[0:05] I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to order. It is 6 p.m. This is a regular assembly meeting for Tuesday, September 1, 2026. Madam clerk, will you please call the roll?

[0:18] I will. Michael Bulls.

[0:19] Here.

[0:20] Stephanie Nowers.

[0:22] Here.

[0:23] D. McKee.

[0:25] Maxwell Sumner.

[0:26] President of the County for.

[0:27] Bill Campbell.

[0:29] D. Matri Fawnoff.

[0:31] Here.

[0:31] Ron Bernier.

[0:32] Present.

[0:33] Madame, are you have a quorum?

[0:35] OK.

[0:36] Are there in, is there anything

[0:38] any members would like to pull from the consent agenda?

[0:45] Anything that anybody wants to pull from the consent agenda?

[0:50] Assembly person bowls, and then Gamble.

[0:53] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[0:54] I move to remove AM26-120 from the agenda to come back on the September 15 agenda.

[1:02] Is there objection from the assembly?

[1:07] I'm sorry.

[1:08] What was that date that it's returning?

[1:12] It was to remove AM26-120 that's on page 6 of the agenda to be taken off this agenda but come back on September 15.

[1:22] any

[1:28] other items? Oh yes assembly person camp. I didn't know we could do that, but I'd like

[1:36] to do the same thing. I'd like to poll RS268082 and bring it back on the 15th of September.

[1:43] Would there be checks and everything in the hand that I'm there?

[1:46] Was there a objection on the AM26120?

[1:53] I don't see anything. Okay, and you have assembly

[1:59] Okay, Assemblyperson Gamble, can you restate, please?

[2:03] Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor.

[2:04] I'd like to pull resolution 26-082 and revisit it on,

[2:11] at the September 15 meeting.

[2:20] The objection from the media assembly.

[2:23] Did everybody hear Assemblyperson Gamble's request?

[2:32] Hold here in the objection.

[2:34] You need somebody else, assembly person McKee, turn your mind on a clean,

[2:49] which one

[2:49] is it about the, oh, there it is, and it's not on the consent agenda, so no, never

[2:56] mic, sorry about that, I'm done, I think he's sort of in the job and he's

[3:07] Is there anything, any other, I said, the person that works?

[3:14] If I could pull, sorry, ordinance 26 dash 099 and resolution 26 dash 080 from the agenda.

[3:22] Is there a objection by the assembly?

[3:26] Can we repeat the number, please?

[3:29] 26 dash 099 under public hearings.

[3:45] Do you have an objection or an item?

[3:50] I want to know the reason why it's pulled and maybe.

[3:52] Okay.

[3:54] Some of the person there were.

[3:57] There was a discussion with the Academy Charter about it.

[4:03] And it was agreed to the money should go back to Academy.

[4:07] Maybe I'll phone a friend to the manager if he can explain the money routing.

[4:12] So through the mayor, it was originally intended to allow us to move the project forward with

[4:17] design elements by front loading the funding while we sold bonds, it's no longer needed.

[4:23] And so we had a conversation with the Academy Administration, the School District, and

[4:28] don't see a need to move the legislation forward.

[4:30] Oh yeah, thank you.

[4:33] Is there any further objection or is your objection, there was an objection, I was just a

[4:39] question, but I'm satisfied with that answer.

[4:41] Any

[4:44] other items, either? Yes, similar to some.

[4:48] AIM-26-123.

[4:51] Can you consent agenda?

[4:53] Are you moving to pull it off the agenda or off the consent agenda?

[4:57] Just pull off the consent agenda.

[5:00] And you said 1, 2, 3, or 1, 2, 2, I'm sorry.

[5:04] 1, 2, 3.

[5:04] Thank you.

[5:08] No objection.

[5:09] No, if he's just pulling an off the consent agenda, Madam Mayor.

[5:15] Assembly person McKee.

[5:17] Under action memorandums, I am 26-119.

[5:24] And you are also just pulling an off the consent agenda, correct?

[5:27] Yeah, just a consent agenda.

[5:33] Any other items from any of you do assembly people?

[5:40] Assembly person.

[5:49] Assembly person.

[5:52] Are you looking for another one?

[5:56] Anything else regarding changes in the agenda?

[6:04] Hearing none in the agenda has been approved as presented and changed.

[6:11] We do have a proclamation, I'm not sure,

[6:17] Kim Kennedy, are you here for the proclamation?

[6:23] We have a proclamation for calling September

[6:27] as pain, awareness month,

[6:32] and we did have a request,

[6:34] but she is not here this evening.

[6:38] So I reached out to her and I haven't heard from her.

[6:45] So I'll wait and see, since it's for the whole month,

[6:48] I'll wait and see, maybe she will come to another meeting

[6:51] where we can present it to her, specific way.

[6:56] So then the next item is the pledge of allegiance

[7:01] and assembly person, Pomna,

[7:03] will you lead us in the pledge, please?

[7:05] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands for nation under God in the visible liberty and justice for all.

[7:27] The next item on our agenda is minutes of preceding meetings.

[7:32] We have the regular meeting minutes from the 21st of July.

[7:37] The regular meeting minutes from the 4th of August.

[7:41] Are there any changes to these minutes as presented by the assembly?

[7:48] Hearing and hearing none in the minutes have been approved as presented.

[7:53] The next is agency reports. Do we have a report from the city?

[8:06] Good evening Mayor and Assembly.

[8:08] Crystal Night Guard Deputy Administrator of City of Wassel. I thought we'd just give you a quick update.

[8:13] What we're doing. I'm sure it's no surprise. We are open to business and there's a lot of business moving in over there.

[8:19] A lot of construction happening. We did receive notification from FAA to extend our runway to 5100 feet.

[8:27] So that's moving along quite nice.

[8:29] We're in the middle of a $12 million expansion

[8:31] for Taxi Way K.

[8:33] That's about 26 acres for economic development.

[8:37] We've got another $3 million in an appropriation

[8:40] that's coming from DC.

[8:41] That's specific to the extension of the runway.

[8:44] And we are procuring property that will make that take it

[8:47] out to 6,000 feet.

[8:49] Our runways are open again, but we are doing some construction

[8:52] out there, so expect one, probably one week

[8:55] of closure this month.

[8:57] We still do not support sales tax of any kind.

[9:01] We did pass legislation in support of the projects

[9:04] that were on the MPO list.

[9:07] And that passed the last time we had our council meeting.

[9:11] There's quite a bit of a paving going on and while

[9:12] Silla right now, now we'll continue

[9:14] probably to the middle of this month.

[9:16] And the road closure on Herman is for the extension

[9:19] of the water lines that are going up there by Sun Mountain.

[9:22] So we appreciate all you guys come to visit our city

[9:24] and we'll try to do more updates more frequently.

[9:27] Thank you.

[9:30] I don't see anybody from Palmer Houston.

[9:38] I will report from the school board.

[9:41] Her school district, a week from tonight

[9:45] in the assembly chambers here, there will be

[9:49] a joint meeting with the school board and the assembly.

[9:53] And it's at six o'clock, of course,

[9:55] It's a public meeting, so that's a week from today.

[10:00] Tonight. There has been a seat of Alaska. I don't see Tom. Okay? We have several people from the state of Alaska. I don't know if they want to give a report or not. I don't see anybody rushing to the mic. So thank you. I understand there was a meeting of the joint assembly in school board.

[10:27] And there were two assembly people there.

[10:30] Would either one of them like to say anything?

[10:39] I must say I think I'm going for about four or five days.

[10:40] And I was waiting to get that packet from the charts and things.

[10:44] So, Steph, you got it?

[10:48] A lot of the discussion was about where enrollments sits for the year.

[10:52] And so, as of, I think I was 24th, they said they were about 500 kids under projection.

[10:59] But they'd already come up by about 200 I believe, so they expect to get closer to what they projected and will just have to kind of wait and see where those are.

[11:12] And then there was some discussion about where the students are going correspondents, the sort of brick and mortar neighborhood school, whatever you want to call it and then kids outside.

[11:21] The district, and I think there was discussion about access for the different schools, American

[11:29] Charter, and Academy, each Charter, and then some discussion of ranking out of U.S. news

[11:36] and world reports that the schools did fairly well in, so there was discussion of that.

[11:42] But I think we'll especially be getting into those at the meeting you mentioned next week

[11:46] for discussion.

[11:51] Rani, are there any, oh, I'm sorry, my date, you want to say a thing?

[11:57] Are there any public relations reports?

[12:06] Wait, I think probably all of you know, as well as the public today, was the opening of

[12:13] our new landfill site.

[12:16] And from the conversations, it sounds like there may be some bugs that are going

[12:24] Challenges out there, so we'll see how it goes in the next couple of days.

[12:33] And then I think you probably all saw that Nova's refining equipment is on its way from Seattle.

[12:42] They did tell us just a few minutes before the meeting that instead of the barge arriving on the 7th it's going to arrive on the 6th and so it's pretty amazing.

[12:59] I think it's getting so excited out there, you know, so anybody else have any other public relations

[13:12] reports?

[13:14] Okay, Mr. Brown, you report, sir.

[13:18] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[13:19] I do have a few updates tonight, so bear with me.

[13:21] I'll try to move quickly.

[13:23] So if I'm moving too fast, slow me down if you have a question.

[13:26] So real quick, I wanted to start with the Barks Committee, which is to review

[13:32] Kinnolstanders.

[13:32] That first meeting is now or will be scheduled in its coming up September 17th.

[13:38] So just to let the Assembly and the public know that that is moving forward.

[13:42] The other thing I wanted to just kind of highlight, and I really just wanted to take a second

[13:45] to give a couple of our first responders by name recognition.

[13:48] I don't do this very often, but when they volunteer to go support a fire in another community,

[13:53] I think that's admirable, for sure.

[13:57] And so I'm just want to mention some folks

[13:58] that were part of that task force.

[13:59] It went up to support the muckler fire in the Tokyo area.

[14:04] So Kirk Gibbs, Mike McCabe, Philip Gauss, Lewis Cates,

[14:08] Dylan Miller, Haley Mitchell, Brent Wood, and Jake Boothby.

[14:13] And I remember, I'll just share this quick story.

[14:15] I remember getting up date.

[14:16] I got a text message from Ken Barkley, one Saturday.

[14:19] I remember setting that reading it and you kind of like,

[14:21] You know, you know, they go, you don't necessarily know what they were doing, but they were

[14:25] put on a detail to basically protect homes.

[14:29] And without going into detail, the task force leader was giving details, some of the details

[14:34] around what they were doing to protect this private residence.

[14:38] And so, you know, I'm setting in the comfort of my home reading about this update, right?

[14:42] And I just remember, it just struck me like, these guys are out there doing that kind of work

[14:47] to protect people's homes, like it is remarkable.

[14:51] And they don't just do it for our community every day, day in day out, they're willing to go north and do it for someone else.

[14:57] And so I just want to pause for a moment to say...

[15:00] I wanted to recognize these folks by name. I really just say thanks for all they do. Here in our community, in elsewhere, just really struck me that night to read through it and it makes a difference. It really makes a difference. And so I just wanted to take a minute and appreciate them. So now I'll move in.

[15:18] Got the presentation up, so we're rocking a roll like a set. I'm going to keep moving. So if you recall back in, and I'll just advance forward here a little bit. If you recall, we had a public safety meeting back in August of last year.

[15:30] year, been about a year.

[15:32] And so I wanted to provide an update on a couple of tasks that I was given by the Assembly

[15:36] to research this idea of potentially developing a regional dispatch facility, or an E9-1

[15:42] facility, and a facility to support the Alaska State Trooper Operations in the Valley.

[15:47] I wrote a meet statement up there to just kind of like talk a little bit about what are the

[15:51] benefits of having a facility like this, and of course some of that coordination.

[15:55] and we've got Austin Daniels, Major Gorn, and Captain Chan in the back that agreed to join

[16:01] this evening to, and we've been coordinating together on this idea over the past year.

[16:08] But I would just say it with this.

[16:09] There is currently no permanent Alaska State Trooper hub in the Matsu, which for the second

[16:14] largest municipality in the state of Alaska, you ought to, some folks ought to find that

[16:19] kind of astonishing.

[16:19] They are currently distributed across six least facilities that were not designed to support law enforcement functions.

[16:28] So if somebody is like, why would the borough have this conversation, that's the answer.

[16:33] And so this idea is to leverage an existing plan to develop a new fire station at the corner of Tate and Bogard.

[16:42] And so that plan has been in the works for Central Matsu Fire Department for a number

[16:48] of years.

[16:48] The idea of consolidating station 5-2 was station 6-5 into a facility that provides a better

[16:54] location, better access and sleeping quarters so that we can improve staffing in the facility

[17:01] to reduce response time.

[17:03] That's what we're trying to do.

[17:05] So along with that, we had this conversation around, you know, if you're going to go

[17:08] and do that, there is an economy of scale to construction and leveraging one project to benefit

[17:14] another.

[17:15] So, the current, so this idea of kind of co-locating to create this operational platform,

[17:20] and I'll start with a quick overview of the regional dispatch.

[17:23] The idea is, you know, right now, Maccom, which is the city of Wasila, supports the boroughs,

[17:31] call taking and dispatching functions for E9-1-1, and we do that through a contract.

[17:35] And they're in a facility, it sort of works like I'm not going to set up here and be critical of it.

[17:42] But what we're looking at is what does the future look like and how do we get into a facility that has a little bit more capacity than the existing facility.

[17:50] And it's also a little more modernized than the facility that we're in, I'll say this.

[17:54] The facility that was in facility that public safety is already left and moved to a new facility and dispatchers and call takers are still in that facility.

[18:02] So that tells me something right there, and down the road, when you look at this, they're

[18:08] performing the dispatch functions for us.

[18:11] The regional dispatch functions are a borough responsibility, because we are the regional

[18:15] government, right?

[18:16] It's not necessarily the cities.

[18:18] I think we enjoy our contractual relationship with the city and they're doing great workforce.

[18:23] I don't have any challenge or concern with that.

[18:25] What I am looking at is how do we posture ourselves in terms of infrastructure to be ready

[18:30] for the future?

[18:31] And that's what this proposal is about.

[18:34] So right now I just thought it would be that bottom left bullet talking about the number of E91 calls and annual calls overall that we receive annually.

[18:42] I think those numbers would probably be like, wow, I had no idea we were moving 100,000 calls a year.

[18:48] But that's the volume of the work that they're doing.

[18:51] And so what I want to be clear is because there's been some, I think probably some concern out there maybe by some.

[18:56] This is not the burrow proposing to assume day-to-day operations or staffing for these facilities.

[19:03] This is the burrow stepping in and trying to leverage another project to build for the future and provide that facility because it supports regional needs, not just city operations.

[19:16] So, the idea here is having a purpose bill facility for regional dispatch operations.

[19:23] Roughly $5 million would be a general estimate and some of that will have to be fared

[19:28] it out during design and it would be done as an annex to station 5-2.

[19:33] So we would leverage the footprint of the fire station to build the dispatch facility because

[19:38] there's cost savings in that.

[19:40] And I'm looking out to Crystal when I make the statement, I believe the City Council will

[19:44] considering signing on to a memorandum of agreement with the burrow on September 14th

[19:49] at the city council meeting.

[19:51] And so we're not moving forward with this in earnest until we have an agreement with

[19:56] oscillate that this is something that they are interested in as well, and...

[20:00] The administration over there is agreed to bring this to the city council for their consideration. So this gives you your heads up that that's coming.

[20:07] As far as the trooper facility goes, probably somewhere in the neighborhood of a 16,000 square foot facility, roughly $8 million, and I'm cold probably back there, shaken in his boots because he probably would like to see that estimate be a little bit higher.

[20:23] That's, you know, puts us in the ballpark, we'll see if we're able to get there and what that looks like exactly.

[20:30] But the idea is, basically, we would have a 20-year initial lease, and the Burroughs role would be to develop the project.

[20:37] I would, I think, were in a better position to do that in the state of Alaska is for many reasons, and I won't set up here and get into the goings on in June.

[20:46] that probably wouldn't make that something easy for the state to accomplish.

[20:52] But I think the borough could step in.

[20:55] And the key here is we would build it, lease it.

[20:59] And there's a term sheet that's included with the legislation online for the public

[21:02] to view that talks about what those general terms are.

[21:05] The idea is to treat it like an investment.

[21:08] And so when Cheyenne and I talked about this, you know, we were like,

[21:11] this isn't your average mortgage or alone necessarily.

[21:15] like if we can, if we can realize the same rate of return as we would on a 20-year investment

[21:20] that we program now that then that seems like a reasonable thing. So when we ran the numbers

[21:26] and looked at it, we're in the ballpark of what the troopers are paying annually for six

[21:32] least facilities. And the idea is we can make this investment, get the rate of return, get paid

[21:38] back, and still own a facility when it's all said and done instead of paying somebody else

[21:43] or facilities that weren't built for law enforcement,

[21:46] and there's no end-in site for payment.

[21:49] And so we're somewhere, I think, roughly around

[21:51] a half a million dollars a year.

[21:53] That's just going out the door into these six

[21:55] least facilities with no end-in site.

[21:58] So this is, I would argue for those

[22:01] that may be in Juno question, what the borrows doing,

[22:04] to kind of stand up on its own in support public safety.

[22:08] I would say this is an example of how we could stand in

[22:10] and do something that fits within what a second class burrow

[22:14] has the authorities to do and supports public safety

[22:18] for our region.

[22:20] Now, having said all that, I will end with this.

[22:23] So the resolution basically says, it doesn't basically.

[22:26] It says, it directs me to go complete a proposal

[22:29] for assembly consideration for facility,

[22:31] because I don't want to spend time in effort getting hopes up

[22:34] that we're going to do this if the assembly is not in.

[22:37] And now having said that, there would still be three assembly approvals for coming even after even assuming that you approve this resolution tonight.

[22:47] We will need to go out and negotiate a lease agreement with the state of Alaska, because obviously we're not going to commit to spending any money to build anything unless we know we have a 20 year lease agreement.

[22:56] All right, so that's condition number one.

[22:58] So we need to go do that work, but I need to make sure I have the authority to go do that work and I'm not out of line with what you all expect of me.

[23:06] Secondly, it's probably even the harder one than negotiating a lease with the state of Alaska, is that I get if we got to find the funding in FY 28 budget and I will tell you that is going to be hard to do.

[23:18] But if we can do it, if we can get there, then that money would be available. We would do this without taking on any debt and we would do this with a rate of return over 20 years that is a reasonable investment.

[23:31] And so those are the next two steps is get the agreement in place between now and the spring budget cycle.

[23:39] Go through the spring spring budget cycle, see if that appropriations in there.

[23:43] And if that works for both the $5 million for regional dispatch and the $8 million for a state trooper facility,

[23:49] and then at that point, the assembly would still have to prove the contracts for designing construction of the facility.

[23:55] So, by no means does this resolution put us on a path that can't be halted or stopped?

[24:00] It just gives me the go ahead to go out, have these conversations, and see if we can reach an agreement with the state of Alaska, come up with a reasonable budget proposal in the spring to then bring those things back to you for your consideration.

[24:16] So, that's resolution 26,089. I don't have anything further unless there are any questions of me.

[24:26] So are we talking a total of 24,000 square foot facility?

[24:31] Yeah, great question through the mayor.

[24:33] So what it would be is the annex to station 5-2 would be the regional dispatcher.

[24:38] They would still be two separate stay in the loan facilities.

[24:42] So we would build the regional dispatch facility as an annex to the existing fire station.

[24:46] The state trooper facility would be next door to on the same parcel or on the same property.

[24:51] But it's own separate stay in the low facility and there's a reason for that because the way the term sheet was developed

[24:57] It is possible for the state of Alaska

[25:00] On that building when it's all said and done if they want. Right? Because it's deep, it's DPS. So the idea is to create that pathway for the state should they choose to own the facility. And so, therefore, wanted to have them as two separate facilities. But on the same property.

[25:16] Okay. Thank you.

[25:17] Any other, yes, assembly person, Gamble and then Fauna?

[25:22] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[25:24] So I take it that the Citroen Matsu Fire Service,

[25:28] Fire Service area board and DPS is on on board with this.

[25:32] So through the mayor, I haven't specifically asked for

[25:35] a resolution of support from the FSA.

[25:37] The FSA will only be obligated to pay for things

[25:40] that are related to fire service.

[25:42] These other appropriations, if you will,

[25:45] will be area wide appropriations.

[25:50] question on you said the funding and getting through the state and if the state is not

[25:54] are we able to there's other path to getting the funding or would state would be actually

[26:00] funding the project where that's the money. How does that work, I guess.

[26:06] Yeah thanks for the question, through the mayor to Mr. Fauna. The funding is actually burrow funding.

[26:11] I think the state, if they could get the funding, would build this facility for themselves.

[26:15] I don't think there's a lot of support in Juneau at the legislature in the legislature.

[26:21] I'll be specific to support a state trooper facility in the Matsu.

[26:26] I'll be honest with you based on a tent language I've seen in the past.

[26:30] Their preference would be Matsu just takes over law enforcement.

[26:33] They draw down a trooper presence.

[26:34] I don't think I'm saying anything that hasn't been said publicly already.

[26:38] So therefore I don't think there's a lot of support for the state providing funding to build the facility.

[26:44] So what we're stepping in and saying is if we can come up with that funding and do it through a lease agreement, we can get paid back over time

[26:52] As an investment or in a generally the same rate of return is of an investment

[26:56] But have a hard piece of infrastructure that supports public safety in the match suit

[27:00] Because I don't think Juno will support that we could certainly put it in our legislative priorities and ask for a capital appropriation

[27:07] I just think based on what we've seen from the legislature in the recent past I wouldn't expect a lot of support for that

[27:15] I mean for the question, and look for some knowledge.

[27:20] Thank you.

[27:21] First of all, I love having the troopers in Palmer.

[27:23] So that makes me partial against this a little bit.

[27:27] But a new building would be nice.

[27:28] I know how old that building is.

[27:30] I wondered if the trooper representative might be able to speak to something.

[27:36] I think the public might be interested in, which is if you have six facilities,

[27:40] your troopers are kind of spread out.

[27:42] if you consolidate to one, like, how does that affect those areas that might have had troopers placed

[27:49] throughout the burrow? And how does that align with where your increasing call volume is going?

[28:00] Like, where do you, you know, are a lot of your calls going up, can it goose bay,

[28:04] north of metal lakes? So you've got faster response times, but I just wonder, I'm consolidating

[28:09] facilities like I can, I can see advantages of it, but I could also see disadvantages

[28:14] if you don't have stage troopers in different places around the borough or such a big

[28:19] borough.

[28:30] And tell me you don't want to leave Palmer.

[28:38] Good evening, Assembly.

[28:41] Thanks for your question.

[28:43] Yes, we are spread out over several, at several, about six, different locations.

[28:49] And they don't all house traditional blue shirt response type troopers, other special to

[28:55] units with drug units and specialty units with in investigations, modern troopers don't operate

[29:05] out of, we don't have to go back to post all the time now to write reports, right?

[29:12] Policing has it, it advanced and evolved and the ability to have communication with all

[29:20] parts and pieces that you need under one griff is a financially responsible, be improved

[29:27] communication, and see brings us to the current age of policing, troops spend a lot of

[29:37] time in vehicles, their offices are now their vehicles, so to think that someone needs to,

[29:44] a whole bunch of satellite offices. I think is largely outdated and extremely inefficient.

[29:54] Did I answer your question? Yeah, and then the other part, yes, it does. The other thing,

[29:59] I was just kind of curious.

[30:00] About is where you're seeing the call volumes. I think we had kind of reports in the past and I think the public

[30:05] is kind of would be interested in that, like, you know, generally the bulk of your calls, or they

[30:12] one direction or other from this facility, if we were able to build it.

[30:18] I don't have a map with me, but I'm pretty confident in saying that I'm the past commander in BD attachment

[30:25] And Captain Chan is the current and if we had to put a dot on a map on where to put a trooper post

[30:30] It's with an about a half a mile of where this is proposed.

[30:37] It's a pretty center

[30:40] Thank you even I know I'd hate to lose you in Palmer. I'd love to see you have a new facility so I understood. Yeah, I appreciate that

[30:46] Then I just have one question

[30:48] And maybe both of you can answer, but

[30:51] BoGuard is already a bad traffic zone.

[30:55] So in planning this out, can we make sure

[30:58] or is it already part of the plans to talk about maybe

[31:01] having a stop light there at,

[31:03] because state's already dangerous.

[31:04] Interstate, you got a curve.

[31:06] I'm just thinking about emergency traffic going out.

[31:08] Is that already part of the eight million, five million

[31:11] plan would that be a state portion?

[31:15] Is it already part of the plan and can we

[31:18] make that part of the discussions to have that kind of figure

[31:21] out before we build the facility and how we're going to pay for it.

[31:27] So through the mayor, I believe that segment of Bogart is state, I'm looking at coal for

[31:33] confirmation.

[31:33] I got that.

[31:34] So as part of any design process, we have to do a traffic impact analysis and we have

[31:39] to submit for essentially a driveway permit to DOT.

[31:43] That's what we go through with schools and anything else that we do.

[31:46] It's hard to know exactly what might be required.

[31:49] But I can't imagine that what we're talking about there in my non-engineer brain would warrant

[31:57] a traffic signal, but that analysis would have to be done in advance.

[32:01] The challenge is we're not there yet.

[32:04] Because I'm just trying to make sure we have, you know, your buy-in before we start talking

[32:09] about spending money on a designer or anything like that.

[32:13] So we certainly would have to look at that.

[32:15] I don't know that you would see traffic generation on a large scale based on the size of

[32:21] these two facilities, but certainly access would be a consideration.

[32:29] Does any feedback on that in terms of accessing an out and things that are important for

[32:34] the tree first for that?

[32:36] Yeah, I agree some type of impact would need to be looked at for traffic flow, et cetera.

[32:43] I mean, right now we are in the middle of a city and we've been making that work for

[32:47] four years, so I have to believe we can make board guard growth work as well.

[32:53] So I'm like, what's in the bowl?

[32:55] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[32:57] So I'm just thinking about this.

[32:59] I know it's different than the Alaska Crime Lab in Anchorage.

[33:03] But my understanding is when the Alaska Crime Lab was built or refurbished in 2012, it greatly

[33:10] increased communication accessibility and efficiency for, you know, please APD troopers.

[33:20] And if that's the case, is this comparable, this thought, this build, is, is that being

[33:29] considered, you know, what Anchorage did and the process they did, as far as leasing, that

[33:34] space to the state and come into an agreement that way.

[33:37] Because it could be a great partnership and I think that it would be beneficial.

[33:48] So, that's what comes from an opassist, yeah, that's fair.

[33:52] DC McDaniels.

[33:52] You know, through the mayor of Mr. Bowels, as I delay for a moment as they've come forward,

[33:58] I definitely wanted to refer to the troopers in terms of how they deploy themselves operation.

[34:02] But what we're talking about here is how do we make sure they have the infrastructure to do

[34:07] what they want to do here in the valley?

[34:08] And when I like it like two to road and the DPS is facility and I see the growth of the

[34:13] Matsu, like at some point we've had this discussion for years around the appropriate movement

[34:18] of state agencies to within the borough. I mean we had this debate for years about DOT and

[34:24] all the engineers living living in the building down by the airport and going, why they live

[34:28] out here? Why don't our traffic engineers and design engineers and construction managers

[34:33] live in the, why don't they work in the Matsu where they live, right? So I think this is to

[34:38] some degree on part with that, you know,

[34:40] and back in the day when the state was still growing

[34:42] and doing things and the oil revenue was flowing,

[34:45] like I don't think it was that hard

[34:47] for some of those things to be built out

[34:48] in other municipalities.

[34:50] We are not enjoying the same conditions that they did,

[34:52] yet where we continue to grow

[34:54] and we're not necessarily seeing some of that

[34:56] move from Anchorage, for example, to the mayor.

[35:00] And there are specialty capabilities that they have, that just as an administrator or a look at and go, shouldn't some of that be deployed out here?

[35:08] I mean, I can't make that call, but if they have the infrastructure, I think it postures for that type of the evolution of that over time, as the needs of all.

[35:19] So I'm in agreement. I think collocation is a good thing. I mean, you know, I were both in the army.

[35:24] Just though, I think we think like they're in a very supportive troopers.

[35:28] And so I see this is a good thing. I'm just thinking about the crime lab.

[35:31] And I remember it was funded by the state, but it was least land from anchorage as an agreement.

[35:37] I don't know if that's an avenue or not. I'm just.

[35:42] I would love to see this happen because we do need a larger trooper presence.

[35:45] That's one of the concerns out in district one is, you know, sometimes people call for a trooper and

[35:51] They can't either can't get there because there's a priority somewhere else, you know, or they might take an hour or two down

[35:58] Canick River Road or up in Sutton, Chickenland, so I think colocation is a great thing.

[36:05] Yeah, thank you for the record, Austin McDaniel, I'm the deputy commissioner for the Alaska Department of Public Safety.

[36:10] So, I wasn't directly involved in the negotiations that occurred for the State Crime Lab,

[36:15] which I know is on city land.

[36:17] It's at least back to the state.

[36:18] I think it's also important to note that the Anchorage Police Department's forensics capabilities

[36:23] are also housed in that same facility.

[36:26] So, there's some synergy there between those two groups.

[36:31] What I would say is right now out here in the Matsu Bureau.

[36:34] We have three patrol swadrooms spread across the burrow.

[36:40] We have three investigative swadrooms across the burrow.

[36:44] We have evidence between four or five different facilities.

[36:48] All of that is a challenging enough itself.

[36:51] And on top of that, our current office in Palmer,

[36:55] we've got our walking papers there.

[36:57] And as Mr. Brown pointed out,

[37:00] We're not seeing additional funding from the legislature

[37:05] for our presence out here.

[37:06] So we're at the point now between the growing costs

[37:09] for everything that we do all over the state, not just here,

[37:13] growing dispatch, contract costs, growing lease costs

[37:16] for all of these facilities of having to start

[37:18] making difficult decisions of can we do we need to start

[37:22] pulling personnel services line to pay for these services

[37:25] that we have to have to have a presence in an area.

[37:29] You know, of looking at the other large second-class boroughs, we also have presence in,

[37:35] I think in the Kena Peninsula borough, the Fairbanks North Star borough, we have consolidated

[37:40] facilities in both of those areas, which has the wild life troopers, major crime investigations,

[37:48] state trooper operations, command staff are all co-located to ensure that we're making

[37:53] the best use of our resources, you know, right now having multiple squadrooms and multiple

[37:58] facilities, because we just can't find a facility to lease that exists to do that today,

[38:05] is definitely not a good use of our resources, which is all of our resources.

[38:10] And we're getting to the point now, we're not sure.

[38:13] We don't have a lot of good backup options for a new Palmer post after we're moved out of

[38:21] the building that we're currently in in a few years.

[38:24] I hope that answers your question.

[38:25] I can get more specifics on that agreement we we had at the time for you.

[38:29] Uh, something.

[38:34] Yep.

[38:34] They mayer.

[38:36] I just wanted to thank you for your guys in service.

[38:40] You got.

[38:42] Support from district seven.

[38:44] Go blue.

[38:50] Anything else?

[38:50] I think that's all for this report.

[38:53] If I could leave you with one like soundbite about this like when I think about this,

[38:58] this is a way to.

[38:59] because you kind of listen to them talk about how they manage the resources and the distribution

[39:04] across these facilities with a lease.

[39:06] We just went through, we've been going through this with charter schools and trying to figure

[39:09] out how to get them into permanent facilities.

[39:12] This helps to create an anchor for the Alaska State Troopers in the match suit.

[39:17] That's what this is about.

[39:19] So, I think that's it.

[39:20] Thank you, gentlemen, for joining and then I'm going to invite Cole Brandem up for the next update

[39:24] mayor.

[39:24] That's okay. Sure. And then just for the record, that resolution is on the consent agenda right tonight. So again, there will be at least three or more approvals moving forward.

[39:38] Sure, we can pause.

[39:42] So Colotia.

[40:00] All right. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Members Assembly, Madame Colbrandum. I'm the project management division manager. And I'm going to give you guys an update on the instrument to trunk road corridor project, specifically talking about the final route selection report.

[40:14] Tonight's presentation is about selecting a preferred corridor. It's not approval of final design or construction.

[40:19] Additional engineering and environmental review right away, coordination with Alaska Department of Transportation and other permitting agencies and funding decisions will still be required.

[40:32] Resolution 26-094 is included in your guys's agenda this evening for introductions and the intention is to have a public hearing set for September 15th.

[40:44] We're doing that so that we can present this information to you tonight.

[40:48] Give you some time to digest the information that's included in that packet.

[40:52] There's quite a bit of information there between the route selection report,

[40:56] some of the resolutions that were provided as well as the Public Works

[40:59] Decisional document.

[41:01] Fall begin by quickly introducing the project team.

[41:05] So HDL Engineering,

[41:08] Assisted the Burrow with the technical analysis,

[41:10] route evaluation and public involvement on this project.

[41:15] So the goals for this presentation is we'll review the project history, scope of the project,

[41:22] purpose and need, route developments in the evaluation criteria we discussed,

[41:27] public input we've received, present the recommendation for Northern Route 1,

[41:33] and then discuss the recommendations benefits and impacts.

[41:37] So this is going to be a brief overview, like I said, there's a lot of information in the packet if you want to find more information about this.

[41:44] In real quick, before I advance, this slide here shows the visual triangles.

[41:47] So this is the area we're talking about.

[41:49] It's bound by Wasilla and Palmer Fisher, Bogart Road and Trunk.

[41:53] And really, we're talking about the southeast corner of this quadrant.

[41:55] We're instrumentalized in.

[42:00] So this slide shows a purpose in need.

[42:02] So continued significant growth has increased traffic demands in the visual triangle.

[42:07] Limited Road Connections, Concentrate Traffic at Inks from Road and Bogar Road.

[42:12] This project is intended to provide an alternate connection to trunk road.

[42:16] The goal is to improve safety, connectivity, emergency access, and long-term network capacity.

[42:23] We're all aware that there's a roundabout project that states working on at the Inks from Bogar Green Forest Intersection.

[42:29] That project is intended to address safety.

[42:31] But it does not create another route into or out of the area in the physical triangle.

[42:39] So this project's been recognized by long range transportation plans, including the 2035 plan,

[42:46] and then the official Streets and Highways plan that identify a need for a major collector connection

[42:51] between Inkstrom Road and Trunk Road.

[42:53] The voters approved the project through tip 21 in November of 2021.

[42:58] The Southern route was shown during the tip 21 as conceptual, but at that point in time,

[43:04] there was no engineering analysis completed.

[43:06] The borough evaluated multiple routes to determine a project that meets the purpose of need

[43:10] and collector function.

[43:15] So a little bit of the history of the project for Constance Engineering began with the Southern

[43:18] route and early analysis identified Northern Route 1.

[43:22] Public Input led to the development of four additional build alternatives open house feedback generally favored northern routes and prioritized access and connectivity

[43:33] The final evaluation will balance the public input traffic cost environmental right away and engineering considerations

[43:42] The route selection document

[43:46] It compares all the routes using consistent planning criteria.

[43:50] No route performs best in every single category.

[43:53] The recommended route is based on the overall benefit,

[43:56] or a balance of benefits and impacts.

[44:00] Selecting a route allows for detailed study and design refinement

[44:03] to focus on a single corridor.

[44:05] So the four build routes that we looked at are the southern route,

[44:11] which is the red dash line towards the bottom of the map.

[44:14] That route is approximately one mile long and connects the Inks from Road to Trunk Road through North Old Homestead Road.

[44:21] It is the shortest route, but it's located close to Bogart Road and functions more like a minor collector.

[44:27] More than Route 1 is approximately two miles long, connects to Trunk Road, southwest of Heat and Road,

[44:34] at a proposed official streets and highways intersection, and it's the purple line shown on the map here.

[44:39] Northern Route 2 follows a very similar path to Northern Route 1, but it extends a little bit further to the east and connects in at the existing heat and road intersection.

[44:49] And then stone creek to Aspen Ridge is the longest route, and it heads north to Palmer Fishirk.

[44:55] And it's about 2.5 miles long.

[44:57] So Southern Route and Northern Route 1 were the...

[45:00] The original routes that were evaluated in the Reconnaissance Engineering Study, Northern Route 2, and Stone Creek to Aspen Ridge, were public input.

[45:10] So when we had the open house and some of those activities, we received input from folks and that's all those alternatives ended up in this analysis.

[45:18] And then, of course, we also had a no-build alternative, which doesn't mean the purpose of the new project but was utilized as the baseline comparison for these routes.

[45:27] So each route was evaluated using the same selection criteria, routes were evaluated for connectivity,

[45:34] mobility, environmental, community impacts, engineering factors included constructability

[45:40] right away, utilities, maintenance, and cost.

[45:44] No single evaluation criteria determined the recommendation.

[45:49] So the categories that most tie into the purpose and need are connectivity and mobility.

[45:55] So the preferred route should encourage traffic to trunk road and provide useful alternative access.

[46:00] It should function as a true major collector with the planned road network by providing benefit to the broader area,

[46:06] and efficiently moving traffic to their destination.

[46:10] The Northern Route serves more of the area by providing better separation from Bogart Road as we'll see in a slide here in a little bit.

[46:16] The Southern Route offers relief but has less value as an independent collector.

[46:20] The traffic study also looked at the intersection relief and traffic volumes on the roads.

[46:27] So without improvement,

[46:28] Inks from road is projected to experience severe congestion by 2050.

[46:32] DOT's roundabout analysis of the Bogart Inks from green forest intersection

[46:35] showed that the intersection flows efficiently through 233,

[46:39] which was the design year, providing meaningful benefit to drivers during that period.

[46:45] But by 2050, which is the year that we looked out to in our traffic study,

[46:48] projected growth is expected to significantly degrade intersection performance, likely requiring additional improvements beyond a regardless of the connector route that we build.

[47:00] Neither route resolves the projected 2050's level of service concerns, as much as this is contributed by the traffic on Bogart Road and the growth that's expected on that corridor, which is why we need an alternate route.

[47:12] Because of intersection performance, because of this intersection performance is not a distinguishing factor in this evaluation.

[47:22] The model shows that the northern route attracts nearly double the amount of traffic, because it serves a broader area.

[47:28] Functions more like a major collector and captures more future growth providing long-term benefits.

[47:34] So more traffic on a corridor is a positive outcome because it means it's redistributing traffic across the network.

[47:45] The broader network benefits also include emergency access.

[47:49] So many neighborhoods rely on Inks from Road as their primary collector access.

[47:54] Crashes, construction, natural disaster and other emergencies are concerned with limited alternative routes.

[47:59] The Northern Route provides better network, network, redundancy, due to its spacing.

[48:06] This improves alternate access for residents, emergency responders, maintenance vehicles,

[48:11] school buses.

[48:13] This also ties in with the way that the borough classifies a major collector.

[48:19] So major collector connects neighborhood roads and local roads to higher capacity roadways.

[48:24] It balances movement with controlled access and appropriate intersection spacing.

[48:31] Spacing between roads of similar or higher classification, matter when considering usage for drivers.

[48:40] The recommended minimum spacing for major collector in higher roadways is one mile.

[48:45] For roadway width speed, whether we're going to include a pathway or not, right away considerations,

[48:50] Those will all be determined during design when we get further into the development of this project.

[48:58] So applying those principles helps us determine where our major collector makes sense.

[49:03] So this figure here shows a heat map of existing neighborhoods and areas of future growth.

[49:09] So you can see the colored areas where we have development in the areas where there's potential for growth in the future.

[49:15] So major collectors should serve current and future development.

[49:18] Inksome road functions as a major collector, but traffic is concentrated onto that single road so an alternate route is needed to distribute the traffic.

[49:29] In our traffic analysis, we considered the fact that inksome north to text out would be constructed, as well as the east and west legs of text out be connected, so that was considered during our evaluation.

[49:43] Roadways spacing influences the distribution and network efficiency of traffic.

[49:49] This figure shows that the northern routes provide greater separation from Bogart Road.

[49:53] Northern Route 1 is about a mile to a mile and a half depending on where you're at.

[49:57] Which creates a balanced grid network.

[50:00] So, if you look at this figure, so we got Bogard Road at the bottom, and that's an artillery road purple. And then the next major collector we have is textile drive. So, if you look at the spacing there to line somewhere in the middle, creating a grid network, that's where the northern routes tie in to the network pretty well. And then as development continues, you start filling in those gaps with minor collectors. And that is one of the reasons why we believe the southern route could make a good minor collector in the future, as developments support.

[50:30] it. Another consideration that I wanted to point out is that the northern routes eliminate

[50:37] one of the sharp corners on the eastern road and could be encouraged, could encourage traffic

[50:42] coming from the Wolf Lake, Aspen Ridge, Stone Creek area to go out to trunk road.

[50:49] If you kept that movement out to trunk road as the through movement and then teed up that

[50:53] southern leg of the eastern road into that intersection, the southern alignment to the south

[50:59] would create a left turn movement, which is a potential conflict for traffic, having to cross

[51:04] across a lane to get over to that alignment.

[51:10] And then the northern route has potential for future expansion, extension, I'll be either

[51:14] late, not necessarily part of this project, but just something to consider when you're

[51:17] talking about a major collector.

[51:20] The transportation benefits of these routes needs to be weighed against the environmental

[51:24] impacts.

[51:26] So these were evaluated at a preliminary planning level.

[51:29] The Southern Route has fewer wetland and stream impacts, while the northern routes have more crossing impacts.

[51:36] On this figure here we show the wetlands, which are the green shaded areas, and then the streams that are blue.

[51:43] And then that orange hash line is the floodplain.

[51:47] All build routes will require environmental permitting, detailed fieldwork, and analysis permitting will take place.

[51:56] Once we have a selected route and get into the design phase of things.

[52:04] Public input and community impacts were also evaluated as part of this.

[52:07] Public involvement included meetings, written comments, a website, and then a survey.

[52:13] Feedback generally favored a connection to trunk road and prioritize access and connectivity.

[52:19] Of the distinct individuals we received comments from the Northern Route was favored.

[52:23] However, there is a group of people that strongly support the Southern Route.

[52:25] those supporters generally emphasize lower cost and fewer impacts.

[52:30] Public input informed recommendation and was considered alongside the technical analysis.

[52:37] So the engineering and constructability, this is kind of the nuts and bolts of things,

[52:40] and it ultimately equates to costs.

[52:42] So we took a look at the design, right away, construction and utility impacts for each of these alternatives.

[52:48] The southern route is the lowest cost option, primarily due to length.

[52:51] Northern Route 1 is the next lowest cost, the higher cost for driven by route length, water crossings, and right-away needs.

[52:59] These are planning level estimates and will change as information is developed and we get into design.

[53:06] And cost was weighed against each of the other categories in the evaluation and the long term benefit of each project.

[53:13] So all that information is consolidated into this selection criteria, which is a SNIP out of the report itself.

[53:25] So the evaluation compares rough performance for all alternatives.

[53:30] No build, the no build option performs very poorly.

[53:34] When you look at the categories that are associated with the purpose and need of the project.

[53:37] But obviously it performs well when you talk about environmental impacts were cost.

[53:40] The Southern Route performs best for cost, length, and lower environmental impacts.

[53:46] The Northern Route performs best for connectivity, resilience, collector spacing, planning goals, and projected use.

[53:53] Northern Route 1 provides similar transportation benefits to Northern Route 2, but Northern Route 2 has a little bit higher cost and more property impacts.

[54:03] The overall evaluation supports Northern Route 1.

[54:05] Based on that, combined analysis, the final route selection report concluded, as the preferred

[54:15] major collector connection, it provides the best overall balance of the evaluation criteria.

[54:20] The recommendation is to advance the corridor into preliminary design, not final design

[54:25] or construction approval.

[54:27] Future design will refine the typical section, alignment, impacts, cost and funding needs.

[54:34] Design and construction funding has not yet been identified, and construction schedule has not been established because of that.

[54:39] Based on all these factors, staff recommends Northern Route 1 as a preferred corridor for further development.

[54:48] In real quick, for I open it up for questions, so our project website is at the bottom of this slide.

[54:54] I'm a QR code if you want to sign it or take a picture of that.

[54:58] Thanks for watching, and I'll see you in the next video.

[55:00] We have the route selection report, the reconnaissance engineering study, traffic study, environmental, open-house documentation, as well as some other updates available on there.

[55:12] So if we continue to move this project forward, we'll advance the public involvement efforts on this.

[55:19] This presentation is really a brief overview. There's a lot of information packed in these reports.

[55:24] We recognize the sensitivity of getting this link right.

[55:28] So if you're interested, please reach out and we can discuss if you have questions between now and September 15th.

[55:36] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[55:38] Thank you, Cole, for the presentation.

[55:40] One thing that I've listened to fellow residents on both sides, you know, somewhat north, somewhat south.

[55:49] One thing that has been mentioned and we met,

[55:52] And we talked about this in a good detail.

[55:55] Apparently, there was an issue with snow drips on angstrom.

[55:58] That's some residents brought up.

[56:01] I guess, once it gets windy and the snow starts drifting,

[56:04] it actually creates a pretty hazardous area along angstrom

[56:08] where the southern route would go, which is concerning

[56:12] to some residents that if was choose the southern route,

[56:14] that could also increase the possibility of the residents being

[56:18] pushed into this area where these large snow drips happened.

[56:22] I don't know. I haven't seen them. I just want to be told. Do you know about that and can you discuss that?

[56:27] Yes, so I'm from there with some of the so drifting that we've had on Inkstrom Road. It has been a problem in the past.

[56:33] With the gravel pit operations, they've created some burns, at least a long Inkstrom Road that has helped relieve some of that.

[56:39] I think there's still potential for some concerns around I believe it's canorite cornealious lake there.

[56:45] As to how the Southern Route would be impacted, it does cross a fairly open area, so there's

[56:51] potential for that, but that would be something that we'd look into in further detail when

[56:55] we've got a design trying to mitigate that.

[57:01] I mean, Assemblyperson Summer, did you have a question?

[57:08] No, I mean, I think my question is being answered for the analysis of the report.

[57:18] Assemblyperson Palmer.

[57:19] I, you briefly touched on the public comments and basically there is a, like I said in

[57:27] group of visual including, I believe, for the north-eastern community council, they were

[57:32] really promoting the Southern, but obviously, when you reach out, you reach out for comments

[57:38] beyond, just community council, could you say the strong, I guess argument, for and against the

[57:46] out around besides the cost. Obviously, that's because of the distance you said. But what

[57:52] else are other reasons that there are strong performance towards the south around?

[57:58] Yeah, I can speak to that. So some of the major things outside of cost, time received time to implement.

[58:04] A lot of that's going to be tied to the funding. When that becomes available and then what that funding

[58:10] sources, whether it's local dollars or federal dollars,

[58:14] really changes the timeline of that project.

[58:17] So at this point, it's hard to say whether the timeline

[58:20] would be quicker or not.

[58:22] Another concern that's raised is the truck traffic

[58:27] from the gravel pit, central gravel pit locations,

[58:33] as raised as a concern that the southern route could solve

[58:37] for this project.

[58:38] We are looking at the larger regional benefits of this.

[58:42] We do recognize there could be some benefits for travel travel truck operations there,

[58:46] but we believe that the northern route provides greater regional benefit.

[58:50] That's one of the reasons why we're supporting that.

[58:53] But those are probably the two main reasons.

[58:56] It's time to implement and conserve your own truck traffic outside the cost.

[59:00] Yeah, well, that's far as traffic for the trucks.

[59:04] That's probably going to operate for a while, but at the same time something can change

[59:07] in the ground that could shut down.

[59:10] So to build a road that is strictly on that,

[59:14] that's, I think, not the strongest arguments.

[59:17] The time frame, if, you know,

[59:19] wasn't the funding issue and the projects were to move forward,

[59:25] is there a big length of time of completion?

[59:28] The two, three year project, one verse, the other

[59:30] is at like, once two years and the other one's five years

[59:32] in which you construct, what would you say, just a preliminary?

[59:37] Yeah, so, preliminary a lot of that depends on one of the fund source, like I said, if it's federal funding there's a lot more steps and whoops you got to jump through that extends out the time of the project and then the other driver of time is going to be right away acquisition.

[59:53] You know, there's a very formal process that we have to follow and steps that we have to go through in that.

[59:58] I would say three years would...

[1:00:00] We'll be the absolute quickest. We'll be looking at probably three to five year timeline to construction.

[1:00:05] Regardless of which option is that correct?

[1:00:08] Where one is at this point? Yes.

[1:00:10] Okay, thank you.

[1:00:13] Can you put the question?

[1:00:17] That's not done.

[1:00:18] Thank you.

[1:00:20] Can you have some more?

[1:00:22] No, okay.

[1:00:23] Mr. Attorney, do you have a report?

[1:00:31] The clerk's report is in your red folder with the upcoming meeting schedule, election dates,

[1:00:37] and quasi-judicial report, and also attached is the joint assembly school board agenda for

[1:00:41] next Tuesday.

[1:00:44] The next item on our agenda is citizens and other correspondence.

[1:00:50] Are there any comments on the citizens or other correspondence?

[1:00:59] Okay, all right, my apologies.

[1:01:08] Deputy Mayor had something more to bring up at the end of the manager's report.

[1:01:14] And skipped over my apologies, sir.

[1:01:17] Go ahead.

[1:01:19] I moved the assembly to direct the vroom manager to pair and submit comments to the last

[1:01:24] Department of Natural Resources and a letter to Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority,

[1:01:31] regarding the pending lands transfer application in the Houston area.

[1:01:37] The comments should express the borough support for continued economic development.

[1:01:42] Industrial growth, transportation investment, and job creation opportunities within the

[1:01:48] Highlight the point McKenzie and the West is sitting at areas as locations with significant potential for future economic development, industrial activity and infrastructure expansion.

[1:02:02] I recommend that DNR and ADA consider opportunities to accommodate future industrial

[1:02:09] transportation logistics, energy, and resource development activities through the use

[1:02:16] of existing state-owned lands in other areas of the borough, including Point McKenzie and

[1:02:22] West's Sit in the area.

[1:02:24] Please make a copy of the letters available to the public when submitted.

[1:02:28] The rationale, the intent of this motion is not to oppose development in Houston, but rather to encourage DNR and data to evaluate how the state-land assets can best support long-term economic development across the borough.

[1:02:44] The Assembly supports responsible development and beliefs,

[1:02:49] location, such as Point McKenzie, and the West is sitting there.

[1:02:53] Area should continue to be considered for future industrial

[1:02:56] and economic development opportunities.

[1:03:02] Discussion on the motion.

[1:03:05] Assembly, please.

[1:03:07] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[1:03:08] Thank you, Ron, for bringing this forward.

[1:03:10] And I don't necessarily disagree with the resolution,

[1:03:14] But I wish that it would be on the agenda ahead of time, so that the public has an opportunity to come and and talk to us about it before we direct the manager to do anything with that and you brought up another important point.

[1:03:27] I was at a port commission meeting this afternoon and I just want to make sure.

[1:03:32] I mean the port is just now really starting to take off and we have some exciting projects that are coming up and I can't go into detail right now about it.

[1:03:39] But I want to make sure that we don't do something that's going to compete with the port and

[1:03:43] that may take away from opportunities that we have to develop the port right now.

[1:03:51] And so I'd like your resolution, but can we get it on the agenda and have a public hearing

[1:03:59] so we can get some input from the public before we direct the manager to do something with it and

[1:04:03] make sure that we're not doing something that's going to harm what we're trying to do out at the port.

[1:04:07] Thank you.

[1:04:08] We are limited on time as far as our window of commenting for this slant transfer, and that's why I brought this up the way I did.

[1:04:22] I actually called last Thursday when they had the Zoom to see if they were going to have a meeting in person.

[1:04:28] And I explained to the gentleman, DNR, Dan Jenkins, that I think the Burrow's best interest

[1:04:43] would be out towards Point McKenzie in that area, and you know, that's where we're trying

[1:04:50] to develop our industrial area, and I think it would be a good idea to look at that area.

[1:04:56] And I think any industrial area coming to that air.

[1:05:12] I don't think they're in any hurry. And I don't think it would be harmful to ask them to extend their public comment period so that we have a little bit more time to have our own public comment period here and simply before we direct the manager. Thank you.

[1:05:32] Does that person know us?

[1:05:38] I get what you're saying that September 14th is a deadline for public comment, but I think

[1:05:44] DNR and ADA would always take comment from the borough.

[1:05:48] I'm not sure we're in the same category, so don't you think that if we sent them a letter

[1:05:54] on the 15th or the 16th, they would consider that it's not like it goes into the public comment file.

[1:06:03] It's the borough, the entity that owns the land out here.

[1:06:08] Just don't you think they would listen to that?

[1:06:10] So even if we got it in after the other public comment period.

[1:06:15] Well, as far as I know, last Thursday, at that time,

[1:06:19] there was like 25, 100 comments, mostly opposing it.

[1:06:24] And I figured this was a good avenue for them to maybe look at point McKenzie

[1:06:30] in the Western area and actually maybe focus on that and that would be doing the burrow of

[1:06:37] a favor in the long run.

[1:06:42] Assembly person Fauma.

[1:06:44] So, the European Mayor is that you're understanding that public have spoken and this is

[1:06:48] you would like assembly to also put an opinion.

[1:06:52] So, we didn't eliminate the public from speaking.

[1:06:55] They could have spoke directly, correct.

[1:06:57] And we're just taking this position, we just need to decide among us if we support us or not.

[1:07:01] I think what you're out there is alliance with what we want to see and I'll support you on that.

[1:07:11] I have a similar person and I always go ahead.

[1:07:14] Yes, I feel like this is an issue that is of importance to a lot of people in the valley and it's important to the rural.

[1:07:23] Yeah, I have my own questions about transferring 20,000 acres to Ada versus giving it to the rural.

[1:07:28] like um and still having the development on it um and I know the bird was never asked for their opinion

[1:07:38] so I've been uh you know it's been sitting there waiting for an opinion from the bird but we

[1:07:47] represent I don't feel like I I guess I agree with a seven-member gamble it feels like um we could

[1:07:54] to let the school to the 15th and give the community opportunity to come to the Burrow with their specific input.

[1:08:02] And still move forward with this on the 15th and the state would support us and listen to us on that.

[1:08:13] I think there's objection then to the motion, right?

[1:08:17] Is there? Do I have any objection to the motion?

[1:08:25] I'd like to offer a secondary minute in a minute.

[1:08:30] I'd like to put Assemblymember Bernier's resolution on the September 15th agenda for public hearing.

[1:08:40] Well, here.

[1:08:41] If I could, Assemblymember Gamble, this is not a resolution.

[1:08:45] This is a motion to direct the manager.

[1:08:48] Okay, I'd like to put the issue on the September delay until September 15th,

[1:08:52] have a public hearing on the letter directing the manager.

[1:08:58] Assembly person follow-up?

[1:09:00] Do we ever have a public hearing

[1:09:02] for the direction to the mayor clerk?

[1:09:06] Because I don't remember where we did that.

[1:09:07] We just sat upon ourselves.

[1:09:10] Through the mayor to Assemblymember Fawnoff,

[1:09:13] we do have audience participation.

[1:09:15] Yeah.

[1:09:15] But not separate public hearing, correct?

[1:09:17] Generally, no, that takes introduction in public hearing.

[1:09:19] Okay.

[1:09:20] Thank you.

[1:09:21] So there won't be time for a formal public hearing, but during the audience, but the

[1:09:27] special people can still participate today, even if they choose to write them.

[1:09:33] So now the discussion is on the motion to postpone until September 15th,

[1:09:43] is your objection

[1:09:44] to them?

[1:09:45] Okay.

[1:09:45] There is objection.

[1:09:47] So man, quick.

[1:09:48] If I can get the members to vote on postponement,

[1:09:55] and a mayor, it is failed with Assembly

[1:09:56] remember, gamble in hours and support.

[1:10:00] And I will back to the main motion. Is there a objection to the main motion?

[1:10:08] We do have a objection.

[1:10:10] I can get the members to go ahead and vote on the main motion.

[1:10:18] Then, remember, Mickey, you're voting on the main motion.

[1:10:22] Your mic is not on assembly member, Mickey.

[1:10:25] I'm sorry. Hold on, just second, where was I?

[1:10:32] Would you restate the main motion?

[1:10:37] Basically, we're asking Mike to write a letter.

[1:10:42] Do you want me to read it into the record?

[1:10:43] No, no, no.

[1:10:47] Madam Mayor, it has passed with Assembly Member Gamble opposed.

[1:10:54] Ready?

[1:10:54] So we are back to where I have three years, two before.

[1:11:01] Citizens and other correspondents.

[1:11:05] Are there any comments from the Assembly on the citizens and other correspondents?

[1:11:10] Yeah, it's a similar person, Fauna.

[1:11:12] Not related to it.

[1:11:13] I guess somewhat related.

[1:11:15] I was expecting seeing a troopers here that will get time

[1:11:19] to ask them questions before they is that something

[1:11:22] you allow for us, maybe after we conclude this chapter,

[1:11:26] or to see if we could have a discussion with them.

[1:11:29] If not, that's okay too.

[1:11:31] But I don't think all of us got the questions in

[1:11:33] because it was kind of related to the post.

[1:11:37] So other discussion outside just would be nasty of them.

[1:11:41] So I think with them being here, I would appreciate it.

[1:11:43] We had an opportunity to discuss not

[1:11:46] where it till they leave.

[1:11:48] That would be my request.

[1:11:57] I thought that under managers report,

[1:11:59] there would be time for that.

[1:12:00] But I guess it was issued specifically

[1:12:02] and once we really went to the following thing,

[1:12:05] we didn't get that.

[1:12:06] So I don't know if we have an option to return to that.

[1:12:09] That was my only question.

[1:12:12] I would make a request to make the changes to amendment, but assuming it didn't manage

[1:12:19] it can put in here's two cents in where we could fit that in in a near future on this agenda.

[1:12:29] Madam Mayor.

[1:12:30] I don't think I understand the person's subner.

[1:12:33] I would like to move to amend the agenda to add a question and answer period with the

[1:12:39] I believe that's what he's trying to do.

[1:12:45] Well, I mean, when after the manager is gently done with his report,

[1:12:52] it's been pretty common for assembly people to give the manager direction,

[1:12:58] and then for the assembly to either concur or not to concur.

[1:13:03] So I believe that's what happened.

[1:13:05] but fall off you, assembly person fall off you don't believe that's what happened.

[1:13:12] I, I, I, yes, please help to understand a lot. I, I'm not, what, what we discussed

[1:13:19] was specifically the, the building and proposal of that, and I, when I, when I see

[1:13:23] the tripers here, I thought we'll, we'll get chance to ask them questions that are related

[1:13:27] to just, they're staffing and that kind of stuff, and I would like to have an opportunity

[1:13:30] to do that if possible.

[1:13:34] And you didn't want to do that before you voted on the motion?

[1:13:38] No, no, motion still stands as it says, this is not related to motion at all.

[1:13:45] We're going to put a order, is that my motion being recognized or not?

[1:13:49] She's trying to understand what the assembly member found out with that.

[1:13:52] I'm not understanding what he's saying.

[1:13:54] Okay, I want to have a question and answer for assembly to be able to ask

[1:13:58] Troopers questions, if I may.

[1:14:02] That's about the motion or just general information.

[1:14:07] Just general questions that we have, because we last seen them a while, several months back.

[1:14:12] That's what they were up here, and you didn't ask your question?

[1:14:17] I did not, because at that time, the discussion was specifically, but in this hours, called

[1:14:21] them to a front, without us consencing it out, but I figured that was specifically for the building

[1:14:27] related.

[1:14:29] And that's still, I'm not trying to change any of that.

[1:14:33] I'm just saying other other questions that are not related to building is what I would have liked to ask them questions, but at that time the discussion was strictly about the building.

[1:14:46] Well, it's not something that there's a decision this evening, right?

[1:14:54] So, assembly person bowls.

[1:14:55] Thank you, Madam Mayor. I was just going to make a point of order that we've already set the agenda.

[1:15:00] Here it is already passed, and we've moved on.

[1:15:03] Okay. Here is a motion for Madame Mayor.

[1:15:08] The motion on the floor is assembly members, I'm nearing to amend the agenda to add discussion with the

[1:15:12] traverse.

[1:15:15] Hey, any discussion?

[1:15:18] We're going to motion.

[1:15:19] Is there a objection to the motion?

[1:15:23] I just want to point out this takes five votes to pass.

[1:15:27] I can get the members in the room to go ahead and vote.

[1:15:34] Madam Mayor, it has one, two, three, four, five.

[1:15:36] It has passed so the Assembly Member Bulls and now is opposed.

[1:15:44] And so Assemblyperson Sumner, when did you want to play set on the agenda?

[1:15:49] I think it's right now, Madam Mayor.

[1:15:51] Right now was my intent, yes.

[1:15:54] Okay.

[1:15:58] So you're going to ask them a question?

[1:15:59] I have no questions.

[1:16:01] I have no questions.

[1:16:06] I'd like to ask the question, please.

[1:16:08] Okay, true person.

[1:16:12] We already voted on it, right?

[1:16:13] We can ask them to come forward now. Yes, please.

[1:16:15] I'll ask them if they, if they desire to come forward, you can do

[1:16:19] man somebody in the audience to come forward assembly person fall off.

[1:16:25] Well, I'm asking if they're be able to answer some of the basic questions we had. Please.

[1:16:40] Good evening. I'm Captain Chen. I'm the current commander for B. Detachment.

[1:16:46] I understand that you have a question.

[1:16:48] Yeah, last time last time when you were here, you,

[1:16:51] The one of the things the vacancies was the big discussion that we had and there was a lot

[1:16:57] There were students that were going through a academy not quite enough to fill it

[1:17:01] I just wanted to ask where we are currently in the Matsuburo for the staffing and when it's

[1:17:07] How many vacancy we have and what's the trajectory of which we're ever going with that on field positions?

[1:17:15] So I can start out with the report. We just got this morning for September and this will be statewide and then

[1:17:21] I kept in shantalk a little bit specifically to be detachment patrol.

[1:17:26] So statewide, there are 61 trooper vacancies out of 410 budgeted positions.

[1:17:34] We have 15 people currently going through the academy down in Sittka, which once they complete

[1:17:39] the academy, they'll be transferred to either the Matsu Valley, Solbana, or Fairbanks,

[1:17:46] and that'll be right around the Thanksgiving timeframe.

[1:17:50] It's when they'll complete the academy and begin field training and then captain Chan. Can you speak a little bit to your patrol vacancies?

[1:17:56] Yes, currently for B Detachment we have eight vacancies. However, given that we have a larger group of recruits going for the academy

[1:18:04] We're going to be receiving at least seven of those recruits that are going to be training here in the massive valley. So potentially the seven recruits that we're going to be filling the eight vacancies up until the time where

[1:18:16] They graduate from the program during the after program and then potentially start beating out in the two year to your point.

[1:18:24] So, after completing Academy, there's still a required to have some service in remote areas and things like that,

[1:18:32] or those rules have been changed and they are different.

[1:18:36] They can go ahead and start right away getting their work hours here.

[1:18:42] Yeah, thanks for that.

[1:18:43] In the most recent collective bargaining agreement we had with the Public Safety Employees Association,

[1:18:48] we did make some pretty substantial changes to required moves and how that process works.

[1:18:54] We still do have a responsibility to serve areas outside of our core three training posts

[1:18:59] that we have.

[1:19:01] However, we're no longer going to be forcing people to make physical moves to these locations.

[1:19:07] We have a couple of different options for folks that don't want to make the full move,

[1:19:11] including working on a two-on-two-off thing so they could still reside in the training post

[1:19:18] area and then work two weeks on in the area where we need them to be working in and then go back

[1:19:25] to their families, continue to kind of reside here. We also have another model where we're going to

[1:19:31] have kind of a cadre of troopers and fair banks and an anchorage that respond out to different

[1:19:36] areas for as needed needs of things. It is still the expectation that once you kind of

[1:19:44] receive training in these more urban areas that you do take those training and skills out

[1:19:50] to the more remote areas of the state, which is essentially for us anywhere outside of the

[1:19:56] That's who Valley Fairbanks North Star Burrow.

[1:20:03] We bring folks to train in these areas because of the higher call volume, they get a much greater exposure to much more complicated calls versus sending them directly to a post that might have fewer calls, but they're far more complicated to deal with as I'd answer your question.

[1:20:21] Yeah, most, is there a lot that are coming close to retirement that are also kind of created a lot of additional vacancies because sounds like a seven out of eight might be failed here soon, but you know, there's a lot of retirement coming up in your future.

[1:20:37] You know, with the, with your four and the 401k style system that exists now, we're seeing fewer and fewer of our employees,

[1:20:46] state-wide that are kind of in that pension bubble. A lot of our command staff is in that pension

[1:20:52] bubble where they could retire. Should they choose between, you know, years 20 and 30 is what

[1:20:57] we're seeing. But a lot of our troopers, sergeants, and even now a good chunk of our lutenants

[1:21:03] are all in that defined contribution plan. So it's a lot harder to gauge retirements because

[1:21:11] The scheme is different for a tier four versus a tier one through three employee.

[1:21:17] Okay, thank you.

[1:21:19] Assembly person bowls.

[1:21:22] No.

[1:21:24] Assembly person gamble.

[1:21:26] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[1:21:27] I just want to thank you guys for the work that you did out in Big Lake and that you're still doing

[1:21:32] over the last four weeks, especially last week, during the cleanup and peaceful place and lazy lakes.

[1:21:36] What you've done out there is just remarkable.

[1:21:39] and it's a credit to force out there, working with the public, working with the burrow,

[1:21:46] Mr. Manager, and all your folks out there too. You did a fantastic job. I've gotten

[1:21:50] nothing but praise for you and the feedback that I've gotten from the people in big

[1:21:56] lake is they're just excited about what you guys did out there. Thank you very much. One issue

[1:22:02] that I did want to raise with you that we're seeing out there, these kids on these motorcycles,

[1:22:06] that are writing on the rear tire, going down the middle of the big lake road, and Beaver Lake Road almost causing, you know, major accidents.

[1:22:16] I'm surprised that none of them have gotten really seriously hurt yet, and it's not just the motorcycles, it's the four wheelers too.

[1:22:21] And they've moved off the bike trails now, and they're on the main roads, and I don't know if you've received a lot of complaints about that and what you think you may be able to do to stop that.

[1:22:31] We did receive some complaints about that, especially just last week, I had actually talked

[1:22:36] a few of my sergeants to ensure that we would get some trooper presence out there

[1:22:41] in the big light area.

[1:22:42] Whenever a call volume allows us to do so, we understand that it is an ongoing problem and

[1:22:47] it is just going to continue.

[1:22:50] And, you know, not that you brought it up, it's just not just really isolated to the massive

[1:22:54] area.

[1:22:55] It's really a state white challenge right now because you have a lot more of those

[1:23:01] electric bites, there are people running on the bicycle path and stuff like that.

[1:23:08] So we are trying to address this statewide and we'll definitely make sure that we have

[1:23:13] a presence out in a big area to do some of these reinforcements.

[1:23:18] Thank you for everything that you do.

[1:23:20] Thank you for your service.

[1:23:24] Assembly and Assembly.

[1:23:26] Thank you very much for indulging the additional questions.

[1:23:30] I appreciate it.

[1:23:30] I don't think anyone's intended back in you up here, but thanks for the impromptu question answers.

[1:23:38] You have age parameters for the academy.

[1:23:46] Thank you.

[1:23:47] Thank you, gentlemen. Very much for flowing with unusual requests.

[1:23:52] But I'm sure you get many of them all the time. Thank you.

[1:24:04] So I don't know if I ever did fully get any comments on citizens and other correspondents.

[1:24:12] I think this is a third time, but let me share a similar person, Minky.

[1:24:17] Yeah, I'm not sure whether this is appropriate place for it.

[1:24:21] But can you can I address some correspondence from a member of the Bureau as far as the animal control, not in specifics, but just can I

[1:24:28] or assembly comments at the end.

[1:24:30] All right, I'll do that next.

[1:24:34] Alrighty, so there are no informational memorandums

[1:24:40] and so we are now at public audience participation.

[1:24:45] We do have a sign-up sheet, so we will call the names

[1:24:49] of those people and then we'll open it up to anybody

[1:24:53] that's here as well as online.

[1:24:56] Jackie, you're first.

[1:24:57] .

[1:25:11] Good evening, Madam Mayor, and assembly. My name is Jackie Goforth. The packet I'm giving you tonight, opening page, our pictures that I took, before I went to the community development department, because I do not trust the community development department and neither should you.

[1:25:26] And the reason I state that is, please turn the page to the first thing in your packet. These are legal documents I want you to look at them please.

[1:25:33] When you first set up the LCAC, it was set up that when a child would book was challenged,

[1:25:40] it would be put in a queue and then the LCAC would choose which one to pull out of the queue

[1:25:45] to read.

[1:25:46] Okay, well, in August 12th of 2025 that got changed without anyone knowing.

[1:25:53] And what it says now is, the community development department will notify the LCAC chair

[1:25:58] and they'll add the item to the next agenda.

[1:26:00] But next, if it's accepted, the item goes into the review queue.

[1:26:05] That's not how you wrote it.

[1:26:08] This is the small step to get to the next one, by the way.

[1:26:11] That is a subversion.

[1:26:13] This is why I say you have a malicious compliance problem going on.

[1:26:18] The next thing that happened was, this policy got changed again three months ago while the board,

[1:26:24] the library board was on summer vacation.

[1:26:26] And look what it says now, are you ready?

[1:26:30] The Community and Development Department will notify the Library Board Chair the Chair May at the book to the agenda at a future agenda.

[1:26:39] The next ones even worse.

[1:26:40] The Library Board May choose to review the material and provide an advisory note.

[1:26:44] And this was used at the last Library Board meeting for the Parks Recreation and Libraries Man to say that if they didn't pick this review up, it would die on the vine.

[1:26:57] was that the intent of your LCAC was to just let this go away if they decide not to review it?

[1:27:03] So who on earth would have the authority to change this policy?

[1:27:07] I think you need to look no further than the signature on the bottom of that page.

[1:27:11] Next you will see that you have the library board person,

[1:27:15] telling the library board that a challenge you have to talk to a librarian first.

[1:27:22] No, it's not in the agenda.

[1:27:24] How does he not know what the new policy says?

[1:27:26] And I tried.

[1:27:28] Next, of course, is what I'm telling you

[1:27:30] when I told you that the friends, the friends are

[1:27:32] a activist arm of the socialist Democrat party.

[1:27:35] And they are requiring that we provide the staff taxpayers,

[1:27:39] staff support to push this agenda in every library,

[1:27:42] and room to put all of their data.

[1:27:43] But the real reason I'm here is the red tab.

[1:27:46] Last time we had a library board meeting,

[1:27:48] you had a board member speak about how it is a hostile environment

[1:27:52] and they are being assaulted online.

[1:27:56] And it is from the Taukitna.

[1:27:58] Now the friends group is now going to send out a message to all of their synchophants to

[1:28:02] show up at that Taukitna meeting next Tuesday at 1 o'clock in order to verbally harass and

[1:28:08] her ring and reboot your library board members again.

[1:28:11] And that is a very, that is a hostile environment that is being created.

[1:28:16] Please, please, if you can beat at the Taukitna Library Board meeting next week at 1 o'clock.

[1:28:22] to see how this works, and to see what I'm talking about, I would appreciate it, because this is what's called malicious compliance in order to make it, so your LCAC challenge thing, the public will not have any say.

[1:28:35] Okay, Jack.

[1:28:37] Thank you.

[1:28:40] Rod.

[1:28:52] Good evening, everybody.

[1:28:55] Rod Hanson with the North Lakes Community Council.

[1:28:57] So, in a couple of weeks, you will decide on the route for this new connection between

[1:29:03] inkstrom and trunk and public works as you heard is recommending more than route

[1:29:09] one as a major collector.

[1:29:12] The Burrough Zone, North Lakes Community Council, Fisher Community Council, Road Service

[1:29:17] Area 25 Board, and the Planning Commission respectfully disagree with that recommendation

[1:29:23] from public works.

[1:29:24] We are all strongly recommending that you choose the Southern route as a minor collector as presented to the voters in the tip 21 long package.

[1:29:34] In the packet for your September 15th meeting, we will provide suggested language for an assembly resolution that supports the Southern route.

[1:29:43] And we're hoping that one or more of you would sponsor that as an alternative so that you're debate next week or in two weeks can kind of consider both options.

[1:29:54] North Lakes and Fisherup Community Council submitted a really detailed resolution too.

[1:30:00] The Planning Commission recommending that southern round and laying out our reasons why, please look at it, it's in your packets and take the time to review it, you know, outlines the history and why we think the best decision right now is the southern round.

[1:30:13] Our highest priority is community safety, the section of regard between trunk and angstrom and the angstrom intersection, experience the highest traffic volume in our community.

[1:30:22] DOT improvements on Bokard, and a new roundabout does not reduce this traffic.

[1:30:29] The route selection report looked at traffic forecast for 2050, and the analysis actually

[1:30:35] shows less traffic on angstrom if the Southern route is built versus the Northern

[1:30:39] Route.

[1:30:41] Without the Southern route, and with central gravel starting there 30-year operation, we must

[1:30:45] also accommodate all the gravel trucks.

[1:30:47] The southern route provides an alternative connection to angstrom and improved safety by removing those trucks from the equation.

[1:30:57] The northern route does not.

[1:30:59] We're also concerned about the financial impact of rural taxpayers.

[1:31:03] So the borough costs estimate for the southern route as you saw is 9.1 million compared to 21.6 for the northern route.

[1:31:10] And the state DOT actually estimates northern route one at over 30 million.

[1:31:14] That's anywhere from two and a half to three and a half times the cost if you choose the northern route.

[1:31:19] As community councils, we also stand for rights of private property owners, the northern route,

[1:31:25] touch through areas of undeveloped homestead and egg property, these property owners have strongly objected to providing right away

[1:31:31] and they will fight hard to keep their family properties whole.

[1:31:35] To be clear, we are advocating on behalf of our community, not on behalf of the gravel pit operator.

[1:31:40] They are willing to provide right away, they're willing to contribute their time, their labor,

[1:31:45] their gravel, to help bring down the cost on the southern route, speed up the process,

[1:31:51] and address safety concerns on Bogart and angstrom.

[1:31:54] The community needs, community needs must always take precedence over a particular business

[1:32:01] or a developer.

[1:32:02] When you make a decision on which route to pursue, please consider our priorities,

[1:32:06] transportation safety, financial stewardship of our tax dollars, and respect for private property owner rights.

[1:32:13] A northern route makes sense in the future.

[1:32:15] The right decision at this time is a southern route.

[1:32:18] Thank you.

[1:32:20] Okay.

[1:32:21] Tom?

[1:32:26] We're going to try to get it.

[1:32:28] Thank you.

[1:32:29] Wait a minute.

[1:32:30] We're just going to get over there.

[1:32:39] Thank you, my name is Tom Robertson, and I'm really glad to hear the public support for our public safety.

[1:32:48] I thought that was really impressive tonight to get to all gone now, but anyways, and by definition of public safety,

[1:32:55] They make the public safe, and it's our obligation to help them so they can do their job and continue making the public safe as possible.

[1:33:07] And one aspect that I keep coming back for, I would like to have the fire station at number 31, there's being built right now in March Road.

[1:33:18] And they're asking for the Governor, a letter to the Governor's support, asking for a driveway to come from the new fire station to the highway, the Glenn Highway, and mile 49 there.

[1:33:33] Right across from the Palmer Pentecostal Church, a driveway into the new fire station on alternate for a safety issue.

[1:33:43] Right now, currently, the plans are for everything to come off March Road, which has a lot of problems there being a blind intersection on a blind hill.

[1:33:55] There's a lot of accidents right there.

[1:33:57] Fire departments need alternate route.

[1:34:00] Wherever they go, they always have to have an alternative backup, whatever they're doing.

[1:34:04] And this extra driveway will help them prevent accidents and speed up their response time.

[1:34:14] So I strongly ask that.

[1:34:16] I presented a letter of support to the mayor and I would like that to be signed and passed

[1:34:22] on to the governor so we can help the public safety do their job and help make the public

[1:34:29] you say it's possible. Hey, great. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you sir.

[1:34:38] Well, I ought to stand up and forget to answer through to my think minutes is up.

[1:34:42] Come on.

[1:34:43] Thank you.

[1:34:46] Sure and Johnson.

[1:34:58] Good evening, may you end this up.

[1:35:00] Members, my name is Sharon Johnson and I live off Bogart Road. I am a frequent traveler through the Bogart Inkstrom intersection and how many of us tonight were fortunate enough to make it here through that intersection without a heart-stopping experience.

[1:35:16] How many on the assembly and here in the audience have had those last second smashing on the brakes, somebody pulling out in front of you. How many have come so close?

[1:35:25] Particularly in the morning, between seven and eight AM, the bus drivers who get that experience with a bus load of students.

[1:35:34] I am here in support of the Southern Connector from Engstrom to Trunk.

[1:35:38] Central grab-up products have given their support, residents, and daily drivers support something to relieve this intersection.

[1:35:45] Well, I look at a connector that is potentially three times more at the price tag and landowners

[1:35:53] who are vehemently opposed to selling their land for a northern route.

[1:35:57] The roundabout at Bogartangstrom is still not heading into construction due to land acquisition.

[1:36:03] Another season away?

[1:36:05] I believe working together, the borough could make the southern connector happen sooner than later

[1:36:11] as opposed to the northern route.

[1:36:13] Plus, I'll work together to make something happen

[1:36:15] and relieve the bogard angstrom intersection, hazardous

[1:36:19] experience a thing of the past.

[1:36:21] Thank you.

[1:36:23] Mm-hmm.

[1:36:24] Now, that's everybody that signed up.

[1:36:27] Uh, they had so open to anybody that would like to address

[1:36:32] the assembly on any subject, whether it's on the agenda

[1:36:36] or not.

[1:36:38] One representative.

[1:36:39] Yeah,

[1:36:49] I had Jesse Sumner, I came to talk about AM26-125, I think I had talked to you guys

[1:36:58] before about building your empire down the landfill and I know this is kind of late, I got

[1:37:06] no beef at this contractor but almost $5.5 million to build another palace on garbage. We are

[1:37:15] Overcomplicating things down there, the new tipping floor scale set up as a disaster, it really

[1:37:24] is very simple.

[1:37:25] You dig holes, you put garbage in them, you cover them up, maybe someday down the road,

[1:37:31] you put a baseball field on top of it, but we are wasting huge amounts of money down here.

[1:37:37] You should not approve this, you should not be building any more palaces on garbage.

[1:37:42] But also since some here, I'll address we went to the ballot for the bond proposal with that southern route and I think it'd be kind of disingenuous to switch that now.

[1:37:57] So thank you.

[1:38:01] Next person, please.

[1:38:18] Good evening Madam Mayor.

[1:38:20] And Burrow Assembly members.

[1:38:21] My name is Carly Shrek and I'm a resident and homeowner in the Crimson View neighborhood and a former valley based reporter.

[1:38:27] I'm no longer a porter, which means I'm not here to ask you questions instead, I'm here as a constituent to ask for your support.

[1:38:34] The Heavenly Meadows Crimson New Project was undertaken by the Burrow.

[1:38:37] We understood that roads need to be maintained and we understood that public infrastructure projects come with some disruption.

[1:38:44] What we did not anticipate was that in the midst of that disruption, the Burrow would ask would come back to the homeowner and ask that we signed an agreement protecting you from liability before you will finish the work.

[1:38:55] I think that deserves a little bit of scrutiny.

[1:38:59] The work at issue occurred within the road right away and easements.

[1:39:02] So I would like the borough to clearly explain to the public what the legal basis for

[1:39:06] asking individual homeowners to assume liability for work the borough is conducting in

[1:39:10] an area where the borough already has the right to perform work.

[1:39:14] And if the easement is held by a utility provider, why is the homeowner being asked to

[1:39:18] assume risk associated with an easement in which the homeowner does not hold utility interest?

[1:39:23] The homeowner should not become the easiest party to hand the liability to simply because we're the people living next to the project.

[1:39:30] Now let's talk about the damage that has already occurred.

[1:39:33] Our trees are being lost because of root damage associated with this construction.

[1:39:37] Trees that we were told last fall would not be affected.

[1:39:41] I understand that a tree growing near the right away doesn't mean the borough has no authority to work there,

[1:39:45] but authority to perform a project is not the same thing as an obligation to disregard the consequences of that project.

[1:39:51] So I'm asking the borough for three things. First, do not require individual homeowners to sign

[1:39:56] away their liability as a condition of completing the project.

[1:40:00] Resolve the appropriate liability and access issues with the parties who hold the relevant interests in the easement. Second, conduct and assessment of trees damaged by the construction using a tracks certified arborist.

[1:40:12] And third, establish a one for one replacement for trees removed as a direct result of the project. If the borough removes a tree, the borough should plant a tree.

[1:40:21] And for the mature trees that cannot reasonably be replaced with an equivalent tree, there should be a meaningful mitigation plan for this kind of work moving forward.

[1:40:28] So another neighborhood doesn't have to go through what we currently are because here's the larger issue

[1:40:34] The borough has the power to undertake projects like this home owners do not have the power to tell the borough

[1:40:40] Do not come into our neighborhood

[1:40:42] So when the government exercises that authority there is an obligation to exercise it responsibly

[1:40:48] I did not ask for this project. We didn't choose the disruption or the damage and we certainly shouldn't be asked to accept additional liability for the privilege of having the borough

[1:40:57] finish what the borough started. I'm not asking the borough to undo this project. I'm asking

[1:41:03] the borough to own the consequences of it. Thank you for your time. I genuinely appreciate

[1:41:07] your service.

[1:41:09] Anyone else?

[1:41:15] Okay. All righty. Go ahead, who's first on line, please?

[1:41:23] I hope my name is Greg Sent, F-I-N-D-T. I'm here to talk about the rope selection for the

[1:41:30] of a trunk connector. About one and a half miles of this route passes through land that is owned

[1:41:38] by my wife's family. We are the most impacted property owner on this project. I encourage you to

[1:41:45] please read the letter that will be submitting as part of your packet for the next meeting. It will

[1:41:52] include our comments, our opinions, and also some, I think, good technical information on this decision.

[1:41:59] We support the cell for out, and we are not willing to sell right of way for the northern

[1:42:05] route.

[1:42:07] Thanks, Edvin.

[1:42:07] For your attention to this.

[1:42:20] My name is Michelle Steven, the vice president of the Alaska Outdoor Council, and I'm speaking

[1:42:29] today on behalf of our more than 4,000 members, the Alaska Outdoor Council respectfully asked

[1:42:37] assembly not to recommend the proposed conveyance of married 20,000 acres of state land

[1:42:42] AEDA. Alaska law gives a very good reason to be cautious before giving up this much public

[1:42:48] land. Article 8, Section 1 of the Alaska Constitution says state land and resources are to be made

[1:42:56] available for maximum use consistent with the public interest. Article 8, Section 2 goes even further,

[1:43:04] it requires the state's natural resources including its lands and water to be managed for the

[1:43:09] maximum benefit of its people. The legislature specifically addressed the value of keeping the

[1:43:15] state land in public ownership. Alaska statute 30804 or 15 in his title public interest in retaining

[1:43:23] state land and public ownership. The state statute recognizes the importance of retaining

[1:43:29] state lands for the beneficial use, including

[1:43:33] hunting, and fishing, hiking, snowmobile,

[1:43:36] skiing, and other activities that can generally be made available

[1:43:40] to more people when the lands remain in public ownership.

[1:43:44] This describes exactly why these lands are precious to the

[1:43:47] last month in the AOC members.

[1:43:50] This area includes established trails and access routes used for

[1:43:53] recreation, hunting, fishing, snowmobile, and access to the lands

[1:43:57] be on them. Some of these trails are recognized and supported by the Matt Sue Burl. The

[1:44:02] public has spoken more than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted to the state

[1:44:08] concerning this conveyance. ALC is not opposed to reasonable economic development. We are

[1:44:15] saying this is the wrong place in nearly 20,000 acres of the wrong scale. That data has actual

[1:44:20] need for state land, consider smaller conveyance, or as needed basis, with enforceable stipulations,

[1:44:29] protections for public access and a clear-air plan of operations.

[1:44:33] The conveyance should also include a reversion clause, rather than waving the important

[1:44:38] protection. Once these precious lands leave state ownership, we give up protection that exists

[1:44:44] today for the benefits of all people. I'd also like to comment on Oregon's 26th,

[1:44:50] of my innate from the Alaska Snow Machine Alliance, we totally support the Lake Louise transfer

[1:44:55] building into Lake Louise and on another note.

[1:45:00] For the Petersville Community Non-Cathets, I do search and rescue in the area and we work with the state troopers and we are definitely supportive of 26-136 for the Alaska state troopers. And one last thing, I would like to say, keep our precious lands in state hands. Thank you. Happy trails.

[1:45:21] Okay. The next person online please.

[1:45:26] Hello. Yes. Go ahead. You can hear me? Yeah. Yeah. My name is Patricia Fisher. Hello. Yeah.

[1:45:36] Somebody either has an just a minute, Patty. Somebody.

[1:45:42] Patty, can you turn off your TV or your radio or your computer? We hear that just as much as we hear you.

[1:46:04] Okay, I'm speaking in opposition to Mr. Bernier's proposed motion requesting the manager to support the transfer of 20,000 acres in the Houston area to AIDEA proposing this motion at this time as a violation of public policy.

[1:46:18] in my opinion. The motion has not been adequately given notice and should not be discussed at

[1:46:24] this time. During the last few months, there has been obviously a huge outcry against the

[1:46:30] slant transfer to Ada and the establishment of data centers. Mr. Bernier's motion has not been

[1:46:37] brought forward in adequate time to be on the posted agenda. It is an insult slap in the face of

[1:46:45] residents of the Matsu, so they are not to be allowed to be heard on this motion, motion.

[1:46:52] Unfortunately, this practice seems to be routine with this assembly.

[1:46:55] And I point out the repeated motion to put a gun range on zero leg, much to the opposition of residents,

[1:47:02] and repeated motion to push motions on gravel through an opposition to public and community councils.

[1:47:11] So being limited on time, as Mr. Bernier stated, is no excuse for ramming this motion down

[1:47:20] the residents' roads.

[1:47:21] This late proposal is a case of very poor planning.

[1:47:26] If it were critical, then it should have been proposed much earlier, and this has been going

[1:47:31] on for at least two months.

[1:47:33] You are simply members are representatives of the residents, not here to impose your own

[1:47:38] I respectfully request that you propose this postpone this motion to a light later date to allow residents to be aware of the opportunity to comment.

[1:47:51] Thank you.

[1:47:54] Thank you.

[1:47:55] Who's next online please?

[1:47:57] Yeah,

[1:48:00] I have Steve Edwards, so I am adding my opposition to the land transfer recommendation

[1:48:10] by the borough, the boroughs represent the people, and there's been quite a few people

[1:48:16] showed their opposition to this transfer,

[1:48:23] and so I would hope that the boroughs position

[1:48:25] or be their neutral or

[1:48:32] to support it in the face of all this opposition seems counter-productive

[1:48:38] as representatives.

[1:48:42] We personally wouldn't find some development areas up there, that they need to be transferred

[1:48:50] from the state to the rural and the rural manage them using a public process.

[1:48:55] Aida has an absolute abysmal record, and should not have anything to do with land transfers.

[1:49:10] I'm opposed to the land transfer to Aida, and if you want to support development in the area,

[1:49:18] that might be something we could talk about. Once it goes into Aida's hands, it's a private ownership.

[1:49:24] and they can build anything you want with no public process,

[1:49:29] but the exception of the four things that require additional permits tower

[1:49:40] junkyards.

[1:49:42] But the exception of those things, once it's in the eightest hands, they can do anything

[1:49:46] with absolutely no

[1:49:50] publics keep it away from ADA.

[1:49:53] After about maybe getting some of it for the borough,

[1:49:58] much more careful about this.

[1:50:00] We're going here. That's all I have. Thank you.

[1:50:04] Thank you. Do we have anybody else? Okay. Go ahead. Who's ever next online?

[1:50:17] Good evening, Matthew Assembly. Can you hear me? Yes. Go ahead.

[1:50:21] Perfect. My name is Kennedy Groman. I'm a nurse at work tonight at your school district.

[1:50:27] I want to spend just a couple minutes talking about something that should be at the center of every of our conversations.

[1:50:32] We have about our school, student health and safety.

[1:50:37] When we hear our school nurse, we often think about the health office, the student with the

[1:50:41] stomachache or a scraped knee or needing medication, but school nurse is so much more

[1:50:47] that a person could even in the health office.

[1:50:49] The nurse is part of the school's safety infrastructure, working alongside health aids and

[1:50:54] school staff to make sure students help me to identify, manage, and respond to appropriately.

[1:51:00] We manage students with diabetes, seizures, asthma, severe allergies and other complex medical

[1:51:07] needs.

[1:51:08] We develop health plans, administer medications, respond to emergencies, train staff, train

[1:51:13] health aid, monitor emergency equipment, manage exposures, support educational needs, and prepare

[1:51:18] schools to respond when something goes wrong.

[1:51:22] And here's the safety issue I want you to consider.

[1:51:25] When nursing capacity is reduced, the workload doesn't disappear, and the risk doesn't

[1:51:32] disappear.

[1:51:32] It moves.

[1:51:33] It can move to the health aids, it can move to the teachers, it can move to the administrators

[1:51:37] and it can move to unlicensed staff.

[1:51:41] But we have to be honest about the difference between these roles.

[1:51:44] The teachers in that educator, a health aid, has a different role, a school nurse brings

[1:51:50] clinical training, assessment, delegation, and health system oversight.

[1:51:56] And in our district, CPR certification is not a mandatory requirement for every school employee.

[1:52:02] And that matters when we are discussing who will be expected to respond during a medical emergency inside our schools.

[1:52:09] We cannot simply assume that because an adult is present in the classroom that a person is a parent to manage that medical emergency.

[1:52:16] So, the question becomes, who is actually trained and repair to respond?

[1:52:22] Who responds when a student has seizure?

[1:52:24] Who recognises the diabetic students' condition is changing?

[1:52:28] And who ensures emergency medications are current and available?

[1:52:32] Who trains and supports those health aids and other staff?

[1:52:35] Who determines what can safely be delegated and provides clinical oversight from medication?

[1:52:40] And who is accountable for making those systems work?

[1:52:42] And when we reduce the nursing capacity, we need to know exactly where those responsibilities are going to go.

[1:52:53] So my call to action is simple.

[1:52:55] I ask the math to assembly to support an independent school by school health safety work load assessment for nursing capacity as before nursing capacity is reduced.

[1:53:05] That assessments should include nurses, health aids, teachers, administrators, and students that they serve.

[1:53:12] It should identify the student medical.

[1:53:20] Thank you for your time.

[1:53:21] Thank you.

[1:53:23] Next, where's my line please?

[1:53:27] Good evening.

[1:53:28] This is Esther Hudelson.

[1:53:30] By not having the letter to DNR on an AIDA on the agenda to break the trust from the public.

[1:53:37] by following state of Alaska laws on the public process is the only way the government keeps

[1:53:42] the trust with the public.

[1:53:45] I'm speaking out in opposition to 20,000 acres of state of Alaska land in Houston, Alaska being

[1:53:51] transferred to the Alaska industrial development expert authority.

[1:53:55] State of Alaska land belongs to all of Alaska.

[1:53:58] The proposed land has been used for generations for hunting, access to remote areas, and for recreation.

[1:54:04] The communities surrounding the state land are in opposition, and it's important for our

[1:54:09] representative, Ron Berner, to support his district's concerns, to data center being built

[1:54:15] in the lock of losing land, which has been historically important to the community.

[1:54:20] Data centers use a lot of water and electricity.

[1:54:24] We as a community already struggle for access to electricity and water.

[1:54:28] Many people in our community have wood stoves, generators, and have to haul water to their homes.

[1:54:33] Well, this data center, cause local businesses and people who do have electricity, competing

[1:54:39] for the use of these resources by having a data center out into our community.

[1:54:46] Our increase or the increase of cost for electricity, the land transfer transfer will seize

[1:54:52] the quality of life in our community by taking away our recreational opportunity.

[1:54:57] We, as a community, say no to this.

[1:55:00] We hope that you respect the needs in one for the quality of life for our community by saying no and shame on you for violating the public process and not having this on the agenda, because there's a lot of people that are in opposition and aren't having an opportunity to speak out against that letter, that breaks the public trust between the public and the government and shame on you for that. Thank you.

[1:55:30] Okay. I have another person online. Go ahead and the next person online, please.

[1:55:37] Yes. My name is Sherry Wresher and the resident of metal lakes. I'm

[1:55:42] want to speak out against any letter from the borough to DNR unless it's

[1:55:49] against transfer of the land. Mr. Benaire, you represent my area,

[1:55:56] Willow Houston, you have residents that follow you from big lake, all those communities have sent letters, asking that that land, not be transferred for all the reasons the previous people have testified.

[1:56:16] These are residents of the borough. They're also residents of the community that you're supposed to

[1:56:22] read present and you're not doing that. Thank you. That's it.

[1:56:28] Okay. Thank you. Anybody else online? No. Okay. One last chance. And for those here that would

[1:56:36] like to address a assembly on any issue.

[1:56:45] And still nobody online. Okay. I want to go close audience

[1:56:49] participation, and then we've had a request for a break, so we'll come back at 815.

[1:57:23] The next item on our agenda is our public hearings, and Madam Clerk, would you please read the legislation into the record?

[1:57:31] Ordnance 2696, an ordinance accepting a appropriating 2025 late August storm disaster relief funds,

[1:57:37] and the amount of 665,000 from the Alaska State Division of Homeland Security and emergency management

[1:57:42] And to fund 445 Project 550233 with the Camping Resolution 26078, a Resolution of Freedom

[1:57:49] and the Scope will work in budget for the refatement and diaper pairs as a result of

[1:57:53] the 2025 late August storm fund 445 Project number 550233, if you're on the final

[1:57:59] late speak to this, press start free.

[1:58:02] Well, when the public hearing, we do not have a sign of the sheet.

[1:58:06] The testimony, at this time, is restricted to ordinance 26-096 and resolution 26-078.

[1:58:20] So anyone that would like to come forth, I needed to testify, I needed that ordinance or resolution.

[1:58:28] We have anybody on, we don't have anybody on one last chance.

[1:58:34] Okay, I'll close public hearing and deputy mayor.

[1:58:39] I moved to adopt ordinance 26-096 and resolution 26-078.

[1:58:47] Okay, the discussion by the Assembly.

[1:58:53] Is there any objection by the Assembly?

[1:58:58] Hearing none, then the legislation passes.

[1:59:01] Madam Clerk.

[1:59:02] Ordnance 26-098.

[1:59:04] It ordinance approving a less than fair market value cell

[1:59:06] the borough on Matthew's public safety building station 15 in the Lake Louise area for 13,

[1:59:13] 176 dollars to the Louise who's sitting a tie-on community association for a public purpose

[1:59:18] if you're on the phone and would like to speak to this press start free.

[1:59:22] I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing and we do have a sign of sheets,

[1:59:28] so I will call those people first. So the public hearing is open for ordinance 26

[1:59:36] to dash 0, 9, 8, and Harry hop,

[1:59:45] is that supposed to be hard?

[1:59:48] Hold, hold.

[1:59:50] Sorry, sir.

[1:59:51] Mr. Holt, can you approach the mic?

[1:59:53] Could you go ahead and just turn it on?

[1:59:55] And then you can just leave it on.

[1:59:56] Thank you, sir.

[1:59:57] Okay.

[1:59:58] My name is Harry Holt.

[2:00:00] I've been a long time property owner of Lake Louise area, and I've been a long time president and a member of the board of the Lake Louise, so much in color.

[2:00:13] I'm here to urge you to approve the ordinance 26, 1998. The sale of the Matthews Public Safety Building in the Lake Louise area, and to the Louise, who's sitting at a time community association for the public purpose.

[2:00:29] This transfer keeps an important community asset in the local hands, the LSTCA, will partner

[2:00:37] with the Lake Louise Snow Machine Club to ensure the building continues to serve the public.

[2:00:44] Together we will use it to support all of our trail maintenance and emergency access, community

[2:00:51] coordination and other practical needs for our community area.

[2:00:56] Approving the sale is a practical responsible decision.

[2:01:00] It keeps the billing available for continued public benefit, rather than asking or risking

[2:01:08] it falling into the disuse or private hands.

[2:01:12] The LSTCA and the Lake WEE's snow machine club are already just stewarded for the people

[2:01:19] of Lake WEE's to sit in the entire one area.

[2:01:22] I respectfully ask you to vote yes and this ordinance in 2016 and I thank you for your time and service.

[2:01:30] Thank you.

[2:01:31] Peter?

[2:01:43] Madam Mayor, Assembly members, I'm Peter Probasco.

[2:01:47] I currently serve as the President for the Lake Willi's Snow Machine Club,

[2:01:51] and I'm also a member of the Community Association.

[2:01:55] I would like the Burl to recognize that they've already made a great investment

[2:02:00] in this area when they first constructed this building. Unfortunately, in the construction

[2:02:07] afterwards, some mistakes were made which resulted in the current condition of the building.

[2:02:15] However, it's not lost. We, the, the, the, uh, social, uh, association along with the community,

[2:02:23] formed a committee and on the committee we have some very talented, they do it for a living,

[2:02:30] very large contractors and the building is salvageable. And with that in mind, we would be able

[2:02:37] to take this building and maintain it for public benefit. Our club, we groom and maintain

[2:02:44] for transportation safety over 300 miles of trail. And then on top of that, you have the

[2:02:50] community association, which definitely wants to look at where we once were, where we had

[2:02:56] safety ambulance, that type of stuff. But we need this type of building and we need to support

[2:03:02] the borough. And I think working together, we can bring this building back. The borough can make

[2:03:07] that commitment that they once had to that community area and we can move forward. I'm sorry.

[2:03:16] 26098, I ask for your support. Thank you. Thank you. Michael Anderson.

[2:03:22] I

[2:03:32] have to do more assembly members in matter mayor.

[2:03:37] My name is Michael Anderson.

[2:03:38] I am the vice president of the Ike Police

[2:03:40] and I'm machine clubbed in a property owner there

[2:03:43] for about four years.

[2:03:47] When this original building was built,

[2:03:50] like Pete said, mistakes were made.

[2:03:55] It was condemned after five years.

[2:03:57] It's been sitting condemned for about eight years

[2:04:02] if I remember correctly.

[2:04:04] So it's sitting there, rotting a bunch of us

[2:04:08] got together with Ilyne Prabasco,

[2:04:12] heading the, you know, grabbing the ball and running with it.

[2:04:17] And we've come up with a plan to fix this building

[2:04:23] to where we can start using it, not only for the

[2:04:25] and machine club, but all of our safety equipment for the fire department, we lost our ambulance

[2:04:31] because we didn't have a place to put the bill in, the ambulance and any more. Hopefully,

[2:04:36] we'll get that back.

[2:04:41] We still got a lot of work ahead of us, but I'm hoping you guys will

[2:04:45] vote yes on this proposal. That's all I got. Thank you. Thank you. I mean.

[2:05:05] Okay, good evening. Assembly members, Madam Mayor, Mr. Manager, Mr. Attorney, Madam Clerk, and my friend, Brenda Joe.

[2:05:14] I'm my lean pervascow district, one resident and homeowner, and I'm late cabin owner and recreationalist in this area.

[2:05:21] I've been in the last instance in 1981 and I've enjoyed outdoors my entire life.

[2:05:26] I'm a retired Alaska public employee with 34 years of service in my last 19 years here at the Mount Sieberl.

[2:05:32] speaking on behalf of myself, as well as the LSTCA and the LLSMC on this ordinance.

[2:05:42] And because of my familiarity with these types of requests and the rural processes, I volunteered to handle this acquisition request for the community and they were glad to turn it over to me.

[2:05:51] So briefly on the LSTCA, they provide the group that's recognized by the PURRO to provide direct input in citizen participation in government and local affairs.

[2:06:05] The LSTCA assists with coordinating EMS services, although it does not directly oversee them. They help provide storage of equipment for EMS services, as well as coordinate brush removal and signage in the channel between Lake Louise and Lake Susit.

[2:06:20] and then mostly outside of the winter season,

[2:06:23] they also facilitate a contract for summer

[2:06:25] and winter snow plowing and road grading

[2:06:27] from a local resident contractor.

[2:06:30] The community has also staged a number of stocked fireboxes

[2:06:34] around the lakes for use in case of emergencies

[2:06:37] and there's a location map for all of those.

[2:06:41] I'm going to talk briefly about the census information

[2:06:44] because some of you might think

[2:06:45] if you looked at the census data that, you know,

[2:06:49] have 36, 38, 40 people there.

[2:06:52] Well, that varies depending on the years, of course.

[2:06:56] But that number of housing units up there,

[2:06:59] according to the borough records,

[2:07:00] I got this just the other day, is 538.

[2:07:03] So we have a lot of folks up there that don't live their full time.

[2:07:07] But that area is packed almost every weekend,

[2:07:11] winter and summer with all the cool stuff going on.

[2:07:15] So the events are held year round at the lake,

[2:07:17] And at any given event, there's estimated to be up to 300 people

[2:07:22] from newborn to age 80s enjoying the lakes in the surrounding area.

[2:07:26] Non-cabin owners come from Glen Allen, Eureka, Fairbanks,

[2:07:29] Feldees, to join these activities.

[2:07:32] And some of the fun things that go on at Lake Louise

[2:07:35] are, well, first in the winter.

[2:07:37] We are a major stop for the copper basin, 300.

[2:07:40] So we have a lot of mousheres up in the area.

[2:07:42] We have a sweet heart fun run, the wolf pack fungerizer weekend,

[2:07:46] Wolfpack Spring Run, an antique snow machine, event in Curling, Ice Hockey, Ice Golf.

[2:07:54] Yeah, Ice Golf or other spring event, we have cardboard boat races, we have an annual

[2:08:00] North Beach picnic in Extravaganza, Halloween Party, Thanksgiving Poplet, and Great New Year's Eve Party.

[2:08:07] So it's busy year round, and I guess I'll sum it up really quickly.

[2:08:14] We do have another member that was supposed to be here tonight to help testify his name is James Hastings and he runs and manages and administers the Alaska Healing Hearts, the Island of Hope and Healing, and he was hoping to be here tonight to testify, but he has something come up so James did submit a letter of support and I'll hand that to the clerk for the record and we appreciate your, your,

[2:08:44] your service to us and for this opportunity for our community we will take good care of it.

[2:08:50] Thank you.

[2:08:52] Okay.

[2:08:54] Anyone else that would like to testify on this ordinance?

[2:09:02] We have a new rule.

[2:09:03] Okay.

[2:09:03] Go ahead.

[2:09:04] Who's ever online, please?

[2:09:08] Hi.

[2:09:09] My name is Michelle Stevens and I am president of the Alaska Snow Machine Alliance, which supports

[2:09:15] of Snomstein Club in state of Alaska.

[2:09:18] We highly support this project in Lake Louise,

[2:09:21] ordinance 26, 095, Lake Louise, support so many trails

[2:09:28] over 300 miles of trails that Lake Louise

[2:09:32] Snomstein Club

[2:09:37] grooms for the community in the wintertime.

[2:09:40] And this project will help so much

[2:09:43] with winter-tale grooming, the community, and everything.

[2:09:48] Story and equipment, this is, you know, huge to keep the equipment dry and covered so that they can do makements on their equipment to keep.

[2:10:00] The trails groomed. They are so involved, they are top-notch. This snow machine club is paramount to the community in the police.

[2:10:10] And I, again, would like to say that the Alaska snow machine alliance and Peter's looks me nonprofit, highly support this project, and thank you for your time.

[2:10:25] in one last chance, any one in present, one, two,

[2:10:29] chest to five.

[2:10:32] Okay, I'll close the public hearing and get me here.

[2:10:39] I moved to adopt ordinance 26-098,

[2:10:42] and I'd like to speak to it momentarily.

[2:10:45] Sure, go ahead, sir.

[2:10:46] So this safety building was built by Grant, I believe,

[2:10:51] It's what I was told.

[2:10:53] And you had a certain amount of time to get it built and stuff.

[2:10:57] And it was kind of a rush deal.

[2:10:59] When I went out there, it kind of looks like maybe 15 feet of fill

[2:11:03] or something.

[2:11:04] And then some perm frost involved as well.

[2:11:10] And nice building, sturdy building,

[2:11:13] columns construction built it.

[2:11:16] But the floor dropped out in some places

[2:11:20] at 29 inches. I know when I walk through there the middle of the building was like 15, 16 inches

[2:11:28] higher than the perimeter. But the building was sound from what I could see. I mean it wasn't

[2:11:35] all cracked up on the drywall and stuff. But at one point they condemned the building and then

[2:11:42] they were trying to work out ways to get the building demolished. There was some talk about maybe

[2:11:50] trading, or letting people tear it down for their lumber costs and stuff, but then the

[2:11:56] world would still have to remove the concrete and clean up.

[2:12:00] This is just a way that is a useful building.

[2:12:06] If you have a little bit of ingenuity and it relieves the borough of any financial costs

[2:12:19] stuff like that as providers get in really building. It's a win-win for them and out there

[2:12:24] they don't get a lot of service from the Bureau and anything that they can get. I'm not

[2:12:29] sure appreciate if they can get it.

[2:12:33] Oh, Assembly person Bowles.

[2:12:36] Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you, Ron, for bringing this forward. I fully support this.

[2:12:40] I'd like to amend this ordinance and resolution. Friendly ordinance or friendly amendment.

[2:12:47] I think that this is so important that we need to change the number to one for one dollar.

[2:12:54] They have already paid their statewide taxes.

[2:12:57] They're going to be utilizing this facility to serve the community.

[2:13:01] This isn't for personal use.

[2:13:02] This is for service to the community.

[2:13:05] I think that that money that $13,175 can be put towards better use than having to put it towards this.

[2:13:13] So I think that the borough should transfer this for $1 and then allow them to utilize that

[2:13:19] funding to serve that community.

[2:13:23] Okay, this is a primary amendment then to change from, remove the $13,000, $1,276 in place

[2:13:33] of that, put $1.

[2:13:35] Assembly for some gamble.

[2:13:37] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[2:13:38] And I hold hardly support the amendment,

[2:13:44] this building has been a disaster for the boroughs since my time and emergency services to the point where it was going to be cost prohibitive.

[2:13:53] I don't even know if they knew how they could even get it engineered to fix the floor and it back when I was with emergency services.

[2:13:59] And so they finally just condemned it and they lost their ambulance in Lake Louisa.

[2:14:04] So now if they need emergency services,

[2:14:06] I believe it has to come out of Golanalan or out of Sutton,

[2:14:09] if they need medical assistance up there.

[2:14:12] And like Assembly Member Boles and Assembly Member Bernier

[2:14:14] have said, this is a great project.

[2:14:18] It's a community coming together to build something

[2:14:20] that's going to serve the entire community.

[2:14:23] And I think this is a great project.

[2:14:25] And we should give them the building for $1.

[2:14:28] Thank you.

[2:14:32] I just like maybe staff to come forward because anybody listening this in public might

[2:14:40] not understand how we like how was the 13,000 calculated what's I mean I've seen a fair number of the less than fair market value sales go

[2:14:52] I've never reduced it to one dollar not that I don't necessarily support that but

[2:14:59] as the pervasse.

[2:15:00] Go as to keep a kind of a straight keel with everybody and how they treat them.

[2:15:06] So can you speak to how the 13,000 was arrived at and sort of the process for less than fair

[2:15:11] market value and what changing it to $1.00 any implication of that?

[2:15:16] Okay, with the Assembly's understanding and permission, I will acknowledge staff, so go ahead.

[2:15:28] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[2:15:29] Assembly members, for the record, Jillian Morsey Community Development Director, and to answer Assembly member.

[2:15:34] Now, our question, the price that you see as part of this legislation is the price reflects

[2:15:45] the subdivision costs period.

[2:15:49] Excuse me, what was the last part that you just said?

[2:15:52] The price of $13,176.

[2:15:56] Just a minute.

[2:15:57] Assembly.

[2:15:58] First of all, will you put your mic on please?

[2:16:00] So it's on the record.

[2:16:00] I thought, thank you.

[2:16:01] No, we'll go ahead and ask you a question.

[2:16:03] I didn't hear the very last part you said it's that that that price is reflective of the price reflects the subdivision costs.

[2:16:10] Oh, okay.

[2:16:11] Thanks.

[2:16:13] Yes.

[2:16:14] Okay.

[2:16:15] Thank you.

[2:16:16] I just wanted to be sure it was on the record.

[2:16:18] No, I can't.

[2:16:19] Yeah, but he mayor.

[2:16:20] This originally was, I believe, a 17 acre parcel and now is subdivided down to five.

[2:16:26] I believe.

[2:16:29] Assemblyperson McKee did you still?

[2:16:31] I did.

[2:16:32] Yeah, so the, this is five acres and so that five acres is worth 13,000, whatever it is.

[2:16:41] What, I guess I would ask you, what, we're giving you that to less than bear market value.

[2:16:45] What is for a market value for this thing?

[2:16:55] Through the mayor to Assemblymember McKee, I don't have that number right in front of me,

[2:16:59] but what I can tell you is this was about a 16 acre parcel.

[2:17:03] and it was now subdivided, where five acres is going to the LSTCA, so to this and the Lake Luis

[2:17:12] No Machine Club, and then about 12 acres were set aside for the borough, but I can get those numbers

[2:17:20] for you about what the values are. Something members, some were just showing me something here

[2:17:27] and I had already read that and it tells me what the whole thing was worth, but I still don't know

[2:17:32] what the, I guess because I'm not getting to the mountain my head, I can't, I still don't

[2:17:36] know what each that whole 5-acre piece plus the land is actually worth, because we're

[2:17:42] giving it for less than that's 13, what, what would it be if we weren't giving it for

[2:17:47] doing it for less?

[2:17:49] Do you understand?

[2:17:52] Who has through the merit to assembly member, I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.

[2:17:57] Because what it says in the, it's talking about 17,000 acres and it was like 545,000

[2:18:02] Now, it's down to like five acres and the building and we're saying in the case of less

[2:18:08] in fair market value.

[2:18:09] My question is what is fair market value for this?

[2:18:11] If we were selling it not to these folks with to somebody else, what would we be?

[2:18:15] Through the mayor to Assemblymember McKee, I do have those numbers.

[2:18:18] They're back at the table and I could get those for you, but I don't have them in front of me,

[2:18:22] currently.

[2:18:23] Could you get them?

[2:18:26] Similar to those in hours.

[2:18:28] So by understanding it correctly, we're selling them to, for the 13,000 that it cost us

[2:18:33] do the subdivision of the property.

[2:18:36] So we're selling it to them at just the cost.

[2:18:38] No value of the property, just the cost of what

[2:18:41] it cost the borough taxpayer to subdivide it.

[2:18:51] So if we give it at $1, the borough taxpayers basically pay

[2:18:59] in the cost of the subdividing, because I'll

[2:19:01] come out of the general budget.

[2:19:07] Through the mayor's assembly, remember now,

[2:19:09] And the 13,176 dollars takes care of the cost for the subdivision.

[2:19:16] And I could give you a breakdown of what those costs are.

[2:19:20] Again, I just have that back at the table.

[2:19:22] And I could survey and cost and other things in order to do the subdivision work.

[2:19:28] Okay.

[2:19:29] So I don't need to break down.

[2:19:30] I understand the 13,000.

[2:19:33] I just don't know if he asked for it to be for $1.

[2:19:36] And I mean, you could consider it just a contribution to the project for putting a floor back into

[2:19:43] to line, I suppose.

[2:19:45] But it helps me to know that that is an actual cost incurred by the burrow.

[2:19:51] Assembly.

[2:19:52] I think I remember hearing about this as it was going along.

[2:20:00] And, you know, the Lake Louie's no machine club, you know, knew they were going to incur these costs for the subdivision.

[2:20:05] I think the more appropriate way to do it would be, you know, perhaps working a grant in the $13,000 grant in the budget process next year.

[2:20:13] But except, you know, moving this long, as it was originally drafted as it was originally intended.

[2:20:21] I think it meant personal goals, and then, please.

[2:20:24] Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, so the taxpayers are actually sitting right out there. They've already paid their taxes.

[2:20:31] They've paid for $13,000.

[2:20:32] It's already been paid, and they're doing this community a huge service by taking this

[2:20:38] on.

[2:20:39] I think that this is the least that we, on the assembly, can do for them, considering what they're

[2:20:46] taking on with this project for one, and then once this project is complete, what they're

[2:20:51] going to be able to do is, as far as providing, mean services, heat for homes, grooming

[2:20:57] trails, just the area out there, I'm sure everybody's been out there, it's massive and the

[2:21:02] snowshing club does outstanding work and this is a very minute amount and that 13 grand

[2:21:10] give her take and go back into that community, they've already paid these area white taxes,

[2:21:15] they can go back into that community and be used to serve that community.

[2:21:20] Okay, I think D has this bullpen and all come in.

[2:21:26] I don't ever like voting on something if I really don't have all of the numbers.

[2:21:30] And if what if this is worth $150,000 and when getting doing it for like $13,000, whatever it is.

[2:21:36] If I'm a taxpayer out there, property tax, property owner, and I'm paying taxes, I'm saying,

[2:21:40] we're going to give away something that's $150,000 for $13,000.

[2:21:43] And I can't even pay my stick in property taxes.

[2:21:46] And this is the benefit people in a certain, I get it.

[2:21:49] You guys are great, whoever you guys that are doing this is a best presentation I have ever heard.

[2:21:54] So I'll probably go ahead and vote for it anyway, but I want to know what we're getting.

[2:21:59] You understand what I'm saying?

[2:22:00] Transparency says, I can't just say, oh yeah, let's just do this.

[2:22:05] Okay.

[2:22:06] Did you get some figures?

[2:22:09] Okay.

[2:22:10] Thank you, Madam Mayor, to Assemblymember McKee, back to your original question.

[2:22:14] And the 2026 building appraised value was $459,100.

[2:22:20] The 2026 building appraised value was $459,100.

[2:22:29] The land value at 16 acres was 86,200.

[2:22:34] If you take the 36 to get 3,650 per acre times five acres for the Lake Louise, the

[2:22:44] L-S-T-C-A parcel equals 18366 dollars plus building equals the total value of 477,466 dollars

[2:22:57] in the 80 cents for this piece today.

[2:23:02] The building is condemned.

[2:23:03] That's correct.

[2:23:08] Similar.

[2:23:09] It's really finished.

[2:23:13] So are we really giving 13,000.

[2:23:16] A waste.

[2:23:17] This thing is supposed to be like, would you ever, what's she, that final figure you ended up with,

[2:23:21] for 13,000 dollars, even if it's a condemned filling.

[2:23:24] Must be worth something if you can fix it.

[2:23:27] What's that probably wasn't a very critical question.

[2:23:29] But what are we actually

[2:23:32] giving them for that money, for how much money was here?

[2:23:37] We're giving for 13,000.

[2:23:38] that final figure up here, that's the 101.

[2:23:41] This said, this five acres and this building is actually worth

[2:23:44] blah, blah, blah, blah, and we're selling it for $3,000.

[2:23:47] That's my question, or my question, that's what I want to know.

[2:23:51] Through the mayor to some of my memory key, I'm sorry, I may not

[2:23:54] understand your question, but what I did want to provide was the breakdown

[2:23:59] of the subdivision costs just to go back to that, so you understand what

[2:24:02] the costs are, there's surveyors over $12,000.

[2:24:07] There's also a plating fees occurred, $81,

[2:24:11] another $300 fee, and then a recording fee

[2:24:15] for the $13,176 in eight cents.

[2:24:19] And that's the less than fair market value,

[2:24:21] that the five, a little over five acres

[2:24:23] is being offered to the LSTCA.

[2:24:27] OK, I think maybe if I put this really,

[2:24:28] if you were selling this to me for fair market value,

[2:24:31] what would you charge me?

[2:24:36] I'm going to declare things to that question.

[2:24:39] Go ahead, sir.

[2:24:40] Through the Meredith Miss McKee.

[2:24:41] Why can't I get that?

[2:24:42] The building is condemned.

[2:24:43] I know.

[2:24:44] I know.

[2:24:45] I know.

[2:24:46] I know.

[2:24:47] I know.

[2:24:57] you to us. Right. And so that's the issue.

[2:25:00] And like Mr. Bernier mentioned, we can go in there and try to fix it, or we can try to demolish and remove it, which is going to cost us probably more than $13,175.

[2:25:11] Okay, I got it. So I think the selling point to me is, these folks sitting out here saying all of the wonderful things that they're going to do with it.

[2:25:19] This is, as I said, the best presentation I've heard. I always go toward something that what would it cost me if fair market value?

[2:25:27] But I understand, I just wanted the numbers out there, and I'm okay with that.

[2:25:33] And through the mayor quickly, I mean the value of sub-dividing is when we hand this to them,

[2:25:37] they're going to take complete ownership and liability for it, right?

[2:25:40] So we want to sub-divide keep the land that's ours for public purpose.

[2:25:44] This will still serve public purpose, but it's going to be under their name,

[2:25:48] and essentially that Burrough's going to wash our hands of it.

[2:25:52] Okay, so when those are draw, they think, yeah, I got it.

[2:25:54] And they're willing to take it all.

[2:26:00] I was just going to say that I think that $13,107,6 dollars is the best off what we've

[2:26:06] gotten.

[2:26:06] The one dollar would be the best off what we've gotten.

[2:26:09] If you look at the pictures, yeah.

[2:26:13] I think that the assessments hasn't caught up with the confirmation department.

[2:26:18] I think that that assessment may have reflected what it would have been in a building that was actually

[2:26:24] So, I mean, this might actually be fair for about $13,000.

[2:26:28] I mean, well, the bland itself's worth a little more,

[2:26:30] but there's a liability that's taken off with it.

[2:26:33] And the only reason that I using question this is when we've had so much

[2:26:36] consternation with the public about taxes and we need to stop spending their

[2:26:42] money and all of that, I need them to know.

[2:26:45] That's why I had this discussion was important to me, because maybe it is

[2:26:49] some folks out there, now it's like, why not?

[2:26:53] And could that matter Mary?

[2:26:54] Half of the question.

[2:26:55] A lot of people that need to talk.

[2:26:57] I had more to add, you know, it was cut off.

[2:27:01] What?

[2:27:02] I had more to say when D interrupted me.

[2:27:05] Very, very politely.

[2:27:07] No, no, not back and forth between the two.

[2:27:10] Madam Mary, may I continue?

[2:27:13] May I continue?

[2:27:15] Yes.

[2:27:16] Some have come through the chair.

[2:27:18] not yet. Thank you. Yeah, what was going to say about after me for allowing that. So I've been

[2:27:28] I've been spanked, so I am now spanking you too. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[2:27:33] Oh, I don't disagree with anything that Mr. Bols was saying about this being, you know, these taxpayers have paid their taxes and the providing a very worthwhile service to the community.

[2:27:44] I just think that it's more appropriate that since there was a cost to curve for subdivision

[2:27:48] that we, you know, receive the expense for the subdivision here on the sale and then if we

[2:27:54] want to give them $13,175, I would 100% support a grant later on during the budget process.

[2:28:03] Or even at the next meeting.

[2:28:09] So I think we're just, I call for the question, we're deviating away from the amendment.

[2:28:14] Okay,

[2:28:18] so first of all, I lean as glad she's retired from the borough at this point, but,

[2:28:22] I'm pretty easy, this is going to happen.

[2:28:25] The 13,000 is just a cost the borough incurred, so to make the subdivision possible.

[2:28:31] And so I agree with Assemblymember Sumner.

[2:28:34] I just think for all future things like this,

[2:28:37] sell it at the cost and then do a $13,000 contribution,

[2:28:42] or whatever, you could come back to us for more if it's warranted.

[2:28:47] So that's just where I am on it.

[2:28:48] But it's going to happen one way or another.

[2:28:52] I think the amendment is changing to $1.

[2:28:54] So I'm opposing that, but we'll support the sale, absolutely.

[2:28:58] Okay, assembly person bowls.

[2:29:03] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[2:29:04] These good people already paid their taxes and with that, I call the question.

[2:29:08] Okay, is there a objection?

[2:29:12] Question has been called.

[2:29:16] They don't see any objection to the question, Madam.

[2:29:21] I can get the members to go ahead and vote on the primary amendment.

[2:29:29] Madam Mayor, it has failed with assembly member gamble and bowls and support.

[2:29:34] and send a person from a question just to have continued please if I may.

[2:29:40] When this whole thing started, that $13,000 that was something that was discussed

[2:29:46] and they agreed with that amount. Is that correct?

[2:29:50] That is correct.

[2:29:52] So it's not surprised to them that they agreed they're happy with the number and everything

[2:29:56] correct.

[2:29:57] through the mirror to a assembly member phone off.

[2:30:01] I'm standing up here in speaking of this. This has been a long process for the community council, land management, also department emergency services.

[2:30:11] There has been years of conversations around this. There are no surprises tonight.

[2:30:15] So, to my understanding, to Miss McKee, to just to kind of put you at ease, we're not charging

[2:30:21] money, we're just passing on the cost, what it costs, to separate us.

[2:30:24] So, I think that is a very reasonable, what the staff has prepared, and I will support it

[2:30:32] as it is written.

[2:30:34] Okay.

[2:30:36] I'm ready to, is there objection to the motion,

[2:30:43] and then I don't see any objection to the

[2:30:45] motion for the legislation passed this.

[2:30:49] Ordnance 26100 in Ordnance 3 appropriating $122,895 in 23 cents.

[2:30:56] From the Brett Reber floor replacement project to the Ice Arena and pool project fund for the purchase of an ice-resurfacing machine.

[2:31:03] The accompanying resolution 2681, a resolution improvement scope will work in budget for the purchase of an ice-resurfacing machine.

[2:31:11] If you're on the point of the like to speak to this, press start free.

[2:31:14] Open the public hearing for ordinance 26-100 and resolution 26-081.

[2:31:23] We do not have a sign-up sheet.

[2:31:26] Anyone that would like to testify on either this ordinance or resolution.

[2:31:36] We have one person online.

[2:31:38] Go ahead, please.

[2:31:49] Did they hang up?

[2:31:54] They put their hand down.

[2:31:55] They don't want to speak.

[2:31:56] Oh, so we didn't lose them, but they just changed their mind.

[2:32:02] All right.

[2:32:05] One last chance for anyone here.

[2:32:10] Okay.

[2:32:10] I'm going to close a public hearing and get the mayor.

[2:32:16] I moved to adopt ordinance 26-101 and resolution 26-084.

[2:32:26] That's the wrong ordinance.

[2:32:30] Did we give them the wrong?

[2:32:31] Yeah.

[2:32:32] That was the assembly member somewhere that was supposed to remove the file on one.

[2:32:37] I don't think it's 100.

[2:32:38] Oh, he's working.

[2:32:43] I think they handed it to me because it's in my district.

[2:32:46] But I moved to adopt ordinance 26-100 and resolution 26-081.

[2:32:52] You like to speak to it?

[2:32:54] Yeah, I like to say one thing.

[2:32:56] I'm not sure if this is as I am voting or not that it was a pretty

[2:32:58] part on the details on what it is that ice resurfacing machine is, but I hope that

[2:33:04] there we go. And I hope what I was going to say is I hope this thing doesn't get

[2:33:07] put out to pasture, put a government auction because, you know, it's possible that it

[2:33:11] could be repurposed for one of our other. I think maybe we have some clarification from staff

[2:33:18] if Madam Mayor will allow it.

[2:33:25] For the record, Jillian Morrissey Community Development Director, through the Mayor to assembly

[2:33:29] member.

[2:33:32] None of our ice-resurfacing machines go out to pasture. We have several other outdoor

[2:33:38] ice-rings that we also service now, including Tel-Kitna, Willow. We also have a Rink

[2:33:44] and Sun, and now we have acquired Glacier View Community Center, which also has an ice

[2:33:49] ring in need of an ice-resurfacing machine. Using the term ice-resurfacing machine is just that I'm

[2:33:56] using instead of saying Kleenex or say facial tissue.

[2:34:01] So it's the embodies who we typically use for our parts

[2:34:05] and for our machinery.

[2:34:07] It's just it allows procurement the opportunity

[2:34:09] just to look at different alternatives.

[2:34:14] Assemblymember Bolt.

[2:34:16] Oh, my camel.

[2:34:17] Thank you, Matt.

[2:34:19] So I was just trying to go back and look,

[2:34:21] Erin, that's kind of slow.

[2:34:22] Didn't we last meeting move money to the Brett

[2:34:25] floor replacement project. And if we moved money to this project from a different project,

[2:34:32] why are we now again moving money from the project? We moved money from to fund to now

[2:34:39] purchases and building. Through the Maritou Assembly member bulls, we actually have, we were not

[2:34:47] moving it to the, we finished the flooring projects. What we're doing is as projects are coming in

[2:34:54] And we have leftover funds we've been coming in under budget, which is terrific.

[2:34:58] We've been moving those funds in order to be able to.

[2:35:00] We're able to repurpose them in order to be able to continue to have high quality operations.

[2:35:05] And this is the final moving of project funds in order to be able to purchase the Zamboni,

[2:35:11] which requires an additional about $65, $70,000.

[2:35:16] Okay, sure.

[2:35:16] So if I may, through the mayor, I think the confusion may be.

[2:35:19] That was the wassela pool flooring, not the Brett.

[2:35:22] Thank you. Yep. Okay. Yep.

[2:35:27] Okay, Assemblyperson Campbell.

[2:35:29] What are you, Madam Mayor?

[2:35:31] Jillian, I must have missed this, so this is adding to a project and you're going to purchase a new Zamboni, is it correct?

[2:35:37] Through the mayor to Assemblymember Campbell, that is correct.

[2:35:40] We are in the need of a new one at the Brett facility.

[2:35:43] Got

[2:35:47] you.

[2:35:48] Is there any objection to the motion?

[2:35:54] See, no objection and the legislation passes.

[2:35:58] Madam Clerk.

[2:35:59] Ordnance 26101 and Ordnance accepting and appropriating 565,900 dollars from the Talki

[2:36:05] to airman's association with Camping Resolution.

[2:36:08] 2684, Resolution of Freedom and School for Work and Budget

[2:36:10] for the top-caint and Village Air Strip Revent Reconstruction.

[2:36:14] If you're on the front of a like to speak to this, press start free.

[2:36:18] Okay, we do not have a sign-up sheet,

[2:36:20] and public hearing.

[2:36:22] Anyone that would like to testify in orders 26-101 or resolution 26-084.

[2:36:33] see anybody do we have anybody would you not have anybody online? Okay. I'll close public hearing and deputy mayor. Now you can reread it.

[2:36:45] I moved to adopt ordinance 26-101 and resolution 26-084.

[2:36:54] discussion in the objection.

[2:37:01] Okay, hearing none another legislation passes, men close.

[2:37:07] Do we have another one? That's the last one, okay. Now we're now to another audience participation.

[2:37:14] Don't look like we have a sign up sheet. Go ahead and open audience participation.

[2:37:20] And if you didn't testify previously, you can testify under this audience participation.

[2:37:31] Anybody online, sir?

[2:37:35] I'm ready.

[2:37:35] I'm going to go ahead and close audience participation.

[2:37:39] And now we're to the consent agenda.

[2:37:42] Assembly.

[2:37:42] Posts is on there.

[2:37:44] Yeah, I'd like to also pull AM26-125.

[2:37:48] 25.

[2:37:55] Is that right?

[2:37:56] 26.

[2:37:56] 125.

[2:37:57] Is that too said, sir?

[2:38:00] OK.

[2:38:01] Thank you.

[2:38:06] There's the only objection to him pulling.

[2:38:09] 125.

[2:38:10] 26.

[2:38:12] Okay.

[2:38:13] Don't see any objection.

[2:38:14] And then, clerk.

[2:38:23] Madam clerk.

[2:38:25] Resolution 26.

[2:38:27] 087.

[2:38:27] Resolution A.

[2:38:28] Two wave application and land use permit fees for denouling Nordic ski clubs.

[2:38:32] proposed four-mile trail expansion up to a heat and lakes park. Resolution 2689, a Resolution

[2:38:38] directing the manager to develop a public safety facility proposal for Alaska State Trooper

[2:38:43] operations in the Maniska St. of Burrow, Resolution 2690, a resolution that mending the Peace

[2:38:49] Kettle for Community Development, Resolution 2696, a resolution that mending the scope will

[2:38:53] work and put it within the midway road service area, excuse me, road service area, to re-allocate

[2:38:58] funds from Steven Drive Improvements to Midway Streets Improvement Project, AM26-121

[2:39:05] authorization to purchase a network's network, which is from Worldwide Technology in the

[2:39:10] amount of $155,449.17. AM26-122 approval of change order number 7 for contract 23T-2PC

[2:39:20] with Dowell for the Ederton Park's Road Mountain Trails Drive Upgrade Pathway Project

[2:39:26] to retroactively extend the completion date to September 30th,

[2:39:30] 2026, AM26-124, approval, a change order number four for contract 2555B,

[2:39:37] with granite construction for the Midway Streets Road Improvement Project,

[2:39:41] to add 11,000 important and $94 and $8,000,

[2:39:44] and retroactively extend the final completion date

[2:39:47] to December 31st, 2026, AM26-126 awarded bid number 2725B,

[2:39:53] to old-day construction company in the amount of 227,773 dollars in 27.

[2:40:00] For a till keep in a transfer station access improvements, AM26-127 authorizing the managers signature on the memorandum of agreement with the Alaska State Department of Natural Resources Division, division of geological and geophysical surveys for the 2023 National seismic hazard model results in a GIS based analysis of soil distributions and liquefaction, susceptibility for the borough, and AM26-128-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-159-15

[2:40:30] approval of additional utility relocation costs of $81,945 and $42 to end

[2:40:36] starting after gas. Company for midway road service area streets improvement project.

[2:40:41] Deputy Mayor. I moved to approve the as consent agenda as read into the record by the clerk.

[2:40:48] Is there any objection?

[2:40:53] I just realized that so I apologize, Madam Clerk.

[2:41:02] That

[2:41:08] am 26-128 is that third additional utility relocation costs for NSDAR that we had discussed

[2:41:15] the last meeting that hadn't come before the assembly yet.

[2:41:18] They would be grouped with the other two.

[2:41:21] So this is utilities that were already spent in the Errolberg budget.

[2:41:27] So I would like to divide the question and hand it out separately.

[2:41:32] Okay, is there objections to a similar person similar to dividing the question?

[2:41:42] We're going to take the empty mayors motion first to pass the bottom of our on the floor.

[2:41:50] So the first segment would be, it doesn't need to be moved again.

[2:41:52] The first segment is everything, but am 2628.

[2:41:57] So nothing needs to be moved again.

[2:41:59] Okay, so is there any objection to moving everything?

[2:42:04] except for 126-128-128 in the objection to movie

[2:42:11] everything but 128. A similarly person bold.

[2:42:23] Yes, Madam Mayor. Sorry. I

[2:42:25] thought that we were also separating 26-125.

[2:42:31] This is everything but

[2:42:32] everything that got hold. This was everything that was on that was not

[2:42:36] pulled already. We haven't gotten there yet. Okay. Yeah. So this is the previous

[2:42:41] things or what we had to what? This is a fourth poll tonight, right?

[2:42:45] You said move everything. Everything but yeah.

[2:42:51] Okay.

[2:42:53] So I don't hear any objections into the motion, so all of the but buts have been approved.

[2:43:02] Okay. Now that I can segment Madam Mayor what's before the body right now is AMs 26128.

[2:43:07] Okay.

[2:43:08] Madam Mayor, I'd like to, as it possible to move this to after the unfinished business,

[2:43:15] for along with the unfinished business, which is the other end start, utility relocation costs.

[2:43:23] Not allowable.

[2:43:25] What had meant book?

[2:43:26] Madam Mayor, it is allowable.

[2:43:28] There is four other things that I think that got pulled.

[2:43:30] So I think that assembly members,

[2:43:31] if the governor's intent is to speak about all

[2:43:34] agreement at the same time.

[2:43:38] Is there any objection?

[2:43:39] Well, just one suggestion.

[2:43:41] I mean, the conversation we're going to have about this

[2:43:43] and the other two.

[2:43:47] Well, Mr. Cooper is here right now.

[2:43:49] I guess we can do the other ones.

[2:43:51] I was just thinking we could take that first

[2:43:52] and let him go home.

[2:43:54] But if we can't make a decision on the unfinished business

[2:43:57] until we get there.

[2:43:58] So anyway, sorry.

[2:43:59] We're tracked all that and let's just continue.

[2:44:05] So I don't think there is a objection.

[2:44:09] Go ahead.

[2:44:11] So now we are back to give me a second.

[2:44:15] A.M. 26, 1119.

[2:44:17] Award of bid number 2733 C to bronze northwest for the anticipated cost, not to exceed.

[2:44:24] 529,226 dollars to remount and refurbished two ambulances.

[2:44:29] It was pulled by assembly member McKee.

[2:44:31] Okay, if I'm going to make you leave, would you please, and then be discussed?

[2:44:37] I'm moving in 26-119 and I have a couple of questions about it.

[2:44:41] Mm-hmm.

[2:44:41] Please, talk.

[2:44:42] And it would probably be for...

[2:44:47] I can't imagine that again.

[2:44:49] Do you want to come?

[2:44:52] Yes.

[2:44:53] Okay.

[2:44:54] If we can have staff, please.

[2:45:00] I know that. Well, I knew the first name I couldn't get the last.

[2:45:05] In Partly Director of Emergency Services. Good evening. Assembly and staff.

[2:45:10] Just two questions. How many bidders were there on this? And I read the part that said that these people have always done. They give you exactly what you need.

[2:45:21] And so I think I'll probably let that question go. I don't care how many bidders if their performance has always satisfied.

[2:45:27] Why do you folks, what's the cost for a new one?

[2:45:29] You have to use this because it's like a half a million dollars to accept your older ones.

[2:45:34] Through the Mayor Assembly Member McKee, as you were aware, prices have gone up tremendously

[2:45:39] for our fire apparatus, our ambulance, et cetera.

[2:45:43] There are fire departments and emergency services departments that are shutting down because

[2:45:48] their equipment is not adequate to be on the road.

[2:45:52] This program, I believe this is fifth or sixth year we've been doing it, and it has saved

[2:45:56] the borough of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

[2:45:59] And if we were to buy a new one, I'm going to have to guess.

[2:46:04] But we're looking anywhere between 400,000, maybe a little less,

[2:46:08] for a new ambulance.

[2:46:09] But it may not have the equipment that these have.

[2:46:12] It may not be for wheel drive.

[2:46:15] So those are the call savings.

[2:46:17] And sticking with these brands, we don't have to stock as many

[2:46:22] various parts.

[2:46:23] And we have tires for them, etc.

[2:46:25] So that's the huge savings for us.

[2:46:28] As usual, you'll always make it an absolutely, I go on.

[2:46:33] So thank you very much.

[2:46:34] Thank you.

[2:46:41] If further discussion on 119, any objection,

[2:46:51] okay?

[2:46:51] And a M-26-119 has been approved, Madam Clerk.

[2:46:58] AIM-26123 author is authorizing the manager to enter into a memorandum of agreement with the

[2:47:04] last-based State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities for a driveway accessing

[2:47:08] instruction of the left turn lane on church road for the American Charter Academy Project

[2:47:13] bold by Assemblymember Sumner.

[2:47:17] Would you move please?

[2:47:18] Yeah.

[2:47:18] I move AM-26-123.

[2:47:21] Yeah.

[2:47:23] I just had some questions for staff.

[2:47:27] We're really just an explanation and an update on this.

[2:47:42] Go ahead, sir.

[2:47:43] Cool, Brandon.

[2:47:44] Project Management Division Manager.

[2:47:46] So, yeah.

[2:47:47] So, we are working through the permit and process with DOT for this project.

[2:47:51] and what we're currently looking to, so the driveway permit itself is requiring left-turtling.

[2:47:59] And we're currently working through a agreement with the DOT to include it into their pavement preservation project for church road.

[2:48:08] The estimate that was provided in this legislation was for a stand-alone project, included a lot of cost for mobilization, surveying, erosion-setting control, and just the magnitude of the project.

[2:48:20] So, for able to come to that agreement with DOT and execute that, that should bring cost down significantly.

[2:48:27] And in the meantime, we're also working on, we haven't received it in writing yet, but a conditional approval to get that drive by constructed this year.

[2:48:36] And then incorporate the work for the left turn lane into next year's work when they're doing the pavement preservation project.

[2:48:45] So I guess this is maybe a question for the manager, but so hopefully the cost is lower, but this cost would be incorporated into hopefully next year's budget.

[2:48:55] Through the mayor to Mr. Sumner.

[2:48:57] Yeah, we're going to have to look at this likely have to look at this as an out of cycle potentially shining.

[2:49:04] I've talked about a couple options for that right now where we can see what the actual cost essence will be.

[2:49:09] The cost estimates that we're originally interested were extremely high.

[2:49:13] We escalated this all the way to the DOT commissioner.

[2:49:16] We had a detailed conversation and the numbers are, I mean, I don't want to stick to

[2:49:21] a hard number, but we're probably somewhere closer to like a quarter of a million dollars.

[2:49:25] Maybe a little bit more, depending on if there's utility relocations required.

[2:49:30] But DOT has been very accommodating to build it into the project so that although over

[2:49:34] cost of a project like mobilization, traffic control, are all paid for by the church road

[2:49:41] preservation project, and DOT is not looking to saddle us with those costs. So that should

[2:49:45] help out significantly. And frankly, it turned lanes probably a pretty good idea long term.

[2:49:51] So I think we're probably in the ballpark of about a quarter of a million, and we will bring

[2:49:55] that forward once we know that with more detail right now, because they actually have a...

[2:50:00] Contractor under contract to do that work makes summer. So they're getting hard numbers. It's not something we're going to have to go out and procure. It really has to do with just getting enough of a design done to make sure we've got the right way, and there's no utility relocations of significance that we'll have to own day get close.

[2:50:16] And so I think they're likely will be potentially some.

[2:50:22] Appropriation coming forward, we're worse for some additional funding.

[2:50:25] But there's also some project funding that may be preserved to get at some of this.

[2:50:30] We just don't know those until we have an estimate we won't know those exact numbers.

[2:50:34] Go ahead and say.

[2:50:35] I want more follow-up questions.

[2:50:37] When is that school opening?

[2:50:40] So through the mayor it's going to open in November timeframe.

[2:50:43] And that's the importance of the agreement, is because that leads us to a conditional approval where we get the driveway access now, even though we're not going to put the turn lane in right away.

[2:50:53] And so that's the value of the agreement and the sensitivity is we need to be able to sign off on that.

[2:50:57] So we can get the conditional approval to keep things on track so that the contractor has a permit to build the driveway.

[2:51:09] is that the schools are helping pay part of the cost of these projects.

[2:51:14] So is this turnling going to be included in the whatever the cost is?

[2:51:21] Is that, is some of that going to be borne by the American charter, potentially?

[2:51:27] So, through the mayor of Miss Nowers, keep in mind that projects are to build the

[2:51:33] to, right, circulation, access, utilities, like it's an all-in proposition, right?

[2:51:39] This isn't a deep project agreement from the state where there were off-site activities

[2:51:42] limited.

[2:51:43] Like we don't have another pot of money to address these needs, okay?

[2:51:48] I would say generally no, because what was in the bond proposition for American was a certain

[2:51:53] number.

[2:51:54] We already exceeded that number.

[2:51:55] If you recall, they simply approved $900,000 transfer from birch tree because we're no longer

[2:52:01] building a new birch tree school and that got moved to this project account so we're already

[2:52:06] using that money because that helped to address the water issue that we had with the treatment

[2:52:12] sister and all that stuff so we've already we're already into that money that's the money we're

[2:52:16] talking about using so if somebody came back from the school community and said X amount of number

[2:52:21] was in the bond they fully realized that for schools we actually brought more money to the project

[2:52:27] to offset these unknowns, such as a turn lane and a water issue.

[2:52:32] And so, as far as messaging to the schools, they're getting more than really what was originally

[2:52:38] out there and available to them because there have been changes in other projects like

[2:52:43] birch tree where we're no longer constructing, and that's already being made available to the

[2:52:47] projects so we can keep the schedule on track.

[2:52:54] I'm ready for their discussion on the motion, is there any objection to the motion?

[2:53:03] Then the legislation passes.

[2:53:08] A.M. 26125 awarded bid number 271, B.D.

[2:53:12] Orient Instruction and the contract amount of $5,087,300 to construct a household hazardous

[2:53:19] waste facility.

[2:53:20] It was pulled by Assemblymember Sumner.

[2:53:22] Okay.

[2:53:22] Assemblymember Sumner, go ahead.

[2:53:24] I am 26-125, not sorry, I moved, I am 26-125.

[2:53:32] You want to speak to it?

[2:53:33] Yeah.

[2:53:34] We had some public comments from a frequent flyer.

[2:53:37] I don't always agree with quite often, he's very wrong.

[2:53:42] But in this case, since we had some growing pains with the opening of the new turn,

[2:53:50] the new way skillhouse of the dump.

[2:53:54] 5.5 million is a lot of money for for walls in a roof to hold hazardous waste.

[2:54:00] I've been to the dump and I've seen what they're working with right now and I don't deny

[2:54:04] that it's necessary but that seems like a lot of money and this didn't really stick out

[2:54:09] at me before tonight's meeting but then with the issues with the dump I would like to take

[2:54:14] a close look at this so I would move to postpone this to collect more information on this

[2:54:18] project.

[2:54:21] Assemblymember, Senator, we do have to have a date.

[2:54:25] Next, two meetings from now.

[2:54:28] So, any left?

[2:54:29] 15.

[2:54:30] September.

[2:54:31] October 6.

[2:54:34] Oh, I thought he said two weeks.

[2:54:45] Discussion on the motion to postpone the assembly person.

[2:54:50] No, we're going to go ahead.

[2:54:51] Didn't see anybody jump out of their seat.

[2:54:53] So, I'm just asking if we don't approve this.

[2:54:57] October, does that do anything to construction deadline?

[2:55:06] So, currently where we're at, I don't believe it's going to have any major impact.

[2:55:11] There'd be preferable, you know, put to the September 15th meeting, if I'm being honest.

[2:55:15] So, we potentially have some opportunity to do work this year.

[2:55:20] But where we're at in the season, it's questionable how much the contractors going to get down this year anyways.

[2:55:25] I mean, it's a design bid build, so this is a construction bid.

[2:55:30] Just

[2:55:35] make a secondary amendment and move it to September 15th.

[2:55:39] Give time to look at it.

[2:55:41] Some of the nurses are somewhere to go ahead.

[2:55:43] I mean, I would err on the side of not spending taxpayer money on necessarily.

[2:55:47] So if we don't get anything done this year, then we don't we have a continue using, you know, status quo.

[2:55:53] Continue using the existing hazardous waste facility for a little bit longer.

[2:55:57] Which is, I mean, we're using it right now.

[2:56:03] I think that gives you two weeks to take a look at this so you can, you know, scan it

[2:56:08] and potentially keep a project movie instead of more delay.

[2:56:13] So I stick to the September 15th and I haven't seen the current facility and that's

[2:56:20] woefully under done.

[2:56:21] But I have no problem with additional questions.

[2:56:23] I just think September 15th it gives you two weeks to take a look at it and analyze it

[2:56:28] And we could potentially get some work done if, yeah, we don't change anything.

[2:56:34] Can we approach those on there?

[2:56:38] Yeah, but we're approaching the end of the construction season.

[2:56:40] It's questionable that you can get any work done or not before the end of the construction season.

[2:56:43] And we just saw the repercussions of what happens when you rush a project.

[2:56:48] And then the collapse is 30 inches in the ground.

[2:56:51] So I'm going to stick with the October 6th.

[2:56:57] So I think there must be an objection here.

[2:57:01] So I can get the members to vote on the postponement to October 6.

[2:57:06] No, no.

[2:57:08] I'm sorry.

[2:57:08] I didn't hear you say I moved.

[2:57:10] I'm sorry.

[2:57:12] When you rewrite this, I'm going to reset it.

[2:57:22] Okay.

[2:57:22] Now I'm ready.

[2:57:23] Sorry, guys.

[2:57:26] I need people to keep voting the whole time.

[2:57:27] Let me get the vote out there first.

[2:57:29] The amendment is to September 15.

[2:57:32] And I'm sorry if you've already voted.

[2:57:33] If you can vote again.

[2:57:38] It failed to assembly member now in support,

[2:57:43] and now we're back to 106

[2:57:44] Manamere.

[2:57:46] Is your objection to the assembly person bowls?

[2:57:55] I just would like to speak to this.

[2:57:59] I can fully support removing this project.

[2:58:03] If there's appetite for that, I agree.

[2:58:06] We have a hazmat building.

[2:58:09] So I'm going to vote no to postponing this so that we can vote yes to suspend this project.

[2:58:23] I think we need to keep this project being forward. I mean, as I say something, as I said many

[2:58:29] times, is the time to object was when we put this out to bid. But I mean, the characterization

[2:58:39] that you just stick stuff in a landfill, you just cover it, is what we used to do, right?

[2:58:45] And it's really expensive if you just do that, you don't do it wrong, you do it wrong.

[2:58:51] That's why landfills have liners now and why lithium batteries catch on fire

[2:58:55] and if you put stuff in there, it gets down into your water.

[2:59:00] So I'm speaking to this.

[2:59:03] So, you know, whether or not the five point, I do not have any objection to scrutinizing

[2:59:11] a contract award, and if you find legitimate things that you think are out of whack, like

[2:59:17] by all means bring those up, but to forego, building a quality hazardous waste facility to deal

[2:59:25] with the material that comes in from the borough that cost us a lot of money if there isn't

[2:59:30] disposal place would not be proved in at all. So I'll continue to support putting this on for October 6.

[2:59:39] The discussion is on the postponement until October 6, right? And there is a objection? Is there a objection?

[2:59:50] There is. Okay. I get the members to vote.

[2:59:58] Madam Mayor, it has passed with a sentence.

[3:00:00] Remember both of those opposed? Okay. No.

[3:00:08] We have everything that we do back and get everything. I think we've got everything

[3:00:13] that a mayor and we are moved on to unfinished business. Okay.

[3:00:21] Okay, we're so we're on face business and

[3:00:25] look what you read into the first item into the record. I am 26106 approval of additional utility

[3:00:34] relocation costs of $220,624 and $38 to end star natural gas for crimson view and heavenly

[3:00:41] metal street improvements in the South Colony Road Service area.

[3:00:46] Okay, the main motion is on the floor, so we'll continue to have the discussion.

[3:00:53] Emily, listen, that was.

[3:00:55] I know Mr. Cooper is here from NSTAR, and I would like to give him a chance to come up and

[3:01:01] to these projects and the cost issues that they've had and also just allow for discussion about what we can do for future costs.

[3:01:12] Okay, yes. Come forward, sir, please.

[3:01:17] And he's been waiting a long time, so sorry.

[3:01:19] You

[3:01:26] get to that hit the button, you turn the mic on.

[3:01:32] Good evening.

[3:01:33] It's been a long day.

[3:01:34] I've been up since five.

[3:01:35] My name is Steve Cooper.

[3:01:36] I'm the vice president of Operations Engineering for

[3:01:39] Instor Natural Gas.

[3:01:41] Worked there for 37 years.

[3:01:43] Born and raised in the valley here.

[3:01:46] I'm a little bit about myself.

[3:01:47] I started in the ditches.

[3:01:49] Got myself in engineering school.

[3:01:51] And moved up through the company managing construction projects.

[3:01:54] Estimating construction projects.

[3:01:56] So I know a lot about this type of work.

[3:02:01] When Instar installs facilities in the right away, we have to get a permit from the

[3:02:07] borough or from any other agency that controls that right away.

[3:02:12] You guys have codes that dictate that.

[3:02:16] So you're 1130-20 so that we can get a permit.

[3:02:19] You're 11, 30, 80 states that the cost of relocation of utility located pursuant to a valid permit

[3:02:29] as required by the borough for a public purpose shall be borne by the borough.

[3:02:35] Okay, so that your statute states that if we have a valid permit, the cost of relocates us is borne by the borough.

[3:02:47] We don't want to relocate our lines, honestly.

[3:02:49] We put our lines in the ground. We want them to be there for the next 100 years.

[3:02:57] That's what we want to do.

[3:02:59] But most of these lines that have been put in the ground were put back in the 80s and 90s.

[3:03:04] They put down on roads that were not developed at the time. They're right away. They're public right away.

[3:03:09] But there's a cow trail in them and we're installing our gas lines.

[3:03:13] By the permit at the out of five foot edge of the right away for feet deep

[3:03:19] The bro puts out bids for construction to rebuild roads

[3:03:22] You guys are widening roads

[3:03:24] The deep predictions that impacts our facility and has to be replicated at no fault of us

[3:03:31] It cost money to relocate utilities

[3:03:35] That whole thing here was tired for the day

[3:03:39] I want to talk about cost estimates because that's what's coming up with these jobs.

[3:03:49] Instar, the Burl comes to Instar and Instar looks at your plans, decides what we need

[3:03:56] to do to put our facilities, re-locate from the right away at the proper depth and whatever

[3:04:03] we're going to avoid, your storm drains or ditching, and we take our best guess, you're looking

[3:04:09] to plan, you're going out in the field, you're looking at these projects, you're getting

[3:04:13] your best guess of how am I going to do this? I think it's going to take this much time,

[3:04:18] it's going to take this much materials and we put that out as an estimate, as an estimate

[3:04:24] of what it's going to take. When you guys put a public project out to bid to build a road,

[3:04:31] you're getting a bid from a contractor to build that road. That contractor looks at that road,

[3:04:36] What's going to cost me to build it?

[3:04:38] What risk is involved that I build it?

[3:04:41] You add to risk to his estimates, and he adds a profit margin.

[3:04:45] Insta has no profit margin in our estimate.

[3:04:49] We simply want to be repaid for what it cost

[3:04:51] to relocate our solutions.

[3:04:53] That's it.

[3:04:58] Our estimates.

[3:04:58] Let's...

[3:05:00] A few of them on these projects didn't reflect the actual work that had to be done.

[3:05:07] Honestly, at the end. Then the day we look at these jobs and like, wow, this was a lot more work than what was estimated by our engineers.

[3:05:16] The wages weren't correct in the estimate also.

[3:05:22] When NSTAR has to work on a public project, we have to pay a day of spaken wage, stay

[3:05:26] at law.

[3:05:27] The estimates reflected a union wage between union and day of spaken, it's about $3 different

[3:05:35] wages.

[3:05:37] So that's one instance, and then it's a time frame in those estimates or not adequate to what actually took place in the field.

[3:05:52] I listened to the last assembly meeting.

[3:05:57] There was talks about how our contractors are so more expensive.

[3:06:04] If you look at our, if you look at our estimating process, which, it's the same for

[3:06:12] Matthew Burroughs, the same for the DOT, we estimate based on how many hours it would take

[3:06:18] for our employees to do the job, so there's an hourly wage and then there's an overhead

[3:06:23] rate that goes with that number of hours.

[3:06:26] that overhead rate pays for procurement, accounting,

[3:06:32] pays for warehouse, pays for transportation vehicles,

[3:06:37] pays for our equipment, pays for our trucks,

[3:06:39] our tools or generators.

[3:06:40] It's all inclusive in that overhead rate with power,

[3:06:46] hourly rate.

[3:06:47] So if you put those together, rough numbers,

[3:06:52] two hundred and seventy dollars an hour,

[3:06:53] and start to show up with one person to do a job.

[3:06:58] Our contractor rates are different.

[3:07:02] I've been building contract work.

[3:07:04] Contractors for DR work for the last 20 years.

[3:07:08] Contractors get paid by the piece of equipment.

[3:07:13] So, contractor shows up with a piece of equipment.

[3:07:16] They have equipment.

[3:07:17] They have a day of spaken operator and they have a fuel charge.

[3:07:21] All combined into one.

[3:07:22] So that if you look at a 320 excavator, that 320 excavator with all that is about 150 bucks an hour, okay

[3:07:29] If you go rent an excavator that size personally, it's gonna cost you $125 an hour and you'll have to fuel it and then you're got to operate

[3:07:41] Just put numbers together

[3:07:46] So

[3:07:48] I've been doing this for a long time

[3:07:50] I mean, you know, whether and start does the work in-house, or

[3:07:54] or in-start does the work with contractors, contractors are generally,

[3:07:58] although cheaper to do the work than our house staff.

[3:08:02] And our in-house staff has all kinds of other work that they have to do

[3:08:05] to maintain our facilities.

[3:08:07] They have to go respond to line breaks.

[3:08:09] So if they're on a borough project, relocating a gas line,

[3:08:14] and we have some, someone, damage our lines, they're leaving that job,

[3:08:18] to fix the line and come back to read your project, which could be on over time, or postponed

[3:08:26] however many days.

[3:08:29] If we look at the Crimson view, I can't remember which one that one is.

[3:08:36] That was a subdivision, it's 1985 bill for us when we put the mains in.

[3:08:41] That's when the first house is winning that subdivision, it's right down the road here across

[3:08:45] in Fairgrounds.

[3:08:47] When that subdivision went in, it was probably gravel roads,

[3:08:51] not developed, new housing, no landscaping,

[3:08:54] no nothing.

[3:08:56] 41 years later, when we went to relocate this,

[3:09:01] which probably wasn't an estimate,

[3:09:04] wasn't looked at properly, but every driveway is paved.

[3:09:07] The roads paved.

[3:09:09] There's existing utilities in there that we have to dig around.

[3:09:13] The Burroughs dig in a three-foot ditch, which means for a 48, we have to go down 7 feet.

[3:09:20] Digging around the utilities, you know, we can't dig within 2 feet of locate mark.

[3:09:24] You have to use shovels, air knives, vacuum extractors, to protect those facilities.

[3:09:31] We're the first ones on the job in that subdivision.

[3:09:36] Homeowners, you know, are enjoying their day.

[3:09:38] We show up, we're ripping through their subdivision.

[3:09:43] We don't generally, on state jobs we would never do that.

[3:09:46] State jobs has a contractor goes in and blows out the asphalt, blows out the road.

[3:09:51] It gets it all ready to go.

[3:09:52] We go in and we look at our facilities in the rural project.

[3:09:55] We're there first. We're digging asphalt. We're digging culverts.

[3:09:59] We're digging.

[3:10:00] In tight areas where the material has to go on the pavement, okay? We have to backfill off the pavement, which is another piece of equipment, and then we have stormwater pollution prevention measures, or we have to keep that pavement clear, and no dust, no dirt, tracking, and more. There's a lot more out of costs to do and work like that.

[3:10:21] That job we estimated 12 days, it took 21 days.

[3:10:27] Like Brown, Tom Adams, this year last week or last Sunday meeting, they're not

[3:10:32] contesting the work that we did.

[3:10:34] We did the work.

[3:10:36] It cost more money than we thought was going to cost.

[3:10:40] Based on an estimate.

[3:10:44] If we step back a few years, step back when I was an engineer,

[3:10:49] Or even up to, I think, 2023, the contract paperwork that the Burl signed to relocate facilities was our people.

[3:10:59] Our paperwork is based on the DOT paperwork.

[3:11:02] It's a time materials contract, it's an estimated cost, and the cost are borne by the agency that is requiring us to relocate.

[3:11:13] This new paperwork that I'm aware of now, that the Brod drafted, I think, in 25, 24 has, and it's not my sign.

[3:11:27] Most of these relocation projects are below my level, I need approval.

[3:11:31] Now I'm aware of them, but they have a, you know, not to exceed 15% more coverage.

[3:11:38] That doesn't work for end star.

[3:11:39] You know, cost-causer is cost-pair, that's the utility model.

[3:11:47] Just like we run in main extensions to homes, we run server-slides to homes, we do LIDs,

[3:11:52] the cost-causer is cost-pair, we need utility model.

[3:11:58] So any time someone wants gas or needs relocation work done, they pay for that cost, because

[3:12:04] we don't make money on infrastructure.

[3:12:06] We make money transporting gas to customers.

[3:12:14] The midway states, that's the one we just brought up here.

[3:12:19] That's an interesting one when I started asking questions.

[3:12:22] That's a 23 project that ends dark and pleaded

[3:12:25] every location.

[3:12:27] It went out to construction in 2025.

[3:12:31] We had to go relocate some of the stuff that we'd already

[3:12:35] because it would drain its changes on the project, that construction.

[3:12:40] It also, because of that relocation, we had to do it an extra,

[3:12:44] as a horizontal direction, a little more on the project.

[3:12:47] So that added more cost to that project, exceeded the estimate.

[3:12:51] These are things that happen in the field where on the job site,

[3:12:55] trying to figure out how to get things done, cost, escalate to get the job done.

[3:13:02] Because, really, I don't have the ability to stop and say, well, I can't do this job anymore,

[3:13:09] but I'm halfway done.

[3:13:11] I have to provide my customer service.

[3:13:13] I have to maintain service.

[3:13:18] The Helen Lane, it's another tight subdivision like Crimson View.

[3:13:25] Those homeers talking to my contractor were a very hostile.

[3:13:30] The Clarencochurch came in for them and cleared that subdivision,

[3:13:35] and those homeowners didn't want that project done.

[3:13:37] We came in there and they were very hostile to our contractors.

[3:13:41] It was tight.

[3:13:42] There was nowhere to put material.

[3:13:44] There was nowhere to store equipment overnight.

[3:13:47] With a mobile and demo every day, it took longer.

[3:13:55] It didn't take longer and days.

[3:13:56] It just took more hours during the day to get things done.

[3:13:59] So we could be productive.

[3:14:01] Those are those three jobs that you have up here.

[3:14:06] I'm sorry our estimates weren't accurate.

[3:14:09] To reflect the work that was actually done.

[3:14:12] We've done better.

[3:14:16] I don't know if any of you are business owners,

[3:14:18] but keeping people employed in this economy is hard.

[3:14:23] Our engineering department, I swear every three years

[3:14:27] Revolving door, because an engineer comes to the gas company, gets gas experience, oil and gas

[3:14:34] experience where they go on or slow, bill court, conical, someone's taking them up, so

[3:14:40] we're constantly in this redevelopment phase with engineers.

[3:14:47] I got a brand new engineering manager, a brand new supervisor, season employees that

[3:14:52] start, but they've moved up in the company. I've got a good couple engineers. I'm looking

[3:14:57] for another engineer after this.

[3:15:00] So we revamped all our estimates. You guys seen that last time. There's the projects that have a gone construction. We looked at every estimate. Make sure they were accurate. Make sure we're not going to go over those budgets. The other thing that we've done in start, because of this, is I'm working again daily. Construction reports sent to our planner so that they can input that data into a spreadsheet, and we're going to do that.

[3:15:30] know where we're at every day on a project so we can notify the world if there's an issue.

[3:15:38] But like I said, there's an issue and I have a three-day job in terms of the four-day job.

[3:15:43] I've blown 15% but I can't stop. I have to get serves to my customers.

[3:15:53] I have lots to talk about but it's late and I'll be so for the questions if you have any.

[3:16:03] So, thank you for coming down. I really appreciate it. I mean, it shows that you're concerned for the company and respect for us, so I appreciate you, especially since you got up at five in the morning, so I'm impressed that you're still standing.

[3:16:19] I did pull this, you know, I understand the work being hard and all the things they go

[3:16:27] with the issue for the burrow is being able to be responsible for costs to our taxpayers.

[3:16:37] And in this case, like the Crimson View Project, this is not, you know, at the end of the

[3:16:43] an extra 200,000, that is coming from, so this was 164,000, and it ballooned an additional

[3:16:53] 220,000, that money is coming from France Road, which leads to a valley school where the

[3:17:00] guardrail is falling off the road, and they desperately need a traffic signal. So the inability

[3:17:07] to contain costs has a real cost for the taxpayer out here and that is there's a

[3:17:15] long list of projects behind France Road that are all in need. So I'm looking at it

[3:17:23] really from the standpoint of what can we do better as a borough and I got to admit

[3:17:30] that you know when this like your example of you know we're on a three day project in

[3:17:36] four days, that's one thing, but like all the contracts we put out per road projects, they have a

[3:17:42] a cost-containment percentage that if you look like you're going to go over that you have a conversation

[3:17:46] with the borough and sometimes it comes back to this body. So right now, you know, like I don't,

[3:17:55] I don't, if we're not having any sort of responsibility for the utility to, you know,

[3:18:06] So let us know, let the burrow know when something's going way over or looks off, I don't

[3:18:12] know how we responsibly keep cost containment because if we don't know what's happening

[3:18:18] and then you just hand us a bill and say we made an error, that's hard to deal with.

[3:18:25] So I'm looking for ways that if this 15% signing a contract that says we'll let you know

[3:18:31] when we're going to go over 15% as a problem,

[3:18:34] like what cost, what do we have at the end of the day, right?

[3:18:42] What, you know, from the higher instant point

[3:18:45] of doing these projects, how can we manage them?

[3:18:50] Like I said, we're implementing some more costs tracking.

[3:18:56] So we can know where we're at with these projects

[3:18:58] before we go to older budget.

[3:19:03] I'm really interested in some of them.

[3:19:06] Yeah, I was just going to add that if you want to make sure

[3:19:08] that these costs balloon, then insist on stopping the middle of the project,

[3:19:13] to wait for a government body to make a decision on whether to continue

[3:19:16] proceeding with what you have to do and has required for the project.

[3:19:26] I'm doing these questions.

[3:19:29] That makes sense to me, right?

[3:19:32] Yeah, you know, having to wait a month.

[3:19:33] That doesn't make any sense.

[3:19:35] But there's great, as it exists, if nothing is signed,

[3:19:42] you just hit us with 200,000 extra, and it was an error,

[3:19:46] like no contractor would be able, like if that happened to me personally,

[3:19:51] we'd be working out a deal.

[3:19:53] And so, on left with the 15% the, you know, the notification doesn't work,

[3:19:58] but I don't hear-

[3:20:00] Anything different. And so that's when I look at, you know, it comes like, you know, is our structure, the way we structure these contracts, the way we structure these projects, are we having the right incentives, do we need to look at something else, where we, we don't put utilities in the right of ways, because they're so expensive, so we don't end up in this, you know, how, how can we, what can we do to have some kind of assurance that we're.

[3:20:30] Going to keep these projects within an amount that we know what we're going to pay and not just get a bill and we got to pay it at the end of the day.

[3:20:40] I'd like to address your right-of-way question there.

[3:20:44] And we talked about this.

[3:20:46] So, answer answer gas is regulated by the federal government.

[3:20:49] We're regulated by pipeline hazardous material safety administration.

[3:20:54] They dictate the maintenance and code requirements that we have to do.

[3:20:57] Our pipelines have to be leaked surveyed every five years.

[3:21:04] We have to walk those lines and have access to them so that we can determine if there's leaks.

[3:21:11] Our transmission lines have to be done every year.

[3:21:14] So I got 1,200 miles of mains and transmission lines in the Mats Hubero.

[3:21:20] So every five years, I'm on a rotating cycle so I can make that work.

[3:21:25] But we have to go through every line.

[3:21:27] And Star is already having so many access problems on private property.

[3:21:33] Just trying to get to our meter set.

[3:21:35] We have customers pulling guns on us.

[3:21:37] We have customers threatening our employees.

[3:21:40] It's really hard to access people's properties.

[3:21:44] And if you haven't eased on someone's property,

[3:21:47] that doesn't mean they can't do anything there.

[3:21:48] They can put the fence.

[3:21:49] They can do landscaping.

[3:21:51] They can plant trees.

[3:21:52] They can block our access.

[3:21:54] And we have to get the cops there to get in.

[3:21:55] I can't have that to make my mandated federal code requirements

[3:22:02] that I have to do on maintenance.

[3:22:04] The other aspect of that is, last year we had

[3:22:08] 199 damages throughout our system, underground damages.

[3:22:12] 71 of those were in the valley.

[3:22:16] 21% of those were homeowners on private property

[3:22:20] damaging our service lines.

[3:22:21] And the scary fact is that 47% of those didn't call for locates.

[3:22:27] They're just digging in their property, hitting our gas lines.

[3:22:31] It's a big problem.

[3:22:33] And if I have my main lines that are serving hundreds,

[3:22:37] the thousands of customers in an easement, behind a fence,

[3:22:42] and they're not calling for locates, that's going to cause a public safety hazard.

[3:22:47] So we locate in the right of way.

[3:22:50] We've always located the right away in courts and laws allow us to do that with the permission of the agency that has the right away giving us a permit.

[3:23:02] We spent, in last five years, $136,000 on permits in the Matt Subaru, to allow us to put our pipelines there.

[3:23:10] I

[3:23:15] think I just continue, like these utility brokerations are just a huge portion of the

[3:23:22] road costs and road costs are driving this borough to an extreme amount of cost, and the

[3:23:32] taxpayer is saying we don't want to pay anymore in private taxes, and the road service

[3:23:38] area is the one that pays the road costs.

[3:23:41] So there's no other pot of money when these projects ballooned over and I just am not comfortable with something that is just an open ended like I don't feel like that it open ended in terms of whatever the cost will be it will be and we'll let you know at the end of the project that doesn't feel like a comfortable position for the person overseeing the cost at the burrow so I'm looking for something a little more if the 15% doesn't work that's fine.

[3:24:10] And I'm also looking for, is there something we can do better

[3:24:13] as a borough to make these projects,

[3:24:15] and maybe this is a discussion beyond at 9.40 at night,

[3:24:20] but to make these projects smoother,

[3:24:23] so we don't have the kind of hiccups

[3:24:24] that lead to the cost overruns,

[3:24:27] because at the end of the day,

[3:24:28] if that money is available, we can get

[3:24:30] to some of these road projects that desperately need to be done.

[3:24:37] Family moans somewhere.

[3:24:40] Yeah, I was just going to say that thanks for coming.

[3:24:45] He made an detailed explanation of what cost the cost of a run on each of these projects,

[3:24:51] and also said that they're going to do better, and the measures that he's going to implement

[3:24:54] to do better.

[3:24:56] That's, you know, satisfied me, and I'd also like to, you know, point out that.

[3:25:00] I don't think any of these guys have extra vision, and these are 40 something year old lines that are buried in the ground.

[3:25:07] So, I move dirt for a living. I don't think that you do misnowers, but sometimes, time of materials is the only way that you can do a job.

[3:25:17] And that's the case here. There is no profit. There is no fat built into these costs.

[3:25:25] You know, if you, so, yeah, I think this satisfies any of my concerns, and I would

[3:25:31] call the question.

[3:25:40] I have to.

[3:25:42] Assembly person D, do you have an objection to calling the question?

[3:25:45] Yeah, because I just had a comment to make.

[3:25:48] Okay, I do that.

[3:25:49] Okay, then I'm calling.

[3:25:50] You can just object in there.

[3:25:53] So, I can get the members to go ahead and vote on calling on question.

[3:26:02] Assemblymember McKee,

[3:26:08] Madam Mayor, it has failed with Assemblymember Sumner, Gamble and Bulls in support.

[3:26:14] So, Assemblymember McKee, now you can discuss?

[3:26:19] I have to tell you, I've listened to a lot of technical presentations.

[3:26:22] Yours is the clearest I've heard in how long it might have been on the Assembly.

[3:26:25] It absolutely answered every question that I have.

[3:26:27] I understand this now is concerns.

[3:26:30] These things change order things drive us crazy because it doesn't

[3:26:34] It's not like we just take it out of the pot and the boroughs and take it out of the people's pockets out there.

[3:26:39] But I really appreciate the way you present it at the end of the thing I really like is that you are willing to say, yep, we screwed up a little bit here on our estimates.

[3:26:47] And we're actually have a plan going forward to do better so as far as I'm concerned.

[3:26:52] I'd give it a go. I think it's what other choice do you or we have, because that's how life is, it's uncertain stuff happens.

[3:27:05] Some of my person follow-up?

[3:27:07] I'll ask a question.

[3:27:08] I guess when you do an estimate and then you realize that took you a lot quicker than

[3:27:15] what you thought.

[3:27:17] How often, I don't know, does do we still stick to the estimated price?

[3:27:22] Or do we actually get and then do we have any historic

[3:27:25] data when how often you're under and how often you're off,

[3:27:28] if you ought to be transparent with us, I guess,

[3:27:32] because I guess we'd like to see it half and it goes the other way.

[3:27:38] Yeah, I don't have that information with me right now.

[3:27:41] As far as which way it goes.

[3:27:47] Yeah, I don't think.

[3:27:48] We'll finally ask lady there.

[3:27:50] I just thought that would be good to know for a comparison,

[3:27:53] because if you know a lot of times you guys estimated

[3:27:55] and then we got a lower price.

[3:27:57] Okay, good.

[3:27:58] But then when this thing happens,

[3:28:00] I guess more acceptable because then we understand

[3:28:02] there's not a pattern always having an estimate and then going up specific to maximize that

[3:28:08] thing so I guess that's that was just my I guess question yeah we don't you don't pay

[3:28:14] based on estimate you pay an actual cost for the project

[3:28:23] yeah I guess in construction I am a

[3:28:25] general contractor you get an estimate and I don't remember ever last time somebody came

[3:28:31] and said, hey, it took me quicker, here's $1,000 less than what I estimated.

[3:28:38] However, oftentimes, he, hey, it took a longer dose of, for

[3:28:43] seen stroke of senses or things like that, and the new pay more.

[3:28:47] So I guess that's just my experience with the estimates.

[3:28:53] So I'd hope that when you overestimated it, we also get a, not a discount, but I guess the

[3:29:00] correct prize that we should have been charged.

[3:29:05] I guess at that point, you know, when you maybe I don't move dirt for living, but I deal with a lot of contractors and you have overages and you know, it might go over 20% but this was, I mean, this was off by a factor of 130% and so if a contractor came to me like it would be nice for the sake of the road service area that's affected by this extra 220,000.

[3:29:29] If in start, since it wasn't estimating error and it wasn't just a little estimating error was a large one to

[3:29:37] you know, meet us somewhat of the way there and then because it wasn't a small one

[3:29:44] and it's had a big impact on the RSA.

[3:29:47] So it was an estimating error for us to do the job of what we thought it was going to take to do the job.

[3:29:54] the job took longer. Our rate payers are your tax payers.

[3:30:00] But I have more rate pairs than you have tax pairs. I cannot, as a utility, absorb, costs, and charge them all my

[3:30:12] rate pairs. Because it's not fair.

[3:30:15] And I do understand that. But on the same hand, to stand up for the road service area, people who

[3:30:22] pay taxes that go towards that, they are being asked to absorb an extra $220,000 cost that they

[3:30:28] might have done something differently had they known, and you acknowledge that NSTAR made

[3:30:35] it, not just like we didn't know it would be this much effort, but there was an estimating

[3:30:40] error on NSTAR's part, and we weren't able to adapt to it at all. So, nice to have some

[3:30:47] kind of mutual consideration for that road service area, because they can't go anywhere else.

[3:30:56] So reserve injection assembly person Gamble go ahead. Yeah, I got away on this so I'm I'm really surprised that you didn't have in place before

[3:31:07] a program where

[3:31:09] when you're going over estimates

[3:31:12] that you're aware of it

[3:31:15] on a more frequent basis and that you would communicate that to

[3:31:19] the burrow. Hey, we're not just going to go 15% over. We're going to go 50% or more.

[3:31:26] So what you're telling me now is that you have put those

[3:31:29] that program in place now, we're going to start getting

[3:31:32] daily reports, so that when you start going over,

[3:31:37] that you're going to be in communication, do you have a trigger?

[3:31:39] Now that when you hit a certain point,

[3:31:41] you're going to let the borrower know.

[3:31:42] Yeah, we have triggers.

[3:31:45] In place where our construction managers and our planning

[3:31:49] guy are working out tracking costs, number of days on the jobs,

[3:31:53] and we're going to be in more communication with public works about.

[3:31:59] Projects.

[3:31:59] My other question is, when you're doing estimates, do you have a CAD program?

[3:32:04] Do you have a program in place where you put the numbers in?

[3:32:08] Whatever.

[3:32:08] I know.

[3:32:11] There's variables when you're doing this work.

[3:32:14] But do you have a program that you put this in and it spits out a number or so you have

[3:32:18] a pretty close estimate?

[3:32:19] And we have spreadsheets that have all of our rates in there for contractors or employees

[3:32:27] and that we've just rebamped again and you estimate the number of days and hours and

[3:32:33] manpower that goes to do the job, puts in an estimate, calculates the numbers, gets checked

[3:32:40] and then it's sent out.

[3:32:42] So if I heard you correctly, I think you said that you estimated a job in 2023 but you didn't

[3:32:48] start it until 2025, do you ever go back and revisit your estimates so that you update them to make sure that?

[3:32:55] That was the 2023 job was midway. We did the work in 2023. We had to go back in 2025 and redo the work,

[3:33:03] because there was drainage changes on the project. There was a design change on the project that we had to go re-locate.

[3:33:09] Some of the work we had already done and it necessitated an actual directional drill to install the line.

[3:33:17] And what was the cause of the new drainage issues?

[3:33:20] It was public works, public works, design.

[3:33:24] OK, thank you.

[3:33:27] Hey, only is there a objection to the motion?

[3:33:34] Reduction?

[3:33:39] I'm just clarifying which are we on all three?

[3:33:42] Are we on one?

[3:33:45] One, six.

[3:33:57] I.

[3:33:58] I will let this move forward.

[3:34:03] I would hope that in, I don't know what the mechanism

[3:34:07] and for N star, I'm looking for the, for N star to meet as part way on this.

[3:34:16] So I don't know if the correct thing to do is to postpone it to September 15th

[3:34:23] and give the parties sometime to talk through that, as well as get just kind of a report

[3:34:30] on what that reporting is going to look like to the borough for future projects, what that means,

[3:34:38] the changes that you're making to explain though so I guess I would make a motion if I could

[3:34:43] on that particular one because it's such a large cost I think it's 130% increase on that one

[3:34:50] If we could postpone that, tell September 15th.

[3:34:59] Um, extension.

[3:35:00] Move to extend the meeting to 11 p.m.

[3:35:03] Is there objection?

[3:35:07] Okay, thank you.

[3:35:08] All right, so we have a motion to postpone.

[3:35:14] Then is there objection to that?

[3:35:17] Go ahead.

[3:35:19] I am objecting to postponing this.

[3:35:22] I don't see what that's going to accomplish.

[3:35:24] I am not opposed to a report.

[3:35:25] I'd like to know how we can improve the reporting procedures between utilities and the

[3:35:29] So that we don't get caught off guard like this again, but I don't think that postponing it is going to

[3:35:33] It's going to accomplish anything

[3:35:40] seven person bowls

[3:35:45] so

[3:35:45] I'm having a real hard time with this and I wasn't going to say a thing. I was just going to let slide

[3:35:51] But just so on the record 19 hours at

[3:35:56] $151.33 an hour for a flagger

[3:35:59] I think we're on the just on the motion to postpone so can you keep it to

[3:36:05] that whether you want it to postpone or not, not on the basis of the passing, the whole or

[3:36:16] AM. So I would like a second dairy amendment to postpone it definitely and then reconfigure

[3:36:26] this because I just can't understand how a project estimated at a certain amount and it comes back

[3:36:34] at three times the amount.

[3:36:37] The clerk is telling me, no secondary amendment is that where you were?

[3:36:43] No, what I said, Madam Mayor's postponing and definitely is not an amendment to postponing

[3:36:48] to a time certain.

[3:36:49] It's a motion unto itself.

[3:36:51] So this is what's on the floor, you have to vote it down.

[3:36:59] So I'm going to vote this down with the hopes that it gets voted down so that we can postpone

[3:37:07] this and definitely get a better report on this and more involved with this because this is

[3:37:12] this is how to control.

[3:37:18] I'm going to close you.

[3:37:19] Yes, we need to.

[3:37:20] I get the members to vote voting on postponing to 915.

[3:37:28] Madam Mayor is failed with Assembly Member Faunoff and now we're in support.

[3:37:39] So record day here.

[3:37:42] Okay.

[3:37:43] Assembly members.

[3:37:44] Assembly members and bold.

[3:37:46] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[3:37:47] I moved to postpone this and definitely with the intent of

[3:37:52] reconfiguring these numbers because it just absolutely doesn't make sense to me with Ken

[3:37:56] Worth I mean all

[3:38:00] $259.44 an hour three hundred two dollars and sixty six cents an hour seven hundred and eighty two dollars sixty six cents a day

[3:38:06] maybe okay

[3:38:07] two hundred eighty dollars and sixty two cents an hour

[3:38:12] and

[3:38:13] I mean these numbers are I understand Davis Davis bacon but this

[3:38:20] When a project comes in at 200 and then they're asking for almost 300 more, it just doesn't make sense.

[3:38:27] I think that this needs to be reconfigured and really looked at and really broken down and explained to our

[3:38:46] It $309.69 an hour. That's just crazy to be. So I moved to postpone a definitely.

[3:38:56] Okay,

[3:38:59] there's a objection to the amendment to postpone a deputy mayor. Okay, so we have an objection.

[3:39:10] I can get the members to vote on postponing this AM and definitely.

[3:39:14] Okay.

[3:39:16] Both born in.

[3:39:18] How does it coming back for us?

[3:39:19] We will not come back if you postpone this one and definitely would require new legislation.

[3:39:28] Then we remember, Bernier.

[3:39:32] Madam Mayor, it is failed with assembly members and now we are in support.

[3:39:41] On the main motion.

[3:39:42] Just quickly.

[3:39:45] I just think there should be some accommodation on this one because of the cost overrun.

[3:39:52] And so I would urge voting it down with some kind of compromise to come back to us on this, otherwise I just feel like

[3:40:00] I'd just feel like the burrows a bit of a blank check and I want to get this, where we feel like we're in a comfortable spot.

[3:40:07] Like we have cost controls. So I would urge you to vote it down with the idea of coming back and working with and start.

[3:40:20] Are there further discussion? Okay. So there is an injection to the main motion and to what down.

[3:40:27] Thank you members to vote on the main motion.

[3:40:36] Madam Mayor, it is failed with Assemblymember Sumner McKee and Bernier in support.

[3:40:43] Move

[3:40:50] on to 116.

[3:40:52] Now we are on to you.

[3:40:54] You might want to tell Mr. Cooper he could probably sit down.

[3:40:57] Okay.

[3:40:57] So he doesn't have to stand there at all.

[3:40:59] Thank you.

[3:41:00] Move on to the next item and business.

[3:41:02] Thank you.

[3:41:03] Hey, I'm 26116 approval of additional utility relocation costs of $44,207.

[3:41:08] $7.49 to install natural gas for the Helen Lane

[3:41:12] can re-construction project in the Boat Guard Road

[3:41:15] Service area.

[3:41:17] OK, there's a main motion on the floor.

[3:41:21] Is there any further discussion?

[3:41:28] Is there objection to the motion?

[3:41:34] I don't hear any objection.

[3:41:36] Which so then, the legislation passes.

[3:41:41] Mayor, oops, sorry.

[3:41:42] Now we are on the other one.

[3:41:45] A. M. 26128, approval of additional, excuse me, approval of additional utility relocations costs

[3:41:52] A. 81,945 dollars and 42 cents to Ernesto Gas Company for midway road service

[3:41:59] area streets and streets improvement project. The main motion is already on the floor.

[3:42:07] Discussion on A. M. 26128.

[3:42:11] Who has a poll that was the original estimate of that?

[3:42:15] Because obviously the one that we wrote it down was the original.

[3:42:20] What was the original estimate?

[3:42:23] What percentage was this one?

[3:42:25] The staff or some Stephanie you have?

[3:42:28] What that's one was?

[3:42:30] For example.

[3:42:31] Thank you.

[3:42:32] The original estimate was 276,314 cents.

[3:42:36] And then it went up to total bill.

[3:42:38] It will be $3,487,762,82 cents.

[3:42:45] It's not $150,000.

[3:42:46] Some percent of the list on this one, okay?

[3:42:48] No, that's like a 30% or something.

[3:42:52] Assembly person now was.

[3:42:54] I think I heard on this project,

[3:42:56] but it would be nice to have some confirmation from staff.

[3:42:58] I think he was saying on this project,

[3:42:59] there was a drainage issue and there needed to be a redo.

[3:43:02] So it had more of an explanation than the previous project.

[3:43:16] Colbert and I'm project management division manager.

[3:43:20] I don't have the specific details on that, but what he was speaking about, does ring a bell.

[3:43:26] I believe it was Vicki Way.

[3:43:28] We did have a little bit of a adjustment for the drainage along that corridor.

[3:43:34] So I can't 100% confirm, but it does sound familiar.

[3:43:38] And I think he's correct.

[3:43:43] Further discussion?

[3:43:44] Yes, sir.

[3:43:45] Sure, absolutely.

[3:43:47] Thank you, sir.

[3:43:47] Thanks, Cole.

[3:43:48] So, it's explained to me, because I'm not a contract, I'm not a dirt guy.

[3:43:51] When you talk about the drainage had to be modified, and he spoke about it also, I mean,

[3:43:57] what does that mean to us, it don't really understand it?

[3:44:00] Yeah, so in that instance, on Vicki Way, there was, there's a lot of water that was coming

[3:44:08] in a subdivision, and so what we did is we channelized, so we did a special ditch that's

[3:44:13] deeper than a typical ditch to drain it out to Lula Pine Road. I believe what it was to get

[3:44:18] it out to the broader drainage system. So by dropping that ditch a little bit deeper, it

[3:44:24] reduced the cover over the gas line. So that would require them to lower it so that they

[3:44:30] had that quick cover per their requirements. So they did have to go in and they had to dig deeper

[3:44:35] and lay their line down deeper then. Yeah, I think what he was saying is they actually did

[3:44:39] directional board underneath the road to get it deeper. Thank you.

[3:44:46] For the release question.

[3:44:49] I want to put it in follow up.

[3:44:50] This will brought up the flaggers rate, which I'm looking at, which is pretty significant.

[3:44:57] My question to you.

[3:44:59] Flaggers.

[3:45:00] But when they charge the way you understand, or industry standard, if they're charging over here, 19 days or so many hours for

[3:45:13] Do they charge how much if there's eight hours in the day to day charge for eight hours of day?

[3:45:19] Or do they actually the way they calculate us out of that day?

[3:45:24] They excavated with used four hours of their or it's four hour.

[3:45:27] Do you know the formula?

[3:45:30] How they charge and what they industry is normally like?

[3:45:32] Because I know not all equipment is simultaneously used at the same time when you're doing a job.

[3:45:37] Yeah, so you till these are different than our general construction contracts, and so to be perfectly clear, we don't have the inspection staff to be out there monitoring and verifying the hours that they put in.

[3:45:52] But they are supposed to charge us the exact hours that they're out there, so they have a flag right out there for four hours.

[3:45:57] So we should, our invoice should be for four hours, we have to roll it out there for eight hours,

[3:46:02] we should get that invoice for those hours, direct one to one, to what they're building.

[3:46:08] I can't speak to, you know, we have the established prevailing Davis-Bacon wages, rates,

[3:46:16] but then when it comes to their overhead, you know, that's, we don't have control over that,

[3:46:21] and it's up to them to establish what that is

[3:46:24] and apply it to the cost for those.

[3:46:27] So how much they're charting overhead on top of those?

[3:46:31] No, not necessarily overhead.

[3:46:33] My question is more of, when they're 40-hour standard week

[3:46:38] of the week, if they had a piece of equipment sitting there,

[3:46:42] out of the 40 hours there was only use for actually 10 hours.

[3:46:45] Is it normal for them to charge the 40 hours

[3:46:48] because it was there available to them?

[3:46:50] We're only 10 hours that it was operating, because that's where the numbers really could change.

[3:46:58] You know, if you had a job, and I know, like, on the small scale, when we went, I pray to that two workers, but we got five pieces of equipment.

[3:47:07] We can only operate two at the same time. So, I guess, do you know, in our world, do they charge,

[3:47:14] That is actually used or per hour that, you know, work out, that it's on the site.

[3:47:22] I believe we're getting charged the hours that it's on the site.

[3:47:24] I mean, there's, you would hope that, you know, because they're not going to be operating that equipment necessarily 100% of the time.

[3:47:30] I don't think they're breaking up the time that they're not in the piece of equipment and operating it within reason.

[3:47:37] But like I said, we aren't out there every day tracking, you know, the amount of workers that are out there,

[3:47:43] the pieces of equipment, we just don't have to staff to oversee it at that level, so we have

[3:47:47] to trust that they're invoicing us for the hours that they're using the equipment.

[3:47:53] Yeah, I guess I missed opportunity to ask them that question, but now that when I started

[3:47:58] looking at those numbers, that was the thing, and if just, you know, to get 10 people working

[3:48:02] about 20 pieces of equipment there, I'm just saying, well, the 10 pieces of equipment can

[3:48:07] be the same. I guess that's just my logic common sense comes in and I wish I would ask

[3:48:12] but it sounds like he wasn't too happy when I left, so I didn't get chance to do that.

[3:48:18] That was seven person bowls. Oh no. Okay. Sorry.

[3:48:22] Any other questions?

[3:48:27] Any objection to passing the M26-128?

[3:48:35] Okay. Do you have an objection?

[3:48:39] I get the members to go ahead and vote.

[3:48:46] Family member burn year.

[3:48:55] It passed with

[3:49:02] a

[3:49:02] There are no vetoes, and then when the clerk is ready, she will read the introductions for the public hearing for the 15th.

[3:49:13] for public hearing on September 15, resolution 26094, ordinance 26102 with the resolution 26088,

[3:49:22] ordinance 26103 with resolution 26093, ordinance 26104, ordinance 26105 with resolution 26095,

[3:49:33] and ordinance 26106.

[3:49:37] Do you, Deputy Mayor?

[3:49:39] I move to introduce the legislation as read into the record by the clerk,

[3:49:42] You can set the public hearings for September 15th, 2026.

[3:49:46] There's no any objection?

[3:49:50] No objection and the legislation has been introduced.

[3:49:54] Deputy Mayor, will you move the vacancy report, please?

[3:49:58] I move to get informed.

[3:50:00] Affairs recommendations, as follows. Enhance 911 advisory board, resignation of Melissa Sonic,

[3:50:08] plating board, resignation of Stephen Kivan.

[3:50:14] Rescustion,

[3:50:19] there are any objection,

[3:50:22] hearing no objection that they can see report has been approved.

[3:50:26] There are no other new business, there are no referrals, there are no reconsiderations.

[3:50:34] So assembly person, Paula, party remarks.

[3:50:40] My wife, I was asked me, how long this meeting going to be today, and if you look at the agenda,

[3:50:46] there's like a medium, so maybe 98, but we are where we at, thank you for everyone who came up

[3:50:54] spoke, you know, none of you are almost none of you are here, but we do value opinion and

[3:51:03] I appreciate all you working together.

[3:51:07] It's as much as sometimes we disagree, but today is another day, me, and it's now just made

[3:51:11] another history.

[3:51:12] So.

[3:51:14] Partying remarks.

[3:51:16] Assembly person Gamble.

[3:51:19] No, thank you.

[3:51:22] Partying remarks.

[3:51:23] Assembly person Bowles.

[3:51:26] Thank you, Matt Mayer.

[3:51:27] So I've been thinking this whole meeting.

[3:51:29] I appreciate Debbie Mayer's letter or, you know, direction to the manager.

[3:51:35] And I support natural resource development, economic growth.

[3:51:39] But I've been sitting here for the last four hours.

[3:51:41] kind of thinking that we probably should have waited in a loud public comments on that.

[3:51:47] So I just want to make it clear that those that have concerns, you know, that's on my

[3:51:54] mind as well.

[3:51:55] I think that we probably should consider maybe thinking about that.

[3:52:04] And with that, it's a privilege to be in the seat, district one.

[3:52:08] Thank you for putting me here and we'll see you next time.

[3:52:12] Madam Clinton, parting comments,

[3:52:17] Assembly person hours, parting comments?

[3:52:20] Yeah, public process is just crucial in ignoring that puts us at peril, so we have

[3:52:25] to tread very cautiously.

[3:52:28] And then I hope everybody's gotten a chance to go to the fair before the first frost hits.

[3:52:35] And that venue mayor, parting process, parting comments?

[3:52:39] Yeah.

[3:52:39] The intention of this letter was not to convey property to Ada in Houston, willow area.

[3:52:48] It was to get them to look at Poem McKenzie and West's sitting area.

[3:52:57] And when I talked to DNR, I was trying to beat the clock, basically.

[3:53:05] And that's that.

[3:53:07] So anyone that was thinking that I was given the green light to give land in Houston,

[3:53:15] Willow area to ADA is

[3:53:20] not true.

[3:53:23] Thank you.

[3:53:30] I'd just like to say thanks to everyone for coming and just putting in the meeting.

[3:53:36] Guess there's only folks that are whose job it is to be here left.

[3:53:41] But everyone else that came and so we're watching, thanks for coming out and participating.

[3:53:48] Martin, come in.

[3:53:50] Assemblyperson McKee.

[3:53:52] Yeah, I just wanted to just very briefly.

[3:53:56] There was a person who sent a letter.

[3:53:59] We all got a copy of it about an incident with a cat.

[3:54:02] It was apparently being mulled by a dog.

[3:54:04] And I talked to Mr. Hayes and that is being, I just want that person to know if you're out there.

[3:54:10] it's being addressed as being discussed as an ignored and it doesn't just go in the

[3:54:14] round file as it's being addressed. I just I think that's really important to let people know

[3:54:17] that they are heard when these things come in, especially something that caused

[3:54:20] you know the thing with the animals that caused such a four as well as should have.

[3:54:25] So just one of that first to know, we're looking at you. Thanks.

[3:54:30] I'm parting comments. Mr. Attorney.

[3:54:38] Okay.

[3:54:39] I do. I move to enter executive session for the matter of which is the immediate public

[3:54:48] knowledge of which would clearly have an adverse effect upon the finances of the borough

[3:54:53] and matters which by law municipal charter or ordinance are required to be kept confidential.

[3:55:00] And to discuss matters involving consideration of burrow records that by law are not subject to public disclosure and discussion of matters subject to the attorney slash client privilege. In particular to discuss Davidson family trust versus the Matt Subaru.

[3:55:18] 3PA-26-02199CI. Those present during executive session will be the mayor, Yassembly,

[3:55:27] the attorney, the manager, and the clerk.

[3:55:32] Okay, discussion on going into executive session in the objection. Okay, so we will leave

[3:55:42] to exit executive session discussion on executive session. Is there any objection?

[3:55:58] Here we know objection we have exit at 1055 and if there's no objection we will adjourn at 1055.

ASSEMBLY REGULAR MEETING on 2026-09-01 6:00 PM

Agenda

Transcript