seattle.

[1:07:53] There we go.

[1:07:55] Kind of like a wide bridge over on the way.

[1:08:02] Middle and South Harbor continue to be really full.

[1:08:05] and I just, you know, I just stopped in a couple times. I encourage people not to get in their way

[1:08:13] but to try to watch with the harbor folks in Glow have been doing to keep people happy

[1:08:18] moving them away. I've not heard a single complaint. They may be complaining to Glow but they're not

[1:08:24] talking to me. We are moving people around and we're making it work and that is a really large job.

[1:08:31] contractor added a section of skiff flow to the south harbor that we're using as

[1:08:37] part of overflow. So we're somehow whether they're making it work. So congratulations to them.

[1:08:46] Lauren Markener and Brian and Julian Currie all spent some time with Jay Stern.

[1:08:53] He is Senator Murkowski's new fish guy and infrastructure. Basically talked about

[1:09:00] some federal issues and upcoming projects that we'd love their help on.

[1:09:06] You know, he kind of cautioned us the same old thing.

[1:09:08] Your marks are not going to happen.

[1:09:11] But we made him aware of several big projects.

[1:09:14] The anti-cap of being one, sea lines being another,

[1:09:18] and you know, the sea line issue as well.

[1:09:20] So they're on top of it.

[1:09:23] We got a pretty good feeling that he's at least visiting.

[1:09:27] He's got a bit of history with Peter's Breakey worked for John Winther for 12 years 15 years

[1:09:32] So while this was his first visit to Peter's Breakey's very familiar with our community from John's operation, and

[1:09:43] After got how many years of hay work there?

[1:09:48] After after excuse me. I'm sorry. It's I yeah, it's better part of almost 30

[1:09:54] Yeah, it's 5.30.

[1:09:56] He has announced his retirement effective August 31st.

[1:10:00] So if anybody sees him, tell Hoff, their congratulations. He's pretty excited and definitely deserves

[1:10:07] everyone's thanks for 30 years in the harbor.

[1:10:10] You've been there long as I could remember.

[1:10:13] Okay, unfinished business. Any questions of the manager and his report before we move on?

[1:10:19] Okay. When are you going to get rid of that cough?

[1:10:22] Unfinished business. Juno appeal of the Petersburg Borough boundaries. Our argument will commence at 3 p.m. Wednesday, September 4th in Juno.

[1:10:31] Judge Menendez has a lot at only one hour toilet for all three parties to make their case.

[1:10:37] I'll be flying up there and sitting in on that with our Borough mayor or Borough attorney. I mean, and we'll see how it goes.

[1:10:46] See what when they come up with their decision, Mr. Mayor.

[1:10:49] Yes, it's my experience in oral arguments that the judges on, especially on issues like this,

[1:10:56] do not really expect the parties to be there and doesn't influence them much. So if you have

[1:11:01] other things to do, I would not make this, I would not recommend it be a mandatory trip.

[1:11:07] Well, I bought the ticket today and it was kind of recommended by our attorney.

[1:11:11] Okay, that's the reason I'm going. Otherwise, yeah, I've been, I've been, I've been a month in

[1:11:16] Did you know this summer?

[1:11:17] I thought you'd been up there for a while.

[1:11:21] Is this Brennan going to this summer?

[1:11:23] Yes, he's coming from Warm Springs Bay.

[1:11:27] A lot of places that judges in legal conferences have said do not introduce your clients.

[1:11:35] I've never been to one.

[1:11:37] So are you?

[1:11:39] Have fun.

[1:11:41] Just to add to it, the perception was coming from Juneau was that they were going to have

[1:11:47] a full house.

[1:11:51] Jim was a little, he wanted somebody there that they, if asked, he could say, yes, the

[1:11:58] mayor is here.

[1:11:59] Okay.

[1:12:01] Anyway, moving on, redistricting there's no new information, unfinished business ordinance

[1:12:09] Since 2013-11, an ordinance providing for Chapter 3.18 of the Municipal Code entitled Finance Department,

[1:12:16] Updating Current Language to Reflect Borough and Corporation and Providing for the Disillusion of the Finance Committee for the City of Petersburg Second Reading.

[1:12:23] The inter-teener motion to adopt ordinance 2013-11 and its second reading.

[1:12:29] So moved.

[1:12:30] Second.

[1:12:30] Yes, been moved by Member Strand, seconded by Member Flint, to adopt 2013-11 in that second reading. Any discussion?

[1:12:39] Seeing none. Will the clerk call the roll?

[1:12:43] Yes. So yes, Cindy. Yes.

[1:12:46] Yes. March? Yes.

[1:12:50] Perth. Yes. Nancy. Yes. Passes 7-0.

[1:12:54] Okay, ordinance 2013-12 of an ordinance providing for chapter 4.35 of the municipal code and

[1:13:01] detailed property development fund updating current language to reflect their

[1:13:06] incorporation and designating that funds from the sale or acquisition of state

[1:13:10] entitlement lands be deposited into or disperse from the property development

[1:13:15] fund. This is the second reading I entertain a motion to adopt ordinance

[1:13:19] 2013-12.

[1:13:22] Move by member Strand, seconded by member log of August to adopt

[1:13:26] Board in 2013, 12 in a second reading. Any discussion?

[1:13:32] Seeing none, we'll call it all.

[1:13:34] So, yes, Cindy?

[1:13:37] Yes.

[1:13:37] John Hope?

[1:13:38] Yes.

[1:13:39] Nancy?

[1:13:40] Yes.

[1:13:40] Mark?

[1:13:41] Yes.

[1:13:41] John, have a lift?

[1:13:42] Yes.

[1:13:43] Thank her.

[1:13:44] Yes.

[1:13:45] Passes 7-0.

[1:13:48] Okay.

[1:13:50] Under Item E,

[1:13:52] The authorization to send a reply to the July 9th letter from Michael Coffee Department

[1:13:58] of Transportation regarding the DOT's use of herbicide and pesticide applications in

[1:14:03] Peter'sburg.

[1:14:05] I don't feel it's necessary to read the whole letter.

[1:14:08] Has everybody read the letter on the assembly and there's copies of it in the packets?

[1:14:13] The only thing I would think that would be change in Mr. Bracken who's in the audience

[1:14:19] This was one of the, people that drafted the letter in the one, let me find it here,

[1:14:27] paragraph, it talks

[1:14:32] about the impact, it will definitely have an impact on people's

[1:14:37] willingness to buy out, last the seafoods, and I would like to see that change to it may

[1:14:42] have an impact or it could have an impact.

[1:14:44] That seems like pretty strong word, it invests a bracket and then it's any problem with it.

[1:14:48] Barry, would you like to talk to that?

[1:14:53] Second.

[1:14:55] Second, the last paragraph.

[1:14:56] Yeah, it is.

[1:14:57] Yeah.

[1:15:00] Mr. Mayor, members of the Assembly, my name is Gary Brock and I reside at 5705, Sandy Beach Road.

[1:15:08] Yeah, I have no problem with the mayor's recommendation, but you might, I think, something stronger

[1:15:16] than may be appropriate here. You could say something to the effect of, as such, it is likely that the public

[1:15:24] and use of, we'll have a negative impact.

[1:15:31] I think May is kind of, maybe a little bit too soft

[1:15:37] and will definitely, is probably too harsh.

[1:15:40] So somewhere in between, we don't know that it's definitely going to cause.

[1:15:45] As such, it is likely that the public awareness of the use of this herbicides

[1:15:48] in or near Alaska waters will have a negative impact on the public awareness

[1:15:53] will in this to buy and consume the Lenskasy food I think that word he would be

[1:15:57] acceptable okay since I'm since I'm signing it thank you can we change that

[1:16:09] Kathy and is that acceptable to the assembly yes okay so I guess we need a

[1:16:15] motion to move the letter or just everybody in favor of sending the letter as we've

[1:16:21] modify it. Just say hi. Hi, hi, hi. Okay, Kathy, can we do that?

[1:16:26] Okay, try to make it less confusing to define myself here on the

[1:16:30] hype out again.

[1:16:35] Okay.

[1:16:38] Yeah, I'm working down that. Okay, slow with this. Okay, new

[1:16:43] business,

[1:16:46] ordinance, 2013-13, an ordinance providing for title one

[1:16:52] of the municipal code, updating current language to reflect

[1:16:58] The ordinance carries over the city of Petersburg code provisions to the borough code.

[1:17:04] It provides for matters regarding ordinance and resolution preparation designated general

[1:17:09] penalty and interest rate limits claims against the borough to be filed within one year and provides

[1:17:14] for records management.

[1:17:19] I entertain a motion to adopt 2013-13 in the first reading.

[1:17:24] Okay, it's been moved by member Flint. Seconded by member Havelick to adopt 2013-13 and it's

[1:17:31] first reading any discussion. Mr. Mayor. Yes. They are trying to find it. We statement

[1:17:41] that requiring

[1:17:46] notice before a lawsuit, I'm trying to find where that is because it's not

[1:17:51] on my iPad, all of a sudden.

[1:17:54] It's kind of 30 days, not for a lawsuit, but I know what you're talking about, it sounds

[1:18:02] like that for a refund or something like that.

[1:18:05] Okay, okay, that's fine.

[1:18:07] I didn't think legally we could make that requirement.

[1:18:09] Yeah, no, it's not for a lawsuit.

[1:18:10] Okay, I didn't think we could make that requirement.

[1:18:13] Good idea, but I could legislate or have to do it.

[1:18:22] Okay, any more discussion?

[1:18:24] Will the clerk call the roll?

[1:18:28] Mark.

[1:18:29] Yes.

[1:18:29] Cindy?

[1:18:30] Yes.

[1:18:31] Nancy?

[1:18:32] Yes.

[1:18:33] Dan Heberleck?

[1:18:33] Yes.

[1:18:34] Kurt?

[1:18:36] Yes.

[1:18:36] Dan Ho?

[1:18:38] Yes.

[1:18:38] And Sue?

[1:18:39] Yes.

[1:18:41] Okay.

[1:18:41] It passes in its first reading.

[1:18:43] It brings us on to item B under new business.

[1:18:45] It's resolution 2013-20.

[1:18:49] A resolution declaring Saturday on October 5th

[1:18:51] as a sales tax free day in Petersburg.

[1:18:53] for Burrell and Pears for Burrell.

[1:18:56] The Chamber of Retail Committee is asking the assembly

[1:18:58] to declare Saturday, October 5th,

[1:19:01] as a sales tax free day in the Burrell.

[1:19:03] Okay, I'm going to ask.

[1:19:06] I entertain a motion to adopt resolution 2013-20.

[1:19:10] Second.

[1:19:11] To move by, remember, have an executive,

[1:19:13] I remember Flint to adopt resolution 2013-20.

[1:19:17] Any discussion?

[1:19:19] Mr. Mayor, I'd like to support this.

[1:19:21] Um, we are ahead of our budget now this year with sales tax revenues and, um, October

[1:19:28] is a month where it's pretty much residents living in Peter's bird or shopping in

[1:19:33] Peter's bird. And, um, I think, I think it could be a better time to have it than it was

[1:19:41] in May when we're full of visitors. Remember strand you have a comment?

[1:19:45] We ever get any figures from the retit from the merchants last year about how much they

[1:19:50] They thought it increased their sales.

[1:19:52] What didn't we request now?

[1:19:55] Can't remember that we did, but didn't we find out?

[1:20:00] I thought there was cost us less than we were assuming. Cost us a little bit less. And we did ask the merchants, if they had any information, but I don't believe they had the ability to tell us for the most part. Yeah, my record.

[1:20:30] We have got some figures from a couple of merchants, but they haven't turned them into a chef, but she wanted to just be aware that there is some info on that.

[1:20:39] Member Flan?

[1:20:39] I think the only request was when I asked Savannah Guthrie who was here last time from the retail committee if they had any information yet, and she said no at that time.

[1:20:52] But they definitely wanted to continue.

[1:20:55] Yes, so any more discussion on the resolution 2013-20?

[1:21:02] Seeing none will the clerk call the roll

[1:21:06] Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, gentlemen, no

[1:21:17] Okay, that brings us to item C under new business

[1:21:21] a determination on the retention of advisory boards, committees and commissions of March 18th

[1:21:27] assembly meeting, whether to retain or disband the various advisory boards and committees

[1:21:32] was tabled due to the lateness of the hour of the meeting.

[1:21:35] Borough Charter Section 19.08c reads exempt for those provided, for by this charter, all

[1:21:43] appointed and elected advisory boards, committees and commissions in effect at the time of this

[1:21:47] charter shall be dissolved one year after the effective date of this charter

[1:21:52] unless specifically continued by ordinance.

[1:21:55] A copy of the March 18th meeting minutes and a recap of the survey

[1:22:00] of the existing boards are attached for review.

[1:22:04] Doesn't show up on the iPad, but it's on the last page

[1:22:08] over there.

[1:22:11] It does, it's just so tiny.

[1:22:14] Yeah, I can't read it yet.

[1:22:19] So,

[1:22:22] any ideas?

[1:22:23] Mr. Mayor?

[1:22:24] Yes.

[1:22:25] I had requested it to be tabled previously,

[1:22:27] because I thought if we were going to look at this,

[1:22:30] we should look at one board at a time,

[1:22:32] let the department heads come in,

[1:22:34] give us a chance to look at,

[1:22:36] I would suggest six months of minutes

[1:22:38] from some of these committees and make a decision,

[1:22:41] committee by committee as opposed to

[1:22:43] doing an up and down in mass.

[1:22:45] And I'm as uncomfortable now as I am then considering it, you know, in mass on dealing with

[1:22:55] these committees.

[1:22:56] Okay.

[1:22:58] Steve, you conducted the survey.

[1:23:00] You drafted it up and sent it out.

[1:23:01] Who was involved in answering the survey?

[1:23:05] Actually, all we did was we went to each of the boards themselves and said on the members,

[1:23:11] Do you think your board should stay? Do you think it should go? What do you think the prime purpose of your board is?

[1:23:19] And so, yeah, very informal, but we did get all of them to turn the response back to us and cross the board they wanted to stay.

[1:23:32] I see, you know, the board is being important because it takes this level of, I don't always

[1:23:42] want to call public involvement away from the assembly meetings and they get a recommendation

[1:23:47] from the board, so here's all the public's comments beforehand and then they give us a recommendation.

[1:23:52] We still have an opportunity to act on it, that's why I feel the boards are important.

[1:23:57] Um, um, fine ask you, but he's being voted on now is being removed.

[1:24:02] So one more reading there.

[1:24:03] It'll be to spam this.

[1:24:06] Mr. Mayor, when I, uh, tour each of the departments, when I was put on the council, I, uh, tried

[1:24:15] to have candid conversation with the apartment heads and the, you know, did they fill the input?

[1:24:21] Did they think they were valuable and only one or two said yes when asked.

[1:24:27] candidly. I reviewed for instance six months of minutes on the Public Safety Advisory Committee

[1:24:34] and it didn't strike me as that committee was important and you know that we have,

[1:24:42] these are elected committees and we have trouble finding people to go through that process especially

[1:24:49] with APOC which maybe we'll get rid of in a year but I would suggest that before we just

[1:24:56] rubber stamp, everyone, that they're the individualized.

[1:25:00] consideration of those.

[1:25:03] How many are there told left to get from the branches?

[1:25:07] You could put them on one on one on each agenda meeting for the next or two on at a time and then have the department heads and some of the committee members come forward and you could look at the minutes and see their usefulness.

[1:25:33] three are appointed but that's true. I thought the public safety advisory board was elected.

[1:25:42] Yeah, it is. Yeah, the majority of the more elected.

[1:25:52] Well, I have nothing against

[1:25:54] a member hoax suggestion of having a member or the chair of the advisory board of two advisory

[1:26:03] your words at a time and the fact the department had come to the assembly and then here if they

[1:26:12] recommend keeping them I mean that doesn't seem like it looks like we have plenty of time is

[1:26:19] this the next step in the process is that what we can do that so we can start in September and

[1:26:27] We've done it in two months, so we're going to walk it over, we're going to get it.

[1:26:31] Well, a couple maybe we don't even have to have, I mean, transient room tax.

[1:26:36] They have one job a year, take that money and give it up.

[1:26:40] I mean, we want to keep that.

[1:26:41] We need to keep that committee.

[1:26:44] Right, and they're just appointed.

[1:26:46] So I mean, we don't need to have special meeting on that.

[1:26:48] So which ones do we think we need to have?

[1:26:50] Harbor Advisory Board, I think, is very important in this town. We shouldn't even have to worry about that one.

[1:27:01] Are they commission? They are elected to appoint you. They are elected.

[1:27:05] Do you want to have a discussion on that issue? Whether they should be elected or appointed.

[1:27:14] I don't, but maybe they do. I don't know.

[1:27:17] It seems like that's one of the boards where you actually have a rod for a seat that's true

[1:27:22] Maybe an elected I've seen one one board. I think with one runoff

[1:27:33] So if there's some we think we don't have to have like the transient room tax we could just

[1:27:38] Put a star by that and then that one should stay

[1:27:42] Can we come to a consensus on that if

[1:27:47] I may that leads you the public safety advice

[1:27:50] report, utility advisory board. I'll skip the library board because I have something to

[1:27:56] say about that. Border pool, I, I planning commission in Parks and Rec. You planning commission,

[1:28:05] you have to have, so unless the assembly wants to do it themselves, which I wouldn't recommend.

[1:28:14] No. But I would suggest the other ones that we put on one or two at a time and go over

[1:28:22] them.

[1:28:22] Do you want to talk to me?

[1:28:23] The library board is the other one that is exceptionally active.

[1:28:27] Yes.

[1:28:27] That was the one department had that told me without any quibbling.

[1:28:32] Yes, they want that to come in.

[1:28:34] I don't think I asked Glo because I assumed that the harbor board was going to stay there.

[1:28:39] But the library board is where I got an affirmative.

[1:28:42] Yes, we want to be in existence.

[1:28:45] It's a very public.

[1:28:47] Mr. Mayor, I kind of agree with your original comment that the more public input we have,

[1:28:52] the better off we are, and I, except for the finance community that we've already talked

[1:28:56] about, I would be very comfortable with just keeping all these boards.

[1:29:01] They've all said they want to stay, and I would welcome more participation than less.

[1:29:07] Yes.

[1:29:11] Well, I guess if we're going to take formal action tonight, we'd need a motion and a second

[1:29:15] and we can have more discussion on it.

[1:29:17] Okay.

[1:29:18] So I would like to make that motion that we keep all the committees that said they've wanted

[1:29:23] to stay except for the finance committee.

[1:29:26] Second.

[1:29:26] Yes.

[1:29:27] The motion is made by Member Havelek, seconded by Member Strand, to keep all of the advisory

[1:29:32] boards that express interest and stain and effect in your discussion.

[1:29:38] which

[1:29:41] means I guess we would keep well the historical review it's not a

[1:29:46] currently active board so that we just can just expand that and if the finance

[1:29:50] committee gets voted out of existence at the first meeting in September that

[1:29:54] would be gone so that means we'd keep parks and recreation

[1:30:00] Your advisory board, motor pool, transient room tax, public library, utility advisory board,

[1:30:05] and the public safety advisory board.

[1:30:09] Any more discussion?

[1:30:10] We're going to get into your discussion about whether or not they were going to be elected

[1:30:14] or appointed.

[1:30:17] Might we consider changing some of those? Are we going to retain them all

[1:30:20] as they are?

[1:30:23] I think this current status, Steve, if I'm not mistaken, was that what the board wanted to

[1:30:33] be elected? Or do they have an input on that?

[1:30:35] Yeah, on the current status column. When I asked them do they want to be elected or appointed

[1:30:42] in the board size, that is what they told me.

[1:30:46] So the APOC filing didn't discourage any, at least of the existing members?

[1:30:50] At least from that perspective. So the only change in that was the Public Safety Advisory

[1:30:56] Board said they thought it would be better if they were appointed rather than elected

[1:31:01] they're currently elected, but that was the only difference.

[1:31:13] Kathy, yes.

[1:31:14] Just want to say it.

[1:31:16] This town, this girl, has more elected positions on its ballot than any of the municipalities

[1:31:23] say.

[1:31:26] That's including your big ones.

[1:31:29] Some of these boards came into existence as I'm told the history of them by people that

[1:31:34] were mayored on 20 years ago because of a distrust of the government.

[1:31:39] I mean, having a motor pool board is doing a function that should be done by the department

[1:31:46] heads and the city manager.

[1:31:48] I mean, the utility board, how much does it really do today?

[1:31:53] How much does it function?

[1:31:54] I mean, that's why I oppose, member Haverlick, let's just vote them all and continue the

[1:31:59] thing because there are boards that, you know, they're necessity and their contribution

[1:32:06] questionable, making them go through an APOC filing. I mean, we have lost people that

[1:32:10] sat on this City Council because of the APOC filing who contributed well. And it would

[1:32:18] strike to me that there is no rush to have this done without some discussion and consideration

[1:32:25] of this by one board at a time. And so I oppose member Haverlick's motion for that reason.

[1:32:33] Okay. Any other input?

[1:32:43] I think my opinion is that we would have them come a couple of

[1:32:47] a time and we could address it then whether they're elected or appointed and how many

[1:32:53] members would be on the board. Some of those numbers could be changed. So I think I would

[1:33:00] be voting against Mr. Haverlick's motion at this point. Any more discussion?

[1:33:07] So, clerk call the roll.

[1:33:10] John, have a light.

[1:33:12] I'm the coward, no.

[1:33:17] You can't vote kiss you can vote against your own motion.

[1:33:19] Sure you can.

[1:33:20] I'm not voting against my own.

[1:33:22] We'll take it.

[1:33:24] No.

[1:33:26] But

[1:33:30] you know, I think it's that.

[1:33:39] No.

[1:33:41] Can I see?

[1:33:41] Yes.

[1:33:42] Cindy.

[1:33:43] No.

[1:33:44] Mark.

[1:33:45] No.

[1:33:46] Okay, the motion fails board is due, so I would just suggest that maybe over the starting

[1:33:52] of the first meeting in September, the borough clerk picks a couple of utility boards, advisory

[1:34:01] boards, committees, whatever you want to call them to come before the assembly and with

[1:34:04] the department head and then we get the information and we vote on them two or a time.

[1:34:09] Is that acceptable to the assembly?

[1:34:16] I guess I can't make a motion.

[1:34:19] Well, it'll just happen.

[1:34:22] Everybody say all that wants that to happen.

[1:34:27] Good and tired.

[1:34:29] Okay, communications.

[1:34:31] Is there any communications?

[1:34:34] Just the phone call they had.

[1:34:36] I guess I have communication from John Krillin,

[1:34:38] We're in the assistant to Jim also from the National Infantry Service, he was the gentleman

[1:34:46] that would like to come to Petersburg and first and see the sea line, probably be reported

[1:34:51] to if there's any incidents.

[1:34:53] So maybe the one that Mr. Hold mentioned tonight, Glow, he could get that information.

[1:34:58] Okay.

[1:35:00] Any more communications? Assembly, discussion items, aye, recognitions, any recognitions this evening?

[1:35:10] I hope so.

[1:35:11] Well, I took my granddaughter up the river last week, and we were so pleased to pour into the Blackberry Point, parking lot with full parking for your trailers, lots of spaces to turn around, and outhouse, and a beautiful ramp.

[1:35:29] and it was such a breeze and thank you to Rack and Rock and Road Construction, Chris Cotta, and everyone else involved.

[1:35:39] Huge improvement.

[1:35:41] It is, I believe there's going to be picnic tables out of to the side as well.

[1:35:45] Can they get rid of the mosquitoes?

[1:35:46] Yeah, they're still there.

[1:35:49] I'm sure they can get the state to spray a test.

[1:35:52] Okay, we have one more item.

[1:35:58] I would like to extend my appreciation and the recognition of the Harvard staff who are

[1:36:06] having found it through my stolen skill and allowed me to get it away in that closing

[1:36:20] at the same time that they were fielding all of their numerous calls at the same time.

[1:36:26] We were actually found in the video clip in the surveillance of the actual theft in progress.

[1:36:34] I really appreciate that.

[1:36:36] All right. Good job, Bill. Thanks, Dave.

[1:36:40] Okay, and then there was one item added under assembly discussion items.

[1:36:44] by member Walhooter, the Rasmus Inge Bridge, so Kurt, what did you want to talk about?

[1:36:50] No, I just want to run it.

[1:37:29] Thanks, Kurt.

[1:37:30] I guess Carl, can you take that into consideration?

[1:37:33] I don't know how that would work.

[1:37:37] It's a good idea, though.

[1:37:38] I don't know if we do any bartering or burn raising anymore.

[1:37:43] Mr. Mayor, it would be a very complicated process.

[1:37:46] It would be a lot of details to work out

[1:37:48] But if we were to even try that,

[1:37:54] if I may, the code, I don't know if you can hear me

[1:37:58] or not.

[1:37:59] The first step is, and we'll run this up the flagpole a little bit, all of the design

[1:38:05] piece has to be done by an engineer because we ask DOT has to rate that bridge.

[1:38:12] So that part of it we can't get out of, the question is, and we don't know an answer,

[1:38:19] here is once the bridge design is there are we allowed to use volunteer labor and still

[1:38:27] get the bridge rated by DOT so that we can drive on it and it's I don't know what they

[1:38:34] accept from a project standpoint if it can be volunteer labor if it has to be a licensed

[1:38:43] I had a quick conversation, but we have not yet called DOT to say, is this even possible?

[1:38:50] Would they allow us to do it and then still wait to bridge so we could drive on it?

[1:38:55] But we'll start asking some questions.

[1:39:03] About

[1:39:38] state and federal.

[1:39:40] Okay, thank you, Mr. Harville.

[1:39:42] I just want us to keep an open mind that was an expensive, possibly over a million dollars

[1:39:48] that we may want to look at is just a walking bridge because, you know, like said

[1:39:55] last time one business is moving out and I know it makes, you know,

[1:40:00] I see you mentioned sunset Norway, it makes an inconvenience, but to me a million dollars plus is a lot more of an inconvenience.

[1:40:08] Let's keep it open. All right. Any more discussion on this? Volunteer, the bridge idea? Well, ask me.

[1:40:21] Okay. Thanks, good.

[1:40:24] The next item adjourned. Anybody want to adjourn? Thank you. Motion adjourned. Okay.

[1:40:29] All those in the food this year.

[1:40:31] Okay.

[1:40:31] All right.

[1:40:32] Good night, Kurt.

City Council View — BOROUGH ASSEMBLY MEETING, 2ND REGULAR MEETING OF THE MONTH

Agenda

Transcript