THE CITY AND BOROUGH OF JUNEAU, ALASKA

November 2, 1998

MEETING NO. 98-35: The Regular meeting of the City and Borough of Juneau Assembly, held in the Assembly Chambers of the Municipal Building, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Dennis Egan.

  1. FLAG SALUTE was led by Mayor Egan.
  2. INVOCATION was not offered.
  3. ROLL CALL

Assembly Present: Garrett, Kibby, MacKinnon, Perkins, Powell, Egan, Hagevig, Muñoz, and Koelsch

Assembly Absent: None

A quorum was present.

Staff Present: Marian Miller, Municipal Clerk; Dave Palmer, City Manager; John Corso, City Attorney; Joe Buck, Engineering Director; Ernie Mueller, Public Works Director; Allan Heese, Airport Administrative Officer; Craig Duncan, Finance Director; Laurie Sica, CDD Environmental/Zoning Inspector; Cheryl Easterwood, Community Development Director

SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Swearing in of Newly Elected Assemblymembers

Mr. Corso swore in John MacKinnon, Cathy Engstrom Muñoz and Jim Powell.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

    1. 07/22/98 - Regular Meeting No. 98-27
    2. 09/14/98 – Regular Meeting No. 98-31
    3. 09/21/98 – regular Meeting No. 98-32

MOTION - by Kibby, to approve the minutes of Regular Meeting No. 98-27 held July 22, 1998, and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

MOTION - by Kibby, to approve the minutes of Regular Meeting No. 98-31 held September 14, 1998, and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

MOTION - by Kibby, to approve the minutes of Regular Meeting No. 98-32 held September 21, 1998, and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

  1. MANAGER’S REQUEST FOR AGENDA CHANGES
  2. Mr. Palmer noted one addition to the resolutions on the Consent Agenda, Item B-2, Resolution 1963 – a resolution declaring a disaster emergency and seeking State and Federal assistance. The resolution was included in the red folder.

  3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
  4. David Benton, 2116 B 2nd Street, Douglas, testified as president of the Alaska Lighthouse Association, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporation headquartered in Juneau. They were seeking CBJ support for their project at Pt. Retreat. They have roughly 100 members, mostly from the Juneau, but some statewide and some from outside of Alaska and they rely heavily on their membership for volunteers. They have a 30-year lease for the Pt. Retreat Light Station, which is a historical light station in a very beautiful location. It is very important as a recreational site and an important landmark. Their association was in the process of restoring the light station in accordance with the National Historic Register Guidelines, and when they were done, they wanted to open it for a Maritime Heritage Museum and possibly a small bed and breakfast operation. More importantly, they wanted to improve the access for visitors and residents making it possible for people to pull in and have a place to tie up. So far, they have spent roughly 5,000 volunteer hours. The building was in reasonably good shape and they hope by this time next year to have all the utilities back in. Their goal was to be complete in the next two years. He asked the Assembly for an expression of support and said it would be very useful in their efforts to raise funds. They would not be seeking any funds from the CBJ but are raising money through grants, foundations, and Federal funds for restoration.

    Page Bridges, Carroll Way, Juneau. She presented pictures of her neighborhood and the small site below her house where they were going to put a large building. She asked if there was any way, because of the extreme danger of the territory, to circumvent an appeal. She said it was so dangerous they had to attach 12-13 conditions to it, including insuring surrounding homeowners for damage to their homes and to their persons. She showed pictures of the construction of the Garrison/Stone building, which was real close by, and how it almost brought down her neighbors’ house. She showed a picture of a crack in the pavement in front of her neighbors’ house and how there was no dirt under the house because of action on the hillside. She had shown a picture of a crack in the hill to the Planning Commission and said the foreman of the construction company had been tamping out the cracks. The contractor told her they were surface cracks from settling but she found one of the cracks when she was gardening that went all the way down, possibly 20 feet, and was about 2-3" wide. She said there were other crack in the hillside, all right below her house. It had been stated that the slope above the Garrison/Stone building was subject to minor slumps and movement. She said she was terrified should they come in with heavy construction, cutting deep into the hill. Her neighbor was terrified as well as the apartment dwellers above her house. Her neighbor has had to hire two engineers to help them cope with this and had to pay $20,000 of their own money to get their house fixed. She did not feel that was fair and she worried that they were being threatened again. They have come up with a very good engineering plan, but R&M and the city are nervous so they attached a lot of conditions to try to make it safer. She felt there were several human errors on the last project and she said there was no room for human error when cutting into this severe slope. She asked how someone could be insured for loss of their home if an injury might be involved.

    Mr. Powell asked where she lived in relationship to the property. She indicated the yellow house at the top of the stairs, right above where the building would be.

    Mayor Egan asked Mr. Corso if there was anything the Assembly could do without an appeal. Mr. Corso said that under Title 49, he could not find a provision for reconsideration by the Commission on a Conditional Use permit. He would keep looking, but suggested that the only way the Assembly could address the situation was through an appeal and that it would probably be best for the Assembly to refrain from commenting on the merits of this issue in case an appeal was filed. CBJ staff could address any dangerous construction that might occur through the building official or other authorities that could halt construction in the event construction occurs and it becomes dangerous.

    Barb Konrad, P.O. Box 33496, Juneau, AK 99803. She was not sure if she could speak on the Mendenhall Treatment Plant before the issue came up on the agenda. Mr. MacKinnon suggested suspending the rules and moving the Progress Report – Mendenhall Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant from the Manager’s Report to this point on the agenda. There was no objection to suspending the rules. Mr. Mueller came forward to give his report.

    Mr. Mueller reviewed the progress report included in the packet. He noted that last week the plant was pretty well flooded out by the record inflow into the plant and they did have two violations on that day. The last couple of months it has been operating very well. They were in the process of a major review of the sources of odor at the plant and they have contracted with Carson Dorn Engineers. There was a schedule included in the report and he noted that the public meeting, scheduled for the 17th, had been changed to the 18th of November so that the consultant from Anchorage could be present. The purpose of the meeting would be to present the initial report by the consultants. They would be doing a survey of the surrounding neighborhood to get input as changes are made to the plant.

    Ms. Konrad came forward and read a letter, which she presented to each Assemblymember, into the record. She read that of the questions that were presented to the Assembly on September 14th, one very important question was not answered: what specifically has been done in operation of the plant. They were promised a meeting in a month and that had not happened. She heard there would be a meeting on November 18th but she thought that would be on the study taking place. She said it had been seven weeks since they were told they would have a meeting in a month. Due to an area resident petition concerning odors, Carson Dorn conducted a study in November of 1993. According to that study, Mr. Dorn said the plant was well kept and maintained, however, it was reported that there were times sufficient staff was not available to clean the SBR basins in a timely manner due to other commitments. He suggested that sufficient staff should be made available to perform the required maintenance and cleaning and that while odors had not been eliminated, they had been significantly reduced. Based on the study, additional steps could be taken to further reduce odor. She asked why management took the ABF plant digester off-line in 1995 when the study indicated that this was needed to further reduce odor and during the years the digester was off, what had been used in its place to thicken the sludge and further de-water it. She asked why it was back on-line after three years and she asked if management would keep it on. She said they have had it up their eye balls with solid waste odor. She said the plant could be studied to death and if this plant, built in 1989, was poorly designed to begin with, why have they not done anything about it. Since the study was done, why did it take five years to come up with a decision to try the more expensive method. She was not worried about costs and thought it was a poor excuse. With the plant as it is now, it would cost a lot more because nothing had ever been done. If the solids were taken to the JD Plant for processing, we would be paying a lot more than what it would cost to get the Mendenhall Plant running the way it could. She said they keep hearing about changes but have not heard what the changes would be. Mr. Mueller stated in his letter that Mr. Bronson directed a number of operating perimeters be changed and had conducted further studies to fine-tune the operations, he said the plant had been operating better than it had virtually since it started. She wondered if Mr. Bronson, Mr. Schuitt or Mr. Mueller really knew what they were doing. The odors have been consistently bad in the last months. Also, she asked if it was normal procedure to have a round hose coming out of a window into a big truck.

    Ms. Muñoz asked Mr. Mueller to comment on the point made by Mr. Dorn regarding sufficient staff. Mr. Mueller said that was five years ago and he understood there was sufficient staff out there now, and they have been routinely cleaning out the processing tanks.

    Mr. Powell asked when the problem would be solved and when the people would not have the odor in their back yards. Mr. Palmer said that was a question for the engineers and if they were asked for an absolute guarantee, they would give you a price. He said the study that was done in 1993 made several recommendations and all but one was implemented. The one that was not was one that, after reflection, everyone agreed would generate more odor, not less. To say it has taken five years to implement this study is not true; those recommendations were done. The engineers’ recommendations have been systematic recommendations, starting with process changes, staff changes, dealing with the least expensive changes first and now we have moved into the more expensive changes. Tonight’s agenda includes a request for $1M to put toward this project. The technology has changed and the equipment that is available for the plant is newer and better. They have asked every engineer and every expert they can find, what to do about the odor which has been created since the plant has been there. They have told us that they would look at every part of the plant and make recommendations to make it as good as they can. He felt the Assembly and staff had shown a commitment; cost has not been the case and no one has said there was not enough money to fix it. At this point, the engineers are working on the problem, equipment had been specified, and there was a time schedule for replacing some equipment.

    Mr. Powell said that if he lived out there, he would not care how it got done, just whether or not it still smelled. He still did not have any assurance of when the problem would be fixed. He sees the process as presented and he asked if the problem would be solved around January-February. Mr. Mueller said the final report would be done by then. Mr. Powell clarified the report would be the corrective actions that were necessary to solve the odor problem. Mr. Palmer said there were two things happening: the physical reconstruction of the tanks and the replacement of the decanters, which was currently underway and should be installed next summer. If there were more steps that needed to be done, they would be presented to the Assembly as options with price tags. Once a decision was made, staff would move forward to fund it, design it, and build it.

    Ms. Konrad had asked Mr. Mueller if he had ever contacted the plant which was mentioned by a lady who attended the August 25th meeting. Her husband had helped design the plant on the outer banks of North Carolina and it sounded pretty close to the same sort of plant. Mr. Mueller said he had not, he thought Mr. Dorn was going to do that. She said she had been hearing the word "costs". She asked why keep going with engineers and studies; the public could be involved, as there are a lot of intelligent people that would be willing to share ideas.

    Ms. Hagevig stated there was a difference in opinion about staffing being a problem. She suggested that possibly people that were there on a day to day basis were seeing it differently. She asked what would be done if none of the options worked; had anyone thought about the ultimate considerations. Mr. Mueller said that last summer there had been one or two vacant positions and it was his understanding that staff was not the problem; technology was the problem. Even with 30 people working there, there still would be an odor. The consultants right now are reviewing the options, including trucking the sludge to the JD Treatment Plant.

    Ms. Hagevig clarified Mr. Mueller was satisfied that there was a solution.

    Mr. Perkins asked what was being done so differently at the downtown treatment plant. Mr. Mueller said there were two different processes plus there were not local residents being impacted like in the Valley where there were people living 40 feet away. The downtown process is entirely different and it has a real sludge digester that was designed to handle the sludge from that plant; the Valley plant does not. The Mendenhall Plant was never designed to do what we are trying to make it do and the JD Plant was designed to do what it is doing. Mr. Perkins asked if that meant the design of the Valley Plant was flawed to begin with. He said with the increased population and the continued growth of the valley, it would only make sense that we would have it minimum of what is being done downtown. Mr. Mueller said when the downtown incinerator was built, it took care of the piece of the process that had been missing for 15 years. The solids handling process that was designed for the Mendenhall Plant was never built. It was designed to have an anaerobic sealed up digesters and to handle that waste with a composting system. When we ran out of money for that plant with $6M of cost overruns, a lawsuit between the CBJ and the designers, and a complicated process that we were not even sure we could make run, the solids handling stuff was never added. We have replaced the filter press but that was all that was ever done to it. We are using a system that was never designed or intended to do what we are trying to force it to do. That is part, but not all, of the problem.

    Mr. Kibby asked if it could be fixed and he said five years was a long time and he could understand the neighborhoods’ frustration. It was frustrating for him to find out it is not only the wrong design, but it is in the wrong place; it seems to be flawed all the way around. Throwing more money at bad money may not be the solution. Regardless of what is done, the problem will be transferred to something else. He thought it would be fair to ask the engineers for something in writing that asks whether or not the problem will ever be eliminated. Mr. Palmer said that he would be sure that question gets asked of the engineer and was included in the report.

    Mr. Powell asked if in other communities there was solid waste facilities that handle waste without odors. Mr. Palmer said there were a variety of designs of plants and periodically there were problems with any of them. Each one works with whatever constraints they are dealt. This plant deals with the constraint of space; we do not have acres of property and it is wet, plus there are people living 40 feet away. The air has to be pretty clean to not offend anyone. Mr. Powell said if a private industry generated odor like this, you could bet we would be on their backs right away to get it taken care of. He pleaded that if staff needed something from the Assembly, ask for it so this problem can be solved.

    Mr. Garrett asked the daily design capacity of the plant. Mr. Mueller said he thought it was originally between 4 –5M gallons a day. He thought it could probably handle more than that on a continuous flow basis but when it is shock loaded it is a problem. Mr. Garrett asked that when the masterplan was done for the wastewater system a couple years ago, did it have recommendations for timing and staging of capacity increases for the plant. Mr. Mueller said only for the Auke Bay Plant and that was under way right now. Mr. Garrett thought it might be useful to have the engineers look at the capacity issue and he said if Juneau continues to grow at the projected rate, capacity was also going to be an issue requiring a solution. He asked if trucking the sludge downtown would stop the problem. Mr. Mueller did not think that would solve the problem completely. The sources of odor were more than just the solids and it was their belief that the scrubbing of the air was the most expensive piece of the action. It may be cheaper for us to thicken the sludge using some new technology that is only now being developed, put it in a tanker truck and truck it down to the JD Treatment Plant, wetter than it is now but dryer than it is as it goes into the filter press. That could alleviate a lot of the odor from that particular source but not 100%, and it may also solve the problem of hauling this in an open truck through the middle of town, instead it could be put in a tanker truck which would be a sealed truck. Mr. Garrett asked if the city owned any tanker trucks big enough to do that. Mr. Mueller said no, but they were available; the Municipality of Anchorage ships its sludge in a tanker truck and it is a well-known technology. Mr. Garrett thought it sounded like a simple solution and he asked why not get a truck and try it, do an experiment while they are doing the study. Mr. Mueller said that would mean moving 80 to 100,000 gallons a day. If that could be cut to 30,000 gallons per day that would be 3 trips with a 10,000-gallon tanker; 100,000 gallons would be a struggle. He thought it would be a great idea but it would not solve the entire problem, only a big chunk of it. Mr. Garrett asked for some of the discussion as to why the plant was sited where it was. Mr. Palmer said he would try to find that.

    Ms. Hagevig said that she was really hopeful that when Carson Dorn reported back, there would be realistic assessments about how practical and how workable the solutions or options were. She would hate to go through the process with the various price tags and then find we still have the same problems. Their expertise should allow a realistic assessment of their recommendations.

    Ms. Muñoz asked if one of the options would be to self contain the operation with solid handling on site. Mr. Mueller said that, and treat the gases. He said the current practice was to take the sludge to the incinerator and burn it virtually the same day it was generated. The decision was made to not build an incinerator at the Mendenhall Plant because of the possibility of adding to the fog around the airport plus the fact that the building was high and might impact air traffic. One way or the other, the final resting-place is downtown.

    Mayor Egan said the neighborhood keeps talking about the study that was done. He asked if the city had tried to act on the recommendations of that study. Mr. Mueller said yes, on the cheap ones. He said that they know more now than they did then and they would be looking at more detailed way to change some of the process so that it may be possible to save some very expensive costs. Also, the technology has changed in the last few years and it may be possible to thicken in a much more effective way with the generation of a lot less odor.

    Mayor Egan said the Assembly would like updates at the first meeting of every month. There may also be a need to have a COW on the final report.

    Ms. Konrad said the Valley residents were also very frustrated and she thought that everyone should try to be a little sympathetic, no matter how many years members in the public’s eye have been receiving phone calls, and not be rude. She referred to Mr. Mueller’s comment that air has to be pretty clean to offend them; she felt that was rude. Mr. Mueller said what he said was that it has to be pretty clean to not offend them when you are only living 40 feet away from the plant. Mr. Mueller said that he wanted to know when ever his employees were rude to any one who called.

  5. CONSENT AGENDA

MOTION - by Garrett, to adopt the Consent Agenda with the addition of item B-2, Resolution 1963, declaring the disaster areas as outlined by the Manager, and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

A. Ordinances for Introduction

1. Ordinance No. 98-19

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE TO BRING THE TEXT INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE TABLE OF DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS AND TO REMOVE OBSOLETE REFERENCES TO THE "D-7" ZONING DISTRICT.

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

    1. Ordinance No. 98-20
    2. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TABLES IN THE LAND USE CODE TO REMOVE OBSOLETE REFERENCES TO ZONING DISTRICTS.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

    3. Ordinance No. 98-35
    4. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PURCHASING CODE TO ALLOW NEGOTIATED PURCHASED OF SERVICES FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, SCHOOLS, AND NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

    5. Ordinance No. 98-36

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SALES TAX CODE TO PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF A TEMPORARY ONE PERCENT AREAWIDE SALES TAX ON THE SALE PRICE OF RETAIL SALES, RENTALS, AND SERVICES PERFORMED WITHIN THE CITY AND BOROUGH OF JUNEAU, THE PROCEEDS OF WHICH ARE TO BE ALLOCATED FOR IMPROVEMENTS AND REPAIRS TO A VARIETY OF PARK, HARBOR, AND EAGLECREST FACILITIES.

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

B. Resolutions

1. Resolution No. 1962

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION FOR APPLICATION TO THE ALASKA CLEAN WATER FUND AND DESIGNATING THE MANNER OF ACCEPTING AND MANAGING THE LOAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF REPLACING DECANTERS AND PIPING AT THE MENDENHALL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this resolution be adopted.

    1. Resolution No. 1963

A RESOLUTION DECLARING A DISASTER EMERGENCY AND SEEKING STATE AND FEDERAL ASSISTANCE.

Administrative Report: The Manager recommended that this resolution be adopted.

C. Bid Awards

    1. Contract No. E-99-082: Underground Storage Tank Replacement

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended award of this project to Hulegaard Construction in the amount bid for the base bid and alternates 1 & 2, for a total award of $77,300.00

B R E A K

8:00 p.m. – 8:12 p.m.

 

  1. ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING

1. Ordinance No. 98-33

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BUSINESS CODE TO PROHIBIT THE POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN PARKS, RECREATION AREAS, AND OTHER OPEN AREAS OWNED BY THE MUNICIPALITY IF POSTED BY THE MANAGER UPON APPROVAL BY THE ASSEMBLY BY MOTION.

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

Public Participation: None

Assembly Action:

MOTION - by Hagevig, to adopt Ordinance No. 98-33 and she asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

    1. Ordinance No. 98-34
    2. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 96-09 TO ALLOW THE ATTORNEY TO CONVERT UNUSED PERSONAL LEAVE TO CASH.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

      Public Participation: None

      Assembly Action:

      MOTION – by Powell, to adopt Ordinance 98-34 and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

    3. Ordinance No. 98-17 (N)
    4. AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING TO THE MANAGER THE SUM OF $100,000 FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE SOUTHEAST CONFERENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A SOCIO-ECONOMIC STUDY OF SOUTHEAST ALASKA. SUCH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ALASKA ECONOMIC DISASTER FUND.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

      Public Participation:

      Mark Wheeler, 635 Main Street. He testified that he worked for the SE Alaska Conservation Council, which was a coalition of 16 volunteer citizen conservation groups in 13 communities through out SE Alaska, from Ketchikan to Yakutat. He provided background of the Tongass Land Management Plan (TLMP). The SE Conference decided to join a lawsuit submitted by the Alaska Forestry Association (AFA). Their representatives on the SE Conference voted to support that motion. He had a copy of the amended complaint and the SE Conference and the AFA were asking to scrap the current TLMP and go back to the old TLMP. He presented a map showing the areas still open for logging. They were either asking for that or to go to alternative P, which was an old alternative that the Forest Service considered a long time ago. A main part of the complaint deals with the socio-economic impacts of TLMP and about 10 of the 52 pages of the complaint argue that TLMP did not perform an adequate socio-economic impact analysis. The residents of Juneau were being asked to spend the money given to us by Congress to fund a study which would look at the socio-economic impacts of declines in the timber industry on the region. This study would most likely be used to support this lawsuit to go back to this old plan to double the amount of logging in SE Alaska and open places near Juneau to more logging. He asked if this was in the best interest of the CBJ. He said the coalition was commissioning a study of their own and had a draft on how other communities were doing after the closure of the pulp mills. Basically, this year, a year after the mill closed in Sitka, unemployment was actually down, and per capita income has raised 4.7% between 1995 and 1996. Those communities were not doing as bad as people thought they would be. They think there are a lot better uses for the money than funding another study. It could be dumped into the revolving loan fund which is helping people go back to work. It could be used to help Sitka start a value added processing lab.

      Mr. Powell referred to the study they had commission and he asked if they would be doing that report. Mr. Wheeler said they had contracted a local economist to perform it. Mr. Powell asked that the Assembly receive a copy when it was complete.

      Steve Brantner, 4347 Taku Blvd. He testified as a member of the Chamber of Commerce and the Resource Alliance. He said he found it ironic that someone would say a socio- economic study was not needed but would commission one themselves. He thought this was a good effort to reach out to all of SE and that Juneau should show its leadership. Anytime economic disaster occurs, one needs a base line to determine what happened; determine situation before the disaster; and then lay out a road map to correct things afterwards. This effort to coordinate with the other communities was a very reasonable thing to do and he thought it was a prudent and wise thing to do.

      Ms. Muñoz asked if the information that was gathered from this study would be used to support the lawsuit. Mr. Brantner said not that he was aware of. Ms. Muñoz said that the intent was to study all areas of the economy in SE, and she thought that was very reasonable, but looking at the outline, she thought it was heavily weighted toward the timber industry. Mr. Brantner thought that was somewhat understandable in light of the fact that the funding for the study had come from Senator Steven’s money, the SE Economic Disaster Fund. In many other communities of SE Alaska, timber was the largest employer. The changes in the economy in other towns has affected the fishing, tourism, recreation, manufacturing, retailing and every other industry. In some ways it has been beneficial and in some ways harmful. He said it would be really hard to tell what an elected body or any group should do without knowing what that baseline was. The study would include all those other industries and not just timber.

      Berne Miller, 213 Third Street, Executive Director of SE Conference for 3.5 years. They are chartered by the State to do economic development work in SE Alaska and one of the first questions he asked was what kind of tools do we have to analyze the impacts of changes in our economy or projects that we might undertake to modify our economy. In talking with a number of economists, he was told a number of things: data and a model of how our economy works does not exist. As the TLMP revision was in progress, SE Conference encouraged the Forest Service to look very carefully at the consequences of their decisions on our region’s people and communities. In particular, do a good socio- economic analysis of what would happen and develop that information or those models so that we can, on a quantitative basis if possible, rather than a qualitative basis, decide about what is going to happen given choices available. The Forest Service responded that they did not have the resources, nor the tools needed to do that kind of analysis. Three years ago, the SE Alaska Conference of Mayors asked SE Conference to tell them how long it might take and how much it would cost to do a number of projects, one of which was build this kind of economic model for the way our economy performs. The last time around, the Mayors decided that they wanted to pick up three of the six projects and fund them and they did, this was not one of them. At their most recent meeting, one of the Mayors asked once again for us to suggest how long and how much. That was the object of this exercise. Regardless of which sector of the economy or regardless of what was going on now, we need better tools to be able to assess what is happening, and what might happen.

      Mr. Powell said he had concerns that $200,000 was not enough money to get the job done and that the only thing they would get would be an annotated outline and some narrative. He asked who would do the study. Mr. Miller said there were a number of outfits both in and out of state who could take on the job. The preference would be for someone in SE Alaska, who was familiar with the economy and how it works. He said he had a call today from Mr. Shaw of the Forest Service and they would like to work together because they need the information that would be in there and they have information that may potentially be useful. He agreed that millions of dollars go into these kinds of studies, but collecting the data would give a credible start. Mr. Powell asked when he expected the study would be done. Mr. Miller said it was estimated that it would take about $250,000 and take about a year.

      Mr. Koelsch asked how he went about allocating what each of the communities would put up for this and how did Juneau end up at $67,000. Mr. Miller said they went through a number of allocation schemes with the Mayors. This one was based in part on how much Steven’s money each community received and in part, on the communities population. Mr. Koelsch asked if the other communities seemed to be agreeable. Mr. Miller said it was the formula that was used for the other effort so it was an accepted allocation.

      Mr. Garrett disagreed with Mr. Powell and thought this was more than enough money to do what needed to be done. He was concerned about the formation of the study. He said a critical piece of the study was how it was laid out at the beginning and he asked if they intended to do the same thorough review of all the other industries as with the Timber Industry. Mr. Miller said that had to be the case or the results would not be valid. Mr. Garrett thought it should include some of the external private sector forces that affect these economies like what happens when the world price of pulp or zinc fluctuates. Mr. Miller said that if that were not in there, it would be lacking one of the major drivers for any resource-based economy. Mr. Garrett said he did not see any reference to national or international perspective on forces external to the region. Mr. Miller said without external input it would be a model in isolation. Mr. Garrett said the Assembly, as a body, had not made a decision about whether or not the AFA lawsuit was a good or bad thing and he was concerned that this was an effort to do back ground work that would be used by the AFA. Mr. Miller said that thought had not occurred to him until he had heard it from Mr. Wheeler earlier. He said that was not the intent.

      Ms. Muñoz asked if he would be willing to revise the outline and the letter of intent on this project to clarify whether or not this information would be used to support a lawsuit. If it was used, she did not want to support this. Mr. Miller said certainly. Mayor Egan said the information would be public information and would be available for anyone who wanted to use it. The AFA, the city of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough sat on this money for a year and there were communities in SE Alaska that needed this information. Sitka has requested it; and t was a real concern from Wrangell. They were under the impression that this information was going to come forward. If the AFA was so concerned about this, they would have done it, but they didn’t do it. He said it was his proposal in Sitka that we take a major portion of this money and give it to SE Conference to get this done. It had nothing to do with AFA and AFA has never requested this study. They can use the information, but so can everyone else. Mr. Miller agreed that was an important point, this would not become a proprietary set of information. Anyone who wants to use it would be welcome to use it. Ms. Muñoz felt that was fine, but she said looking at the outline, it was with the intent of doing a more thorough analysis of the timber industry. If it truly is a socio-economic study of all industries in the Region, then there needed to be equal time with the other industries. Mr. Miller agreed and said before a RFP went out, that would be fixed. Mayor Egan requested a copy of the RFP before it goes out. Mr. Miller said that any of the communities that were contributing money were welcome to look at the RFP. They are working on behalf of the communities of SE.

      Mr. Kibby noted that the amount in the Manager’s report was incorrect. The total should be $187,000.00 and not $255,000.00. Mr. Palmer said the information was taken from what was submitted to them. Mr. Garrett thought the correct, total amount should read $287,300.

      Assembly Action:

      MOTION - by Kibby, to adopt 98-17(N).

      Mr. Koelsch said he supported the idea but he felt the explanation for how the allocation was set up for Juneau made sense to him and Juneau should not pay beyond its fair share.

      Mr. Powell clarified he supported the $67,000 and not the $100,000. He asked the rational for that amount. Mayor Egan said that money had been committed to the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and this would move those funds over to get the study done. If there was any money to be returned, Juneau would get those funds back.

      Amendment by Koelsch to lower the amount to $67,000.00. Objection was noted.

      ROLL CALL

      Ayes: Koelsch, Powell, and Garrett

      Nays: Hagevig, Kibby, MacKinnon, Muñoz, Perkins, and Mayor Egan

      Motion fails 3:6

      There being no objection to the main motion, it was so ordered.

    5. Ordinance No. 98-17 (O)
    6. AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING TO THE MANAGER THE SUM OF $29,500 FOR A GENERAL WAGE INCREASE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION MEMBERS. SUCH FUNDS PROVIDED BY ROADED SERVICE AREA FUND BALANCE.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

      Public Participation: None

      Assembly Action:

      MOTION - by Muñoz, to adopt Ordinance 98-17 (O) and she asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

    7. Ordinance No. 98-17 (P)
    8. AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING TO THE MANAGER THE SUM OF $6,850 FOR REPLACEMENT OF KITCHEN SERVICE WARE AT CENTENNIAL HALL. SUCH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSIONAIRE.

      Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

      Public Participation: None

      Assembly Action:

      MOTION - by Hagevig, to adopt Ordinance 98-17 (P) and she asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

    9. Ordinance No. 98-17 (Q)

AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING TO THE MANAGER THE SUM OF $1,000,000 FOR CONTINUATION OF PHASES I AND II, AND FOR RENOVATION OF THE CENTRAL STERILE SUPPLY AREA OF BARTLETT REGIONAL HOSPITAL’S PROJECT 98. SUCH FUNDS PROVIDED BY BARTLETT REGIONAL HOSPITAL RETAINED EARNINGS.

Administrative Report: Attached. The Manager recommended that this ordinance be adopted.

Public Participation: None

Assembly Action:

MOTION – by Garrett, to adopt Ordinance No. 98-17 (Q) and he asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered.

  1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
  2. NEW BUSINESS - None
  3. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS

A. Manager’s Report - Action Items - None

B. Manager’s Report - Information Items

    1. Progress report –Mendenhall Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant (this was moved to the beginning of the meeting.)
    2. Police Station Bid – Status Report. Mr. Palmer reported that by the close of business of October 26, they received two protests. The Purchasing Dept. and Law Dept. had reviewed them and Purchasing should issue their recommendation this week. He said they were expecting that once that letter was issued there would be an appeal to the Bid Review Board. He said there was one vacancy on that board and there was a requirement that there be an attorney in that position. The City Attorney had reviewed that and did not feel that would present any obstacle to the Bid Review Board proceeding.
    3. Mr. Kibby noted that his wife Julie sits on the Bid Review Board and he asked if the appeal made it to the Assembly, would there be a conflict of interest. Mr. Corso said no, but in the past, if a matter was appealed from the Bid Review Board, Mr. Kibby had stepped down. It was not a financial conflict of interest but might be an appearance of bias, which justifies an Assemblymember stepping down. Mr. Kibby commented that he was aware that the Bid Review Board had written all their facts of finding in the past on a lot of cases and he asked that staff be present to help them with that process.

    4. Update of Camping Enforcement – Fish Creek Area. A report was included in the packet. Mayor Egan asked for an update on the St. Vincent DiPaul - Thane Road at the next meeting as it would dovetail in with Fish Creek.
    5. Communication/Leadership Training.
    6. City Manager’s Quarterly report to the Assembly: July – September 1998. A report was included in the packet. Mr. Palmer added that Congress had adjourned and they passed the authorization for the land trade for Auke Cape, Lena Point. They included a mandate that an easement be granted to the city for access across the interior property. They also granted the authority for NOAA to construct on the Lena Point site and they granted authority for the University of Alaska to co-locate on that site. The agencies are currently preparing next years budget and it was his understanding that there would be money included in the request that goes to OMB for construction. The CBJs requirement was that to exercise our option, we needed to see construction money approved. His hope was that at this time next year, there would be construction money so they could exercise the option. Mr. Perkins asked if Mr. Palmer would be involved in the process to make sure that the funding was put into the budget. Mr. Palmer said yes, everyone should stay involved. Mayor Egan said that design money, $6M, was now authorized so they could begin with that aspect.

C. Attorney’s Report

    1. Boone vs. CBJ – The verdict form was included in the packet. The jury found in favor of the city and concluded that although Ms. Boone had suffered a substantial amount of damages, none was attributed to the city. He noted the important lessons learned at this trial.
    2. City Attorney’s Quarterly report to the Assembly: July – September 1998 – A report was included in the packet. Mr. Garrett asked if they had noticed any relief from the additional prosecutor. Mr. Corso said they handle about the same number of cases and were more satisfied with the results. Mr. Garrett said he would like Mr. Corso to go into the Supreme Court Brief and excerpt the court's question to Mr. Wilhelmsen and e-mail it to him as he would like to read it.

  1. MAYOR’S REPORT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
  2. A. Revised Pending Items

  3. COMMITTEE REPORTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS

A. Committee Reports

1. Committee of the Whole – Mr. MacKinnon said there was a COW scheduled for Monday the 23rd at noon for the downtown parking study, and the 16th for the for-hire vehicle ordinance.

2. Finance Committee – Mr. Perkins referred to a letter he received from Mr. Holbert regarding the continuation of capital focus. He said he would schedule that for Finance in the next couple weeks.

    1. Committee on Committees – Mr. Powell noted that Friday, November 13th at 11:45, they would continue with the election process for the Planning Commission. The list had been narrowed from 9 to 5 people and those 5 would be interviewed at that time.

Mr. Powell forwarded the following people for consideration:

ADA Committee – Pamela Mueller-Guy

Douglas Service Advisory Board – Scott Dornbirer, William League and Linda Gwyther

Health Care Coordinating Council – Patricia Birmingham and Kathleen Miller

Housing Advisory Committee – Betsy Logenbaugh, and Cathy Crawford

Social Services Advisory – Patricia Birmingham and Mavis Waarvik

Waste Management Committee – Peter Bittenbender, Ron Gillette and Dick Stokes

Planning Commission – 2 incumbents – Johan Dybdahl and Ken Williamson

4. Human Resources Committee – Ms. Muñoz stated the next meeting was scheduled for the November 23rd at noon to discuss the CDD Block Grant applications.

5. Lands & Resources Committee – Mr. Kibby said they were working on the Land Management Plan and the Land Disposal Program. The meeting for the 11th was rescheduled to the 25th. He said that on the 4th at noon, in room 211, the Parking Plan review meeting would take place and on the 5th, from 7-10 p.m. in the Chambers, the Parking Plan would be open to the public.

6. Public Works & Facilities Committee – Mr. Garrett said they would meet on Thursday the 12th at noon. There would be a neighborhood meeting to discuss the North Douglas Sewer design project on Tuesday the 10th from 7-10 at Centennial Hall. He said two items to add to the PW& F agenda would be item 9, the Mendenhall Treatment Plant; and 10, a design and cost for connecting the back loop sewer into the main line over the Peterson Hill area. He reported that in the last couple of weeks, they had been discussing how to move forward with the still pending need for a new High School. They have talked about conducting a condition survey of Marie Drake and JDHS. Staff was moving quickly to put together an RFP for a consulting engineer. There would be a joint meeting with the School Board on Tuesday the 17th prior to their normal meeting, 5-6:30 at the School District office. The discussion would be the process they plan to go through for evaluation of the report. Then, how to move forward with regards to masterplanning the downtown site and their process of determining what was the right solution for the community.

7. Strategic Policy Committee – Ms. Hagevig said there were no meetings scheduled.

B. Board Liaison Reports

Mayor Egan reported that the Alaska Committee would have to reschedule their retreat and it would not be happening on Thursday at 5.

  1. ASSEMBLY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
  2. Mr. Koelsch thanked the people who put together the information on Fish Creek camping. He asked Mr. Corso if he had found any additional information about Ms. Bridge’s request. Mr. Corso confirmed that the Planning Commission’s rules for reconsideration were the same as for the Assembly. Notice of consideration had to be given to him and was not. The decision to issue a conditional use permit was final after it had been registered with the clerk and it could be brought for appeal up to 20 days after the Clerk had received it. There was no emergency action the Assembly could take. Mr. Koelsch clarified it would be best not to discuss this. Mr. Corso agreed, unless it were to suggest some alternate dispute resolution or something like that.

    Mr. Perkins said they had received a letter from Ms. Levine about the Capital City Transit and overcrowding. He assumed Mr. Palmer would follow up with a letter and he asked if it was safe to assume that they would be working on issues of overcrowding. Mr. Palmer indicated he would be responding and said the Assembly looks at 30 minute service each year but the price tag is over $600,000.

    Ms. Muñoz referred to Mr. Benton’s request from the Point Retreat Lighthouse for a resolution of support. There was no objection to directing the City Attorney to draft a resolution.

    Mr. Garrett asked to review the RFP for the SE Conference.

    Mr. Powell asked for a report or analysis about the most recent disaster. He wanted to consider if the right kind of culverts and drainage pipes were being put in as building continues. He said he understood the EPA was elevating the COE permit for the airport and he thought it might be an opportunity to pass on to the Wetland Review Board the concept of working out the Mitigation Banking. He thought it may be a strategy for working out the land that was needed for the Airport expansion.

    Mayor Egan reminded everyone of the retreat scheduled for 5pm on the 12th at the Douglas Library. He said he had been contacted by a representative of GCI to appear before the COW to talk about the Assembly adopting a resolution regarding competition. He thought the others side should be invited to attend the meeting. Mr. MacKinnon said there was a COW scheduled for the 16th and 23rd and he would try to fit it into one of those.

  3. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS - None
  4. ADJOURNMENT - There being no further business to come before the Assembly, and no objection, the meeting adjourned at 9:21 p.m.

Signed: ________________________________

Mayor Egan

Countersigned: ________________________________

Marian Miller, Clerk