Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-08-19 Council PacketKenai City Council Meeting Packet August 19, 1987 IIODIflA mm aTr COUNM —1 amm ENTMIO Ayw�i�1oo7. 7100 PM f+raft+olrPOfo=la MusoToYf "M ovowA ufto 1. of owbik comrs ba adwA M OwWo . Akft Cmffa Nana F4oW-- !. No MaW i - FAA . FW oaMoa SWO o. ftffa. KOO • PfdW FWD Wake pNNO 1. ofdralm luw . Wwooft flav/APPrd • ofanr, tbw • IIWo* L CMdM /otM • fnonaa' 1 R fiw/Appna Omnr. Swim CMW4 • $9,271 O. m a I M i • *m d% KWd Mkolofpaf Coda 0.1 • WAIA r ftpw ro Enoarapa %q& o and ftma" a "" 4. &dmnM 1l176l7 • In me" OWIAN N Coda M • 1f "faoolir Coda L soak" 07 $ • #AND 1i0 VAN ow from Offs • nw oft wawa *- Is 01, a "ww an P u mm"w boo *11a In?) s. PA"" • Nooaafiq t1Mok" e7.ao . Now ow" f oowmo to W" NW MfAfkVM WN L TANU M W44 • AooaOfiq ft" oK flood apoo manlo • $M.000 Yon bam co and Ca row door"Wo TfM. ouNYo r fmflad a afMM�d and pnfloltolo. JAMET W H M1M off► am e L �� I AGENDA KENAI CITY COY -REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL August.,17, 1987 7:00 PH 6:30 - Work Session - R/V Park Pledge of Allegiance A. ROLL CALL 1. Agenda Approval 2. Consent Agenda *All items listed with an asterisk M are considered to be routine and non -controversial by the Council and will be approved by one motion* There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. B. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD (10 minutes) - Alaska 1. Don Markle, Cooperative Extension Service Craftsman Home Program 2. Dick Matthews, FAA - Flight Service Station 3. E.M. Knight - Protest Public Works Decision C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. ordinance 1224-87 increasing Rev/ApPns - Grants, 2. Library - $15,630 ordinance 1225-87 increasing Rev/Appns - Grantsp 3. Senior citizens - $90271 ordinance 1226-87 - Amending Kenai Municipal Code #3 Refundable Deposit to Encourage Spaying and 4. Neutering of Animals Ordinance 1227-87 - increasing Rev/Appns - 5. Donation, senior Citizens - $1#113.25 Ordinance-1228 -87 - Amending Kenai Municipal code 6. #4 - Update Electric Code Resolution 87-16 - Accepting State Grant from DEC - Financing Sewer interceptor to Thompson Park 7. (Postponed from April 15, 1987) -36 - Resolution 87-53 - Repealing Resolution 87 Establishing Now Approval Requirements for Travel 8. -and- Entertainment Road Resolution 87-54 - Accepting State grant improvements -­ $200, 000 �o 9 Resolution 67-55 - Submit to voters -Exemption from COI and Campaign disclosure laws f o . D. COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Planning & Zoning 2. Harbor Commission 3. Recreation Commission 4, Library Commission 5. Council on Aging 6, Airport Commission 7. Misc. Commission & Committee E. MINUTES 1. *Regular meeting, August 5, 1987 F. CORRESPONDENCE 1. 2. *Alaska commissionetter hanks Alaska Community for Community Development Block Grant program - 3. Unexpended funds *Senator Stevens - Air Force National Guard Move 4. - Alaska Department of National Resources oil and Gas leasing program G. OLD BUSINESS H. NEW BUSINESS ills to be to e Ratified ?, 3. Requisition Exceedingl$1,000s *Ordinance 1229-87 - Increasing Rev/Appns - Float Plane Basin - $1,173,780; Repeal ordinance i { 4. 1222-87j Establish new budget *Ordinance 1230-87 - Amend Kenai Municipal Code �t12 - Reduction in charges for excess false alarms Rev/Appns - Cabinets 5. *Ordinance 1231-87 - Increase 6. for Fort Kenay - $840 Ordinance 1232-87 - Rescind ordinance 1067-85, provide for dedication of City - owned lands to �t. temporary use - Daubenspeck Property I. ADMINISTRATION REPORTS 1. City Manager . a1j 2. Attorney e OOnvw.. 0 1 COUNC L MEETING OF ��►.�i1iJ�'ii�'iC����rrrirr��r��. •�►,wr••�rrrrrr/ram -lr,�,��rrrw�_rrr...._._._�r_ c•itJrrriirr��i��r��� 171 drs �r _..r;..r�.rrrrr�r.r.....:rrrrr [��©����©rrr■ •�rv��r��ir�r.��rrrrrrrrrrr ,. rr�rc�r�c�c��rrrrrrrrre y��r,r�r.��rrr�rrrrrr� Now, %�.rrrmmmrrrr..■r...rrrrirrrir �rrrrrr�rrrrirrrrrr■ L L �rrrr� RULES AND REGULATIONS I I , VACATIONERS. OUR PRIMARY CONCERN IS TO MAKE THE PARK A HAPPY RELAXED PLACE IN WHICH TO VACATION. THE FOLLOWING RULES AND ` REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN TIME TESTED AND ARE DESIGNED TO HELP EVERYONE GET THE MAXIMUM FUN AND ENJOYMENT FROM THEIR STAY HERE. THE RULES AND REGULATIONS APPLY TO ALL RESIDENTS AND GUESTS IN THE PARK. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO DENY RESIDENCY PREVI LEGES OR ACCESS TO THOSE PERSONS WHO BREAK PARK RULES, OR THOSE WHO REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIVES OF OUR STAFF AND OR MANAGEMENT. �^ REGISTRATION. ALL RV OCCUPANTS AND OVERNIGHT GUESTS MUST BE RE- M GISTERED. TWO PIECES OF ID(valid drivers license and major credit card) are required for all checks. One sleeping vehicle and a "- - -- ---- maximum of 8 persons are alloWOd per site. Check -in time is 2i00 pm Check out time is 12:00 noon. NO CASH REFUNDS FAR EARLY CHECKOUTS I TENTS, ARE ALLOWEDr,IN'DESIGNATED TENT AREAS ONLY. TENTS OR ROPES OF ANY KIND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE 'PIED TO STRUCTURES OR TREES. THERE � IS A MAXIMUM OF g PUP TENTS, 2 MEDIUM TENTS OR 1 LARGE TENT PER 4 - CAMPSITE. LARGE TENTS ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF MANAGEMENT. 1 i` j, GUESTS ON SITE AFTER 12:00 WILL BE CHARGED ON HALF THEIR DAILY RATE, IF THEY DEPART BY 5 s00pm. THIS HALF DAY RATE IS AVAILABLE ONLY WHEN THERE IS NO RESERVATION DUE DN ON THAT SITE. GUESTS ON SITE AFTER J 12100 NOON , WHEN A RESERVATION IS DUE ON THAT SITE, WILL BE TOWED AWAY 1 AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. t NOISE: YOU ARE HERE FOR REST AND RELAXATION. SO ARE YOUR NEIGHBORS. LOUD, OBJECTIONABLE NOISE IS NOT ALLOWED AT ANY TIME. VOICES, MUSIC AND TV MUST BE TURNED DOWN BETWEEN 11:00 pm and 7s00 am TO ALLOW YOUR NEIGHBORS TO SLEEP. PLEASE KEEP YOUR SITE CLEAN. i'1ECHANICAL REPAIRS ARE NOT ALLOWED ON YOUR CAMPSITE. OUTSIDE STORAGE IS NOT PERMITTED ON CAMPSITE. UTILITY OR STORAGE SHEDS ARE NOT ALLOWED ON SITE, CLOTHESLINES ARE NOT PERMITTED ON SITE. NO NAILING-, FASTENING, WIRING, OR TYING OF AWNINGS, FENCES, ENCLOSURES, ROPES OR LINES TO ANY TREE, FENCE OR OTHER PERMANENT . STRUCTURE IS PERMITTED. ALL VEHICLES IN THE PARK MUST HAVE A VALID PARK ID OR WILL BE TOWED AWAY AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE. ALL BOAT TRAILERS MUST BE PARKED EITHER ON YOUR CAMPSITE OR THE DESIGNATED AREA. PLEASE DO NOT BLOCK OR -OCCUPY--SITES- OTHER -THAN .THE ONE_ YOU _RAVE. RENTED. IF YOU HAVE A PARKING PROBLEM PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFICE. THE MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT IN THE PARK IS IOMPH- L MOTORCYCLES/MOTORBIKES ARX TO BE RIDDEN IN AND OUT OF THE PARK. j ONLY. CRUISING IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE PARK AT ANYTIME. l ATV'S Le. THREE WHEELERS ETC. ARE NOT PERMITTED TO OPERATE IN L THE PARK AREA. THIS RULE; WILL BE STRICKLY INFORCED. CHILDREN MUST BE SUPERVISED AT ALL TIMES. DESIGNATED DOG WALK AREAS ARE PROVIDED FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE. PLEASE USE THESE AREAS. DOG OWNERS MUST CLEAN UP ANY MESS THEIR , DOG MAKES OUTSIDE THESE AREAS. DOGS MUST BE LEASHED AT ALL TIMES AND LEASHES MUST NOT EXCEED 6' IN LENGTH. DOGS MUST NOT 1 BE LEFT UNATTENDED OUTSIDE OF AN RV. ANY DOGS -LEFT UNATTENDED MAY BE IMPOUNDED. IF YOUR DOG CAUSES A DISTURBANCE OR THERE ARE COMPLAINTS ABOUT YOUR DOG, YOU MAY BE ASK TO LEAVE THE PARK. i FIREWORKS AND FIREARMS ARE NOT PERMITTED AT ANY TIME. ' BEACH AREA. OVERNIGHT CAMPING OR SLEEPING ON THE BEACH IS NOT ALLOWED. NO CARS, TRUCKS OR OTHER VEHICLES TO BE DRIVEN ON THE BEACH. PETS AND GLASS CONTAINERS ON THE BEACH ARE { PROHIBITED. SWIMMING IN DESIGNATED AREAS ONLY. ALL CHILDREN MUST BE j SUPERVISED BY ADULTS. NO LIFE GUARD ON DUTY. 1! 0 s FOR YO!1R INrOI:MATION r HOUSE PHONES ARE LOCATES IN THE OFFICE COMPLEX FOR YOUR { CONVENIENCE. is PARK MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL ARE HERE TO ASSIST YOU. THEY'RE DRESSED IN EASILY RECOGNIZABLE ATTIRE. PLEASE STOP ONE OF THEM IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ISSUES YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS. — — — — UNLOCKED BICYCLES AND UNATTENDED ICE CHESTS ARE "ATTRACTIVE". THE BEST:DETERRENT TO' POTENTIAL THIEVES IS TO SECURE YOUR VALUABLES, MANAGEMENT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR LOST OR STOLEN ARTICLES KEEP YOUR VALUABLES LOCKED UP. RESIDENT VISITORS WILL BE ADMITTED FREE OF CHARGE. THERE: IS A OVERNIGHT PARKING FEE E'OR THOSE GUESTS WHO PLAN TO RE— MAIN IN THE. PARK OVERNIGHT. rT R' THE MESSAGE BOARD IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE ADMINSTRATION OFFICE. PLEASE CHECK THE BOARD FOR YOUR MESSAGES AT LEAST ONCE A DAY. — PARK PERSONNEL WILL DELIVER ALL MEDICAL EMERGENCY MESSAGES TO YOUR CAMPSITE WHEN THE MESSAGE IS RECEIVED. +� OFFICE NUMBER 8:00 — 5:00 (907) 283•- WEEKENDS/11OLlDAYS AFTER HOURS: (907) DUMP STATIONS ARE LOCATED IN THE PARK FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE. PLEASE HELP SAVE ENERGY BY RL'DUCING YOUR USE OF ELECTRICITY AND WATER WHENEVER POSSIBLE. :t t EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBERS ANY EMERGENCY 911 POLICE 283— FIRE DEPARTMENT 283— HOSPITAL 262— STATE TROOPERS 262- t d s 15 a' .. i AUGUST 19, 1987 INFORMATION ITEMS 1 - Library Report, July 1987 2 - Calendar, Forget -Me -Not Center - August 1987 3 - Billing - Wm. Nelson, Engr. - Boating Facility - $3,268.13 4 - Billing - M. Tauriainen, Engr. - JABBA Project - $7,200.40 5 - AK DC&RA - Final Payment, State Revenue Sharing 6 - Billing - Zubeck, Inc. - Airport Safety Zone, GA Apron, Taxiway Improvements - $100,579.73 7 - Transfer of Funds Under $1,000 - July, Aug. 1987 8 - AML Newsletter - August 1987 9 - AML Bulletin - August 1967 10 - Billing - Blazy Const. - Leif Hansen Memorial Park - $21.906 11 - KPB Agenda - August 18, 1987 12 - AK DC&RA - Final Payment - Municipal Assistance jw , � .n. �. Y, k'• pi(Y---...... w�. .-...�.rr�..irr11!».11.E ._-.T - _ __ i _ - .. _--. ..�. ... _. _ i {Jy T" tj 7 The Alaska Craftsman Home Program i In most Alaskan communities, the demand for energy is placing a serious strain on the local economy. This is particularly true in rural communities which are subsistence based. The cost of energy Is a constant drain on the local economy with money being sent out to petroleum suppliers rather than being circulated within the community. in fact money circulates 3 times less frequently in Alaska than in communities in the lower 48 according to the Alaska Department of Labor. The burden that energy cost places upon the family is illustrated by the fact that rural Alaskans (off the natural gas line) spend -be en 15% and 37% of their incomes on enerav bills. This is after State subsidy of utility and energy delivery costs. In general terms it costs on average between $1.200 to $1,500 annually to heat a home in Alaska. It is clear that conservation which can save up to 80% of energy costs to our citizens, has a key role t— o play in the State's economic Developments around the world have changed the way homes are being built in Northern climates. So many technical changes have taken place that an educational network is needed to keep the building industryy in Alaska informed of the Home Prcaram (ACHP) is the network, and advancements. The Alaska Craftsman way we have unleashed the creativity of our progressive builders and designers. With this network the Alaska building industry can stay abreast of advancements in other parts of the world as well as other parts of Alaska. The Alaska Craftsman Home Program is designed to provide, technical information ' for the industry and a forum for the industry to help determine objectives for the State Finance and University Research Community. The program has its roots in the $50,000,000 Canadian R-2000 program and is patterned after it. A key to the success of the ACHP program lies in the cooperative approach. The program is voluntary. The program is government funded yet is a partnership o1 1 government, higher education and Industry. A board of directors dominated by industry sets the policy with the various agencies and associations carrying out the program work. The program was put together to achieve the interests of each of the key participants. The State wanted to encourage energy efficient construction, the Cooperative Extension Service wanted to initiate a statewide builder education program, and the Home builders wanted a stimulus for the ailing building industry. state—of—the—art information and a way to mitigate the financial damage of new thermal regulations. The ACHP has set a voluntary performance standard based on the latest technology. that the future of the f Participants in the Alaska Craftsman Home Program believe shelter industry is in superinsulation or high insulation levels, air —tight construction, a ventilation system and optimal use of solar energy and glass. Building this way durable home. Increased results in; significantly reduced- energy, bills,. -a more y comfort, reduced noise from outside sources, and Improved indoor air qua]ity. r: -= -- - - - fnou h s erinsulated homes -have now -been -built -In -all re ions of the State to rove that they out er grin stan and housing ever ere. These homes were built by pr vate citizens. Pay acks for the added costs associated with superinsulation start at less than two years in areas with high energy costs. The Alaska Craftsman Home Program will have completed four phases by the time It reaches maturity. PHASE 1 — A pilot series of building seminars were held 0 t ," March of 1986. PHASE 2 — A workshop was held to train 24 Alaskans to conduct two—day workshops around the State on the superinsulation technology detailed In the new Alaska Craftsman Home Building Manual. These 24 people represent all regions of the State and are divided into 12 training teams. These trainers have put on 14 regional workshops. PHASE 3 — October 27 through November 2, the 1 10 training teams will come together again to critique the program. The materials and I program will be modified to the needs of the training teams and the clientele they I y-- serve. A marketing campaign will be developed and initiated. PHASE 4 — L,egislation is Rending to appropriate near iv $8.000,000 to the Program in the areas of education, promotion. Incentives, and research. The legislation will include the ' following program needs. EDUCATION: The.first element has already been Initiated within the Alaska Craftsman Home Program. A manual, audiovisuals, an achievable standard, a series of workshops have been developed and implemented to allow Alaskans to build to what present technology will allow. The education process needs additional money to fill voids, add new information generated by the program itself and to have a truly International review. New sections on retrofitting, water conservation, and ventilation are necessary. Continued support of the workshops and information network is necessary. There Is a need to include a computer planning program and building hot line. INCENTIVES: The State would commit to making 250 homes newly built or retrofit to Alaska Craftsman standards as local demonstrations. That commitment would require an average of a $5,000 investment in each house in return for a two —week, open house and the ability to monitor the home. One million dollars of the program would be earmarked for a pilot project for low Income rural housing being built to Alaska Craftsman Standards. The point of this low income program is to stop subsidizing fuel bills forever and building tomorrows weather12ation projects. Grant payment would be made upon achievement of program criteria. PROMOTION: There should be two efforts In the promotion of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program. The first effort would be to educate Alaskans of the advantages of the Alaska Craftsman home. The second promotional effort is to export the technology and Alaskan products developed through the program. RESEARCH: The engine behind the change will be research. Alaska must document the achievements and find solutions to problems that will be identified through research. This will require instrumentation and new product development. Research will also define the direction in which the housing industry will proceed and the role of Alaska in the International housing Industry now developing. The economic benefit of a superinsulated home is the primary motivation in the grassroots support of the technology. A suoerinsulateg b ji i the home owner from 50% to 80% of the heating which can be between 45 000 and 8120,000 over the 60 Year life -of the home. Dramatic savings to the citizen and the economy of this State, especially If the -fuel supplied -is. from- outside-cfAlaska.- The savings could be even greater If the price of fuel escalates faster than inflation over - the life -of the- house,_whleh-Is-the prediction -of most -economists.-,- Some areas of the State with cheap natural gas will not see dramatic savings 0 Immediately. The dollar savings for building an Alaska Craftsman Home will be significantly less as long as we enjoy low gas prices which make it relatively cheap to heat a house even if it is energy ineffioient. Building an energy efficient house will still save energy however, and as the present low energy prices change the L._. Impact would be much more affordable in a superinsulated house because of the lower fuel requirement of the structure. It is interesting to note that Anchorage has experienced a 44% gas increase and 149% electrical Increase since 1980. There is a long term social problem associated with building homes that require a great deal of energy to heat because fuel will not always be inexpensive, even in Anchorage. A recent analysis by the Municipality of nf%f%#%v, ngo Indicates -that energy costs are_ I I r 2000, just 12 years away. There Is a second motivation toward the Alaska Craftsman Home Program standard. The motivation is health and safetyy. The Consumer Federation of America estimates that Door Indoor air pollution costs this country $100 Billion annually. The more conservative Bonneville Power Administration puts the estimate at $30 Billion. Radon gas kills between 5.000 and 30.000 Deople a year with lung cancer according to Environmental experts, much of which is related to indoor air pollution. if we put 30.000 into perspective that is almost three times more than are murdered In this country and 314 as many as are killed In car accidents. Indoor air contamination by radon and at least a 126 other Identified toxic indoor air contaminates can be reduced through mechanical ventilation, which is a requirement of the voluntary Alaska Craftsman Home Standards. Recent analysis indicates that 40% of the clinic visits in the Barrow area were upper respiratory related calls. Consider the fact that we Alaskans spend around _9 ° o gur time indoors, and that indoor air quality is suspect in t e majority of those calls in Barrow. Now consider who pays for the calls? Who pays for the lost days at work? Who pays for the hospitals, doctors, and for the medicine? Who pays for the $30 Billion to $100 Billion and could It be spent better on something else? Through the program research we envision a totally independent living environment for our rural residents in the future. This home will be basically independent of the need for expensive community energy, water, waste disposal systems as we know it today. We also envision our shelter industry as a world innovation leader. f�. � '1 The benefits to the Alaska Craftsman Home Program incentive Proposal ar.t: To pump life into a large but presently crippled Alaskan home building industry. - Increase employment and reduce State unemployment benefits being paid. - To establish Alaska as a world technology and education leader in homebuilding which is one of the world's largest industries. - To have homes that last longer and have higher resale value. To save Alaskans massive amounts of cash presently being exported for fuel purchases. - To provide a higher and more comfortable standard of living for Alaskans. - To save money for the citizens who live in our homes over the entire life of the home. - To improve the health of our people who spend so�much-time indoors by encouraging homes to be built with improved indoor -air quality. - Save the money spent improving poor health because of poor indoor air quality. - Reduction of home heating contributions to outdoor airborne and environmental Pollution- - A reduction in Alaska's contribution to the global problem of the greenhouse effect. - Hake available the fuel that would be used to heat homes for other higher and better uses such as transportation, medicines, clothing, and food production. - Provide Alaskans with security against increased competition for reduced amounts of fuel worldwide in the coming decades. Keep in mi` that during decades of shortages predicted the houses built today will still be in use.. - The increased education how the home works will give lAlaskans a le eciunderstand ed aidve g air other of pursuits. The joint effort between education, government and industry using a voluntary program with incentives can be a model for future cooperation in other industries. Reduce the capital burden of achieving all the social benefits of superinsulated housing for the small independent contractors that provide so much innovation to the housing industry. Establish a research facility that will enable the small businesses that develop most of the innovations in a free market, to have access to the best technology available -to test ideas. This will encourage innovations and improvements. Hake available more Alaskan oil and natural gas as exportable products. Vill save the people who participate conservatively $75,000,000 over the sixty year life of the homes that are build to Alaska Craftsman Standards. The people of this State will save orders of magnitude more if this project stimulates the industry to voluntarily adopt the Alaska Craftsman Home as the Alaska home of the future. a. City of Kenai Resolution i' Where as — high quality energy efficient building technology developed by the Alaska Craftsman Home Program would substantially reduce home energy consumption, Improve the health and safety of the occupants, Improve indoor air quality, reduce the contributions of dwellings to outdoor air pollution, increase home durability, reduce home maintenance needs, and increase the economic stability of the owner; Where as — Alaska state lawmakers have introduced legislation in the form of _ a: Senate Bill 308 and House Bill 318 that support the Alaska Craftsman Home Program. And that these bills will help improve and stimulate the homebuilding , industry in Alaska through incentives and education and thereby improve the local economy of the City of Kenal. Where as — The citizens of the City of Kenai will benefit substantially from the building of energy efficient homes as developed by the Alaska Craftsman Home Program. There For Be it Resolved: s That it is the policy of the City of Kenai to encourage the building of homes to the energy efficiency standards of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program and further that the City of Kenai supports Alaska State Senate Bill 308 and House Bill 318 to establish similar state policy and state support for the Alaska Craftsman Home j Program. . i i i A i, J Introduced by: Mayor Jones Introduced: 06/02/87 Drafted by: G.L.S. h BOROUGH I No. 87-66 j k CRAFTSMAN HOME PROGRAM FOR nergy efficient building ska Craftsman Home Program energy consumption, improve ants of dwellings, improve )ntributions of dwellings to tome durability, reduce home he economic stability of the Lon of the Fifteenth Alaska louse Bill 318 supporting the 3 introduced, and Ad bills would improv� and ;try in Alaska through i wen- ontributing to the overall muska-Susitna Borough, and he Matanuska-Susitna Borough the construction of energy guidelines developed by the LVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE :y of. the Matanuska-Susitna ction of homes to the energy L Craftsman Home Program. . ,orts the concepts as set out 111 318 as introduced in the Kaska Legislature to establish )vide support for the Alaska 3 Ass mbly of the Matanuska - Tune, �BJ I . - -- - - -- .-...-- - -- « •... .. w.� .. P- it Nit l Introduced: 5/15/87 5-1191A Referred: Community b Regional Affairs and Finance funding Information 1 _ Cenesal Fund 37,-965,000 Other Funds .0-� k , ,00 � j BY ELLIS, KOPONEN, MENARD,N ULMER, DAVIDSON, LAR 1 IN THE HOUSE AND DAVIS HOUSE BILL NO. 319 3 IN THE LEOISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ,. 4 FIFTEENTH LEGISLATURE - FIRST SESSION I - 5 A BILL l 6 par an Act entitled: "An Act making special appropriations for the Alaska 7 energy efficient home program; and providing for an g effective date." - - 9 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA: 10 * Section 1. The sum of $1,615,000 is appropriated from the general 11 fund to the University of Alaska, cooperative extension service, for preps- i i12 ration and implementation of the Alaska energy efficient home program and j 13 for Instrumentation and data base development for the program. 14 * Sec. 2. The sun of $1,400,000 is appropriated from the general fund i -- j 15 to the University of Alaska for development of a portable, instrumented 16 test shelter and for research activities of the Alaska energy efficient ' 17 home program that have been approved by the board of directors of the 18 program. 19 * Sea. 3. The sum of $450,000 is appropriated from the general fund to j i 20 the Department of Community and Regional Affairs to develop and distribute i 21 educational information for the general public regarding the Alaska energy I.. 22 efficient home program. 23 ° Sec. 4. The sum of $4,500,000 is appropriated from the general fund 24 to the Alaska energy efficient home equity fund (AS 44.47.370) in the 4 25 Department of Community and Regional Affairs for the purposes of the fund. ( d -. 26 * Sec. 5. The appropriations made by this Act lapse into the general 27 fund June 30, 1992. - -- - -- --•- ----- - -- - -- - Zg - * Sse.-6. This Act takes affect -an the-affaetive__data9!__an_Act .pesssd---- - - -1 - ---------- ---- -- 29 by the Fifteenth Alaska State Legislature that establishes the Alaska H50319A -1- HS 319 I allergy efficient home equity fund- .2- HB0319A R Introduced: 5/16/87 5-1234A ~� Referred: Community 8 Regional Affairs, Labor d Commerce b Finance i BY FAHRENKAMP, STURGULEWSKI, JOSEPHSON, j 1 IN THE SENATE SZYMANSKI AND RODEY 2 SENATE BILL NO. 308 f 3 IN THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA 4 FIFTEENTH LEGISLATURE - FIRST SESSION 5 A BILL 6 For an Act entitled: "An Act establishing the Alaska energy efficient home ' i 7 equity fund." 8 BE IT ENACTED BY -THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA: 9 e Section 1. FINDINGS AND POLICY. (a) The legislature finds that 4 !O (1) high quality energy efficient building technology developed 11 by the Alaska Craftsman Home Program would substantially reduce home energy y 12 consumption, improve the health and safety of the occupants, improve indoor i 13 air quality, reduce the contributions of dwellings to outdoor pollution, 14 increase home durability, reduce homemaintenance needs, and increase the 15 economic stability of the home owner; I 16 (2) state money now being spent to subsidize energy bills, to 17 weatherize and repair poorly constructed homes, and to improve the health 18 of people affected by poor indoor air quality would be reduced or eliminat- 19 ed as existing homes are replaced by homes that are built to Alaska Crafts- 20 man Home Program standards; I • � 21 (3) state money now used to finance and repair homes would be I 22 invested more wisely in homes that are built to the Alaska Craftsman Nome 23 Program standards= j 24 (4) local economic benefits are achieved when money being spent 25 on energy, home repair, and health are reduced because of building to the 26 improved building standards of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program; - --- --- - - — - - - 27 i ppent of housing - - �- --- _ __ _- - --- -- -- (5) the principal responsibility -for development -----__-'-.----...-- _-.-_.T - _- - ____28 _ rests with the _private sectors - - .`"`, 29 (6) research and development of energy efficient housing will r� BB 308 t ep "in -mill lei 1 create new ,lobs, provide technology that can be exported, develop new 1 2 business opportunities, and increase the stability of the state's economy. 3 (b) It is the policy of the state to encourage the building of homes 4 to the energy efficient standards of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program and t - 5 to assist in the education, planning, and development of this standard of 6 buildint in cooperation with the building industry. 7 u Sec. 2. AS 44.47 is amended by adding a new section to read: 8 Sec. 44.47.378. AtASKA ENERGY EFFICIENT HOME EQUITY FUND. (a) 9 There is established in the department, as a revolving loan fund, the 10 Alaska energy efficient home equity fund consisting of money appropri- 11 ated to it by the legislature and repayments of principal received by 12 the fund under (c) of this section. The commissioner shall administer (- 13 the Alaska energy efficient home equity fund in accordance with the' 14 provisions of this section. 15 (b) The commissioner may issue equity sharing funds from the 16 Alaska energy efficient home equity fund to individuals or businesses 17 that retrofit or build new single family dwellings to criteria estab- 18 lished by the commissioner. 19 (c) Funds received by the commissioner as repayments of princi- 20 pal and from the sale or refinancing of a dwelling shall be deposited 21 in the Alaska energy efficient home equity fund. Funds received by 22 the commissioner as payments of interest shall be deposited in the 23 general fund. The commissioner of administration shall separately 24 account for payments of interest deposited in the general fund under' 25 this subsection. The annual estimated balance in the account may be 26 used by the legislature to make appropriations to carry out the pur- 27 poses of this section. - - - - - - --- - 28 (d) The commissioner shall !exempt the first- 250 -homes to -receive_ 99 l{` anu4ty funda from thw reeavment of the amount issued by the 1 1 I commissioner under (b) of this section if the home serves as a demon- - i 2 stration home. Loa income housing equity funds given to federal or 3 state housing programs are exempt from repayment provisions.. 4 (e) The commissioner shall prepare guidelines and procedures for - 3 the fund in consultation with the board of directors of the Alaska 6 Craftsman Home Program. , i a 1 i � t 5-1190A Introducedt 5/15/67 ReferradtFinance ommuity 6 Regional d BY ELLIS, KOPONEN, MENARD, ULMER, DAVIDSON, LARSON 1 IN THE HOUSE AND DAVIS I 2 HOUSE BILL N0. 31S 3 IN THE LEOISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA 4 FIFTEENTH LEGISLATURE - FIRST SESSION 5 A RILL 1 6 For an Act entitled: "An Act establishing the Alaska energy efficient home f7 equity fund." a BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA: 9 * Section I. FINDINGS AND POLICY. (a) The legislature finds that 10 (1) high quality energy efficient building technology developed 11 by the Alaska Craftsman Home program would substantially reduce home energy 12 consumption, improve the health and safety•of the occupants, improve indoor 13 air quality, reduce the contributions of dwellings to outdoor pollution, 14 increase home durability, reduce home maintenance needs, and increase the l 15 economic stability of the home owner; 16 (2) state money now being spent to subsidize energy bills, to 17 weatherise and repair poorly constructed homes, and to improve the health 19 of people affected by poor indoor air quality would be reduced or eliminat- G 19 ad as existing homes are replaced by homes that are built to Alaska Crafts - 20 man Home program standards; 21 (3) state money now used to finance and repair homes would be 22 invested more wisely in homes that are built to the Alaska Craftsman Nome 23 Program standards; 24 (4) local economic benefits are achieved when money being spent 25 on energy, home repair, and health are reduced because of building to the ` 26 improved building standards of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program; - - --- —! 27 (5) the principal —responsibility_ for development of housing 29 rests with the private sector= -- ^ . 1 create new jobs, provide technology that can be exported, develop new 2 business opportunities, and increase the stability of the state's economy. 3 (b) It is the policy of the state to encourage the building of homes 4 to tha energy efficient standards of the Alaska craftsman Home Program and S to assist in the education, planning, and development of this standard of 6 building in cooperation with the building industry. 7 * Sec. 2. AS 44.47 is amended by adding a now section to resdt 8 See. 44.47.378. ALASUA ENERGY EFFICIENT HOME EQUITY FUND. (a) 9 There is established in the department, as a revolving loan fund, the 10 Alaska energy efficient home equity fund consisting of money appropri- 11 ated to it by the legislature and repayments of principal received by 12 the fund under (c) of this section. The commissioner shall administer 13 the Alaska energy efficient home equity fund in accordance with the 14 provisions of this section. 1S (b) The commissioner may issue equity sharing funds from the 16 Alaska energy efficient home equity fund to individuals or businesses 17 that retrofit or build now single family dwellings to criteria estab- lg lished by the commissioner. 19 (c) Funds received by the commissioner as repayments of princi- 20 pal and from the sale or refinancing of a dwelling shall be deposited 21 in the Alaska energy efficient home equity fund. Funds received by 22 the commissioner as payments of interest shall be deposited in the 23 general fund. The commissioner of administration shall separately 24 account for payments of interest deposited in the general fund under 23 this subsection. The annual estimated balance in the account may be 26 used by the legislature to make appropriations to carry out the pur- 27 poses of this section. 28 (d) The commissioner shall exempt the first 250 homes to receive 29 equity funds from the repaymsAt of the amount issued by the v HD 316 -2- UB0316A Y31 ��:i�idJ.N•n�VtY;.•.„ �:��.F:ula:.� .ti:ulz ,n-_ L �- I w L 1 commissioner under (b) of this section if the home serves as a demon- p stration home. Low income housing equity funds given to federal or 3 state housing programs are exempt from repayment provisions. p (a) The commissioner shall prepare guidelines and procedures for S the fund in consultation with the board of directors of the Alaska 6 Craftsman Home program. . • rt'�:1, t ►'d 1 •' , s ir:•�.) a.,:.:. •r. . a .. �+•it•. s.{�i`.,w;t. � •,. Y.r{ 5" 1� � Ki �� tf�'�,. • ��1.-:fiut..+r..::.. r . • �.` .V :+ •1 } t'♦• , �+. � • J t ... •.Zr yt't•�+,{GSA J''+,(jr ���?t.; t •/1 tl:�:•?t�{• rfi. � f, ' •'<��'Ji r. 't•`..f� , ,. ..li,�o.c•, t:;,•til.. f�k • liijj�ft�- t. Y� -- .t. } R+ •SH; l•• r, n. • , e � ,- ,.M9 a 1q • t lrf .s • �?�(�'�?t{tif. .. 5�. t t'i.'►/'. .F �ti • +.1. +: w'b. I' /,' 'tt }�' jti: • it,;fb'3:� .xTi%,. •f.'�7;•• Y' •'h�pE'" •j:'.tt•.: i:.'' •ARROW t'";: •�•.,.li •�:;iil,d, 4i' WAINWRIGHT f!t�. iju ;« .�� "• ;'r���"''+••p,'i �'? r!ti''.:; ITI<ASOOK " AKTOVIK •� ��' NUIOSUT Y: PT. LAY HOPE • f�� J J _ � �ANAKTUVUKPASS April E40 1997 The Honorable Steve Cowper, Governor State of Alaska f P.0 Bou A Juneau, Alaska 99811 Dear Governor, •`n. ram, Recently we have received information regarding the Alaska Craftsman Home Program regarding education and Implementation of efforts towards promoting high levels of energy efficiency for Alaskan Homes. Benefits to building super —insulated homes are far reaching encompassing home owners and the building industry; as well as•having lone range positive effects to community.sevings which assist in stimulating local economies, especially important to rural communities. Here on the North Slope with communities paying the highest In the nation for heating fuel it is of the utmost Importance to find and implement alternatives to insure our financial security.for the years to come. Education for this generation and generations to come is very important. A recent state survey pointed out that the least likely way Individual home owners learned about home energy efficiency was through the schools. With this in mind it is very important to establish a foundation on which to develop awareness for all alternatives available and capitalize on those alternatives that worle. 7 The Alaska Craftsman Home Program Incentive Proposal is an idea which time has comes not for just our communities, but for -all who call Alaska their "home'!. Development of the State of Alaska•s Residential Thermal Standards brought us a long ways to promote the ideals of resource efficiency. Promotion on the commercial, communitys and individual home owner level with it,s development committed to education is indeed a worthwhile venture. l As -Energy Planner-frir-the-North Slops Borough Utilities lF- - Dept. I support the Alaska Craftsman Home Program. ...,. ¢,... :)RTN N OPF .;%mr)i inn Bast Rggard Er�i� gy anner � N.S.B Utilities i fob A is] i 1 _ » I CITY OF = ANDERSON k P.O. Box 3100 Anderson, AK 99744 Phone (9071502.2500 _ . in Reply t - Refer To: E April 20, 1987 The Honorable Steve Cowper _. Governor State of Alaska Pouch y Juneau, Alaska 99811 �f Dear Governor Cowper: On behalf of the City I am writing•in support of the Alaska Craftsman Home Program, (ACHP). ACHP's.efforts to promote resi- dential energy -efficiency in home building construction has been s `i impressive. The reduction in housing costs and maximization of thermal efficiency should be a major component in any attempt to develop Alaska's rural economy(s)• Local economic development efforts, currently underway in _ communities such as the City of Anderson, would be positively enhanced through the state's support of the ACHP. .3 Your support of programs such as the Alaska Craftsman Home l Program, can help to ensure for the successful development of l both rural and urban Alaska alike. Thank you. Sincerely, THE CITY OF ANDERSON ' •• • ,ter"„�•.,��..�.'a), Lans ton Chinn -- __-----____- �_ City Administrator. l A AS A ALASKA STATE HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION March 25, 1987 - Dear Fellow Alaskan, I have a proposition that 1 think might Interest -you. Attached you will find a proposal that the Alaska State Homebuilders Association has submitted to the Governor. Please read this proposal and support it if you approve of it by writing a letter or calling your legislators and the Governor. Obviously there is something In a building incentive program for all of us who own or wish to own a home. The attached proposal gives builders a good reason to build energy efficient homes. Building energy efficiently will benefit us all in the future when fossil fuels run short. In the mean time we can all benefit from more comfort, less noise and a higher quality home. I hope you will see the advantages to this proposal and I look forward to your thoughts and support. 00 The Governor's address is Governor Steve Cowper P.O. Box A Juneau, Alaska 99811 Your legislator is at the following address. Pouch V Juneau, Alaska 99811 ,f If you wish to become active in this grass roots campaign for energy efficient j�construction please have your friends and contacts support the proposal as well. I k� think the concept is a good one and will help Alaska stabilize Its economy. �..,� Thank you for any Ideas you might submit In addition to those in the proposal. 7 Sincerely, i James Malapanes President n L r. I.. _ .. __. . Jessica Achman Mathews me washtngton Post January 6, 1987 Tuesday, ' Get Ready for the Next EnergyCiisis Before OPEC takes control again.. In a few years —the early 19908. it corrective since 1973 and now produce almost 10 percent of action isn't taken in the interim —we will have the world supply, the bottom line remains that the another energy crisis. The oil market will again OPEC nations hold two-thirds of the world's proved tighten, with sudden sharp price increases and a oil reserves, much of it (unlike U.S. reserves) return to OPEC control of the market. capable of being produced at very low cost. The difference is that this time the United States The United States need not passively accept this will likely rely on imports for at least 40 percent and trend. We have the ability to shape out energy perhaps as much as 70 or 75 percent of its needs, as destiny through steps to control demand and to compared with the 33 percent level of dependence develop alternative energy sources. That such steps that triggered the first oil crisis in 1973. Even the would have to be taken in the face of market signals added protection of the Strategic Petroleum Re• strongly pointing in the opposite direction makes serve will not prevent an economically debilitating the policy choices that much more difficult, but no adjustment —made all the more painful by the knowledge that it could have been so easily avoided. less in the national interest. The United States and its oil -importing allies Asking Washington to Address a future crisis when there are plenty of immediate problems crying for need to buy time to deter or perhaps even Avert the date when OPEC will regain market control. This answers is a Sisyphean took. This ppeending crisis is can be done through the introduction of economical - important enough to be worth the eIfort, nonetheless. It demands analysis And action now, while steps can be ly competitive efficiency improvements to reduce energy demand. Consider that between 1973 and carefully thought through and painlessly executed. It 1985, U.S. GNP rose by 30 percent in real terms. nothing is done. the only later choice will be to muddle while . energy use actually declined slightly. Yet through, paying a large and unnecessary price for our experts believe that there are comparable or great - collective lack of foresight. Why will high all prices return? The answer lies in er savings still to be exploited, It demand rises at only 1 percent a year instead of 3 percent. it will the number& The most important tact is that the lake two decades instead of seven years to exhaust _ U.S. oil resource is in the declining years of its life cycle. My colleague Jim MacKenzie has analyzed the excess capacity. In terms of specific steps. the principal vehicle for cumulative U.S. oil production and found that 190 change ought to be the market. where the market billion barrels is the likely total that will ever be works. For instance, now, while prices are low, is produced in the lower 48 states. Of this, About the easiest time to remove energy subsidies and to three-quarters had been pumped by 1985. and 90 increase energy taxes. especially for gasoline. ' percent is likely to have been consumed by 2004. Where the market doesn't work, sensible regula- Projections of annual oil production show a steep lions will produce economic and social benefits. For downward curve continuing the trend that has example, we ought t3 have minimum energy per - prevailed since 1070. despite the tripling of oil formance standards for new buildings. just as we prices and of oil well completions. have standnrds for fire protection. electrical wiring i Moreover, today's price drop is likely to mean even and plumbing design. And we need national appli• lower future production than past trends suggest. once efficiency standards —legislation that Presi- because low prices lead producers to curtail explom- dent Reagan shortsightedly vetoed at the close of lion and to permanently dose marginal stripper wells. the last session and which Congress should put back Oil companies have already cut their exploration and an his desk early in this session. ! production budgets by 20 percent to 70 percent. At the next level of difficulty. energy policy needs Depending on where they assume oil prices will settle, to reclaim its place on Congress's agenda for a experts predict a U.S. production loss in the range of debate on whether the Analysis presented here Is 25 percent to 40 percent by 19901 correct —namely, that during the next few years Meanwhile. energy demand will rise. A year age energy prices will be sending a market signal that is experts generally predicted about 3 percent annual ultimately contrary to the national interest. It this growth in demand for all in response to $15-a barrel view gains general support. then more ambitious do lose prices, and in fact overall U.S. oils use in the first steps need to be taken to ensure that we not nine months of 1986 climbed 3.2 percent over the the efficiency improvements achieved during the corresponding period of 1985. With declining pro- duction. demand in to lower post decade -as we are in (Linger of doing in the for that we and rising response transportation sector. example —and prices, it is inevitable that imports will rise. The take advantage of the new opportunities that still trend is already sharply evident. A Chevron official abound. predicted some months ago that imports could Victor Hugo once svote that "good government - -- - exceed 75 percent of -demand by 2000. Most of his consists of knowing how much future to introduce in colleagues are not tar behind in their estimate& the piesent! In this core, good government to - Whit do these numbers mean? It growth rises quires no crystal ball, just a hend for numbers. a - -worldwide at 3-percent per year.-today's large - good memory and the will to influence the future for excess capacity of about 14 million barrels per day the batter. will be exhausted In less than seven year& This excess capacity Is the slack that keeps market The writer is Wre president and directoroj prices low. And Although Alexico. the United King- remrch of the World Resources Institute, a policy dom and Norway have entered the export market rraearch center in Waseia91011. Lr J L 7 no The pract ci6f law lies.66 , years, and Macbon doesn"t :good., Yearo a 6, man casts,wer going to "t s h . 4.�,wcddlng date and the first, thing my dad a) fool; don't y9u,know that's the first day las eeW,p..-,,;-; asi kil i'l I time Madson graduated In engineer Dqteye • Jn had tro daughters. He,traveled constant 11,15" to!'{ J, i�;,; "t n hnnnv life he said, ."I ren 0 i . -% "No*lth .144 049''t, 09P41#6 f. ioupihsouthettIndiana ink.caiwal U W jI9 I Koon h end push to sa��Iet A. 0 14 A? �k Mimu jW ;#W, opkA OR` 11;tiavad ft-rivinga, cuss q a a. That doesn -AA 0-thoug t, Th Jan who d9n't belong thei v-Y.,ez VT �4 k,j even, "•There are attorlieye.1, ',town no1W,*-*h6,- d to W s6iWhIng,better- in life 4% 44: , 1) POLLUTION (Continued from page 1) nuln threat of polluted air to Amer- - cember 31, im, deadline for meet- 4prsity School of Public Health, icans In cities, particularly the ing even the current, Inadequate CC01 1pid the health effects of only a few threat of the ozone that is a major ozone standard Imposed by the Ing J,ndoor contaminants have been consituent of smog. Clean Air Act. He put much of the acts documented. But he added that It * Richard E. Ayers, chairman of blame on the environmental agen- H 'Was being found tha neentrations the Coalition, said that three- cy for what he said was a failure to hon i ZI contaminants inside homes often fourths of urban areas In the United adequately carry out the law, along a ry ipceed the maximum sale levels States would fall to meet the De- with state and local regulators. *ptablished for hazardous waste call "Therefore. i4scom- me. i cleanupsites. AIR bon sense thatwedevelop a ratloir nini 4 and consistent policy for addres- Continued from page 11 million readings. T 4ing human exposures to environ- Knowles, whose city is attempting !'What's important Is we're mak- .011i dental contaminants," he said. to attract, the 1994 Winter Olym- ing tirogress toward attainment;" V181 I Foy ;.,Stephen Brobeek, executive, pic$, was not happy to see a front- Bloc ard said. The federal govern. director of the Consumer Federa- page story heralding the city as ' ment has set Dec. 31, 1987 so- the B Ition of America, suggested some "Los Anchorage," nor a USA To- date for the notion's cities to meet the 14pecific remedies for Indoor air day article U r� I but local officials the standard of only one violation fou"i p�oollution problems, Including an emphasize that the Press release Per Year, oill immediate ban on all uses of asbes• must be kept In perspective. In an April 2 letter to Gov. Steve for ibs, a ban on smoking In airplanes "Personally. I don't think It's any cow r and the chief executives of 64TI and other public places, a ban on bi deal as Ion as it doesn't get Cowper that off 41 other states, Thomas stated bousehold chemicals that cause big %y the media and. EPA may Impose standards In secl cancer and more aggressive action the.public," Richard Joy, a some areas that don't meet federal osu the environmental agency to borough environmental engineer, requirements. Those could Include IP the public deal with the radon said so e bans on construction of new pollut- roblem. He also called for a 0 on t I clearinghouse," spon- Implementation of the local IM Ing sources, imposition of sewer h nations I gget spred by the government and pill• program and advances in tecIM010- grant sanctions and withholding 0 X Institutions, to provide the, gy have contributed to a decline In federal highway funds. "In addl- to ate air quality violations recently, tion, we will be notice -and- 88F, consumer adequate information on we comment rocelulnres Into this 'oft: i lhdoor air boazards." - - - T re as high as 125 a year cl 9 9 .'. In a 'related developmini, the during the late 1970s, according to sprIngwith ealmotdisapprovin ban National Clean Air Coalition, an borough officials. Air quality in the 8 number of plans which cannot hon 111ance of environmental public borough exceeded federal elan- rovide a persuasive demonstra- Inst 0' on that they will. attain the stan- re., health groups, called for an aggres- dards 36 times during the. IM-86 sivenew orogram-to ease the conti- winter, but at lower parts -per- dard in the near future." ram, LIFE/STYLE,E,..N�m,..,.. Beware the air indoors .-'----• --- - - 1 �wwrrrareaN . wU..nIM.YaINrMMMYMnrrl/NFMIMa UrrU jw.�rq�NrrW MgMMM.b"w . AM aY .Nir uY Moo" no M mm h too" Nr rMw �nr',�N�rbwOMl iMa wNM sw�(bMIWIIY MM ab urn" ft RMNa�p .rnMnlrn�dNrArq•�n.rNwMNn /�arvNYn /rrp.aS rr.�q asuAhrL►1M1 Mar MrtlMMMNNrnrr-i1MsMAhW. �OaM�d�M.�4nnnrMN As ansilsow d MaK Y M �•� nMM(nrM Mrs r N N M rMMr d Mr�l.�� riNr�i Na.rnMai�M ' �N1rn. fad hllr M laa UN nhrrrM.�rrMnr,wir.arar,rrwwaM 4 b r Self=sech: rawaw�NarnrrarN OYKINKMULUMA 'r YNYlid rdtilNn.hrhranvnurayorrurNaryY Nhh NIN arYOf Mrrrw e. _ _ wrcaM M « �It� W, UiMh NP• 4E� n MrRan er rva � y bl rM Nr . tr4M In am am rrprotum W ar arlp i"MM I�OINIIYy. Wer. MrY la4 NW Q/ AUW &-ft r Nrr •�P�- q� IN �M► • . ' YdYrYp Mry�r�hlaA. awrrrraal N. f1Y �NtrI1RAWN1War�a.. i ptlWAl keMya., fNfrlp r► �rrU YI - tarNN�iYaK�a�O��eeccaa�1,, laahnaga ,MNM Y M MI'SNIaNW�/ dd ra/rahCr�.nrkryMNW/ YrNei• moiriwMnsfum-Righlw wn ��tlaYrrfreMt gdre�wne rrewW rullr,wwwMantMMYNnNN7 �r"" rga,.M`d "cr'n.hbaar« • , � +„ njr ru�nuuw OIYr 1 1lrarn r rMYryr NNr�y INIUM wih •• ACdNNy YONNBIM L�1YwrY,Y�s YYdMnrq,YrfrNNW y`MYW wM�anMr/-l.Irlr . pa1r:1111MYMMM hrn.a of Z. YN L wall E. G-/ Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE NO. 1224-87 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $15,630 AS A RESULT OF RECEIVING TWO GRANTS FOR THE LIBRARY. WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has received a Public Library Assistance Grant in the amount of $8,630 to be used for the purchase of books and other library material, and WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has received an institutional Grant in the amount of $7,000 to proviao library services to Wildwood Correctional Center and Pretrial Facility. NOV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE 4CITYhOF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenue and appropriat increased as follows: Genexa.l Fund Increase Estimated Revenues: Library Grants +� Increase Appropriations: Library - Salaries $ 4,808 01 Library - ESC 41 Library - Worker's Comp. 21 5C Office Supplies 10, Books g15,63 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, 19th day of August, 1967. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Readings August 5, -Be- cond Reading: August-19; Effective Date: August 19, Approved by Finance: e--B_ L 0 C - a W7 Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE N0. 1225-67 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $9,271 IN THE SENIOR CITIZENS -BOROUGH SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AS A RESULT OF GRANTS FROM THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH AND UNITED WAY. WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough has awarded the City a grant for Senior Citizen services in the amount of $37,606, and $34,476 was estimated in the 1987-88 Annual Budget, and WHEREAS, United Way has awarded the City a grant for Senior Citizen services in the amount of $17,600, and $12,638 was estimated in the 1987-88 Annual Budget, and WHEREAS, United Way has awarded the City an additional grant for emergency food and shelter in the amount of $3,219.79, and . WHEREAS, these additional grants will allow the City to eliminate the appropriation of fund balance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased tdecreased) as follows: Senior Citizens - ARK0 ah Increase Estimated Revenues: Appropriation of Fund Balance $(2,041)- Borough Grant 3,130 United Way Grant 4,962 United Way Emergency Food Grant 3,224 -' 1 increase Appropriations: Salaries 18) $c 313), Leave J PERS t 1 ESC 3) t 3> Worker's COUP. < 13> Health insurance <2,100> ! Suppl. Retirement < 7> Office Supplies 300 Operating Supplies 5,315 Transportation 360 Printing & Binding 600 utilities 1,296 Repair & Maintenance 2,000 Janitorial 1,420 Postage 252 Misc. 200 9 9.271 $ 'i PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 19th day of August, 1987. r JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Readings August 5, 1987 Second Readings August 19, 1987 �} Effective Date: August 19, 1987 Approved by Finances _2+ _ " Increase Appropriations: Salaries $< 318> I Leave < 13) PERS < IS) 83C < 3) Worker's Comp. < 13) , Health Insurance (2,100) Suppl. Retirement 4 7) _-.-.-__-_.---.._ _----- Office Supplies 300 - - r Operating Supplies 5,315 II Transportation 360 Printing & Binding 600 4} utilities 1,296 Repair 6 Maintenance 2,000 Janitorial 1,420 Postage 252 y Misc. -�--QQ- 200 a...2, 1 - PASSED BY THE COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this (` 19th day of August, 1987. AV ' JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk - First Reading: August 5, 1987 ' Second Reading: August 19, 1987 Effective Date: August 19, 1987 Approved by Finance: if i 1 t C. - 3 1� Suggested by: Animal Control CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE N0. 1226-87 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 3.25.060 TO PROVIDE FOR A REFUNDABLE DEPOSIT ON ADOPTION OF ANIMALS IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE THE SPAYING AND NEUTERING OF ANIMALS. WHEREAS, a large number of unwanted and abandoned pets continue to appear within the City of Kenai, and WHEREAS, growth of unwanted and/or abandoned pet populations may pose significant risk to the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of Kenai, and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of protecting the public health, welfare and safety to foster spaying and neutering of Veto, and WHEREAS, imposition of a refundable deposit upon adoption of animals from the City of Kenai Animal Control Shelter would encourage owners to have pets spayed or neutered. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, as follows, that KMC 3.25.060 be amended as follows: (c) (THE CHIEF ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER MAY REQUIRE BY REGULATION THAT NO IMPOUNDED CAT OR DOG MAY BE ADOPTED UNLESS THE ANIMAL HAS BEEN SPAYED OR NEUTERED. IF SPAYING OR NEUTERING IS REQUIRED UNDER THIS SUBSECTION AND IS NECESSARY AT THE TIME OF THE DOG,$ OR CAT'S ADOPTION, THE SPAYING OR NEUTERING OF THE SMTMAf. SHALL BE DONE AT THE PROSPECTIVE OWNER'S ERPENSE.j IR L -J �si8B8i L PASSED 8Y THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 19th day f of August, 1987. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: August 5, 1987 Second Reading: August 19, 1987 Effective Date: September 19, 1987 L L !0' c-y 7 Suggested by: Administration CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE N0. 1227-87 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY FUND AS 1UN1a5 IN THE COUNCIL ON A RESULT OF ADDDITIONAL DONATIONS. SPECIAL REVENUE f WHEREAS, the City budgeted $8,000 from donations for the purchase of a senior citizen van, and WHEREAS, actual donations from the Mayor's Council on Aging ` totalled $9,113.25. 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be (7) increased as follOWs: Council on Adinn - Borcuah Increase Estimated Revenues: $1,113.25 Donations: Increase Appropriations: { Machinery & Equipment $1,113.25 I t PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 19th day of August, 1987. �1 i i JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Jane W elan, City Clerk 0 First Reading: August 5, 1987 Second Reading: August 19, 1987 Effective Date: August 19, 1987 - f.. _-.---------_----._-_-- �e MWANK i i f. 1 Suggested By: Building Official i CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE 1228-87 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING THE KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.30.010 ENTITLED "ADOPTION" AND KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.30.050 BY REPEALING THAT SECTION IN ITS ENTIRETY. WHEREAS, the National Electrical Code has been updated to the 1907 Edition; and, - -- - WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has adopted the 1987 Edition. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the Kenai Municipal Code Sections 4.30.010 and 4.30.050, are amended as follows: y Section is 4.30.010 Adoption: There is hereby adopted for the purpose of establishing standards governing the installation of electrical conductors, fittings, devices, and fixtures, -- hereinafter referred to as "electrical equipment," within or on public and private buildings and premises, that certain code known as the "National Electrical Code," E1984j 98 Edition, j except for such portions as are hereinafter deleted, modified, or amended; and the same is here by adopted and incorporated as fully as if set out verbatim herein. Section : 4.30.050 Minimum Size_of Conductors: Repealed ETHE FIRST SENTENCE OF SEC. 310-5 OF THE ELECTRICAL CODE ADOPTED BY THIS CHAPTER IS AMENDED BY CHANGING THE PERIOD TO A COMMA AND ADDING THE FOLLOWING: "...EXCEPT THAT WHETHER SOLID OR STRANDED, CONDUCTORS SHALL NOT BE SMALLER THAN NO. 12 COPPER OR NO. 6 ALUMINUM OR f_1 COPPER -CLAD ALUMINUM."� -1- Er PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 19th day of August, 1987. ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: August 5, 1987 Second Reading: August 19, 1987 Effective Date: September 19, 1987 (7/30/87) [ 1 Suggested By: Administration CITY OF KBNAI !. RESOLUTION 87-16 �I A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, ACCEPTING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $562,100 FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TOWARD FINANCING OF A SEWER INTERCEPTOR TO THOMPSON PARK. WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Conservation has offered to the City of Kenai a grant in the amount of $562,100 as partial -- - - - financing of a sewer interceptor main line, including lift station, to Thompson Park; and, WHEREAS, the State requires the City to accept the grant by resolution, to accept responsibility to operate and maintain the proposed sewer system, and to agree to the terms and conditions of the grant offer. NOW THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED 8Y THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF s KENAI, ALASKA, that: Section is ' t _ The City of Kenai accepts Grant No. 46540 in the amount of $562,100 from the State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation. Section 8: The City of Kenai agrees to accept responsibility to operate and maintain the proposed newer system, and agrees to the terms and conditions of the grant offer. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that 19th day of August, 1987. I � - ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk Approved by Finance: JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR J� 3 r- MM TO: Kenai City council FROM: Charles A. Brown, Finance Director t R DATE: April 7, 1987 SUBJECT: D.B.C. grant - Thompson Park The attached Resolution accepts a D.E.C. Grant for $562,100 for a sewer interceptor to Thompson Park. lf.accepted, we agree to the terms and conditions of the grant offer. The Council should read the attached offer and consider that: 1) The estimated cost of the project is $2,243,000. The City's share is, therefore, estimated at $1,680,900. The City is agreeing that it will provide the local funds to ensure completion of the project (condition N4). 2) The State may cancel the grant at any time (condition #14). 3) The grant is subject to the availability of money. We may receive $196,735 instead of $562,100 (see condition #15). In that case, the city's share would be $2,046,265. I 07 0 S q7PA' I i F A A _Q� HA A enw C1)tVPML GOVERNOR DEFT. or ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 465-2600 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER P.O. BOX 0. JUNEAU 99811-1800 March 19, 1987 i - 1 Mr, Samuel Gesko City Manager ; 210 Fidal go Street Kenai. AK 99611 Dear Mr, Gesko: Gran_ t Offer: Thompson Park Water b Sewer 046640) - In accordance with AS 46.03.030, Governor Cowper and the Department of • Environmental Conservation (Department) offer the city of Kenai (grantee) a grant of State funds not to exceed $662,100. This grant will be applied ' toward the financing of installing a sewer interceptor main line from the -existing main on Lawton Drive to Thompson Park Subdivision, and a lift a, station. This grant offer represents a portion of estimated nonfederally funded 7 eligible costs of $2,243,000 This offer is expressly conditioned upon the terms and limitations contained } herein, in 2 AAC 45.010 (copy enclosed), and in 18 AAC 73, and is based upon estimated eligible project costs as itemized below: Total Estimated Eligible Protect Costs 1. Administrative Expenses t 1,000 2. Legal Expenses -0- 3. Engineering Design Fees -.. 4. Project Inspection and Surveying 1760000 F S. Construction 1,907,000 6. Equipment -0- 7. Project Contingencies 1609000 -,�-- ---- ---?- - 8. Total -Estimated Eligible Costs - -- - - 2,2431,000 --- - - - --- --- --- -- --- ----, L L - I Samual Gesko -2- March 19, 1967 (N46540) ` {} il 9. Less: Federal Financing -0. 10. Estimated Non-federal Eligible Costs 2,243,000 11, State Grant v 50% of Line 10 562,100 1 Adjustment of expenditures within the budgeted cost items is allowed; how- ever, if actual project costs exceed the total estimated eligible costs, a revised grant application must be submitted before additional funding can be committed. If actual -project costs are less than the estimated costs, the grant will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with the per- centage limitation set forth in this offer. Grant payments will be made when expenses have been incurred and documentation has been provided to the Department along with the payment request form, unless a payment schedule established as a special condition of this grant. Payments will normally .is be made monthly, but no more frequently than twice per month. All requests for payment must be submitted on the enclosed Request for Payment form. By accepting this grant offer, the city of Kenai agrees to comply with the and in the ogeneraliandon Gspecialrats egions ts oas dfollowi Uocedures rant S AAC 73 appended),easnwell the g conditions. GENERAL GRANT CONDITIONS 1, Plan Approval e grantee agrees to obtain plan and specification approval from the Notice Department in accordance with 18 AAC 73.020 prior to issuing a to Proceed with Construction to a contractor. 2. Contract Award 8 Contractor Bonding Requirements a* The grantee agrees to Did construction contracts exceeding $50,000. Adequate time (not less than 30 days) shall be allowed between the date of formal advertisement and the date the bids must be submitted. The grantee agrees that any contract awarded will be to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder. b. The grantee agrees to submit procedures for award of construction contracts of less than $50,000 to the Department for prior approval when means other than the competitive bidding process are proposed. , c. The grantee must require the contractor to furnish performance and payment bonds in accordance with AS 36.26.010. d. If local or federal ordinances or regulations also apply to the contract award or contractor bonding- requirements for this project. -- - -- - - --- ---- - - --- the most stringent requirements shall apply. e. The grantee agrees to provide the Department with a summary of itemized bid tabulations, a copy of the Notice to Proceed, and a copy of the construction contract. 4 Samual Gesko (M46540) -3- March 19, 1987 3. Change Orders e grantee agrees that all project change orders will be submitted .to the Department for approval in accordance with 18 MC 73.020(e). 4. Project Completion, e grantee a rq sto provide sufficient local funding to match State an federal grant assistance and to ensure the com letion of a ro er1 functioning project in accordance with 18 A C 73. 20 . S. Operation and Maintenance e grantee agrees � operate and maintain the completed project. 6. Titles and Easements e grantee agrees to obtain all titles and easements necessary to ` provide clear title or authority to construct and maintain the proposed project. 7. Eli ibilit e grantee acknowledges that disbursement of progress payments by the acceptance of any item as an eligible project State does not constitute cost until all project costs are audited and rminedtobe eligible. -� Ineligible project costs must be included the audit c.� 8. Inspection e grantie agrees to allow, adep andrdtmentata forspec- tion of all project work and audit ofeasonabdertime, which this grant is offered. 9. Records e grantee agrees to maintain project accounts and records which verify the grant eligibility of project expenditures. These accounts and records shall be kept apart from non -grant eligible local records forof other State or pro�ectose thethe federar►lmgrant programs involved inined .10. Progress Reports The gran ee agrees to submit periodic progress reports on the proposed project with each payment request. 11, Subcontracts �e gran ee agrees to submit project subcontracts over $10,000 and all s changes to these subcontracts for Departmental approval. 12. Dama es e grantee shall hold and save the Department, its officers, agents, t and employees harmless from liability of any kind, including costs and - expensesp- for or on account -of- any and..at1_suits. or _damages- Of -any - {, - -- - nature, substained by any person or persons or property, by virtue of --performance -of-the- grantee, -or any_ person or entity_acting 1n place of or for the grantee for this project. Samuel Gesko (N46540) -4- March 19, 1987 13. Municipal Bond The municipalofficial having custody of the construction account must be bonded as authorized in AS 29.23.520. 14. Grant Cancellation e grantee ac nowtedges the right of the Department to rescind this grant and seek recovery of payments already made if the grantee has provided incorrect or misleading information to the Department or if a grant condition contained herein or in 18 AAC 73 is violated. This - - rant offer may be terminated at apy time it is in the best InteFe—st— of the State to do so. Availabilit of Funds e total award 'or this grant is $662,100. ending June 30 1987 the grantee may not b $196.735. unless additional cash flow Is au 1 V UR funds are ava a e. T e grantee is on notice tnat tnis -agreement is subject o aval 1HOMM o1jBW=y_from State, federal, or other sources to finance the performance set out in this agreement. If funding is withdrawn reduce - or 1_ imit�in any way after the e ect ve ate of -this agreement and before the completion of perfor- mance, the Department may terminate the agreements A termination under this section shall be implemented under the same conditions as a termination under condition 14. If the Department determines it is in the best interests of the State, it may renegotiate the terms of the agreement in accordance with the new funding limitations and conditions. SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS I None Please carefully review this grant offer, the related grant conditions, and the enclosed regulations. If satisfactory, sign and return the original, along with a formal resolution accepting the grant enacted by the Kenai City Council. In the resolution the municipality must agree to accept responsibility to operate and maintain the proposed water, sewer, or solid waste utility improvement and agree to the terms and conditions of this grant offer. Acceptance of the grant is required within six months to prevent revocation of the offer. No progress payments can be made until this grant offer is - — - - signed by -the grantee -and --returned -to the -Department.Nothing- In this_____ offer, whether or not accepted, may be deemed to constitute a contractual — -- --. - - obligati -on -on--the -part of the Department until a resolution of acceptance _ has been received. i. } u Samual Gesko •5- March 19. 1987 (N46540) The City is to be congratulated on its effort to provide this important community improvement. Sincerely. Commissioner Accepted on behalf of the city of Kenai by: Type 3 N ame t e ate gna ure L L rFn` S 9 . C - 7 f Suggested By: Council CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION 87-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, REPEALING RESOLUTION N0. 87-36 AND ESTABLISHING NEW APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAVEL AND ENTBRTAINNENT. WHEREAS, Resolution No. 87-36, adopted June 3. 1987, requires Council approval for travel by all City employees; and, WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that it is within the City Manager's authority to approve travel for employees that work under his specific or general direction. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that: section 1s Resolution No. 87-36 is repealed. Section Zs No expenditure incurred for entertainment shall be paid by the City of Kenai to or for any elected official, appointed official or city employee unless approved prior to the expenditure by the Council, or subsequently approved by a vote of the Council upon a finding of a public purpose and benefit. No expenditure incurred for tr ei outside the Third Judicial District for the State of Alask shall be paid by the City of Kenai to or for any elected offi ial or appointed official (including commission, committee r board members, the City 1 I 8 Manager, City At orney, and City Clerk) unless approved prior to the expenditure b the Council, or subsequently approved by a vote of the Counci upon a finding of a public purpose and benefit. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that 19th day of August, 1987. JOHN J. OILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk Approved by Finance: &2 (8/7/87) r; } 1 -., _.. e 1 n MEMO TO: Kenai City Council FROM: Charles A. Brown, Finance Director a R4 DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Travel Authorization/Resolution #87-36 The conclusion to Resolution M87-36 says: "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that no expenditure incurred for travel outside the Third Judicial District for the State of Alaska and no expenditure incurred for entertainment shall be reimbursed by the City of Kenai to any elected official, appointed official or city employee unless approved prior to said expenditure by the Council, or subsequently approved by a vote of the Council upon a finding of a public purpose and benefit." Rick Ross and I have written memos to the City Manager expressing concerns about this resolution. In summary, our concerns are: 1) The resolution only speaks of reimbursement to officials or employees. The fact is, most expenditures for travel are not reimbureed to officials or employees; they are paid directly to travel agencies, hotels, etc. A literal reading of the resolu- tion excludes moat travel and entertainment expenses by an informed purchaser. 2) Often, short notice is given of space availability for classes at police training facilities. It may not be possible to wait until the next Council meeting. 3) Travel related to police investigations, including assistance to other municipalities, is often on short notice. Also, advance announcement of such investigative travel is not in the public interest. It now appears that the Council wishes to exclude most employees from further travel authorization, relying upon the City Manager's authority to control travel expenditures of employees under his direction. The attached resolution accomplishes this. I L _ J C—go li� Suggested By: Administration CITY OF KENAI ` RESOLUTION 87-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENAI, ALASKA, ACCEPTING STATE OF ALASKA GRANT N0. 8/88-511 IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has offered the City of Kenai a grant in the amount of $200,000 for road improvement projects; and, WHEREAS, the State requires that the Kenai City Council accept the grant by ordinance or resolution. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF f RENAI, ALASKA, that the City accept the State of Alaska Grant No. t 8/88-511 in the amount of $200,000 for road improvements. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENAI, ALASKA, that 19th day of August, 1987. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk Z__.__ IN L 0 STANDARD AGREEMENT FORM FoR G RJANTS This agreement is executed between the State of Alaska Department of Administration (Hereinafter called the "State"), and Kenai Hereinafter called the "Grantee"), WITNESSETH that: Whereas, the Grantee is willing to undertake the performance of this grant under the terms of this agreement; Whereas, the municipality has the authority under the State law or local charter to provide the services for which funds were appropriated; Whereas, the State has the authority to enter into this agreement by AS 37.05.315; Whereas, funding for this grant lapses on lapse date X upon completion of the project; Whereas, the grant #8/88-511 of $200,000 is for the purpose of City Local Road Improvements (please provide further explanation and details in the space provided); This grant is for road improvements for existing traveled transportation routes throughout the City and for new roads to open up new commercial, residential, and industrial zoned areas. Improvements could include, but are not limited to, water, sever, street lighting, sidewalks, storm drainage, curbs and gutters, seeding, landscaping, traffic control markings, signing, paving, parking areas, and other miscellaneous items. The general area for improvements would be within the City limits of the City of Kenai. Page 1 of 4 Suggested By: Council CITY OF KENAI RESOLUTION 87-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, PROVIDING FOR SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY OF KENAI AT THE REGULAR OCTOBER 6, 1987 ELECTION, PROPOSITIONS FOR THE PURPOSES OF EXEMPTING MUNICIPAL OFFICERS AND CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAW (AS 39.50), AND MUNICIPAL CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE AND POLITICAL -GROUPS AND PERSONS ATTEMPTING TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF A MUNICIPAL ELECTION FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE LAW (AS 15.13). WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Kenai feels that the Conflict of Interest and Campaign Disclosure Statements do not have any specific advantage in protecting the electorate; and, WHEREAS, the Council feels that the Conflict of Interest and Campaign Disclosure Statements are an unnecessary added burden on candidates for public office and municipal officers; and, WHEREAS, the Council feels the Kenai Municipal Code adequately protects the City's interests and the rights of the citizens of Kenai. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that the following propositions be submitted to the qualified voters of the City of Kenai at the October 6, 1987 regular election in substantially the same form as set out hereinafter: Shall the municipal officers and candidates for elective office of the City of Kenai be exempt from the requirements of the State of Alaska Conflict of Interest Law (AS 39.50)? YES R NO ❑ 1 L 7 PROPOSITION Shall the municipal candidates for elective office and political groups and persona attempting to influence the outcome of a municipal election of the City of -,-� Kenai be exempt from the requirementSof the State of Alaska Campaign Disclosure Law (AS 15.13)? YES NOF� PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that 19th day of August, 1987. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk i �1 (8/13/87) 3 i� Suggested sy: city council CITY Of KENAI RESOLUTION 87-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, PROVIDING FOR SUBMISSION To THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY OF KENAI AT THE REGULAR OCTOBER 6, 1987 ELECTION, A PROPOSITION FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING SECTION 9-3 or THE KENAI MUNICIPAL CHARTER TO PROVXDH FOR AN INCREASED FINE FOR VIOLATION OF THE KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, inflation since the adoption of the Kenai Municipal Code has caused the present fine limitation to become less OffsctivOl and, WHEREAS, the current Charter limitation of $300.00 on fines for violations of the Kenai Municipal Code is no longer an adequate deterrent to prevent violations of the City Code; and, WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Kenai Council, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the the for violations Of the Kenai City of Kenai to increase penalty Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF the following proposition be submitted to the KENAI, ALASKA, that qualified voters of the City of Kenai at the October 6, 1987 regular election in substantially the same form as set out below. PMRS;TZON Shall the Kenai Municipal Charter, Section 9-3, be amended to increase the fine for violations of the Kenai Municipal Code from a maximum Of $300.00 to a maximum of $500.00? 7 . - a PASSED BY THE COUNCI L OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, that 19th day of August, 1987. l JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk (8/18/87) L I U CITY OF KENAI "'Od Cajadacd of 4"„ MORMu+o WMI,AL"M ne» ,OUM.Ms TO: Council Members City of Kenai FROM: Tim Rogers, City Attorney City of Kenai ;f --- _ -- - - -- - - ' DATE: August 19, 1987 RE: Resolution 87-56 The Legal Department drafted the above -referenced resolution in r, an attempt to raise penalties under the Kenai Municipal Code. The matter must go to the voters as required by the Charter. It should be noted that the matter is being hand -carried to the Council because it has just come to the Legal Department's attention that the Borough Clerk will be on vacation and the time :.:,... '.; which was originally intended to bring the matter before Council has now been changed and the matter needs to be acted upon immediately. The Legal Department was only informed on August 18, 1987 that it no longer had until September 1, 1987 to submit the attached resolution and that the matter had to appear before Council On August 19, 1987. 1 KENAI PLANNING 6 ZONING COMMISSION August 12, 1987 - 7:00 PM Kenai City Hall Hal Smalley, Vice Chairman 1. ROLL CALL T �/ UITAFFROVE Present: Bryson, Church, O'Reilly, Osborne, Smalley Absent: Lewis, Mishou both excused 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Agenda approved with the addition of an informational memo from Ron Sutcliffe 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Conditional Use Permit: Lot 1, EZ S/D (1111 Kiana) - Day Care Center - Laura Peterson Mrs. Peterson stated that she is presently an owner of child care center in Soldotna. She intends to have 15 children to begin, eventually hoping to have a maximum of 25. Hours of operation are to be 7 AH to 6PM Monday through Friday and run a full year as opposed to seasonal. Vice Chairman Smalley asked about the access for traffic to the center on the lot itself from Kiana, are you going to be able to accomodate enough cars going in and out of there so as not to cause a traffic problem, answer the driveway accomodates three (3) cars comfortably which would probably be used for employees, the front fence has been backed up 25' from the edge of the road to accomodate six (6) cars comfortably across the front of the lot, not in the street but pulled up into the lot. Basically, the only off street parking will be the six not including the 3 up the driveway. Vice Chairman Smalley asked if any comments from the public had been received, answer no. Twenty-six (26) certified notices were -._�_ .—__..... . .. ..... .. sent.-Vice._Chais►_S_m_ailey asked for _plans for snow removal, $; answer it is always hired out to clear. Commissioner Bryson asked �'• _ .___ ____-__ _ _-if-the-house was her residence, answer yes. It was a child care {. center once before;-but- relicensed as a home: m:n se over -- - - - O'Reilly asked how many employees Mrs. Peterson expected, answer that with 15 children, three staff, with 25 four. Commissioner O'Reilly asked if the hours would be flexible, in other words, f PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION August 12, 1987 i Page 2 1 will everyone come at the same time or will scam be dropping off the children at different hours, answer yes, the hours will be jjj flexible. Using my Soldotna center as an example, I am licensed for 42 and I service 35 families and my parking lot serves about 6 cars comfortably and we don't have a parking problem so I do not i anticipate a problem here. Commissioner Church asked if there were subdivision covenants which may prohibit this use, answer from Mrs. Peterson no. MOTION: - Commissioner Bryson moved approval of Conditional Use Application, ! seconded by Commissioner O'Reilly. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. S. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of July 22, 1987 Vice Chairman Smalley asked that the word "west" be changed to } "east" on page 2, last paragraph - tt Minutes were approved with the correction P 'F 6. OLD BUSINESS 4 None �•__ - E {, 7. NEW BUSINESS None i� 6. PLANNING a. Amend Zoning Code: 14.20.240 Pertaining to Mobile Homes & Recreational Vehicles - Continued b. Amend Zoning Code: 14.20.160 Pertaining to Townhouses (formerly Zero Lot Line) - Continued No new information i 9. REPORTS -.1 1 �. a. City Council +}: Councilman McComsey reported on a work session held by the Council ' regarding an RV park proposal by Ed Garnett. Mr. Garnett has asked for. land near the FAA antenna site on Daubenspeck property. Fosters also presented a plan for an RV park that they are pursuing Anglers Acres -area: whey have a ground- -in -the- - work for reclamation of the gravel pit by preparations for the lake and the surrounding land for either the RV park or the original plans of a subdivision. There is going to be a buffer of C r. 0-1 In PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION August 12, 1987 Page 3 ( trees completely surrounding the park area. Preliminary plans appear to be appealing. The Fosters have called and written letters to the adjacent property owners to attend a meeting to view these plans and present any comments. Not one of the owners appeared or called. Mr. Morgan has approached the city concerning additional lands for parking for the golf course. As the popularity of the golf course has increased, Mr. Morgans needs are for parking places for cars, and if possible, parking for RV's that come in for tournaments. This does not mean hookups or water, but only adequate space. b. Borough Planning Commissioner Bryson informed the Commission that for the next meeting of the Borough Planning Commission there are no plats for review which is a first in several years. C. City Administration Administrative Assistant Gerstlauer reported on recent activity in the land department. There have been four on -going projects. On is a request for lease for property fronting on Main Street Loop for the Windmill Restaurant. Two are leases that are requesting purchase, one is Bob Jackson. Five leases have come back due to financial difficulties. They are in the CIIAP area, most have no buildings on them. The one sale that is coming back is the one next to the Katmai that was purchased by Vic Tyler. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 11. INFORMATION ITEMS a. Council Agenda --Not Available r b. Borough Agenda No comments 7 - C. Letter from Howard Hackney Pertaining to Sign for Twin City j 4 The owner/manager of the raceway, Mr. Freddie Pollard has I submitted application for variance for his sign. This will be on the next -agenda as a public hearing item. d Letter from Ron Sutcliffe Pertaining to Indian Lands 1 Vice Chairman Smalley stated that from all he knows about native allotment, she cannot transfer native allotment status. Now they ' 7 T PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION August 12, 1987 Page 4 are denying that it has changed hands. From the memo I understand 1 •.... that it will be pursued further, answer yes. Vice Chairman Smalley stated that he went all the way back to the BIA in Albekerque on this because I have a vested interest in this and they told me that the moment it changed hands there is no allotment status. What we don't know is if it is a change of hands and there is a warranty deed. Commissioner Church stated that the BIA has to approve the transfer which comes from Washington DC. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS None 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next regular meeting of the Commission is Wednesday, August 27, 1987. Janet A. Loper, Planning Specialist Secretary to the Commission � 3 M YNAPr,COVE D KENAI PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION August 11, 1987 - 7:00 PM Kenai City Hall Richard Hultberg, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: Carlson, Sandahl, Siebert, Siekawitch Absent: Hultberg, Salazar both excused Also Present: Kayo McGillivray and Janet Loper -" - - 2. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA a ;�. Agenda approved as submitted 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of June 9, 1987 Minutes were approved as submitted - S. DIRECTOR'S REPORT - ,, s A. Summer Recreation Program I This year the Summer Recreation Program was run in the Center rather than in the schools. This year there were more children �.: enrolled than any previous year, the total coming to just under 200. Many comments were received from parents, all were positive. The leaders had a hard time using the gym for a while.when the aerobics classes were being held. Several times they ended up 1 .... _. using the racketball courts, but it worked out well in the end. Commissioner Siekawitch informed the Commission that the parent z, pitched in and pooled money to take the kids out to lunch at the Pizza Hut. Also for the last day, Friday, parents brought cookies and other treats. {: B. Parks Crews 1 The crews were as good or better this year as last, with the loss of some of the "old timers" and the addition of new members. The _ crew. pride work and it shows. The Commission asked -took -in -their to pass on to the crew that they are to be commended on their _ _ work, comments have been received from visitor and from R -many - - residents. ` C. Softball Tournaments 1 r� 7 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION August 11, 1987 Page 2 �I 1 There have been tournaments thus far with a Class D State tournament coming this month. We will have a Class D or E co-ed coming also. Commissioner Carlson asked about the progress of the new fields. Director McGillivray answered that they put down some peat and did some leveling, however, there is still some inspecting to be done and cannot proceed with any major work until that is done. We will have to fence the through area as it is too dangerous to run traffic so close. The Softball Association has indicated that, either this year or next-,- they would like to donate money to help with the concession stands and restrooms. Director McGillivray stated that, ideally, the water & sewer lines could be run to accommodate Treets Cabinet Shop along with the fourth field. D. Beautification Crew The Committee asked that a letter of commendation be sent to the Beautification Committee and the crew for the all the work that has been done to beautify the City. E. Floor Refinishing Bob Miller, the custodian for Soldotna High School, brought his materials over to the gym and was able to do the floors for $1,900 as opposed to the informal original estimated costs of $3,000 plus. F. Tile Replacement (men's bathroom) The purchase order has been written for the replacement tiles and the work will begin shortly. G. Hot Tube l` The ad has been placed in the paper to put the tubs out for bid. Part of the bid specifies that the tubs must be removed by the person rather than by the City. H. Building Refinishing (outside) Still waiting for a quote on cost. He have been holding off a bit because of the flowers and landscaping done around the building. As soon as the painters begin spraying the chemicals on the building it will kill all the work the crews have done this year. I. Arco Jesse Owens Track Five youngsters -from the -Kenai -area met -in -Los -Angeles to -compete — - in several areas Three were from Kenai. Alaska did bring back 2 gold, i silver, and 1 bronze medals. 1 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION August 11, 1987 ' Page 3 Director McGillivray presented a letter from Rebecca S. Parker, Coordinator for Arco Alaska thanking Kayo for his continuing help for the games which were held in Kenai. I J. Cemetery Work There has been a lot of work done this summer at the cemetery. Pipes have been cut and placed into the ground at ground level to �--- hold the white crosses. When the crews mow the crosses can be i taken out and replaced into the pipes. j Commissioner Sandahl asked if there was room for expansion, answer ; :-- - - yes. There has been an increase -in the number of burials this year over last year which means an increase in activity as well. i The Commission commented that the cemetery is looking really f } great. Commissioner Sandahl asked if vaults were being considered as a viable alternative, answer no. The Commission asked that the Cemetery Committee be asked if this could be an item for '? discussion. S. OLD BUSINESS A. Memorial Park ? Some work has begun in the form of digging and laying cement, however, due to the lack of available lumber supplies. The parks crew will be maintaining those areas not contracted for planting. B. Airport Triangle Park i Wards Landscaping has made an offer to complete and upgrade the Airport Triangle Park. At the last Council meeting the design and work was approved by the Council, money was appropriated from the 1 road widening project. Wards has donated the shrubs and trees for . the three triangles within the park and Trinity Nursery donated f the flowers for the KENAI planting. ` C. Youth Sports Fields The survey has been done. Until the City has dedicated the lands to park use nothing further can be done. At a meeting last week the Mayor stated that he wanted a committee to see what volunteer - work can be done. Director McGillivray will be meeting with the new president to discuss this issue. Referring to the plat of the Section 36 balifields, Vice Chairman ' Siebert asked if some ball fields could be drafted on to the plat to.get an idea of _size and location, answer yes. Vice Chairman _ Siebert will return the plat and some drawings. .• �;, Commissioner Siekawitch asked- if -it -would be -possible -to put -a -- - - - --------- ----- ---- - -- - camper park at this location, answer from Director McGillivray, the downtown no. The Council has been looking for lands nearer area. c L PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION August 11, 1987 Page 4 6. NEW BUSINESS None 7. COMMITTEE QUESTIONS & COMMENTS None 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned. Janet Specialist Secretary to the Commission 4 rot R D—y KENAI ADVISORY LIBRARY COMMISSION MINUTES August 4, 1987 Kenai Community Library Linda Swarner, Chairperson ITEM L, C&kh TO ORDER & ROLL CALL At approximately 7:55 p.m. the Kenai Advisory Library Commission Meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linda Swarner. The roil was called by Secretary Carol L, Press. Commissioners Present: Swarner Smalley Emery Brenckle Commissioners Absent: Hues (Excused) Simmons (Excused) Turner (Excused) Other present were: Linda McNair, Library Representative and Carol L. 8reas, Acting City Clerk. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. ( 1 ITEM a : PPRRQVAL 08 AG&M Commissioner Emery MOVED for approval of the Agenda and Commissioner Brenckle SECONDED the motion. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. VIM 3: $,E,�RIONf° P BSENT SCHEDULED TO 8E HEARD There were none. ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES a JULY 7. 1987_ Chairperson Swarner asked it there were any corrections or i ! the Minutes of the July 7, 1987 meeting. delet ons ram Commissioner Emery stated that his absence tram the last meeting was an excused absence and that the minutes did not reflect that. He would like that correction made. Commissioner Brenckle stated-. that her name is spelled incorrectly throughout the minutes of the July 7, 1967 meeting and would like those corrections made. Commissioner Emery questioned the motion made in Item 6-a of the July 7, 1987 minutes and asked which motion was tabled. Chairperson Swarner explained that the disruptive policy was tabled indefinitely until Commissioner Turner brings back information regarding a reporting form to the Commission. Commissioner Smalley MOVED for approval of the minutes with the corrections noted and Commissioner Emery SECONDED the motion. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEN 5, pIRECTOR'S REPORT Linda McNair gave the Director's Report in the absence of Librarian Emily DeForest. Ms. McNair distributed copies of the Year End Report for Fiscal Year 1985-1986, Year End Report for Fiscal Year 1986-1987 and Report for the Month of June, 1987. Ms. McNair explained that she distributed a copy of the Year End Report of 1985-1986 for comparison to the Year End Report of 1986-1987. Comparison of the two reports indicates that circulation, additions, reworks, interlibrary loans and library cards issued have all increased. State grants received include: $8,630 for Public Library Assistance Grant which will be used for books; $7,000 Institutions (Wildwood Correctional Facility) Grant, which breaks down to $4,880 to be used for personnel, $2,070 for materials and $50 for supplies. The Library Cooperation Education Grant is pending at this time. An appropriations ordinance will be presented to the City Council Meeting scheduled for August 5, 1987 as new business for approval of the monies to be spent in this manner. Ms. McNair stated that they are awaiting the installation schedule from Dynex ithe new computer). Dynex is hoping to coordinate the Mat -Su installation with the Kenai installation in order that a representative from Dynex will be able to be present for any problems arising. Arrival of the computer is expected to be the end of September or beginning of October. The summer film program will be complete at the end of August. It has not been as popular this year due to the less number of college students in the area working for the canneries. r 2. r-', 7 Librarian DeForest is near completion of an accomplishment activity report for the past seven years for the City Manager which includes schedule of assets added or deleted, participants, future plans, expected growth, state and federal participation figures. Commissioner Smalley asked if the summer reading program has completed. Ms. McNair answered yes and that it was very successful. Approximately 98% of the children who entered the program, completed the program. There was a party for those involved where over 100 certificates of completion were distributed. Sixty to seventy children attended the party. Questions of the Djrector Commissioner Hrenckle requested further explanation of the Institutional Grant. Ms. McNair explained that the grant does not involve supplying the law library for the Wildwood Correctional Institute. It supplies reading material to their library, the Community Library does preliminary work and sometimes includes holding copies of their books. This insures that the Wildwood Library always has access to that book. The Wildwood Library borrows many books from the Kenai Library and have microfiche available. The person hired through that grant will be doing some of the ordering and preliminary cataloging. Commissioner Emery asked if the amounts of the grants has decreased from last year. Ms. McNair answered no, that Emily spoke with the coordinator for South Central and the coordinator told Emily that there would be no reduction in the amount of monies requested from the grants submitted. Ms. McNair also added that the policy of application for grants is changing in that the grants will run year around. 27214 SL s A. DISRUPTIVE DMMAVIOR POLICY Chairperson Swarner stated that since this topic was tabled at the last Library Commission Meeting by Commissioner Simmons and L �ww..we f•wwwi awi wwe.. Q4.w.ew'16 is not present, the topic will stay -- 3 Mittel$ 7l B. SUMMER READING PROGRAM i Chairperson Swarner asked if there was any more discussion other than what was already reported by Ms. McNair. Commissioner j ' Brenckle asked if a presentation of the Summer Reading Program would be presented by its coordinator at a future meeting. Ms. i Q McNair answered yes. aai C. COMPUTER SCHBDULL A training schedule was discussed at the last meeting -- either have employees go to Anchorage for approximately a three-day ' training program, or have the representative from Dynex come Vo Kenai and train the employees. If the training program is coordinated with the Mat -Su employees and the program is 1 presented in Anchorage, the cost of the training program would be split with Mat -Su and the City of Kenai. Discussion followed where it was pointed out that some times it is an advantage to have the trainees work with their computer and catch problems as they arise with new programs, etc., however Dynex has proposed a large amount of money for their coming to Renal. No. McNair 7� stated that there would probably be five employees who will need training. The decision of whether the training will be in Kenai or Anchorage will be made by Librarian De8orest. I D. OTHER OLD 8UBIN888 Commissioner Smalley stated that a letter of thanks had been written and mailed to Ms. McNair in appreciation of her help and hard work in the Library. j !i ZTEM 7 • HEN BURZNEBS A. FIVE-YEAR PLAN Chairperson Swarner stated that a five-year plan should be defined due to comments made by Councilwoman Monfor in regard to wishes of the Mayor that if commissions, etc. were not active ' they would be dismissed. The Commission discussed the set of goals which were previously prepared (revised February 3, 1987) ,? and found that they would include the next five years. The ,Goals of the Library Commission" is attached hereto and made a ;! part of these minutes. I . q a i Commissioner Brenckle suggested that the goals should be advertised to bring more interest in the library. Commissioner Smalley added that advertisement might increase the number of volunteers. Commissioner Brenckle suggested that an annual book sale might make people more aware of the library needs. Monies gathered from a sale would be for the benefit of the library collection. (The money would be made by the Friends of the Library and then the Friends would donate it back to the library.) Commissioner Emery suggested a joint meeting between the Library Commission and the Friends of the Library and discussion followed. Commissioner Emery MOVED for a joint meeting with the Friends of the Library and the Library Commission to be held on September 1, 1987 and Commissioner Brenckle SECONDED the motion. Discussions The invitation to the Friends should include the suggestions of joint activities such as a book sale, five-year plan, discussion of having a representative from the Friends attend Library Commission Meetings, etc. i MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. f~ B. EQUIPMENT LIST The Commission discussed the equipment list that was presented to the Council for approval for use of Federal Revenue Sharing f Funds. The list included a telefax; CD ROM Reader; PCXT and 1 printer; VCR 1/211; info track; stereo; high speed duplicator. Chairperson Swarner asked the Commissioners if they have other suggestions for equipment. Commissioner Brenckle suggested that when the equipment and library technology materials that Emily is } awaiting from the conference she attended comes in, that the Commission look over the information and Emily note the equipment that might be of interest to the library for purchase for the future. Further discussion followed regarding the availability of library materials for blind and senior citizen patrons. Commissioner Emery stated that he would like a collection of books on cassette tapes and VCR (classics). Ms. McNair offered that the library would not want to be in competition with the local video tape rental stores. Commissioner Brenckle questioned the availability of foreign s- language materials. Ms. McNair reported that there is some .t S 1 t� 1 f` German, Japanese and Portuguese available. Commissioner=Lmery suggested word processing availability for use on the computers for patrons and Commissioner Brenckle suggested other educational programs be available also. C. GRANTS RECEIVED These grants were discussed during the Director's Report. Two have been received and the library is awaiting notification for the third. These grants are all State grants. D. TRUSTEE WORKSHOP •, Latest notification of dates for the Trustee -Workshop was October 16, 1987. The date will be checked. Chairperson Swarner briefly addressed the topics that will be discussed at the workshop. Some of these include board member qualifications, responsibilities, etc.; fund raising; legal structure of libraries, etc. The Workshop is for all libraries on the Peninsula. S. OTHER NEW BUSINESS c Chairperson Swarner stated that the Standard Operation Procedure for Non -Resident Summer Visitor Library Cards will be discussed formally at the next Commission meeting. A copy of the tentative rules is attached. ITEM •a. ¢OMMISSZON COMMENTS AND OU&ST=ONS Commissioner Emery informed the commissioners of his travel through California this summer and that he was impressed by what the City of Kenai's Library has available for use by its patrons in contrast to other libraries he visited. There were no other comments. ITEM 1• ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Smalley MOVED for adjournment. 80 ORDERED. Meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Submitted by %0:wwa L. CitlaO, Acting City Clerk r- �� t 1 W DRAFT GOALS OF THE LIBRARY COMMISSION Revised and Updated: February 3, 2987 GOAL A: Review and implement a master plan of the library during 1987. Objective It Expansion of the library facilities amended in March, by 10,000 square feet by 2991. GOAL Bt Make recommendations to the council regarding capital and other improvements to the library. 1 bjective it Complete selection and purchase of in-house computer catalogue and automated charge system during 1987.. bjective 2: Increase the library equipment in 1987. Priority list of equipment is as follows, but not limited tot Telefax Facsimile C/D ROM Reader h" VHS player with monitor (combo unit) Computers with printers (from 1 to 3). Video compact disc player Audio compact disc player i bjective 3t By 1991 explore the feasibility of a bookmobile for local service use. objective 41 By 1992 examine the feasibility of a satellite library given population growth and changes in population density. ;t Make recommendations to the library and council to. improve library services. (bjective 1t Continue to recommend to the City Council that an increase be made in the funding for books and other library materials. )bject-ive-2: -Continue -to increase interi-ibrary-loans and -- promote state support of -same -via funding and - - -- personnel. - J L poll NO DRAFT Goals of the Library Commission page -2- Objective 3: Maintain utilization of the activities room. Objective 4s By 1999, increase library personnel bu t not limited to, an Assistant including, Librarian. Objective Ss By 1989, explore the feasibility of telecommunications as a means of increasing patronage. Objective 61 Continue to support the Kenai Community forts to increase • Library, Inc*,lports ofthelibrary and its outside fiscal support • services. Objective 7: Continued public recognition of volunteer andincreaseublic atheid slibra sits afforts wareness andse an a services of y through the local media. Objective 8: By 1990 consider the addition of loan for example, specialized toys, programs: compact audio discs, or pieces of art, and computer software. Objective 91 By 1989, increase library hours on Friday and having Sunday hours. Saturday and consider 1. 2. GOALS ACHIEVED Typewriters were purchased. Now have three public use typewriters. Ms:-- D-eForest has comple-ted _a _comprehensive bid prospectus for an in-house computer catalogue and - automated charges. __W-hich includes:_ 10 public access terminals --- S dial in ports rence desk, 1 in center 2 terminals, 1 at refe- ,ary for employees L 1 w 1' i i 1 's DRAFT i j Goals of the Library Commission ! page -3- _ Proposal also included a bibliographic maintenance unit, circulation- unit, card catalogue, acquisitions i and serials. 3. Volunteer efforts have been recognized. ` y. 4. I Newspaper recognition. 5. Open house for the library addition. 6. Saturday hours have been increased from 800 to 5:00 7. Activities Room has increased its utilizations such as, City meetings, Organizational meetings, Friday Night Movies and Tudor program. S. Obtained computer software. 9. Increased patronage. NEW GOALS } 1. Continued school contacts in cooperation with schools. a. Increase access of library services to school age children. 3. Increase services to blind and physically handicap. k". + 4. Continued cooperation and access of library services -,- -- •- - -- - for Wiidwood Inmates. 5. Reference service by 1990. ... �t; 6. Annual review of library Y Policies and soles. Ij 1 I - NEW STNDARD OPERATION PROCEDURE FOR NOR RESIDENT SUMMER VISITOR LIBRARY CARDS, ETC. Each potential patron is required to furnish a "picture Id" from which we can verify full name, and permanent address. �.► Should they be of College age we obtain the address of their parentlo since some furnish their College ID. IN addition to their mailing address (General Delivery) we obtain the name of their employer (if known) and the location where they are camped. If there is by chance a local person known to them his/her address and telephone number is !ilos= obtained. Every effort is made to obtain this information and if nolD or permanent address given we DO NOT ISSUE A TEMPORARY LIBRARY CARD. The Temporary Card is marked with a purple dot in upper left hand corner as is the Library application card. They are ' told that they may take only one book at a time and we make up a green card on which we record their name and their Library Card NUMBER and when a book is taken out that green card is affixed to the back of the book card and filed in the due date as usual. They are instructed to call this to the attendant at the desk when returning the book so that we may then card the book, and check for any outstanding fines and obtain payment before another book is released.. When the Library card is mailed to the patron a set of rules specifically stating the requirement of one book only Is sent and that area is marked and the card taped to it so that it is called to the patron's attention again. July 31, 1987 Today we received a check for $27 for replacment of a book STEINBECK's Of Mice and Men taken out in the summer of 1983 by a cannery worker who we contacted at his home address In Virginia. lA young lady from Berkeley personally returned a Chiltons t Manual for Volkswagen that she had taken out in the summer of 1984 and about which we had written this year. ' We have also effected the return of books from Florida and Connecticut and you might be amused at the reply from a young man who Cook out Richar Haliburton's "The Glorious Adventure" in July of 1984. From his postal card from Fort Meyer, Florida (the second response) was un—signed and we can't tell whether he is telling us the book has flown"- E1 M>-� LANDSCAPING/SITE PLAN REVIEW BOARD Emergency Meeting August 7, 1987 - 1:30 PM Kenai City Hall Lou Schilling, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL Present: Schilling, Cole, Darrow Absent: Calar, Oberg, Osborne, all excused 2. NEW BUSINESS a. Review for New Addition: C-Plaza - Moose Lodge - William Chenault Review for the record, the original site plan was submitted and review by the Board on July 7, 1987. The site plan was not approved at that meeting as it did not meet the ordinance specifications, several suggestions were made from the representative, Mr. Carmen Gintoli and the Board. The Board asked that -Mr. Gintoli return with a revised site plan. In lieu of a revised site plan, several letters were written by Mr. Gintoli outlining the desires of his client, Mr. Chenault. The intent of the ordinance still was not being met. Chairman Schilling met personally with Mr. Chenault resulting in the emergency meeting this afternoon. Mr. Gintoli passed along the feelings of his client that he has done the 5+b of the area and the fact that the landscaping will be enclosed by a site obscuring fence is immaterial. The ordinance is very clear in section 14.25.010 (a) intent which states generally that the landscaping must enhance the City not merely the site, thus the sight obscuring fence defeats the intent. Chairman Schilling: what the Board must do is represent the i people of the City and the Council. Carmen Gintoli: I do not disagree with that. Chairman Schilling: We still want to avoid any disagreements if at all possible. Chairman Schilling: After meeting with Mr. Chenault and Mr. Gintoli, the agreement has come to be that Mir. Chenault will take down the fence and go ahead with the site plan plus place same flower boxes on the side of the -- building facing the highway. Board Member Darrow asked what would keep anyone from putting that fence back in at a later date. Answer from Vice Chairman Cole, nothing. The ordinance is not written with any powers to enforce. Th is nothin to prevent him from taking the flower boxes home ere g either. Boarded Member Darrow noted that this certainly would not be fair to the others who had -come- before the -Board- in good faith - - - - - - -- -- - ---- ----- and had to meet the expense of landscaping and maintaining their ----- -----' - ---1 — - - . property. Planning- Specialist -Loper- recalled -the words --of- former- - -- --- -- . __ ----_._.----- _ -----___..-- _-- 3 Councilman Jess Hall, it is hoped that if a developer spent enough 11-4 r---17) - LANDSCAPING/SITE PLAN REVIEW BOARD Emergency Meeting - August 7, 1987 Page 2 money on improving the property, he is going to maintain it. Board Member Darrow noted that of the site plans thus approved, all but one has agreed that the landscaping has enhanced the business as well as the property and customers take notice. MOTION: Board Member Darrow: in lieu of all the other problems involved with this plan, moved to approve the plan with the fence removed, seconded by Board Member Cole Vice Chairman Cole agreed, however, drew attention to the ROW strip and stated that it would be the hope of the Board that the Moose Club would take it upon themselves to clean it up and maintain it. Board Member Darrow agreed, -stating that this should be something that needs to be passed on to the Lodge. Chairman Schilling suggested that the Beautification Committee be notified and perhaps through that body, attention could be drawn to this area. Mr. Gintoli stated that from his conversations with Mr. Chenault, he was going to approach Fred from the Moose Lodge about maintaining the flower boxes. Mr. Chenault would buy them and put the flowers in if the Moose would ensure that they would be replanted next year. The area that has been designated as being grassed will be maintained by the Moose as it is primarily for the children when they have outdoor activities. As far as the ROW, he is going to approach the Moose in view of the fact that it does belong to the State. The Board assured Mr. Gintoli that they are aware of that fact. Chairman Schilling asked if it would be feasible to put a stipulation with the approval be contingent that the fence not be added. Vice Chairman Cole disagreed, from the safety aspect. It would be more desirable to put up barriers. Chairman Schilling agreed, stating that a chain link fence would be better. Vice Chairman Cole asked if the catoneasters would be planted, Mr. Schilling answer no. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously Mr. Gintoli suggested that the letter from the Beautification Committee to the Moose, something could get started on it perhaps this year, esp. in view of the fact that I am aware of City crews maintaining some of the ROW's in the downtown district. C 7 3. BOARD COMMENTS & QUESTIONS None ... .J 4. - ADJOURNMENT - - There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Janet A. Loper, Planning Specialist v ✓ Secretary to the Board , 1 - -f AGENDA f { KENAI CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 5, 1987 PLEDGE 08 ALLEGIANCE A. ROLL CALL 1. Agenda Approval 2. Consent Agenda *All items listed with an asterisk 0) are considered to be routine and non -controversial by the Council and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests, in which case the item Will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda as part of the General Orders. B. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD (10 Minutes) 1. Ed Garnett - R/V Camper Park 2. Warren Larson, Cooperative Extension Service - Test Plant Site C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Resolution 87-50: Award Bid of Senior Citizen Van - Craycroft Chrysler - $17,113.25. 2. Resolution 87-51: Award Contract for Painting of Fire Hall - J & D Painting. 3. Resolution 87-52: Modifying City of Kenai Public Utility Regulations and Rates - Fire Hydrant Use. 4. Application for Liquor License - Change in Status of Windmill Restaurant. -1 F io D. COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Planning & Zoning 2. Harbor Commission 3. Recreation Commission 4. Library Commission 5. Council on Aging 6. Miscellaneous Commission and Committees E. MINUTES 1. *Regular Meeting, July 15, 1987 F. CORRESPONDENCS 1. City of Galena - Thank You. ;1 G. OLD BUSINESS H. NEW BUSINESS 1. Bills to be Paid, Bills to be Ratified. 2. Requisitions Exceeding $1,000. % 3. *Ordinance 1224-87: increase Revenues/Appropriations E Library Grants - $15*630. 4. *Ordinance 1225-87: Increase Revenues/Appropriations - Senior Citizen Fund - Borough Grants and United Way Grants. 5. *Ordinance 1226-87: Amend KMC Title 3 - Refundable Deposit on Adoption of Animals to Encourage Spaying and Neutering of Animals. ! 6. *Ordinance 1227-87: Increase Revenues/Appropriations - Council on Aging Donation. 7. *Ordinance 1228-87: Amending KMC Sections 4.30.010 and. 4.30.050 - National Electrical Code. S. Discussion - Ward Landscaping Proposal for Airport Triangle Park. 9. Discussion - Purchase of City of Kenai Pins - $700. 10. Discussion - Section 36 Ballfield. 11. Discussion - Additional Work - Float Plane Basin. 12. Discussion - Approval of Amendment to Dock Leases I. ADMINISTRATION REPORTS 1. City Manager 2. City Attorney 3. Mayor 4. City Clerk 5. Finance Director 6. Public Works Director 7. Airport Manager J. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO HE HEARD IFive Minutes) ADJOURNMENT rfilings.q i I f� KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1987 KENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 1 PLEOGR 01 ALLEGIANCS ITSH A., ROLL CALL Present: Williams, Malston, Mccomsey, Bailis and Monfor Absent: Measles and Ackerly City Manager Brighton stated that Mr. Aokerly called and said that he would not be in attendance at the meeting tonight, but will be present at the August 19, 1987 meeting. Ile AI "=A Apum Mayor Williams requested that the following changes be made to the agenda: 1. Add as Item C-5, Games of Chance and Skill Application, Eagles Auxiliary - Request for Approval. 2. Delete 9-2. Warren Larson. Judge Hanson telephoned to inform the Council that Mr. Larson wee on jury duty and unable to attend the meeting. 3. for informational purposes, the Renal Peninsula Borough Minutes were distributed prior to the meeting, along with a memorandum from Janet Loper regarding the Airport Triangle Park. MOTION: Councilwoman Bailie MOVED for approval of the agenda as amended and Councilman Malston SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. 80 ORDERED. ITO _.a CONSENT AGENDA There were no changes. a. PlRSONs rassan scumman, To an NNARD 110 MINUTss) ITSN s-1s-1 1D OARNs'1'1'- Ril cAmpn PARR Mr. Garnett stated to the Council that he ham been working toward the placement of an R/V park within the City of Renal for about two years. He has submitted a proposal (included in the Council's packets) which he believes is reasonable. Mr. Garnett impressed four points in regard to R/V parks. They are: Location: It is necessary that the park De wiansn walking distance to a retail center, about a one- half mile distance. i. Sewer: People prefer sewer hook-ups so that it is not necessary to unhook, go to a dump station and then park again at their camping area. I. Water and Electricity: Mr. Garnett foals that water and electricity is essential. t. Adequate Space:-R/V-campers- prefer areas where they are not placed three or four test from other R/V's. Mr. Garnett proposes a space of eight to ten test on -the door side- so -that -awnings can be - - - - - - L a1 1 H AI - - ft � t RBNAI CITY COUNCIL MELTING MINUTES AUGUST S, 1987 RBNAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIANS, PRESIDING PAGE 1 extended it desired and there is space for sitting outside. He prcposas a width of twenty teat for each R/V space to pro+ide a strip between trailers. Mr. Garnett stated that he would like to offer A Camping area in which Campers would be encouraged to stay for two to three days. He believes the park should be available for use between May 15 to September 18 with the heaviest use i concentration during the latter part of June, July and the first part of August. j Mr. Garnett stated that he believes the most desirable property for use within the one-half mile walking distance to the retail area, with water, sewer, and electricity 1 available is the southwest corner of Beaver Loop and the Frontage Road presently being used as a football field. The second most desirable piece of property is the area between the FAA facilities and the bluff and seat of the Senior Citizens Center. Mr. Garnett added that he is aware that this property might have some future use other than an R/V park and if he would have to return the property to the City at some point, he would only like to be reimbursed for the expenses he puts into it, with depreciation. Mr. Garnett stated that time is of the essence in order that 1 the ground work, etc. can be done and ready for next summer's travellers. Also, to be effective, on ad should be included in the Alaska Magazine and the Mile Post this fall to advertise the availability of the R/V park in the City. Comments from the Council. Councilman Malston stated that the property along Frontage Road has been set aside for a Community center. He would like it to stay available for that use. He asked what the cost of the project would be. Mr. Garnett answered approximately $1,800 per space. Councilwoman Bailie suggested a work session to discuss this proposal further. A work session was set for Monday, August 10. 1987, but later changed to Tuesday, August 11, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Mayor Williams added that administration will need to check 4 the land's availability for a project such as this. The property may be BOR property and if so, must be used for outdoor recreation. There were other suggestions of land, i such as the ball park on Spruce Street and the on the green strip by the softball fields. Mr. Garnett stated that both those areas would be too small. Mayor Williams suggested a sublease of the Fred Meyer property. City Manager Brighton stated that he wrote to Fred Mayer about three weak* ago in regard to an extension of their lease. Although he has not lj heard back from Fred Meyer, he believes it is their intention, if their store in the Mall doas•well, to be under construction on their leased land site by next summer. A Nark 8eknioe was not for August- 11, 1987, st-7t00 p.m. is - - ._.. the Council Chambers. - WA1k - LARSON -- COO1XRAZM Rl=S20N- some-- JWW BITX. Mayor Williams stated that there is a letter in the packet from Mr. Larson. Mayor Williams suggested that if the f 1 i KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1987 EENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIAMS. PRESIDING PAGE 3 Council has any reasons to terminate the Memorandum of Agreement between the Extension Service and the City, he believes they should wait until after the planting season as there are gardens and test plants. There were comments from the Council. This item was removed from the Agenda during the Agenda Approval, however. Mr. Larson came into the meeting late after the jury was dismissed and spoke to the Council. Mr. Larson stated that he come to the meeting in order to answer any questions that the Council may have regarding their test site and offered to answer questions at that time. Councilwoman Bailie stated that she had been told that the test site had been opened to anyone who wanted to have a garden. She did not believe that was intention of the agreement. Mr. Larson responded and explained that he felt that the project is worthwhile. He would like to continue the project as it is a long-term project. There are approximately 15 varieties of grass being grown; ten varieties of potatoes; fertilizer tests; vegetables, etc. There are six to seven gardens. He believes that this is a good idea. All the test items are doing well even with the wind, etc. Mayor Williams asked if the Extension Service is planning to continue their project as the agreement stipulates. Mr. Larson answered yes. Councilwoman Bailie stated that she understood Mr. Them that there would ba shrubs and trees being tested which would enhance the area. Mr. Larson answered that they are planning to plant shrubs, trees, etc. for tests as wall as a windbreaks. Mr. Larson stated that he is hoping to have a tour of the area, perhaps in September and the Council will be invited. Z2U C PL„ XG NsunGi ITCH C-1C-1 RseOLU'�'I�Ii 87 60 t AMAa sI 9/ sBNiOR- GZT2EBti VAN .•.►vs■e•m ewavaLste 817.113.9E MOTION; Councilwoman Bailie MOVED for adoption of Resolution 87-50 and Councilwoman Nonfor SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. There were no comments from the public. 80 ORDERED. LUL& :a �tl�■n� •n■enw 87-§12 AWARD CONTRACT 70 PAINTING OGRE Councilwoman Monfor MOVED for adoption of Resolution 87-51 and Councilwoman Bailie SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. There were no comments from the public. 80 ORDERED. - L L f R "HAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST b, 1987 KENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN a. wILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 4 ITfN C�� RSEOLUTIOII 87-bit MODSfYIM4 CITY__01 RENAI PUBLIC RAW USILL councilwoman requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT- Councilwomaniution 87-69 Monfor and SECONDED the motion. There were no public comments, however Councilwoman Bailie asked how the hydrants are being used. City Manager Brighton answered that the primary problem is that the people are not asking to use the hydrant and not getting the necessary permit and therefore are using wrenches that strip and damage the hydrant, making it unusable by the Fire Department. Costs to repair the hydrants can run up to $1,100. Councilman McComsey asked why the people would ask to use the hydrants now if they have not before. City Manager Brighton answered that the Fire Department and Police Department have been directed to ask to see the permit of the hydrant user and if they have no permit, they will be fined $300. They have not had the authority to fine before. Discussion followed regarding the rate. Mayor Williams felt that the rate to too high. Councilwoman Bailie stated that she felt that the hydrants are there for the protection of the City. If they are damaged, they are s dstriment. Comments from the public brought Marole ward of ward's Landscaping. Me. ward stated that they often fill up their tanks, etc. when doing contract work for the City at the hydrants. she foals that the rate is too high. City Manager Brighton added that the purpose Of the hydrants is to provide fire protection. The tee is $100 per day, or $300 per week. Jack Foster of Foster Construction stated that he feels the cost is too high and that the cost will fail back on to the City at the time of bidding for construction work. Public works Director Rorneiis stated that at times contractors get permits for usage and the permit for is waived. Also that there is always the possibility of water lines being broken if the hydrant is not turned on properly. Councilman McComsey questioned how many hydrants had to be repaired because of improper use. Mr. Rorneiis answered the last list had approximately b0 needing to be repaired. Not all of the repairs were due to improper use, however. Councilman Malaton stated that he also felt the cost too high. VOTES Maiaton - Yes Mccomsey - Yes Monfor - Yes Masales - Absent Bailie - Yes Ackerly - Absent Williams No -.. MOTION PASSED. L i RENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 8, 1987 RSNAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIAMS, PRESIDING milk i PAGE S c-a �I'•Tnuog LigzHas - CHANGe IH BTATUN 01 =TeM �*�a Ci •Exaavm .w. �r YiHDNILL HATAURAHT- Councilwoman Kantor MOVED for a letter of non -objection be i r� sent to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board regarding the Windmill Restaurant and Councilwoman Bailie SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. SO ORDERED. owes nP C C ARSRZLL - MOHTM CLO APPLiCATIOH __ AL�ii-IARY RROU=ST IOR OA f NAGL•NN - ��Te�aAL ORDiR Councilwomen Monlor MOVED for approval of the Monte Carlo Application and Councilwoman Baiiis SECONDED the motion and _ requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. SO ORDERED. Qj COWasION RePORTN _ DL•A�I G a ZONING-COMMISBION Councilman McComsey stated that there are two small subdivisions needing approval but they have not been brought is to the Council as yet. Administrative Assistant Gerstiauer spoke from the floor that the Council does not need to approve subdivisions, although the Borough does. R=1 HARBOR COMMINNIGH Public works Director Rornelis reported that there was a Commission Meeting in which the commissioners met the Harbor harbor manager and the two lessees. He reported that Mr. lessees) to not unloading fish and that the Nord lone of the other lessee, Seafood Services has been buying fish is doing well. Q3 ��L�'!OH COMNINNIOW .� City Manager Brighton reported that Parks i, Recreation is not available at the meeting due to Director McGillivray his accompanying Jesse Owens athletes to California. There was no Recreation Committee meeting last month. � 162RsiaY_CONMMISNlON i Chairperson Swsrner reported to the Council for the Library and the Library Commission that over 100 participants completed the summer reading program and that there were more participants than last year. The summer film program 1 is being enjoyed. Councilwoman Bsiiis reported that there was no meeting. HISC &ARMS COMMON AND COMMI22Ni1! Councilman Maleton reported that the Airport Commission not end the minutes are included in the Council's packet. The -_-_------------------------- .._,7. Commission -nominated and. elsctgd Mr. Irwin as their - - - — - chairperson. _. =-�------- — .- Councilwomen- Bailie-statad_that_ the -Beautification Committal - report would be given under H-8. - _ KHNAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1887 KEMAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. NILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 6 &=" MINMB LW !-1 RUZM MEET=N0. a= ib. 1167 Accepted by Consent Agenda. ITEM Pf CORRESPOMDENCR He comments. IZM a. OL sU IMEss There was no old business. ZTWLg HEM agazHEss IM IL-1 1*L•L-s To as PAID- BILLS TO EE RATIPIRII Councilwoman Sailed MOVED for approval of Item H-1 and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Councilwoman Monfor SECONDED the motion. 80 ORDERED. ZT M N•R REOUIs TSONS EXCEEDING 21.000 Councilwoman Saiiie MOVED for approval of Item H-9 and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Councilman MaComsay SECONDED the motion. SO ORDERED. 222M a-3 i___=Rw_ IMCRIIEE REVENUEs1APPROPRlATIONs= LyagAgy as=s - E15.630 Introduced by Consent Agenda. am .` .. $ lswaau 2j-6s. 2KCa sm sa/IePROPRIATIOMs-m /ENIOR CI IE PLwO - EOROUGH GRANTS UNITEtD NAY 4RANTR, Introduced by Consent Agenda. 12EM H-5 OROM A iaRa-ale AHEND Idle TITLE 3 - REPUHDAELE ��pslT„Qy wo "enu AND ' Na OF ANIMALS. Introduced by Consent Agenda. ORDINAHgp 19S7-E71 an ]MIN R3YENUE2/APPROPR2TioN • 2=31,;�0N AQIHa DOM�TIOH. introduced by Consent Agenda. I M-7 p *tli 1E28-87t ANENDI G KMCJWIONE 4.30,010 AND ggS ZONAL 12. Introduced by Consent Agenda. DS80U80Z0N - WARD LaDSCAPING !RG[OSAL FOR AIRPORT TRIMLE PARX.- - Councilwoman Bailie reported -to the -council --that Ward._ _ Landscaping has submitted a proposal for the landscaping work on the Airport Nay Triangle for $6,500, a copy of which - - is -included in -the-packet. - The-Seautification Committee is impressed with the design and support and urge the Council to accept the bid. Councilwoman Bailie announced that Nerd's Landscaping has donated the trees included in their design that will placed at three corners of the park (a ,y i. L KENAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST S, 1987 KENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 7 value of approximately $2,000). Councilwoman Bailie added that Ward's Landscaping spoke with Dan Sexton of Trinity Nursery and they donated the flowers to plant in the KENAI planter lapproximately 9,000 flowers). Councilman McComsey eyesight if hy4roseeding was included in the bid. Councilwoman Bailie answered no. Councilwoman Bailie requested that a letter thanking ward's Landscaping , and Trinity Greenhouse for their donations to the park be sent. i MOTIONS Councilwoman Bailie MOVED for approval of the $6,500 proposal from ward's Landscaping for the landscaping of the Airport Way Triangle and Councilman McComsey SECONDED the motion. UNANIMOUS CONSENT was requested. 60 ORDERED. 1 IRBA A brook was taken at 8:05 p.m. The August 5, 1987 Council Meeting was called back to order at 8:10 P.M. DI/CUSSION fURCHA// Of 1121 O* MAI PINS • /700. Mayor Williams stated that he was not suss why this we included on the Agenda. These pins are being ordered to -- refurnish the Chamber of Commerce of pins he borrowed from them and to replenish the City's Supply. ITEM H-10 pi/CUa/ION - /=.TiOH 36 BALLIIELDL Mayor Williams stated that Mr. McGillivray had been requested to intervene on behalf of the Council and meet with the Little League Board and volunteers. Soma discussion followed. Mr. Williams informed the Council that It the development of these balifields is not dons by the volunteers, it could cost up to $200,000 to complete. He feels the City should know whether the work will be done by the volunteers before starting the project. Mr. McComsey stated that he has talked with the Little League. They have new officers who have not been involved in the project and he informed them of what had been discussed before. He believes that the Little League will speak to the Council in September. Mayor Williams suggested that this topic be not aside until Mr. McGillivray has a chance to put together a committee of the Little League and their volunteers. ITEM 5-11 0I/CU/ ION • ADDITIONAL Box - am PLANS EA/IN. Airport Manager Ernst referred to the memorandum included in the packet from Keith Xorneiis to Wm. J. Brighton. The memo referred to a meeting between City administration and FAA representatives held on July 30. 1967. Mr. Ernst reported that the FAA ware impressed by the low bid received for the work to be done on the float plane basin and requested that the City use funds left in the grant for some additional -work at the iloat pines basin. Those requests -and the - -- -- - - -- - - ----- estimated cost are: l�1 , KENAI CITY COUNCIL 148ETING MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1967 KENAI CITY HALE MAYOR JOHN J. VILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 8 1. widening Water Runway 8 71,700 2. Stripping of stockpile area 59,200 3. Additional Survey, Engrg-, Inep. 19•) 11,800 300 6. 10% Contingency 5. Two windsocks TOTAL �STI COST $1500 Mr. Ernst tools that the widening of the runway could be done at a later time under another pre -application. This work is not necessary at this time. The stripping of the stockpile area is feasible at this time and the windsocks are a must -- this can be accomplished with a change Order to the project. The widening of the runway would involve additional engineering, surveying, etc. His recommendation is to do the stripping of the stockpile and purchase the windsocks by using the State grant money. Mayor Williams further explained that Administration and Ernst recommend that the 0164,500 be not aside for future projects that could be designed through the winter and into next year and using State funds for items 2. 3, C, and 5. Mayor Williams requested a motion for direction of Administration. MOTIONS Councilwoman Bailie MOVED to direct the Administration to proceed with the additional work including items 2 through 5 appropriate protracted for cost and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. Councilman Malston SECONDED the motion. Comments from Council: Councilwoman Nonfor stated that the project is already costing more money and that she would vote no. Mayor Williams added that these two additions will not cost more money. VOTs1 Holston - Yes Mccomsey - Yee Monfor - No Measles - Absent bailie - Yes Ackerly - Absent Williams - Yes MOTION PASSED. jM311M-11 DIBGUSSION - ADPROVAL 01 AHeNDHINT TO DOCK InesS Mr. Kornelis reported to the Council that as a result of the last Council Meeting where Joe Nord made a presentation to Council to lower the price of the fish brought over the dock or tenders from three cents 0.03) down to one and one-half is 18 01-i/21 The amendments were made and the amsnded con Jesse agreements were included in the Council packets. Councilwoman Monfor MOVED for approval of the amended lease agreements and Councilmen Hccomsey SECONDED the motion and requested UNANIMOUS CONSENT. SO ORDERED. i RBNAI CITY COUNCIL MBBTINO MINUTBB AUGUST 5, 1987 RBNAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. NILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 9 1' ITB!! Z ►IHIST1laTI0N RR 0�1tT_8 4 TZM 21 CITY MAHAOlR f� Mr. Brighton reported the he received notification from the for , State for award of $200,000 for capital improvements toothe projects. road $tote for$160,000forthe ct congregate housing project. Mr. Brighton met with the FAA and they have suggested that like, they would have a representative if the Council would present at the August 19, 1987 Council Meeting to discuss the flight service station. They have indicated to Mr. j Brighton that they will not need access to the building jl! 12 people until April 25, 1988. The expect to have 8 to new by April 25 and additional people coming in over in the area time until 1990 when 70 to 80 new personnel will be in the - area. Mr. Brighton stated that when the FAA discovered the low bid on the work for the float plane basin they made recommendations to the City regarding extra work to be done. Mr. Brighton believes that their recommendation regarding the widening of the runway is unnecessary. Mr. Brighton has received several memos from department in to the travel policy the Council made heads regard e!leetive by resolution. Mr. Brighton explained that the manner in which that resolution was written is being Interpreted to say that employees needing to travel to classes, etc. outside the jurisdiction cannot be done approval. He believes that the Council's al without Council Intent was to make a policy to control travel of the City i Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk and elected officials. that that was correct, that the Councilwoman Bailie stated City was toroliicislatol the ynotntoainfringe, City Aono policy and eiectedcontlicthe Of department head's and the City Manager's administration their duties. Councilwoman Monfor agreed and suggested that a new resolution be drafted for the next Council Meeting i that will amend the former resolution. j City Manager Brighton reported that Chief Ross will have an to make it less 1, ordinance to emend the false slurs code stringent. The only people chastised ore the schools. 7 City Manager Brighton discussed a meeting that he attended with the economic Development group from the Borough. He he cautioned the Council to pursue their own thoughts on the Borough, with their intentions, will be believes that putting together a group which will be in alliance with the { " Borough and not with the cities. Mr. Brighton reported that the Kenai Fire Department, along with the Nikiski Fire Deportment put together an automatic aid agreement and that they submitted to the Assembly for acceptance. The Assembly felt that -the-so dotna and - be added into the agreement Ridgeway Fire Departments should and because of resolutions made by the Borough Mayor and Assembly and their yroposals;-the-resolution for -the - Nikiski firs agreement between the Kenai Fire Department end teal that r i• Departments was withdrawn. Mr. Brighton does not the Borough's okay of the aid agreement is required. — i ' al h KBNAI CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST S, 1967 KENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN 0. WILLIAMS, PRESIDING PAGE 10 Mr. Brighton reported that there will be a breakfast with Council Members, school Board and Assembly members present and discussion will be regarding the Kenai Elementary School closure rumor. Mr. Brighton discussed a request made by Vic Tyler to rescin4 his ownership in a piece of property along Ryan Creek that he purchased from the City. Mr. Brighton stated that he assumes that the Council would allow the rescinding instead of going to Court it he refuses to pay. Administration will process the transaction. Mr. Brighton reported that the City's insurance carrier tools that the City is negligent in overseeing or responding to risk management insofar ae Workmen's Compensation is concerned. They have made some suggestions and the City is going to meet with their representative to give the City some instructions in overseeing the City's risks in order to out down on losses. it the City does not concede to their suggestions, the rates will probably accelerate. He will be reporting back to the Council. Questions of the City Manager Councilman Malston asked it there have been many Workmen's Compensation claims. Finance Director Brown answered that they have not been excessive. The insurance carrier is not threatening, only making suggestions at this point. Councilwoman Bailie asked it there is security at the Flight Service Station. Mr. Brighton answered yes there is and when FAA starts putting their belongings in the building, they will assume responsibility for security of the building. Councilwoman Bailie asked it FAA would put in writing that there will be 70 to 80 people moving into the building and the area? Mr. Brighton answered that it they violate their contract the City can evict them. I= 1-1 CITY ATTRM REPORT J. Ron Sutcliffe, Acting City Attorney, referred to A purchase order in the packet written to Computeriand. He explained that the purchase order was in the packet in order to report that the purchase of the computer has been made, but that the vendor's name changed. There were no comments from the Council. Mr. Sutcliffe also remarked that he believed that there should not be any problem in regard to the rescinding of Mr. Tyler's property. Mr. Sutcliffe reported that the APUC brief has been filed by the City and that there should be a response in the next week or two. Questions of the City Attorney Councilwoman Montor remarked that them have been foreolosurs-notices in the paper -in-regard to Mr.- LOWY. Mr. Sutcliffe answered that the properties are Traatsi f=f and A -a. Councilwoman Kantor also asked about the Runway Lquage.._Mr. -Sutcliffe-answered that he understood that the partners pulled out and Me. Daniel is solely responsible. She ie up to date with her rental payments at this time. s 1 1 t RENAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES ` AUGUST 8, 1987 KENAI CITY HALL MAYOR JOHN J. WILLIAMS, PRESIDING s� PAGE 11 IM -3 MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Williams brought the Council's attention to Into No. 12, a letter from Tom Blasy regarding a delay on the Memorial Park and requesting a sixty-day extension. Due to this delay the dedication of the pork which he was planning would have to take place in the spring. Mayor Williams reported that the night prior to his leaving on vacation he went aboard a Chinese ship. He reported that it was quite a nice visit and believes that it will open the - doors for trade between the countries. guestions of the Mayor 1 Councilwoman Bailie stated to the Mayor that a new member of 1 the Beautification Committee is needed and also the Economic Development Committee needs to be appointed. Mr. Williams stated that he hopes to have these positions filled shortly. He also stated that he has an application from Mr. Ed Garnett for placement on the Airport Committee. Tii M 2-L There was no report. DIRECTOR ITEM i-8i-E fiNANCR There was no report. 1.� ITU 2-62-6 PUBLIC WoRRe DIRECTOR There was no report. However, Councilwoman Bailie thanked Mr. Rornelis for getting the banners put up. She ban had several positive calls about the banners. MANAOER ITEM 2-7 AIRPORT There was no report. BE HEARD j' J PERSONS PRESENT NOT ICHNAR TO Mr. Jack Poster spoke regarding the R/V park. He believes f that there is one needed in the area and wanted to report to the council that he and him brothers are still planning to R/V park at Angler's Acres. He described what the park is to be like and the Council suggested that he bring his plans to the Work Session planned for Tuesday, August 11, 1987 to inform the Council more of the plan. An Councilwoman Bailie MOVED for adjournment. The meeting ' adjourned at approximately 9si8 p.m. ,! NOTE= Alter adjournment, Mr. Brighton brought the Council's attention to info Item No. 10, a latter from Ron Rainey of NSA regarding charges for relocation of their equipment at _ 1 the float pisne-basin and asking for payment of the -. -_\ -------.-------.._-------_--- relocation work. Mr. Brighton stated that if any payment the lawsuit ff - would be made at this time it may jeopardise _._�_._____ k s with APUC. - -------- ----- - — ' �Q/�4`'G �i`'`�' . • of • is . _ t9� r STEVE COWPER _ GOVERNOR II ' 4 STATE OF ALASKA O/IICL or THE GOVERNOR I ALASKA WOMEN'S COMMISSION ` 3801 C STREET • SUITE 742 4 ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 i4§�� t June 30, 1987 j� irC r j :f Mayor John Williams 210 Fidalgo j Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Mayor Williams: Now that the hectic pace of the recent months has slowed a little, we want to thank you for your support and advocacy on } behalf of the Alaska Women's Commission. One of the most rewarding aspects of the Commission's struggle for extension was the outpouring of support from a diverse cross-section of people in our state. Overwhelming numbers of F{ women, men, organizations, and legislators expressed their positive views of the Commission and backed their opinions up with action. Thank you, again, for your contributions of time and energy in i; support of the Alaska Women's Commission. The Commission will be in touch with you this summer to strategize for the upcoming session. We look forward to our continued joint endeavors on behalf of Alaska's women. j Sincerely, Kris Chatfield Chair 1 i maw • COMMUNITY 8c REGIONAL AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE COMMI3SIONER Qv K � my 22, 1987 i STEVE 61 P.O 80X 8 JUNEAU. ALASKA 00811•21W PHONE: (807) 4654700 Q 040 a 36TH AVENUE, SUITE 400 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 005084302 PHONE: (001) 563•1073 To All interested Persons: Please be advised that as the Commissioner of the Department of Community and Regional Affairs, I am establishing a policy for the states Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program CDBtgto the for tion funexpended federal fiscal years 63 84p 8S# Gfunds y. or recaptured -- - - - 86 and 87. The new policy will allow the state to use the unexpended funds to award grants for projects that have an immediate nee • 3. or to dispel emergency situations. Specifically, the policy will enable the state to be more responsive when a situation exists that would jeopardize a community's well being or solvency without financial assistance. These set -aside funds will come from grants cancelled or dollars unused by a grantee and returned at the close-out of the grant. In past years funded projects were cancelled ecusrequiremecOm unity's inability to meet the necessary performance From past experience in administering the State's CDBG program, we anticipate that this new policy will allow us to more effectively and expediently reallocate these resources to areas where there is an immediate need, if you have any comments regarding this policy, please submit commentshem willobehis office no later carefully reviewed andn Augusconsidered. 1987. Your Iv re G. Hof n Commissioner DGH/Sbp - - 0 I dO"N C. SUNNI/. MI//IS/IMN. CHAIRMAN RO/tRT C. GYRO. WI{T VIRGINIA WILNAM NOKMN. WISCON/IN MARK O. MTnlLO, CROON TW RMN{. AWKA DARIEL K. INOUVL HAWAII !MM{T P. HOLLINO/. {OUT" CAROLINA LOWltI P WIICKER is. CONNECTICUT JAM!/ A MCCLUKI. IDAHO MWTGN CHMIL STON. L A /lNNITTJONN/ION.tOVI{MNA JAR! DARKLOCH AIN. TNAO cOCNRAN.YNI{N{IM W KASU", J.. WISCON{IN �tnite� Staten senate OUINTIN N. BURDICK. NONN DAKOTA CK J. I ""VEANON/! ROQRT M. WAMATO. NEW TOMSAM TlIIN!{/U L WARREN WOMAN. NSW HAMMININ � v{� NS M co COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS ' nK a,A0. NlW JOINT 1. RWIOW A NlN§1tt{. WAeNINOTON. DC 10610-8036 aA IKIARIMIUNY, INA DON OR /AARM A, MIKULSKL MA IVLANO HARRY NO, NWADA /RANCl/ A SULLIVAN. /TA/K OINCTON .L KEDN NtNNEOT. MINOAM {TA" DIRECTOR July 150, 1987 y The Honorable John J. Williams Mayor, City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Kenai, Alaska 99611 Dear John: The National Guard Bureau has recently replied to my inquiry on your behalf concerning recent changes in the status of the Air Guard in Alaska. I hope the attached response will prove to be of interest to you. Thanks again for bringing your interest in the my attention. I'm glad to be of assistance. With best wishes, Co ally, TEVENS L • '' DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY AND THE AIR FORCE /.. NATIONAL GUARP 9URBAU WASHINGTON, 0.0.203104500 Office of policy and Liaison . •a�.v Honorable Ted Stevens United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Stevens: - Thank you for your May 6, 1987 letter to Lieutenant General Herbert R. Temple Jr., Chief of the National Guard Bureau, in behalf of the Honorable John J. Williams, Mayor of Kenai, Alaska, concerning an Air National Guard (ANG) wing for the City of Kenai. I as again responding due to General Temple's temporary absence. Mayor Williams draw attention to the 71st Aerospace Rescue and - Recovery Wing (ARRW) at Elmendorf Air Force Base (APB) being transferred to the Lower 48 and dismantled. The only publicly announced change for the 71st ARRW is that 3 RC-130 aircraft will be placed in unfunded status. This will help conserve defense funds and reduce the Department of Defense budget currently under careful scrutiny by Congress. The remaining 71st ARRW assets will stay at Elmendorf APB and are not programmed for transfer to the ANG. Currently, the Air Force has no programmed air rescue growth for the ANG. Rescue and recovery requirements for Alaska are supplemented by U.S. Coast Guard assets at Sitka and Kodiak and Army helicopters throughout the State. This has allowed the Air Force to draw down the RC-130o without jeopardizing Alaskan rescue service. Your continued support of the ANG and the residents of Kenai's willingness to host a rescue unit in their community is appreciated. Sincerely, 4RB BU AF Staff Officer, Office of I Policy and L a son i • Copy Furnished: The Adjutant General, Alaska - - ` L-- -- - . •'d • CITY OF KENAI 'Vid delaW oJ 4"01 210 FIDALGO K0NAI. ALASKA 9MI TSOMON520-TM August 12, 1967 Alaska Department of Military A Veterans Affairs 3601 C St. suite 620 4: Anchorage, AK 99503 Attentions Chee T. Borg Deputy Commissioner Dear Mr. Borg I have just recently returned from my vacation and as indicated prior to my departure I am contacting you regarding any further } information that may have developed during my absence. I am also enclosing my most recent correspondence from Senator Stevens _ as well as a copy of a letter to him from Major Robert Burns, Department of the Army and Air force, National Guard Bureau. Do - you have any further information as to the status of the Air National Guard and its potential transfer? It would appear from Major Burn's letter that the unit is being down -graded rather than being dismantled. I very much appreciate any new j information you may have I plan to attend a gathering in Anchorage on Tuesday August 16, _ 1987 in early afternoon. If it is convenient I will try to drop by your office some time in the early afternoon. Thank you very much for your consideration in these matters. Sincerely yours, f John J. Williams .. j, Mayor i' JJW/res a. J, r ,t -- - -- - ---- '-- - - '' • � �� 1 1 �1 +' 1+ `mil },•i P• r-•1. , �� STEVE J r r > L.1. t� DEPARTIMEXT OF' NATURAL. RESOURCES ( j `�� ANCHORAGE- KA99510-IM August 13, 1987 DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS f ' «; . i CALL- FOR COMMENTS `•-� ;:'/ Cd U ADDITIONS 10 THE STATE OF ALASKA FIVE-YEAR OIL AND, GAS SAC AND PROPOSED STATE OF ALASKA OIL AND GAS LEASE SALE& QK 1992 The Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas (DNR/D06G) is requesting comments on the following lease sale areas which are proposed to .: be added to the State's Five -Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program. Two exempt sales are proposed to be added to the leasing schedule, one for 1986 .(North eryear Slope) and one in 1989 (Cook Inlet). Two new sales are prop -. 1992. Sale 66A, North Slope Exempt June 1988 'Si a 67A, Cook Inlet Exempt June 1989 Sale 61, White Hills January 1992 Sale 68, Beaufort Sea June 1992 Fivel-YearoOiland andaGasrasp Leasingeach Scheduledisdpresented last. The now proposed Addition of these areas to the Five -Year Leasing Program does not mean that the sales will automatically be held. This Call for Comments is the first step in a lengthy planning and review process that may or may not result in conducting the proposed lease sales. The preparation of the Five -Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program, in which lease sale areas are identified five years before their proposed sale dates, allows local governments, state and federal agencies, the public, and the petroleum industry ample opportunity to study each proposed area and to plan for potential effects, if t sale should occur. The areas described and depicted here are very general. In manyer than that actual areas that finally may be offered for lease will be be alter for lease is shown. An intensive land status analysis o will be accomplished approximately two to three months prior to each lease forelease.�In those areas involvingcoastalstate wa ers, sthat tatetime ownershipboffered and extends seaward to the three-mile limit. There may be environmentally sensitive lands within these proposed lease sale protective will beerequirediif oileandngaseleasinle grtakes,placspecial on ia1 these lands. - — - -Additional --opportunities-for-comment-will--occ-ur At several_ intervals during cthe allsefor c le process. The omments issued aboutp36tandtl8sfor monthsdpriornal to the sale.nts inIsude-two - m addition. about five months before each sale, a request for comments on the director's Preliminary Finding is made. In commenting on these proposed sales, please be as specific as possible. The Department of Natural Resources is interested in learning about areas you believe should be leased for oil and gas exploration and development, areas you believe should not be leased, and mitigation measures to protect the environment. Send your comments to the Leasing Manager, Division of Oil and Gas, P.O. Box 107034, Anchorage, Alaska 99610-7034, by no later than September 26, 1987. The annual Five -Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program document will be available in January 1988. The document will include the new five-year schedule, descriptions of each sale area, a comparison of the state's oil and gas leasing program with the federal government's lease schedule in Alaska, an analysis of lease sales held in 1987, and other topics of interest to the public, state and federal agencies and the petroleum industry. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED LEASE SALES Proposed Lease Sale 66A, North Slope Exempt, June 1988 The division proposes to hold Sale 66A (North Slope Exempt) as an "exempt" oil and gas lease sale under AS 38.05.180(d)• This statute allows the leasing of lands not on the five-year schedule if the lands were previously subject to valid state or federal oil and gas leases or are contiguous qto land already under lease. During ease sale. The areasproposeddtoive be offered asoSaleN66A Slope exempt acreage is the area of concentrated interest reflected in the exempt sale requests. The acreage within this sale is located within the area of former lease sales 47 and 48, an area generally known as "Kuparuk Uplands." Best interest findings were issued for sales 47 and 48 on July 26, 1986 and January 16, 1986, respectively. Since the acreage proposed for leasing in Sale 65A was indision does not propose ltoeissuetaenew best interestarea of eitherale findingrforlproposed@Sale 66A. AS 38.05.035(e)(7) provides: "a written finding is not required before the approval of an exempt oil and gas lease sale under AS 38.05.180(d) for - - which a written best interest finding has been issued for the area of the sale within 36 months before the date of the sale unless the commissioner determines that new information has become available that justifies a revision }_ of the best interest finding." =------ ------- ----- -- - The --proposed sale area, _outlined- on the map consists of approximately 340s000 acres of land. The division plans to reduce the sale area site prior to the next notice, and hereby requests specific nominations of specific areas at - should be retained. -- - -- The petroleum potential of the area is considered to be low to moderate. -2- v Proposed Lease Sale 67A, Cook Inlet Exempt, June 1989 Proposed Lease Sale 67A, Cook Inlet Exempt, is the second "exempt" oil and gas lease sale proposed to be added to the Five -Year Leasing Prooggram for of 1988-1992. Like Sale 66A, it would be held under the provisions AS 38.06.180(d). Proposed Sale 67A may include eligible lands which have or �. t will have received specific nominations prior to December 31, 1988. The division has received five nominations for Cook Inlet exempt acreage so far in !' 1987. The specific lands that would be offered in this sale have not yet been identified by the division. Therefore, it is not known, at this time, whether AS 38.05.035(e)(7) would apply (i.e., whether a new "best interest finding" would be required prior to the sate). Eligible lands in the lower Susitna ,: - -- - - - Valley, on the Kenai Peninsula and submerged lands in Cook Inlet may be - - - - - - offered. The petroleum potential for this area is considered to be low to moderate. 1 i _.._ Proposed Lease Sale 61, White Hills. January 1992 Proposed Lease Sale 61 was previously scheduled for September 1990. When the division revised its leasing schedule from three to two sales per year in 1986, this sale was deleted from the five-year leasing schedule. Renewed interest has been expressed in this area recently, -and as a result, the division proposes to reschedule this sale for January 1992. The proposed sale area consists of approximately 876,000 acres located southwest of the Kuparuk River oil field. The area is situated between the ' White Hills to the northeast and the Colville River to the northwest. The southern boundary of the sale area is defined by an east -west line six miles Umist Base Line. Other North Slope lands then available may also south of .the be offered for lease in the proposed sale. The petroleum potential of the area is considered to be low to moderate. Proposed Lease Sale 66, Beaufort Sea, June 1992 Proposed Sale 58 consists of approximately 3931,000 acres of state-owned and tide and submerged lands offshore of the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska 4:• (NPRA)e as well as same submerged lands whose ownership is currently - ;..--- disputed. The area extends from Tangent Point in the east to near ulavik (719N, R21W U.N.) in the west. Depending upon their availability at that time, these Beaufort Sea lands offered previously in sales 60, 62, and 65 may also be offered for lease in the proposed sale. The petroleum potential of the area is considered to be moderate to high. _- ----- - -- -4- _u _ -3- + J �T4+ 17 PROPOSED STATE OF ALASKA FIVE-YEAR OIL AND GAS LEASING PROGRAM t,. August 13, 1987 Sate Number/Name Proposed Date 54 Kuparuk Uplands January 1988 55 Demarcation Point June 1986 66A North Slope Exempt June 1988 52 Beaufort Sea January 1989 67A Cook Inlet Exempt June 1989 56 Alaska Peninsula June 1989 59 Cook Inlet January 1990 57 North Slope Foothills June 1990 64 Kavik January 1991 65 Beaufort Sea June 1991 61 White Hills January 1992 68 Beaufort Sea June 1992 �a I I520 1500 1413; 7% !1 A rT r r STATE OF AL ASKAc �w�ee ARTY[NT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TATav ViL DIVISION OF OIL* OAS 0[P FPROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASE SALE GOA NORTH SLOPE M o - - - - D �rw«► A��-o t - OPOSSD SALt AREA JIM EASON rm CIIeD MOLA Amp is lam■ Z;iipm bmmo -- - M JIM EASON 1,00mm• e s 9?- Moir��.y �o.�ii l ff ' 12 6-#,Jl% IM SIVA. 1PINAPAQ 1640 1560 15760 STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MOUND DIVISION OF OIL & OAS STAIRIT 0 " aci 13 111110 PROPOSED OIL -AND GAS LEASE SALE 6 BEAUFORT SEA SCALI-114m,0% -lash* Wollev NO 40' so Mike PROPOSM SM-9 AFWA 1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... AppRomp Wore WAKC ToNomollows &10— 'C J JIM EASONoosDISPUTED AREA IM I LEASING -MANAGERI P ME AMELA ROGERS will gas I �, y� •r� q b ri o n n r1 4 Ca n cl OEf�i � P � � S ' g n S. n 'd p •G 'd 1°�r Ci, I Cj! r{ z N ID N i/� 1j •0 S�- pm� � I n N00 ` y N N Nlz Ci A iV NM Egg �Pp e� 1 �ry({puu •N6q� V � A CA Op ~1+ N N All ~ N •( pMp M p I 11 i YOiO N ON N N P � WYD rp O W ppsyt� y� h+ O •o ►' u� A o �n N� t N q to N �y � D I t4 1 A s# t' • i � rJ y-Z co�,u�L CITY OF KEHAI e"'''�' „ od a �4"„ ' MO FIDAM KM, AI,MNA 9N11 7!LlPMON520-7M " MQRANpUM TO: WM. J. BRIGHTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: KEITH KORNELIS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: AUGUST 18, 1987 SUBJECT: AIRPORT - SAFETY ZONE/TIEDOWN/TAXIWAY PROJECT TIEDOWN APRON LIGHTING FOR: COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 1987 FAA has requested that we take down the three west poles at the Airport Tiedown Apron (see attached July 16, 1987 letter from FAA) . I received a cost of $3,030.00 if we were to handle this as a change order to the project. I thought it was excessive and requested a cost from someone else. Attached is a P.O. to Jahrig Electric for $1,450.00 to accomplish this. ;_ _x�Qus/t_. tdt .the..,_CitY._.. Cquna.__._ edd_, ._th.._.R�.A �..o F�4���.�-t�;ons Dyer. ,��.1000.., 00_ needi..r�y_�Cour}c�l +�ppr..aVsi Sincerely, Keith Kornel.is Public Works Director cc: Randy Ernst, Airport Manager KK/kh PROJECT\KMAXMP\JAHRIG.MEM i i USDeporlMAl Alaskan Reglon 701 C Street. Box 14 d1onSpottGtlon Anchorage. Alaska hderol Avlallon 00513 Admird0raMm RE.-ba v cD July 16. 1987 AUG 171987 �Weft dK� Mr. Randy Ernst Airport Manager City of Kenai 210 Fidelgo Street Kenai.. Albaka 99611 Dear Mr. Ernats Kenai Apron Lighting (AIP 3-02-0142-03) Based on Kenai tower concerns. we have reviewed the relationship between di the BAR Part 77 surfaces and the apron lighting currently being installed under AIP-03. In that review. we found that the three most westerly light poles and fixtures penetrated the approach tranaitional surface of runway 01 by 26.4 feet or more. As a result of this penetration (deviation from standards) an ALP review was conducted. -The determination emanating from that review found the deviation to standards to be unacceptable. Based on that determination we request the removal of the three most westerly light poles and the annotation of the three easterly light poles on the ALP. Sincerely, Floyd K. Pattison Hanger. Planning and Programming Branch i Airports Division C r if. - — -' PURCHASE ORDER ~ CITY OF KENAI THIS PURCHASE ORDER HITS -VENDOR 210 FIDALGIO ST. NUMBER MUST APPEAR ON PHONE283.7638 ALL PACKAGESANDPAPERS LOENROD • ACCOUNTING RELATING TO THIS PUR- NARY • ACCOUNTING KENAI, ALASKA 99611 CHASE. BLUE • SHIPPING & RECEIVINGNO. REEN • APPROVED COPY 8/1 PINK • REQUISITIONERS VENDOR NO. 4 l JAHRIG ELECTRIC Ordered by_..� f Date p .. r TO Contact_,.__. Phone L SHIP VIA: BY _ T_ PREPAY SHIPPING •CHARGE SEPARATE ON INVOICE iti OUOfATtON PURCHASES AUTHORIZED ONLY WHEN SIGNED ABOVE BY THE FINANCE DIRECTOR OR HIS AUTHORIZED AGENT ITEMNO. DESCRIPTION OR ARTICLE „tp UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT TAKE DOWN 3 WEST LIGHT POLES AT AIRPORT $ $1450.01 TIEDOWN APRON. REPLACE THE SINGLE LIGHT FIXTURES ON THE EAST SIDE WITH TWO OF THE DOUBLE FIXTURES FROM THE WEST SIDE. DELIVER ALL REMAINING MATERIAL TO THE CITY OF KENAI SHOP AREA. STATEMENT BELOW READ OR MAILED TO VENDOR. .. PO is for all cost a freight to Kenai Freight for this PO is on PO N__ NO ADDITIONAL COSTS WILL BE PAID WITHOUT TOTAL $1,450, AUTHORIZATION a NEW PO PRIOR TO DELIVERY. DEPARTMENT 6Y oa Mr�o Attorney ---- U City Clerk } (X Find^^d A Tu mltt�J B r L i 40 N A 01 a f 9 P. � M ' O � O H G 8 fv � � M 8 t "r. ^ •\ fd p ff i I Ii r+ N h+ ijPPi 0 8 %OS 8 8 �1 It tI .. . f i L t , .I, Suggested By: CITY OF KENAI *aDINANCN 1229- 87 y -3 Administration AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1222-87 AND ESTABLISHING A NEW BUDGET IN THE FLOAT PLANE BASIN CAPITAL PROJECT BY INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $1,173,780. WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has approved an allocation of $667,830 in Airport Improvement Program Funds for a float plane basin and related improvements; and, WHEREAS, $505,950 is available from the 1984 State Grant for airport improvements after closing the Main Apron Extension Capital Project; and, ---- ` WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1222-87, adopted July 15, 1987, appropriated amounts far in excess of those needed for completion {!y of the float plane basin. r , r NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASRA that: Section lot - Ordinance No. 1222-87 is repealed. Section 2: Estimated revenues and appropriations be increased as follows: plop* A7ane Basin Capital Project Increase Estimated Revenues: - f FAA Grant $ 667,830 State Grant - 1984 505,950 I 81.173.780 L i Increase Appropriations: inspection $ 174,400 Construction 999,380 81.173.780 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this second day of September, 1987. JOHN J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: August 19, 1987 Second Reading: September a, 1987 Effective Date: September 9, 1987 Approved by Finance: C916 (8/7/87) -a- Suggested By: Administration CITY OF KENAI i T - ORDINANCE 1222-67 l; AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, l ' a INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY $2,189,239 IN f THE FLOAT PLANE BASIN CAPITAL PROJECT. f . " t WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has approved an allocation of $1,683,289 in Airport Improvement Program funds for Y - a float plane basin and related improvements; and, -- --- -- -- - - -� WHEREAS, $505, 950 is available from the 1984 State _anent for { airport improvements after closing the Main Apron Extension Capital Project; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to proceed with the construction of the Float Plane Basin. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ` ALASKA, that estimated revenues and appropriations be increased X as follows: j Float Plane Basin Capital Project, Increase Estimated Revenues: FAA Grant $1,683,289 State Grant - 1984 505.950 1 82.189,239 Increase Appropriations: Inspection $ 196,000 Construction 1,993.239 92.189.239 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 15th day 1 of July, 1987. ?JOHINWILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Carol L. Freas, Acting City Clerk A First Reading: July 1, 1987 Second Reading: July 15, 1987 Effective Date: July 15, 1987 - Approved by -Finance: CRQ - - - ---- - ;' (6/22/87) 14-11 Suggested By: Administration CITY Of KENAI E; ORDINANCE 1230-87 ik AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING KMC 12.30.040(a) TO PROVIDE FOR A REDUCTION IN CHARGES FOR EXCESS FALSE ALARMS IN HIGH RISK AND ERROR -PRONE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, Kenai Municipal Code currently imposes a false alarm -- - -- charge for excessive false alarms: and, WHEREAS, the history of the present ordinance indicates that a $200 alarm charge for false alarms in excesa of ten (10) per year is excessive and unnecessary; and, WHEREAS, reducing the charge for excess false alarms will have the benefit of making it more economically feasible tor alarm systems to be used in high -risk and error -prone applications such as public school systems. NOW THEREFORE DE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, - ALASKA, that KMC 13.30.040(a) is amended as follows: r la 30 040 False Alarm Charges: (a) [EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEREIN, THE OWNER OF AN ALARM SHALL PAY A CHARGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION FOR EACH AND EVERY FALSE ALARM TO WHICH THE POLICE RESPOND, AS FOLLOWS: 4� EXCEPT FOUR FALSE ALARMS AT EACH IDENTIFIABLE SEPARATE LOCATION DURING NO CHARGE ?. A PERIOD OF ONE (1) CALENDAR YEAR - „.3 THE FIFTH (5TH) FALSE ALARM THROUGH 8 50.00 �j THE TENTH (LOTH) FALSE ALARM - FOR EACH FALSE ALARM IN EXCESS OF TEN - $200.001 i (b) The City shall bill the owner for false alarms, and the owner shall pay those charges in the manner provided by the City. if an owner fails to pay charges assessed pursuant to this section, the City may seek payment by any lawful means. (c) This section shall not apply to false alarms occurring within thirty (30) days immediately following installation of that alarm. (d) This section shall not apply for a period of seven (7) days after receipt of written notice that an alarm system is being upgraded, repaired, or receiving maintenance. Only two (a) such seven-day periods will be granted in any calendar year. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASRA, this second day of September, 1987. JOKK J. WILLIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: August 19, 1987 Second Reading: September a, 1987 Effective Date: October 8, 1987 (8/10/87) --1 r KENAI POLICE DEPT. 107 SOUTH WILLOW ST., KENAI, ALASKA 99611 AU01987 mot*+ ��� 0U r R? .....: , yeu x V 198 TO: William Brighton, City Manager L4Gpp K N 1� `�� ;Tye pf0 L y N -I1Y ,gyp � KE FROM: Richard Rosse Chief of Police ���'1d9Z9Z$ SUBJECT: Alarm Systems Re: Ordinance 12.25; Section 12.30.40(a) False Chaff (' DATE: July 13, 1987 \ Request that the cited ordinance and section be amended by the City Council ' as follows: DELETE: "The fifth(5th) false alarm through the - #j tenth(lOth) false alarm $50•00 For each false alarm in excess of ten - $200.0011 r '. ADD: "All false alarms including the fifth(5th) and thereafter $50•00" Our present ordinance was patterned after the Fairbanks ordinance. In the year we have worked with the ordinance it has worked well in reducing false alarm responses. our experience however has differed from theirs. Of the 75 systems registered, only one(1) system has to date generated 10 or Hare k alarms that were classified as false. This system belongs to the school district and is in an application where human error generated alarms will occur more frequently than some other applications. Changing the ordinance will make it gore economically feasible for alarm systems to be used in high risk and error prone applications like the one cited. It is not believed that the change will create a problem resulting in increased false alarm responses. CC. City Attorney 7 r: 0�1- I Suggested By: Administration CITY OF ISNAZ ORDINANCE 1231-87 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA* INCREASING ESTIMATED REVENUES AND APPROPRIATIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND By $840 FOR CABINETS AT FORT KENAY- --- WHEREAS, the City of Kenai has received $948 in museum donations that have not been appropriated; and, WHEREAS, the supervisor of Fort Kenay has asked that $840 be appropriated for additional cabinets to be built in the museum section of Fort Kenay. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED By THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, an fol]OWB: General fund Increase Estimated Revenues: $840 Miscellaneous Donations Increase Appropriations: $840 Museum - Repair and Maintenance PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this second day of September, 1987. JOHN J. VIL LIAMS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, city Clerk First Reading: August 19, 1987 Second Reading: September 2, 1987 Effective Date: September 2, 1987 Approved by Finance: §7 11 Suggested By: Council CITY OF KENAI ORDINANCE 123E-67 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 1067-85 AND PROVIDING FOR A DEDICATION OF CERTAIN CITY -OWNED LANDS TO A TEMPORARY USE. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1067-85 restricts a certain 7.2 acre parcel of land within -the City of Kenai known as the proposed Tract C-1, re-subdiveion, Daupenspeck Property to the use for a community center; and, WHEREAS, the voters of the City of Kenai rejected a bond issue for implementation of the Kenai Community Center; and, WHEREAS, the Tract C-1 Daupenspeck Property remains vacant and is not producing any income to the City; and, WHEREAS, the 7.2 acre tract, C-1, could be put to a profitable use for the City of Kenai in the form of a needed recreational vehicle park; and, WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Kenai to have the Tract C-1 acreage available for future development of the community center should the funding become obtainable. NOW THEREFORE HE IT ORDAINED SY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA that Ordinance No. 1067-85 is hereby rescinded and that Tract C-1 Daupenspeck Property as shown in the attached Exhibit "A" shall hereinafter be available for any use compatible with the Charter and City of Kenai Municipal Code, upon the condition that if funding is ever obtained for the Kenai Community Center, that any lessee of the Tract C-1 Daupenspeck Property shall immediately vacate the premises upon sixty (60) days notice and remove any and all improvements, fixtures, appurtenances, and -I- 7 structures on the land within the sixty-day period. This ordinance shall not be construed to allow compensation to any lessee for improvements to the land. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this second day of September, 1987. JfO N J. WILLIANS, MAYOR ATTEST: Janet Whelan, City Clerk First Reading: August 19, 1987 Second Reading: September 2, 1987 Effective Date: October 2, 1987 Approved by Finance: (8/13/87) -2- j t0 � to r ,f 1 • `3f �i ry7�: _ • c:, j 1 1: S Qf2 $allocated byl Adainistreticn City or NENAI OBOINANCL 110. 100-0 AN ONOINANCL Or VK COUNCIL Of INE CIt1 Of NENAI► ALASNA► FINDIN0 INA, CLNIAIN CI11.ONNED LANDS ANC 4900110tO too PUBLIC USt. MNLNCAS Nenmi Nunlelpml Code Ss.01.010 provides far tho dedication of lands for a public purpose If se deteroin*d by Council* and VN94CAS the 9e081 Cowe ly Canter cesmittee and f 0 five and ileinen cessesion bluff have aerloogoes, no irehe ordI N1vie�riM a fivoa•osre located between MICAS, 010nns �aailltylandlB -evnl cat a $code and%he NNCNtAs. epprewloatoly 7.2 oeesa of tr@to the proposed Subdivision rill be needed to oecaa�ed Commianity Center and supporting Improvements. NOW iNCBtrOse. BL 11 OSDAINLO Bt ?NC COUNCIL Or 109 Clit Of stills. ALASKApthat the described Cityswnsd land* are hereby Ka i ved forluly labile usi for the purpose or the development of the Con tree! C-1 Ooubanspook property In accordance with Cmblbit 40' VABSLO By ?Ne COUNCIL Or INC CIt? Of NENA19 ALASNA. this 110 day of solve 191S. first Beadingf July 3; 19lq Second Boodin91 July effective Obtoo Au0ust 17. 1980 q sass ;-,�•_.,� 1 � ' '}� .t 'p '.Y M' •a�7 �t ���,}�:1 �1• r 1► ••, •• �/i:k?iY74+ji, t •�$�r M •� �'• ��yy��r1(+��irt���h .ifl •;;.`•.i I •�i•IJ ,•41�����'�{��, ,}• h"� .. . .•�1`A 1.1 • . r q i 1 � " ' � tt��•�ire. r • ;� • .�{-$sale 1i,�1. i l�} ;► a„' .�� •{:w� rtU.r� . Y• a, : ,•� i t • f •a�,•t• ./ •,1.•.. is ;�, .,.�` vy�•'',,•tjy i to .•jri,,!��•� l•..A . III1 j, •1. •t�1�'•�. pyMi.�•�•7V e 1 } `u8i��+{y'1..' �`,'..1t•• 1 L ,lit rr Z4"ry &Amps Awr Alr9ftW.0 ApAo6l A 4i Mae rr coomms c %tug ­1 -i a gn'ui •n.N �.—r- /49t0 µoh•.! I _1L� •901. nn•Ir -� rAt ICt •I' ❑ ❑ ❑ /RAC► E 8 4CM /r A."ur Err. s C.wc• Am btwlru, rtlr. - Lase. •� d Yr(j.MrY/( !; 1 � `-BRAY H"•ir�f/ rtrt• ft ry a t �jli 1 cc rRAer - e ,..,...t..•..,r, 14.442 AC a..t. avN •�' / � r Y'sf J� 4 i to ♦ 0�!• f } ' i ccnlrt '-•' • (L• ..' Ar8 80 (. �r'•ult, rtt tot (L470 Aw ( / . L47A AC �� �•In ' •9 � � Kfly,A/ ' q/VEq U. 1 Iw . 1 ! •••rap• / d ,'i �III•dK - CCAf1I1CAff 0I •OrMfMM1I AMC C[OICAf10M gs t in WOOF off v 1 I so/IMIU N 11 1/ 1Mr /NI trIMw,@ two m""N� to t••Itt tA•ntt, tow"f . to w tllrtlt tIMMr Of" It INFORMATION ONLY: Daupedspeck """"• Property (subdivision) ad presently e-- exists. L i� cq f f/'•- C3, aLYl�ir�r��r •al..Tau� ✓/seal, ,�j%�a .s�9QY/ 10071 eas-sans August 19, 1987 [I 'I Mr. mill Brighten, City Manager ;- City of Kenai 210 Pidalgo Kenai, Alaska 99611 Res R. V. Park Dear Sills Pursuant -to the request of several of the Council Members, -we have run a cost analysis on the R. V. Park and with underground water, sewer, electricity and access roads the cost would be $1,425.00 per unit. The purpose, of the Council Persons request, was to determine the buy back amount of the park if it became necessary under one of the alternate proposals. 7SinSe ely Edward L. Garnett ELG:elg DOPY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 049101 Received FOR THE STATE OF ALASRA JUL 2;1987 3KN-85-00169 CI Clerk of the Trial Courts - _ Deputy CITY OF KENAI ve -i STATE OF ALASKA, ALASKA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION f a .. t: APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER OF THE ALASKA PUBLIC UTILITIE8 COMMISSION BRIEF OF APPELLANT CITY OF KENAI Timothy J. Ropers City Attorney City of Kenai '! 210 Fidalpo Street Kenai, Alaska 99611 l; Filed July 23, 1987 in the Superior Court of the State Alaska. Sys • Clerk Lam.. 0 op A n ZABLE OF CONTENTS Pape TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . CONSTITUTIONAL STATUTORY REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . vii { JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 STATEMENT OF ISSUES. . . . . . . . . . . 4" SCOPE OF REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I. APUC Lacks Jurisdiction To Adjudicate Disputes Between A Utility And A Municipality Over Relocation 'Expenses Involving Construction Activity Within A Right -Of -Way Owned By The Municipality. . . . . . . 7 A. Alaska Case Law Precludes APUC Jurisdiction In This Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 B. APUC Has Exceeded Its Jurisdiction Under AS 42.05.251 To Act In Equity. . . . . . . . . 11 C. APUC Exceeded Its Jurisdiction In Ruling That Application Of The Common Law Results In A Taking Of Property Under The Alaska Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 D. Jurisdiction To Adjudicate The Present Issue Is Unnecessary For APUC To Perform Its Duties Imposed By AS 42.05.251. . . . . . . . . . . . 13 II.. APUC Erred When It Invalidated The Common Law Rule Or Found An Implied Abrogation Of The Common Law Rule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 A. The Common Law Rule Regarding Relocation Expenses f In Alaska is Valid And Has Not Been Modified By l The Legislature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 B. Modification Of The Common Law Rule. . . . . . 17 Co APUC Has No Statutory Authority To Invalidate The Common Law Rule As To Relocation Expenses. 21 2. The Common Law Rule Is Not A Fee Under AS42.05.251. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3. The Common Law Rule Is Not A Term Or Condition Under AS 42.05.251. . . . . . . 26 4. Relocation Expenses Are Business Expenses, Not Public Improvement. 32 D. APUC Responsibilities Under AS 42.05.251 Do Not Conflict With The Common Law Rule. . . . . . . 33 III. APUC Erred In Determining That A Utility's Interest In The Use Of Municipal Rights -Of -Way Is Protected By Art. I, Sec. 18 Of The Alaska Constitution, Or That A Taking Has Occurred. . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A. The Utility's Interest In The Municipal Right - Of -Way Is Not "Property" Entitled To Protection Under The Alaska Constitution . . . . . . . . . 37 B. Even If The Utility's Interest In The Municipal Right -Of -Way Is A "Property" Interest, No Taking. . . . . . . . . . . . 41 IV. APUC Erred In Determining That Municipalities Have no Proprietary Interest In Municipal Right -Of -Way. 42 A. Alaska Statutory And Case Law Have Not Voided The Municipal Proprietary Interest In Rights - Of -Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 B. A Permit Fee Is Not Required To Be Based On Or Correlated To Actual Relocation Expenses Incurred . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 C. Existing Franchise Agreements That Provide For h M-41 4 tv Ta Pav A Permit And Franchise Fee . i i � r TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES Pale Arkansas State Highway Com. v. Arkansas Power & Light {� Co., 231 Ark. 307, 330 S.1W.2d 77 (1960) . . . . . . . . Fn 15 C Cable v. City and Borough of Juneau, 613 P.2d 616 (Alaska 1980) . . . . . . Fn 4, 14 I 15, Fn 6, 26,*34, 35, 45, 50, 51 j gcrough of Hiahspire et al. v._Pennsyivania Power and Licht et al., CCH, Utilities Law Reports, 623, 733 (Pa. 1982) 40 11, 16, - Chugach Electrical Association --v. City of Anchorage, 476 P.2d 115 (Alaska 1970) . . . . . . . . . . 43, 44, 45 City of Anaheim v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, CCH Utilities Law Reports, 623, 719.03 (Cal. App. 1982) . . . . . . . . . . . 31 City of Center Line v. Michigan., Sell Tel. Co., 182 I N.W.2d 769 (Mich. App. 1970), Aff'd, In Re City of Centerline, 387 Mich. 260, 196 N.W.2d 144 (1972) 20 City of Columbus v. Indiana Bell Tel. Co., 152 Ind. j App. 22, 261 N.E.2d 510 (1970) . . . . . . . . . 19 City of Pontiac v. Consumers Power Company, 101 Mich. ADP• 450, 300 N.W.2d 594 (1980). . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 City of Wichita v. Kansas Gas & Elec. Co., 204 Kan. 546, 464 P.2d 196 (1970) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 41 Connecticut RCS. & Lighting Co. v. New Britain Redev. Co_"•mm'n.-, 161 Conn. 234, 287 A.2d 362 (1971). . . . . . . 19, 20 26, 33 arth Resources Co. v. State., Dent of Rev., 665 P.2d 960, 965 (Alaska 1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 16 37, 43 E1 Paso Natural Gas Co. v. State, 135 Ariz. 482, 662 P.2d 157 (1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 17 --Equitable Gas Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility al., 65 Pa. Comm. 318, 442-A.2d 419, --- -- --- - - Commiskion�:.�et 422 y(1982) 10, 11 Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit -Authority, 469 U.S. 528, 105 S.Ct. 1005 (1985) . . . . . . . . . . 28 Grant v. State, 560 P.2d 36 (Alaska 1977). . . . . . . . 41 Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. City of�achorag_e, 504 P.2d 1027 (Alaska 1972) overruled on other grounds 595 P.2d 629 . . . 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 45,51 Jaae v. State, 537 P.2d 2100 (1975) 5, 6 Kelly M. Zamarello, 486 P.2d 906, 916 (Alaska 1971). . . 6, 22 --- -- - - Michigan BellCo. v. City of Detroit, 106 ,Telephone Mich. App. 690, 308 N.W.24 608 (1981). 16, 17, _ t 33, 39 ,.( Missouri Pac, Ry. Co. v. City of Topeka, 213 Ran. 658, 518 P.2d 372 (Ran. 1974) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - - ;i Mat. Bank of Alaska v. State Deo't of Rev., 642 P.2d 811 .1 (Alaska 1982) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 34 I National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833, 49 ?' L.Ed.2d 245, 96 S.Ct. 2465 (1976) Overruled, Garcia §an Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528, 105 S.Ct. 1005 (1985) . . . . . . . . . . . 28 New Orleans Gas Co. v. Drainage Comm., 197 U.S. 453, 462, 25 S.Ct. 471, 49 L.Ed. 831 (1905) Fn 14 New York City Tunnel Authority v. Consolidated Edison Co,,, 295 N.Y. 467, 68 N.E.2d 445 (1946). . . . . . . . . 19 I!qw York Tel. Co. v. City of Binghamton, 261 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 219 N.E.2d 184 (1966). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 .. New York Telephone Co. v. City of New York, 466 N.Y.S.2d 56, 481 N.E.2d 184 (1983). . . . . . . . . 17 ` Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Auth. v. Chesapeake er@ Potomac Tel. Co. of Virginia, 464 U.S. 30, 104 S.Ct. .-.. _ i 304, 78 L.Ed.2d 29 (1983). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fn 3, 20, 21, Fn 14 } Opinion of the Justices, 101 N.H. 527, 132 A.2d �E 613 (1957) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Pacific Telephone & Teleg-aph Co. v. Redevelopment Aden v of the City of le dale, et al 75 Cal. App. 3d _- _957, 142 Cal. Rptr. 584, 591 (1977). . 30, 31 iv �JI Pennsylvania Gas & Water Co. v. Nenna &_Frain Inc., 320 Pa. Super 291, 467 A.2d 330 (1983) . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Rochester Tel. Corp v. Village of Fairport, at al., 446 N.Y.S.2d 823, 84 A.D.2d 455 (1982) . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 40 Roaers Construction Co. v. Hill, 235 or. 352, 384 P.2d 219 (1963) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Rutter v. State, 668 P.2d 1343 (Alaska 1983) . . . . . . 12, 22 San Pablo v. East Bay Municipal Utilitp District, 75 Cal. App. 3d 609, 142 Cal. Rptr. 256 (1977). . . . . . . �19 South Central Bell Tel. Co. V. City of Chattanooga, 578 S.W.2d 950 (Tenn. 1978) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fn 7 southern California (lag Co. v. City of Los Anceles, 50 Ca1.2d 713, 329 P.2d 289 (1958) cert. den. 359 U.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 583, 3 L.Ed.2d 572 (1959) . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 20, 36 State v. Hammer, 550 P.2d 820 (Alaska 1980). . . . 38, 39 } State, Dept of Labor, Etc., v. Univ. of Alaska, 664 P.2d 575 (Alaska 1983). 12 Stewart & Grindle. Inc. v. State, 524 P.2d 1242 (Alaska 1974) . . . • • • • • . • . • 41 .F Transit Commission v. Long Island Rv. Co., 253 N.Y. 345, 171 N.E. 565 (1930). . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 20 Urban Renewal Aa. of the City of Eugene v. Pacific j Northwest Bell TejO_hone Co., 23 or. App. 384, 542 P.2d 908 (1975) 17, 20, � 39 Vermont Gas Systems, inc. v. City of Burlington, 130 Vt. 75, 286 A.2d 275 (1971) . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 36, 39 iWentland V. Emylovment Sec. Div., 671 P.2d 1285 ' (Alaska 1983) . . . . . • . . . . . • • • • • • • 23, 34 Alaska Const. art. I. 618. . . . 13, Fn 13 al AS 01.10.010 26, F; 10, 33, -51..-------- - - --- - =-- - -- — - - - -- - AS 09.55.290 . , _. 13 - - - -- ---- -- - - --- v AS 19.25.020 . . . . . 19 AS22.10.020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 AS42.05.141 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 AS 42.05.251 . . . . 2, Fn 2, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 52 AS 42.05.551 . . . . 1, 5, AS 42.05.641 . . . 5, 15, 34, 50 AS 44.62.560 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 5 AS 44.62.570 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 McQuillin's, Municipal Corporations, 0930.39, 30.39a . 17, 38 3 McQuillin's, Wunicipal Corporations, 5934.74, 34.74a . 17, 19 3 McQuillin's, Municipal Corporations, 032.38. . . . . . 32 3 McQuillin's, Municipal Corporations, 010.05. . . . . . 31 2A Nichols, Eminent Domain, 06.31. . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4A Nichols, lminent Domain, 915.22.. . . Fn 14, Fn 15, Fn 16 4 0 i vi --------------- f I 0 �frrx CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY REFERENCES Alaska Constitution, Article 1, Section 18. Eminent Domain. Private Property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation. AS 01.10.010. Applicability of common law. So much of the common law not inconsistent with the Constitution of the State of Alaska or the constitution of the United States or with any law passed by the legislature of the State of Alaska is the rule of decision in this state. AS 09.55.290. Jurisdiction. Eminent domain proceedings may be commenced in the superior court. AS 19.25.020. Relocation of utilities incident to highway projects. (a) if,' incident to the construction of a highway project, the department determines and orders that a utility facility located across, along, over, under, or within a state right-of-way must be changed, relocated or removed, the utility owning or maintaining the facility shall change, relocate or remove it in accordance with the order. The order shall provide a reasonable time period for compliance. (b) If the utility facility is not changed, relocated or j removed in accordance with the order, the facility becomes an unauthorized encroachment and may be disposed of in accordance j with AS 19.25.240 - AS 19.25.250. In addition, the owner of the i facility shall indemnify the state for any amount for which the 1 state may be liable to a contractor by reason of the j encroachment. (c) The cost of change, relocation, or removal necessitated by highway construction is a cost of highway construction to be paid by the state in accordance with AS 19.45.001 (4), notwithstanding the terms or provisions of any existing permit, agreement, regulation or statute to the contrary. (d) If requested by a municipality, the department shall implement this chapter by requiring to the maximum extent possible location underground of electric power transmission lines within the municipality. { AS 22.10.020. Jurisdiction of the superior court. (a) The superior court is the trial court of general jurisdiction, with original jurisdiction in all civil and criminal matters, including probate and guardianship of minors and incompetents. (b) The jurisdiction of the superior court extends over the whole of the state. (c) The superior court and its judges may issue'inductions, -- -- ---- ---= writs- of review, - mandamus,- .,prohibition, habeas .corpus-_ and. all_ other writs necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its jurisdiction. _ A_ writ of habeas_ corpus may be made_ returnable before any judge of the superior court. - -- -- vii , (d) The superior court has jurisdiction in all matters appealed to it from a subordinate court, or administrative agency i when appeal is provided by law. The hearings on appeal from a j final order or judgment of a subordinate court or administrative agency shall be on the record unless the superior court, in its discretion, grants a trial de novo, in whole or in part. (e) An appeal to the superior court is a matter of right, but an appeal from a subordinate court may not be taken by the defendant in a criminal case after a plea of guilty, except on the ground that the sentence was excessive. The state ha o right to appeal in criminal cases, except to test the sufficiency of an indictment or information or to appeal a sentence on the ground j it is too lenient. ' (f) An appeal to the superior court may be taken on the ground that a -sentence of -imprisonment of 80 days or more was excessive and the superior court in the exercise of this jurisdiction has the power to reduce the sentence. When a sentence is appealed by the state on the ground it is too lenient, the court may not increase the sentence but may express its approval or disapproval of the sentence nd its reasons in a i written opinion. (g) In case of an actual controversy in the state, the superior court, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and legal relations of a interested party seeking the declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. The declaration has the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and is reviewable as such. Further necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted, after reasonable notice and hearing, against an adverse party whose rights have been determined by the Judgment. j (h) The superior court, in an action for divorce, separation, or child support, affecting inalienable stock in a corporation organized under 43 U.S.C. 1602-1628 (Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act), may order the stock transferred to the spouse, a child, or a guardian or custodian for a child, but may not order it sold o the open market or transferred to other persons. (i) The superior court is the court of original Jurisdiction over all causes of action arising under the provisions of AS 16.80. A person who is injured or aggrieved by an act, practice or policy which is prohibited under AS 18.80 may apply to the superior court for relief. The person aggrieved or injured may maintain an action on behalf of that person or on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who are aggrieved or injured by the act, practice or policy giving rise to the action. In an action brought under this subsection, the court may grant relief as to any act, practice or policy of the defendant which is prohibited by AS 18.80, regardless of whether each act, practiceorpolicy, with respect _-to .- which _ relief ._ is _grant(B4, directly affects the plaintiff, so long as a class or members of --a clam of__ which the plaintiff in- _a -member _ are_ -or may_be___ viii 1, 7_ _--"f . r 0 1; Y aggrieved or injured by the act, practice or policy. The court may enjoin any act, practice or policy which is illegal under AS 18.80 and may order any other relief, including the payment of money, that is appropriate. AS 42.05.141. General powers and duties of the commission. (a) The Alaska Public Utilities Commission may (1) regulate every public utility engaged or proposing to engage in such a business inside the state, except to the extent exempted by AS 42.05.711, and the powers of the commission shall be liberally construed to accomplish its stated purposes: (2) investigate, upon complaint or upon its own motion, the rates, classifications, rules, regulations, practices, services and facilities of a public utility and hold hearing on them; - (3) make or requite just, fair and reasonable rates, classifications, regulations, practices, services and facilities for a public utility; (4) prescribe the system of accounts and regulate the service and safety of operations of a public utility; (5) require a public utility to file reports and other information and data; (6) appear personally or by counsel and represent the interests and welfare of the state in all matters and proceedings involving a public utility pending before an officer, department, board, commission or court of the state or of another state of the United States and to intervene in, protest, resist, or advocate the granting, denial or modification of any petition, application, complaint or other proceeding; (7) examine witnesses and offer evidence in any proceeding affecting the state and initiate or participate in judicial proceedings to the extent necessary to protect and promote the interests of the state. (b) The commission shall perform the duties assigned to it under AS 44.83.162. (c) in the establishment of electric service rates under this chapter the commission shall promote the conservation of resources used in the generation of electric energy. AS 42.05.251. Use of streets in cities and boroughs. Public utilities have the right to a permit to use public streets, alleys and other public ways of a city or borough, whether home rule or otherwise, upon payment of a reasonable permit fee and on reasonable terms and conditions and with reasonable exceptions the city or borough requires. A dispute as to whether fees, terms, conditions or exceptions are reasonable shall be decided by the commission. The commission may require a utility to add the amount of any permit fee paid as a pro rata surcharge to its bills for service rendered at locations within the bdundaries of any city or borough which requires payment of a permit fet r AS 42.05.551. Review and enforcement. (a) All final orders of the commission are subject to judicial review in accordance with AS 44.62.560 - 44.62.570 of the Administrative Procedure Act. (b) if an appeal is not taken from a final order of the commission, the commission may apply to the superior court for enforcement of this chapter, the regulations adopted under it and the orders of the commission. The court shall enforce the order by injunction or other process. AS 42.05.641. Regulation by municipality. The commission's jurisdiction and authority extend to public utilities operating within a city or borough, whether home rule or otherwise. In the event of a" conflict between a certificate, order, decision -or regulation of the commission and a charter, permit, franchise, ordinance, rule or regulation of such a local governmental entity, the certificate, order, decision or regulation of the commission shall prevail. AS 44.62.560 Judicial review. (a) Judicial review by the superior court of a final administrative order may be had by filing a notice of appeal in accordance with the applicable rules of court governing appeals in civil matters. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after the last day on which reconsideration can be ordered, and served on each party to the proceeding. The right to appeal is not affected by the failure to seek reconsideration before the agency. (b) The complete record of the proceedings, or the parts of it which the appellant designates, shall be prepared by the agency. The original shall be filed in the superior court within 30 days after the appellant pays the estimated cost of preparing the complete or designated record or files a corporate surety bond equal to the estimated cost. (c) The complete record includes (1) the pleadings, (2) all notices and orders issued by the agency, (3) the proposed decision by a hearing officer, (4) the final decision, (5) a transcript of all testimony and proceedings, 96) the exhibits admitted or rejected, (7) the written evidence, and (S) all other documents in the case. (d) Upon order of the superior court, appeals may be taken on the original record or parts of it. The record may be typewritten or duplicated by any standard process. Analogous rules of court governing appeals in civil matters shall be followed where this chapter is silent, and when not in conflict - with this chapter. (e) The superior court may enjoin agency action in excess of constitutional or statutory authority at any stage of an agency proceeding. If agency action is unlawfully withheld or unreasonably -withheld-, -the superior -court may compel the -agency to initiate action. M AS 44.62.570. Scope of review. (a) An appeal shall be heard by the superior court sitting without a jury. (b) Inquiry in an appeal extends to the following questions: (1) whether the agency has proceeded without, or in excess of jurisdiction; (2) whether there was a fair hearing; and (3) whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the evidence. (c) The court may exercise its independent judgment on the evidence. if it is claimed that the findings are not supported by the evidence, abuse of discretion is established if the court determines that the findings are not supported by (1) the weight of the evidence, or (2) substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. (d) The court may augment the agency record in whole or in part, or hold a hearing de novo. If the court finds that there is relevant evidence which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not have been produced or which was improperly excluded at the hearing, the court may (1) enter judgment as provided in (e) of this section and remand the case to be reconsidered in the light of that evidence; or (2) admit the evidence at the appellate hearing without remanding the case. (e) The court shall enter judgment setting aside, modifying, remanding, or affirming the order or decision, without limiting or controlling in any way the discretion legally vested in the agency. (f) The court in which proceedings under this section are started may stay the operation of the administrative order or decision until (1) the court enters judgment, (2) a notice of further appeal from the judgment is filed, or (3) the time for filing the notice of appeal expires. (g) A stay may not be imposed or continued if the court is satisfied that it is against the public interest. (h) If further appeal is taken, the supreme court may, in its discretion, stay the superior court judgment or agency order. (i) If a final administrative order or decision is the subject of a proceeding under this section, and the appeal is filed while the penalty imposed is in effect, finishing or complying with the penalty imposed by the administrative agency during the pendency of the proceeding does not make the determination moot. JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT This is an appeal of an administrative order of the Alaska Public Utilities Commission (APUC) (Order No. 7, U-83-74), entered on the eleventh day of January, 1985. The Superior Court has jurisdiction to review such decisions pursuant to AS 44.62.560, which is made applicable to APUC Orders by AS 42.05.551. The City of Kenai received Order No. 7 on Janukry'23, 1985 and filed a Notice of Appeal February 14, 1985. This case is now on remand from the Alaska Supreme Court, Case No. 5-1337.1 4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE In 1971, Homer Electric Association, Inc. (REA), by contract with the City of Kenai (City) assumed control of certain _ 4 � municipal utility facilities located within the City. (R. p. 31, 1' I i parties to the Case Il City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo Street Kenai, Alaska 99611 Alaska Public Utilities Commission c/o Mark L. Figura, Assistant Attorney General I Office of the Attorney General 1031 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 200 _j Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Matanuska Telephone Association, Inc. c/o Andrew E. Hoge, Esq. I Hoge GLekisch ' 437 'IS" Street, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Homer Electric Association, Inc. c/o Charles_ R._ Baldwin. Esq- - - - - - - ---- - - P.O. Sox 4210 r Kenai, Alaska 99611 t a L 313) Subsequent street construction required relocation of utility facilities and the City refused to reimburse HEA for thatµr expense. (R. p. 31) HEA sought declaratory relief before the Alaska Public Utilities Commission (APUC) to resolve this dispute according to the contract terms. (R. p. 274) APUC declined to hear the contract dispute on jurisdictional grounds, but encouraged AEA to file for a special tariff before*hPUC'to recover the expense either through a surcharge pursuant to Alaska Statute (AS hereinafter) 42.05.251 or through general rates. (R. p. 275) HEA then filed for a tariff revision (TA 35-32) which provided for a surcharge against individual users within the boundaries of the City of Kenai to recover all costs associated with the relocation of electric facilities at a municipality's r request when those costs are not paid by the municipality (R. p. 1) The City responded as an interested party with written 1 argument expressing opposition to a surcharge of City residents, i citing the common law rule that those costs are to be borne by utilities. (R. p. 31) APUC suspended the tariff revision and called a public hearing on the proposal (U-83-74 Order No. 1), and requested that the City intervene. (R. P. 86) The Order + suspending the proceeding identified five questions to be considered which related to the method of allocating relocation '' fexpenses to consumers. (R. p. 89-90) ' The City declined to accept intervenor status because there was no -indication that a -tariff -revision-would- directly affect-- --- --- -- --- ------ -.-- "- the City- other than as- an individual rAtepayer, -but the -City 2 i! 1 l I reiterated in writing its position in response to the APUC order. (R. p. 93-96) On November 17, 1983, APUC conducted a public hearing on U-83-74 (consolidated with U-83-79). (R. p. 137-269) i A decision, order No. 7, U-83-74, issued on January 11, 1985. (R. P. 269) The Order is a fifty -page study in bureaucratize and k tortured reasoning. The Order, in usurping the roles of the judiciary'and legislature, went beyond a determination of how or if the relocation expenses should be recovered by the utility through a tariff revision, the issue which was presented to APUC. The i order: k 1. Abolishes the Alaska common law rule as to relocation 1 expenses (R. p. 300, 309); I 2. Denies municipalities any interest in their rights -of - way that would support use fees charged to utilities (R. V. 298); 3. Invalidates existing and future franchise agreements ! I between municipalities and utilities that provide for i use fees (R. p. 298); 4. Requires all municipalities to compensate utilities for relocation expenses any time a municipality is engaged In a "proprietary activity" (defined by the APUC to • include most public improvements within right-of-ways owned by the public). (R. p. 299, 309) This appeal followed. The Superior court dismissed the appeal and the City appealed to the Supreme -Court.- The City 3 I S.i prevailed at the Supreme Court and this matter is on remand to the Superior court for consideration of the appeal from the Agency's decision. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 1. Whether the Alaska Public Utilities Commission (APUC) lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes between a utility and a municipality over relocation expenses involving construction activity within a right-of-way owned by the municipality. 7 2. Whether APUC exceeded its jurisdiction under AS 42.05.251 to act in equity. f 3. Whether APUC exceeded its jurisdiction in declaring ;, `y that application of the common law of relocation expenses i involving construction activity within a right-of-way owned by ` the municipality results in a taking of property under the Alaska i Constitution. 4. Whether APUC erred in invalidating the common-law rule of relocation expenses involving construction activity within a i right-of-way owned by the municipality. 5. Whether APUC erred in finding an implied abrogation of the common-law rule of relocation expenses involving construction activity within an right-of-way owned by the municipality. 6. Whether APUC exceeded its statutory authority by i lid tin the common-law rule of relocation expenses involving URI �.--- --- - -..-- -- - nva a g-- ------------.------_-- _-- - _ vonstruction- activity -within -an -right-of-way owned by --the ---- - - - - - -- - - -- r. municipality. 4 L.� 7. Whether APUC erred in reading AS 42.05.251 and AS 42.05.641 to find that provisions of a municipal franchise not in conflict with APUC regulatory activity remain in force. S. Whether APUC erred in determining a utility's interest in the use of a municipal right-of-way is protected by Article 1, 618 of the Alaska Constitution. 9. Whether APUC erred in determining that a', taking occurred as a result of City's reliance upon the common law of relocation expenses involving construction activity within a right-of-way owned by the municipality. 10. Whether APUC erred in determining that municipalities have no proprietary interest in municipal rights -of -way. SCOPE OF REVIEW AS 42.05.551 makes judicial review of APUC decisions (final orders) subject to review by the Alaska Administrative Procedures 1 Act (AAPA), AS 44.62.560-570. AS 44.62.570 addresses the scope of review in administrative appeals to the Superior Court and 1 provides in part: ;7 "Inquiry and appeal extends to the following questions: (1) whether the agency has proceeded without, or in ' excess of jurisdiction; (2) whether there was a fair hearing; and. (3) whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by ° law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the i, evidence. -- -- - -- - ----- - - - `' t The questions on -appeal in -this case address both . APUC ;._.. �. _exceeding -its--jurisdiction and - abuse_ of discretion questions. While the Alaska Supreme Court in Footnote 23 to JageX v. State, K J i j- f .y 537 P.2d 11o0 (1975) recognized "at least tour principal standards of review of administrative decisions," only one standard is applicable in this case. The scope of review which should be applied in this case is the, "substitution of judgment" standard of review as outlined in Earth Resources Co v. Deg't of Rev,, 665 P.2d 960 (Alaska 1983). This standard permits the Court to consider questions of law where no agency expertisd is involved. Id. at 965. The substitution of judgment standard is appropriate "where the knowledge and experience of the agency is of little guidance to the court or where the case concerns statutory interpretation or other analysis of legal relationships about which courts have specialized knowledge and experience." Id at 965, quoting e� llY v. 2amarello, 486 P.2d 906, 916 (Alaska 1971). More importantly, application of this standard allows the Court to substitute its own judgment, even if the agency's decision had a reasonable basis in law. Earth Resources at 965, citing, Rogers Construction Co. v. Hill, 235 or. 352, 384 P.2d 219 (1963). The points on appeal here all address questions of law and statutory interpretation which the Court is better equipped to handle than APUC and accordingly, the City asks the Court to substitute its judgment and invalidate the APUC order. 6 L 0 I As stated in Order No. 7, this is the first occasion that the Commission considered the scope of its regulatory powers under AS 42.65.251 which governs municipal activities affecting utilities."s (R. p. 269) This occasion presented itself through a request by HZA to surcharge the City ratepayers to recover relocation expenses which the City of Kenai refused to pay pursuant to the common law rule.$ APUC went beyond a determination of which method of recovering this utility expense from ratepayers would be the appropriate method, or whether the utility's claim for the amount requested was justified. APUC -s �A8 42.05.251. Use of streets in cities and boroughs. Public utilities have the right to a permit to use public streets, alleys and other public ways of a city or borough, whether home rule or otherwise, upon payment of a reasonable permit fee and on reasonable terms and conditions and with reasonable exceptions the city or borough requires. A dispute as to whether fees, terms, or conditions or exceptions are reasonable shall be decided by the commission. The commission f may require a utility to add the amount of any permit fee paid as a pro rata surcharge to its bills for service rendered at .1 locations within the boundaries of any city or borough which ,- requires payment of a permit fee. $"Under the traditional common-law rule, utilities have been required to bear the entire cost of relocating from a public right-of-way whenever requested to do so by state or local authorities." Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority v. gbesaneake and Potomac Telephone Co. of Virginia, 464 U.S. 30, 104 S.Ct. 304, 78 L.Ed.2d 29, 34 (1983). 7 L X i i determined that its jurisdiction includes the authority to decide that Alaska statutory and case law impliedly abrogate a common law rule governing legal relationships between a utility and a municipality concerning use of a municipally owned public right- of-way. APUC went even further to decide that the common law rule is expressly abrogated by APUC's own regulations. A. Alaska Case Law Precludes APUC Jurisdiction in This Case. - - The Alaska Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether APUC has authority to adjudicate disputes over construction activity due to improvements within a municipal right-of-way in Greater Anchorage Area Borough v. City of Anchorage, 504 P.2d 1027, 1035 (Alaska 1972), overruled on other grounds 595 P.2d 629. This decision held that APUC has no such authority. to that case the city -owned utility needed to use a right-of-way owned by the borough to service a subdivision within the city. The borough refused to grant the city a permit to use the right-of-way, so the city installed its facilities despite the refusal. The borough sought an injunction in Superior Court. The parties later agreed to an installation plan, thereby settling the immediate problem; but since the dispute over control of construction within the rights -of -way was a continuing one, they submitted the question to the Superior Court of whether the 6 1 borough had the authority to regulate use of its rights -of -way, including construction in those rights -of -way. 504 P.2d at 1029. The superior Court referred the matter to APUC, citing primary jurisdiction in APUC as its reason, and the borough appealed, claiming that APUC lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate that issue. The supreme Court noted that the "...resolution of this issue...depends upon the nature and scope of the POC's jurisdiction." 504 P.2d at 1032. The Court identified AS 42.05.141 as the enabling act defining the general powers and duties of APUC. In holding that APUC lacked jurisdiction to determine the matter, the Court stated: "The essence of the administrative power conferred upon the PUC is regulatory; _the Commission is empowered to not rates, promulgate regulations, collect information, process complaints against utilities and the like. The statutory framework, however, does not grant unlimited adjudicatory authority to the PUC. The agency is not empowered to decide disputes between municipalities over the control of construction activities within rights -of -way belonging to one of the litigants...By stipulation, the dispute concerns the Borough's authority to control work and other activities which take place within the Borough's rights -of -way. In short, the Alaska Public Utilities Commission Act simply does not contemplate the establishment of an administrative body with the authority to adjudicate such disputes." 504 P.2d at 1033, 1034. There are only two differences between the present case and Ore ate r Anchorage: Here the utility is not owned by a city, and here the dispute over construction concerns liability for relocation costs rather than municipal authority to prohibit the construction. r•; N i The similarities between Greater_ Anchorage and the present i - dispute, however, easily place the present dispute within the Is t holding of that case: The dispute concerns construction activity s; within a public right-of-way (504 P.2d at 1034); the municipal .� fi owner of the right-of-way is refusing to accede to certain construction demands of the utility; the dispute centers on the municipality's police power to regulate construction within•and -- - - - the use of its own right-of-ways and APUC is adjudicating a j i - dispute over construction regulation and liability under the common law rather than administratively regulating utility I i operations and rates. The Supreme Court expressly held that APUC lacked such adjudicatory jurisdiction in Greater Anchorage, and that holding controls here, 504 P.2d at 1035. While Greater Anchorage does not specifically address APUC 41 jurisdiction over relocation expense disputes, the issue has been { j addressed in other jurisdictions. In Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission has general regulatory authority "...to determine the ` reasonableness of utility rates and rate structures; and the - ' adequacy, efficiency, and safety of utility service." &qgtgble --., Gas Company M. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, et al., 65 Pa. Commw. 388, 442 A-2d 419, 422 (1982). The general authority of the Pennsylvania Public Utilities* Commission is therefore the same as that of APUC as outlined by - - - - --- -- --- -- -- =� 10 i' { L s 1 r-- i Greaten Anchorage. But this regulatory jurisdiction does not extend to adjudication of relocation disputes between a utility and a municipality. "This argument has been rejected in the context of C cases governed by the common law rule; that is, cases where a utility is merely required to move its facilities from one to another portion of a public highway right-of-way." Equitable Gas, 442 A.2d at 422; f Horo ch of Hichavire et al, v. Pennsylvania Power and f CCH, Utilities Law Revorts, 623, 733 (Pa. j -- --- - - - 1982). APUC is a regulatory agency with limited authority. It is not the equivalent of State Court. Relocation cost disputes require adjudication. No basis at law exists whereby APUC can <� act. Order No. 7 should be invalidated. F' B. PU a Exceedets Jurisdiction Under AS �05,M To hat _.a Lauity. d = Aside from misconstruing the case law, statutory requirements and constitutionality of the common law rule, APUC ;1 I relied on an alternative basis for its adjudicatooy authority to rule on the reasonableness of the common law rule. That alternative basis is a purported equitable authority granted under AS 42.05.251 to review any municipal action affecting M f t' utilities for reasonableness. (R. p. 301) APUC determined that - the common law, "...is unreasonable as placing an inequitable or -:1 unduly discriminatory burden on a utility's ratepayers to finance public improvements." (R. V. 299) 11 j. • �s. I This finding was not a constitutional decision, but based rather, " ..on the application of the discretion conferred on the Commission in AS 42.05.251 to independently appraise the reasonableness of municipal actions affecting regulated utilities." (R. p. 301) AS 42.05.251 confers no equitable authority whatsoever on APUC to review the reasonableness of any municipal .action affecting regulated utilities beyond the discretion to review ,the reasonableness of the amount of permit fees charged by a municipality, or the reasonableness of terms, conditions or exceptions that a municipality imposes on a utility in the actual physical placement of its facilities within the public right-of- way through a permit. "Administrative agencies are creatures of statute, deriving from the legislature the authority for the exercise of any power they claim." Rutter v, State, 668 P.2d 1343, 1349 (Alaska 1983). The power conferred is defined under AS 42.05.251 and does not need APUC to expand upon it by implication. State, Uep't of Labor, Etc., V. Univ. of Alaska, 664 P.2d 575, 579 (Alaska 1983). APUC lacks the sweeping discretionary jurisdiction it claims under AS 42.05.251 and there is no reasonable basis in law for APUC to exercise such equity powers. The Court should substitute its judgment here and invalidate Order No. 7. 12 L L C. It is unnecessary and impermissible for APUC to adjudicate taking issues under Art. 1, Sec. 18, of the Alaska Constitution to perform its duties under AS 42.05.251. Order No. 7 analyzes the application of the common law and concludes a taking under the Alaska Constitution occurred. (R. p. 305-308) A claim that utility property was damaged or taken is jurisdictionaily within the sole province of. the trial courts of the State of Alaska. There is no concurrent jurisdiction with APUC, AS 22.10.020; AS 09.55.290. D. Jurisdiction To Adjudicate The__Present Issue Is Unnecessary or APUC To Per crm Its Duties imposed By A§ 42.05 251 The (treater Anchorage case does not address AS 42.05.251, although the statute was in effect at the time of that decision. Order No. 7 relies on AS 42.05.251 as authority for APUC's action. The faulty and circuitous reasoning used is that the common law rule is a fee, term or condition regulating the use of 1 i a municipal right-of-way and APUC has jurisdiction to determine { the reasonableness of any such fee, term or condition affecting the utility's right to use the public right-of-way granted by the 1 t i statute. (R. V. 280) Under the APUC scheme of things, there is j I z no regulatory authority over rights -of -way vested in municipalities. 3: 13 7 0 s ,I There can be no doubt that municipalities retain some 1 regulatory authority, as yet undefined, over the use of its rights -of -way by utilities that is beyond APUC authority to review for reasonableness under AS 42.05.251. B-C Cable v. City and Boroggh of Juneau, 613 P.2d 616 (Alaska 1980). In B-C Cable, ` the appellant contended that construction expense liability under the common law rule is within the municipal regulatory authority and therefore beyond APUC's review under the statute. The issue addressed in B-C Cable concerned the validity of a franchise agreement entered into between a utility and a municipality prior to the adoption of the Alaska Public Utilities ;^ Act (APUCA). The agreement in part required the utility to pay a j three percent franchise tax to the municipality.4 After adoption of the Act, the utility refused to comply with the agreement, contending that APUCA pre-empted municipal regulation and voided existing franchise agreements. The trial court granted summary judgment to the municipality and the utility appealed. On appeal, the utility maintained "...that the APUC Act is complete and comprehensive in its regulation of public utilities and 3 - { 4The court co ~' arising from an ord nature of a contract a of authority. B-C C 0 nstrued all franchise agreements, whether' inance or a franchise permit, as being in the This position is in accord with the weight able, 613 P.2d at 619 and cases cited. 14 I 1 7 leaves nothing for a city to regulate except its public streets," citing AS 42.05.251 and AS 42.05.641 as the pre-emptive legislation. 613 P.2d at 618. irs The Supreme Court disagreed suggesting that, "While the APUC Act pre-empts a large portion of the regulatory authority of municipalities over utility companies, it does not pre-empt all such authority." Id. The court identified the authority of APUC to include review of the reasonableness of franchise fees, but not for the right of a municipality to assess a fee in the first place. Iat 619. Though B__r C -Cablp does not define the scope dL of authority reserved to municipalities, at a minimum that authority is the authority to govern construction activity within its own rights -of -way consistent with Greater Anchorage. The effect of AS 42.05.251 is quite simply to give utilities a right to a permit for the use of municipal rights -of -way upon payment of a fee, subject to reasonable terms and conditions on that use imposed by the city. The limited authority given to APUC is to determine the reasonableness of the fee, term, or condition and to allow a surcharge to recover the fee. It is unnecessary and impermissible for APUC to adjudicate the validity of the common law rule on relocation expenses to perform its duties under AS 42.05.251. Because there is no express authority to adjudicate the common law rule, APUC has exceeded its statutory jurisdiction. Borouch of HiWis-P re, CCH Utilities Law Reports, 823,733.02 (1982). Accordingly, the Order should be invalidated. 11 A. The Common Law Rule Regarding, Relocation Expenses in Alaska Is Valid And Has Not Been Modified By the Legislature. The issue of the validity of the common law rule of relocation expenses involving construction activity within a right-of-way owned by a municipality is one of first impression in Alaska, though there is ample case law from other jurisdictions. (R. p. 269) The issue of the validity of the common law is a question of law. The appropriate standard of review is therefore the substitution of judgment standard. Earth Resources Co. V. State_ Dept of -Rev., 665 P. 2d 960 (Alaska 1983) . The rule stated in Michigan Bell Telephone Co. V. City of Detroit, 106 Mich. App. 690, 308 N.W.2d 608, (1981) is: "At common law, and in most recent cases to consider this issue, the right of the public utility to use public streets is subject to the right of the local government to require the utility to relocate its lines and facilities at its own expense when made necessary by considerations of public health and welfare." i (Citations omitted.) ,.1 See also McQuillin•s §634.74, 34.74a. The basis of this rule is generally recognized as being the police power. E1 Paso Natural Gas Co. v. State, 135 Ariz. 482, 662 P.2d 157, 158 (1983); New York Telephone Co v. City_of New York, 466 N.Y.S. 2d 56, 58, 481 N.E.2d 184 (1983); Mcquillin's §530.39, 34.74. The interest that a utility acquires in the right to use a municipal right-of-way remains subordinate to the municipality's exercise of the police power for the public health and safety. Urban Renewal Ao.__of the C_ t o! Eu�eme v Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co., 23 or.App. 384, 542 P.2d 908, 911-912 (1975); McQuillin's 934.74. The fact that a utility operates under a franchise granted by either the municipality or the State does not relieve the utility from application of this rule. Michigan Bell Telephone CO. at 610. B. 011 dification Of The C pmon Law Rule. The common law rule can be modified in two ways: Express legislative action, or contract agreement pursuant to appropriate municipal authority to do so. Pennsylvania Gas & Water Co. v. Nenna & Frain inc_, 320 P. Super 291, 467 A.2d 330, 334 (1983); McQuillin's 534.74a. Only the legislative action method is involved here. The City of Kenai's consistent position has been that the utilities, with the help and guidance of APVC, are attempting to do through an administrative order that which they could not accomplish through the state legislature: abolish the L L 7 common law. (R. p. 31) The acrobatic semantics of Order No. 7 attempt to circumvent the fact that the legislature refuses to abolish the common law rule.$ The APUC Order gets around this inconvenience by reasoning instead that the legislature and judiciary in Alaska have impliedly rejected the common law rule. (R. P. 301-304)' No = t case law authority, however, presents itself that recognizee'an implied modification of the common law rule. Rather, any legislative action that precludes the municipality from exercising its police power pursuant to the common law rule must be express: GHB 155 and SB 155, identical bills which would have abrogated the common law as to utility relocations, failed to make it out of the respective House or Senate Committees during 1 the 1987 Legislative Session. HB 159 was similarly treated by the 1986 House as was the case in 1985 and 1983. Arguments to 's elected officials by the Kenai City Attorney during these years .:� have also emphasized that to shift utility relocation costs within municipal rights -of -way to municipalities is to shift the burden of determining the appropriateness of the amount of those i costs from APUC to the municipalities without providing the required expertise and personnel presently existing and residing with APUC. At best, such a decision would require duplicitous effort and expenditures by municipalities. At worst, each utility relocation would raise a possible appeal to APUC (i.e. unreasonable "...fees, terms or conditions...") as an intermediary step to the courts as final arbiters. Certainly, this is a more expensive, circuitous and wasteful route than that i which presently exists. I *After musing over the B-C Cable decision and the implied -- rejection of franchise authority, APUC determined that "...premature prophylactic abrogation of franchising authority' could have unintended consequences." (R. P. 304) The City agrees with APUC that premature prophylactic abrogation is a .;} problem in expanding the sphere of APUC power. --- -- ---- -- - ....--------- ' 18 - - - IN r0 4 "The reasonable construction...is to assume that the people are not to be burdened with any heavier expense than necessity requires, and that to relieve the public service corporations having franchises in the streets of their common-law liabilities and to pass them over to the taxpayer can only be accomplished by the express direction of the Legislature." Southern California Gas Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 50 Cal.2d 713, 329 P.2d 289, 293 (1958) cent. den..359 V.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 583, 3 L.E4.2d 572 (1959), quoting Transit Commission v. bonaIsland Ry. Co., 253 N.Y. 345, 171 N.E. 565, 568 (1930), and citing New York City Tunnel Authority v. Consolidated Edison Co., 295 N.Y. 467, 68 N.E.2d 445, 448-449 (1946). See Also NcQuillin's, 9934.74, 34.74a; San Pablo v. East Bay Nunicipal Utility District, 75 Cal. App. 3d 609, 142 Cal. Rptr. 256, (1977); Connecticut Rv. and Liahtina Co. v. New Britain Redev. Comm'n., 161 Conn. 234, 287 A.2d 362, 366 (1971): "There can be no doubt that in the absence of express statutory authority a utility is not entitled to reimbursement for its expense in relocating its facilities located in public highways." Cases recognizing legislative modification of the common law rule limit it strictly to those situations expressly provided for in the statute. These cases typically involve urban renewal or federal highway construction statutes that expressly require a municipality or state to pay all or some portion of a utility's relocation expenses. See, for example AS 19.25.020; City of Columbus M. Indiana Bell Tel. Co., 152 Ind. App. 22, 281 N.E.2d 510, 513 (1970): Nothing in this opinion should be construed as an attempt to alter the common law right of the city to i subordinate the utility's interest to an exercise of 19 L 0 L r 0 :3 t S( r the police power in any other setting than urban renewal. It is because of the expressed legislative intention and the nature of urban renewal that this exception has been established. Quoting City of Center hire v. Michigan Hell Tel. Co., 182 N.W.2d 769, 772 (Mich. App. 1970), Aff'd, In Re City of Centerline, 387 Mich. 260, 196 N.W.2d 144 (1972)•? Where the statutes and contracts are silent as to relocation expenses, state judicial decisions have refused to find implied responsibility of municipalities to pay. Southern California'Gas Co. v. City of Los Angeles; Transit Commission v. Lon? island Ry. Co_; Connecticut Ry. & Lighting Co. v. New Britain Redev. Coffiffiln., supra. Doubtful relocation expense provisions should be construed in favor of the municipalities. Urban Renewal Aa. of the City of Eugene v Pacific Northwest Hell Telephone Co., 23 Or. App. 384, 542 P.2d 908, 912 (1975). The United States Supreme Court, in an 8-0 decision, applied this rule of construction to federal statutes that identify "businesses" and "displaced persons" entitled to certain relocation expenses. The Court refused to allow utility relocation expenses to be impliedly included within those relocation expenses reimbursed under the statute. Rather, the court held that the common law rule was not abrogated because the legislative intent to do so was not expressed. Norfolk ?Other case examples of this principle are Ovinion of the ces, 101 N.H. 527, 132 A.2d 613 (1957); Missouri Pac.' o. v. City of„Topeka, 213 Ran. 658, 516 P.2d 72 (Ran. 1974); rantrnl Roll Tal_ Ce_ V. Citv of Chattanooga, 578 S.W.2d 0 (Tenn. 1978). Redevelopment and ,Mousing Auth. v. Chesapeake and Potomac Tel. Co. of Virainia, 464 U.S. 30, 104 S.Ct. 304, 78 L.Ed.2d 29, 34 (1983). The common law rule of the exercise of a municipality's ; police power in this situation is well established and clear. The city may direct a utility to relocate its facilities within municipal rights -of -way at the utility's own expense ften relocation is necessary for the construction of improvements for . the public health and safety. Any action of APUC which invalidates this rule of law must be based upon express statutory directive. The statute relied on by APUC to invalidate the y. common law rule is AS 42.05.251. This statute contains no - f express language modifying or invalidating the common law rule. ' In conclusion, the common. law has not been expressly invalidated by the legislature through statute, which is the sole manner in which this power may be restricted: no implied modifications are permissible. APUC erred in finding that any i '< such modification has occurred. This Court should accordingly substitute its judgment and invalidate Order No. 7. . ( C. APUC Has No Statutory Authority To Invalidate The Common Law Rule As To Relocation Expenses APUC, as an alternative to finding a legislative or judicial 3. modification of the common law, relies upon authority APUC 21 L perceives as being delegated under AS 42.05.251 to expressly invalidate the common law rule on its own. (R. p. 272-273, fn. 1) No such delegation of authority exists. APUC is a creature of statute and its power is limited to that conferred. Rutter v. State, 668 P.2d 1343 (Alaska 1983). APUC has no inherent authority. It may enact regulations only where such regulations are necessary to performing its assigned duties. Kelly v. Zamarello, 486 P.2d 906, 916 (Alaska 1971). APUC construed the authority granted under AS 42.05.251 to include the authority to adopt a rule that modifies the common law rule as to relocation expenses. APUC determined in Order No. 7 that the common law rule is under most, but not all, circumstances an unreasonable fee, term or condition under AS 42.05.251. (R. P. 290, 318) Thus leaving APUC as the sorcerer to roll and read the bones as to if and when the common law will and will not apply. The authority conferred on APUC under AS 42.05.251 is to review the reasonableness of fees, terms or conditions included by a municipality in a permit to use its right-of-way. The issue of the scope of APUC authority under this statute, then, is whether the common law rule is a fee, term or condition of a permit sub3ect to APUC review, even where there is no permit issued by the City to the utility. This is a question of - statutory construction and the appropriate standard of review is 22 1 the independent judgment standard. Wentland v. Employment Sec. Div., 671 P.2d 1285, 1286 (Alaska 1983); ;fat. Bank of Alaska V. StSte DeRlt of Rev., 642 P.2d 811, 815 (Alaska 1982). 1. AS 42.05L�5� Only Allows APUC Review Of "Perm is " The proper construction of AS 42.05.251 only allows APUC to review actual permits granted by municipalities. The'statute prevents a municipality from denying a utility the use of a right-of-way. It does this by entitling all utilities to a use permit. But in many instances no permit is granted when a utility places its facilities in public rights-of-waY. The municipality simply does not object to the use of the right-of- way. In those cases, there would be nothing whatsoever for APUC to review; yet the common law would still apply. No permit was required by the City of Kenai in the present case, and consequently, there is nothing to review under AS 42.05.251. APUC gets around this problem through perplexing semantic gymnastics. APUC reasons that the "permit fees" identified in the statute are "interchangeable concepts" with other items, such as relocation expenses. (R. p. 284-287) The result is that APUC _- a-- ----- am enema sanvthine that it considers to be an -1 M. 11 J r permit here to review. Proper construction of the statute precludes APUC review of "interchangeable concepts." If the legislature chooses to empower APUC to review "interchangeable concepts" it may do so through another statute that is, hopefully, as clear and succinct as AS 42.05.251.0 2. The`Common Law Rule Is Not A Fee Under AS 42.05.251.' The Order contains a lengthy analysis at (R. V. 281-305) that the City understands to go as follows: HEA applied for a surcharge. HEA says a surcharge must be due to a reasonable permit fee. If the fee is unreasonable, APUC may modify or prohibit it. Relocation costs are interchangeable with permit or franchise fees. HEA proposes a split of authority as to whether such fees should be recovered as an operating expense or through a surcharge. APUC concludes that under some circumstances, the common law rule is reasonable, such as when relocation is needed *Appellant notes that the interchangeable concept argument advanced by HEA was that permit fees and relocation expenses are interchangeable concepts because one can be negotiated out or down for the other. (R. p. 149-150) Or, as the Order phrases it, payment of relocation expenses is the "quid pro quo" for right-of-way use. (R. V. 264) But HEA pays no permit fee to Kenai. (R. p. 162) if relocation expenses can be negotiated for payment of. a permit fee, the logical extension of this argument would be that utilities pay all relocation expenses if the city will refrain from charging any permit fees. Since HEA pays no permit fees, it should be content to pay relocation expenses '' under its own theory. 24 - Wi& t 7 3 . for repairing storm damage. These relocation costs "...typically will be capitalized and recovered in generally applicable rates." (R. p. 310) APUC declares the relocation cost an unreasonable fee that may not be forced upon the utility in most cases. Thus this cost would never be recaptured through a surcharge, because the municipality"would have to pay it. Relocation costs would, therefore, never be recaptured pursuant to AS 42.05.251 under any circumstances since "...there is no justification for utilities to have municipal surcharge tariffs to authorize recapture of unreimbursed relocation expenses." (R. p. 310) The APUC reasoning misses, or avoids, the point that no fee is being paid to a municipality when relocation is necessary. Franchise fees and relocation costs are not interchangeable concepts. Relocation costs are not paid to municipalities at all. Relocation costs are never an obligation of the municipality until the legislature expressly makes them no. They are not use fees;9 they are not easement acquisition payments; they are not fair market value condemnation compensation paid to a property owner. Regardless of the aonroDriate mechanism through which a utility should recover its •The Order prohibits municipalities from collecting a rental -type use fee from a utility, which could conceivably off- set the relocation expenses being imposed on municipalities, i because municipalities no longer have proprietary interests in their rights -of -way. This point is addressed later in the Brief. 25 i AN I . I I relocation expenses from its ratepayers, the relocation costs are, quite simply not a "fee" imposed on a utility by a F municipality under AS 42.05.251 for the use of its right-of-way. Connecticut Ry. & LightingCo. v. New Britain Redev. Common., 161 _ ' f Conn. 234, 287 A.2d 362 (1971). qk-NA 3. The Common Law Rule Is Not A Term Condition Under AS 42.05.251. The "terms" or "conditions" words of AS 42.05.251 refer to i • I restrictions or regulations of the right-of-way use that a city or borough imposes on a utility. They refer to how a utility can j use the right-of-way. See B-C Cable. The Order construes AS 42.05.251 to allow a surcharge for expenses incurred by a utility due to any term or condition of use of the right-of-way imposed by a city. If adherence to the common law rule is a term or j +( condition required by a municipality, then the utility could recover the relocation expense through a surcharge. (R. p. 280) I °i The problem with APUC's reasoning is that the common law is 4 not imposed on utilities by municipalities. It is imposed on all I i parties to this appeal, including APUC, by state statute, AS „ 01.10.010.10 The common law is, to the extent not specifically 'OAS 01.10.010. Applicability of common law. So much of the common law not inconsistent with the Constitution of the State of Alaska or the Constitution of the United States or with any law passed by the legislature of the State of Alaska is the rule of decision in this state. ------------__.-.._ .._ 26. F 1 - 7 abrogated by the legislature, the law of the state. simply because a municipality relies on state law does not transform the state law into a local rule or regulation, or into a "municipal j practice" as APUC phrased it. The terms and conditions of AS 42.05.251 refer to local i regulation. If APUC were correct and adherence to state law was properly claasified as a term or condition, then any state**law that a municipality relies on in its relationship with a► utility becomes subject to APUC review for reasonableness. The absurd result is that APUC has displaced the state courts in authority l and any state law becomes subject to APUC review for reasonableness. Yet, adherence to the law is not considered an unreasonable term or condition by APUC in all instances. According to APUC reasoning, if the municipality chooses to improve a street, or drainage, or install sewers or water lines and fire hydrants, or to engage in any other "proprietary activity," then the common law rule becomes an unreasonable term or condition. APUC defines "proprietary activity" to be primarily all activities reflected in a municipal capital budget. (R. p. 309-310) Under the Order, then, the municipality's police power is subordinated to the utility's interest in municipal right-of-way .-...,. use any time the municipality engages in a capital budget improvement. Either the taxpayers, or the property owners being 27 ' 4 i' L -� I assessed for the improvement, would have to cover the cost of relocating the utility facilities made by a municipality in its "proprietary capacity." The proprietary/governmental function analysis used by APUC is a criticized, confusing and contradictory area of the law. Cases can typically be found on either side of the fence characterizing the same municipal function as being' either proprietary or governmental (see discussion infra, P. 40). The use of this analysis should be avoided whenever possible. The United States Supreme Court retreated from the use of this analysis in commerce clause cases, in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528, 105 S.Ct. 1005 (1965) by overruling its prior decision in National League of Cities v. Users, 426 U.S. 833, 49 L.Ed.2d 245, 96 S.Ct. 2465 (1976). Garcia characterized the proprietary/governmental analysis as being completely unworkable. The APUC Order is a classic example of the morass that can result from application of this analysis. APUC somehow concluded through application of this analysis that municipalities no longer have a proprietary interest in their own rights-of-way.11 The cities might just as 4 &'The issue of whether municipalities shall have a j proprietary interest in rights -of -way is addressed later in this f Brief. 7 well give the utilities a fee simple interest in their rights -of - way and be done with it under the APUC rationale. After this conclusion APUC reasons that, since municipalities no longer have any proprietary interest, they cannot charge utilities a user fee. Since APUC finds user fees and relocation expenses to be interchangeable concepts, municipalities cannot force utilities to relocate without reimbursing the expense. All existing and future franchise agreements calling for a user fee are also declared void. (R. P. 311) The obvious objectives of APUC in using the proprietary/governmental analysis is to eliminate any ability of a municipality to charge franchise fees and to force municipalities to pay relocation expenses. it was a calculated step taken by APUC to deprive municipalities of franchising authority without going through the Legislature. This Court should overrule the use of the proprietary/governmental analysis in determining whether the common law is a term or condition under AS 42.05.251. At the least, the court should not utilize APUC proprietary/governmental characterization. If one follows the reasoning of the California Court of Appeals, the use of the proprietary/governmental analysis is unnecessary to determine the issue at hand. In Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v: Itedevelopment _Agency of the City of Glendale, et nl., 75 Cal. ` 29 4 --- _ _ -Li App. 3d 957, 142 Cal. Rptr. 584, 591 (Cal. App. 1977) rehearing den. (1978), after a criticism of this legal tool, the Court avoided its use in a relocation expense dispute. The Court quoted New York Telephone Co.._ . City of Binghamton, 261 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 219 N.E.2d 184, 186 (1966) when it stated: The distinction between "governmental function" and "proprietary function" is a sort of abstraction difficult to make meaningful in a day when municipalities continually find new ways to exercise police power in their efforts to cope with the pressing needs of their citizens. (Cite omitted.) A utility's right to compensation should depend, not on whether municipal activity is "governmental" or "proprietary," but on whether compensation has been required by the Legislature, or whether there has been a constitutionally compensable taking or damaging of a valuable property right." (Pacific Telephone & Telecragh Co. v. Redevelopffient Agency of the City of Glendale, et al., 75 Cal. App. 3d 9570 142 Cal. Rptr. 584, 591 (1977)I. This legal theory has, however, been used in other jurisdictions to determine when municipal construction necessitating utility relocation is outside the public health and safety interests that come within the common law rule. If the government requires relocation for a purpose other than public health and safety it must pay the relocation costs. See, City of Pontiac v. Consumers Power Company,, 101 Mich. App. 450, 300 N.W.2d 594, 496 (1980) appeal denied (1981); Rochester Tel. Corp. v. Village _ of Fairport, et al., 446 N.Y.S. 2d 823, 84 A.D.2d 455 (1982). (But see dissenting opinion.) In any event, the 30 _. ... 1 _ -- -- -- i activities identified by APUC as being proprietary are actually recognized as being governmental in nature. "Among the powers generally held to be governmental rather than private are the conservation of public construction and maintenance of streets; health; extinguishment of fires and making arrangements therefor; and power to legislate as to public utilities." McQuillin's, 910.05. See'also, City of Anaheim v. Metropolitan Water Oistrict of Southern California, CCH Utilities Law Reports, 523, 719.03 ^� (Cal. App. 1982); Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Co. v. i Redevelopment Agency of the City of Glendale, at al_., 75 Cal. App. 3d 957, 142 Cal. Rptr. 584, 591 (1977). Even if the proprietary/governmental !unction analysis is used, then, APU erred in application of it to determine that all capital improvement items are proprietary functions not subject to the common law rule. The municipality acts in its governmental capacity when it ,! improves roadways for the public health and safety. It has no ,. inherent authority to either impose on a utility, or to release a utility from the common law requirements. City of Wichita v. Kansas Gas and Electric Co., 204 Kan. 546, 464 P.2d 196, 205 f } (1970). A Thus, the common law rule is not a term or condition imposed by the municipality, such as a restriction on construction V� material, or location, which is selected to regulate how a right- 31 of -way may be used. APUC erred in construing AS 42.05.251 to include the common law rule within "terms and conditions" subject to review under that statute. This Court should substitute its judgment and declare Order No. 7 invalid. 4. Relocation Expenses Are Business Expenses, Not Public Imgrovement Constriction Costs. Order No. 7 asserts that unreimbursed relocation expenses are a cost of constructing public improvements. The APUC Order concludes that burdening the utility with relocation expenses is unreasonable and discriminatory because it saddles ratepayers with a disproportionate share of the cost of the public improvements. (R. V. 285, 289, 300-302) The construction of public improvements results in costs to private interests that are directly related to the public improvement construction, but are nonetheless within the class of damnum absque injuris and are not considered a cost of the public construction for the purpose of compensation. See 2A Nichols, Eminent Domain, 66.31; McQuillin's §32.38. The expense of i i t relocating facilities is an expense the utility must an c pa e s. .;., when public construction occurs. Even where a utility has a vested right to use municipal rights -of -way, the local government, absent state legislation to the contrary, is not divested of the power to improve the right- of-way for the general welfare of the community and require the 32 L utility to relocate its facilities at its own expense. Ntichican all Telephone Co. v. Cit of Detroit, 106 Mich. App. 690, 308 N.W.2d 608 (1981). The interest of the utility under a right of use such as is granted under AS 42.05.251 is ancillary to the primary interest of the public in its right-of-way, and is subordinate to the interest of the public. Vermont Gas Systems, Znc. v. City --of Burlington, 130 Vt. 75, 286 A.2d 275 (197i). "The relocation costs borne by the utility are in the nature of a business loss. Connecticut Ry. & Lighting Co. v. New Britain Redev. Congn'n., 161 Conn. 234, 287 A.2d 362 (1971). As such, these costs are properly recovered by a utility from al ratepayers through general rates. AS 42.05.251 does not provide for a surcharge to cover a business loss; only for a permit fee. Since the relocation costs are anticipated business expenses, they are not costs of public construction discriminatorily imposed on the utilities or their ratepayers. Because relocation expenses are properly business expenses and not permit fees, terms, or conditions, any action taken by APUC under the guise of fulfilling its AS 42.05.251 duties should be invalidated. D. UC Responsibilities Under AS 42.05.251 Do Not Conflict Generally, a rule of common law regulating activity between ( , a utility and a municipality, not in conflict with a statute, remains in force. AS 01.10.010. This construction has been •� ' 33 � 1 :} k L applied in Alaska in regard to franchise provisions and APUC regulatory activity in B-C Cable Co., v. City and Borou h of J,upeau, 613 P.2d 616-618 (Alaska 1980). In 8-C Cable, the court suggested that while the APUC Act preempts a large portion of the regulatory activity of municipalities over utility companies, it does not preempt ali such authority. The Court read AS 42.05.251 and AS 42.050641 to find that provisions of a municipal franchise not in actual conflict with APUC regulatory activity remain in force. id. at 618. The application to this case is that AS 42.05.251 and the common law can operate simultaneously as long as there is no conflict. A simple review of the statute reveals that there is no conflict when the statute is given its proper construction. Review of the construction given to a statute by an administrative commission requires the application of the independent judgment standard by which the court makes its own determination of the meaning of the statute. Wentland v. E.mplovment Sec. Div., 671 P.2d 1285 (Alaska 1983); National Hank of Alaska v. State Dep t of Rev., 642 P.2d 811 (Alaska 1982). This court can use its individual judgment to see that there is no conflict and invalidate order No. 7. 34 L 0 AS 42.05.251 grants utilities the right to a permit and grants municipalities the right to a fee -Is It authorizes APUC to determine the reasonableness of any fee, term, condition, or exception a municipality includes in the permit. The fee, term, condition, or exception language in the statute is not inclusive of all rules and laws that pertain to a legal relationship between a municipality and a utility in the use of a right of way. H-C Cable. In this case there is not a lee, term, or condition in any permit for APUC to review. Accordingly, the common law is operative because there is no fee, term, or condition with which the common law can conflict. The problem is that APUC manufactured its own conflict in order to invalidate the common law rule. APUC did this by applying its own special brand of construction to AS 42.05.251. APUC construes AS 42.05.251 to authorize the Commission to review for reasonableness —n municipal action affecting a regulated utility. (R. V. 301) APUC then further reasons that reliance on the common law is deemed a "municipal action" or "practice" affecting a utility. (R. p. 299) APUC then manufactures a conflict, by reasoning that they can review the common law for 1suo fee was charged HEA by the City for the use of the right-of-way, and no permit was issued. The City and HEA have a contract for the takeover of certain utility facilities which is i. currently in litigation as to relocation expense liability (NSA p_t City of Kenai, 3KH-83-461). At the APUC's urging, HEA has moved to amend its complaint in that case to state a cause of ,. action for recovery on the basis of the APUC Order. (R. p. 317.) ---- - --------�s_ 35 P L �s reasonableness because it is a "practice" followed by the municipality. Further, the municipal practice of relying on the F common law is unreasonable, under AS 42.05.251 therefore, the , common law is unreasonable and accordingly, the common law is, invalid. This reasoning is not borne out by simple comparison of the plain meaning of the statute as compared to the common-law rule. { - The common law rule on relocation expenses does not curtail or restrict a utility's right to the use of a municipal right-of-way which is granted by the statute. The rule simply subordinates i the utility's right of use to the police power of the i municipality. Vermont Gas Systems. Inc.-v.- City of Burlington, j ;i 130 Vt. 75, 286 A.2d 275-277 (1971); Southern California Gas Co. V. City of I,.A., 50 Cal.2d 713, 329 P.2d 289-291 (1958). The subordination of the utility's right of use to the police power I of the municipality can in no way be seen to conflict with APUC's j ' ability to determine the reasonableness of any fee, term, i condition, or exception that a municipality might include in a i. permit. Accordingly, there is no conflict and the common law rule can co -exist with APUC's responsibilities under AS C 36 III &UC_Erred In Determining That A Utility's. nterest In The Use Of Municipal Rt.ahtp-Of-Way Is Protected ByArt. I. _Sec_._18 Of The Alaska Constitution. Or That ,A.,Taking Has Occurred A. The Utility_ /,s-ar6.... In Ordei No. 7, APUC interpreted Art. I, Section 18 'of*the Alaska Constitution" to include the interest that a utility has in the use of municipal rights -of -way pursuant to AS 42.05.251 as falling within the category of property interests protected by the takings clause. Additionally, APUC determined that a taking occurs when a utility, in accordance with the common law, is required to relocate its facilities within municipal rights -of - way due to public improvement construction. (R. p. 306-309) Both of these determinations are erroneous. Both are questions of law that require the substitution of judgment standard of review. Earth Resources Co._v-- State, Deo't of gqv,, 665 P.2d 960, 965 (Alaska 1983). APUC reasons that AS 42.05.251 gives the utility an interest that is sufficient to be protected by the Alaska takings clause, -"i which is broader than traditionally allowed,i4 and thus "...the common law rule allowing a municipality to mandate unreimbursed utility relocations... appears to be inconsistent with the Constitution of the State of Alaska." (R. p. 308) This line of reasoning in the Order relies heavily on the criticized, confusing and contradictory distinction between proprietary and governmental activities of municipal governments (supra, p.30). APUC characterizes the activity of a municipality in construction and improvements of.its rights -of -way as a proprietary interest. This interest, however, is governmental, not proprietary and, as stated before, inherent in the state and delegated to municipalities. See McQuillin's 5530.39, 30.39a. Aside from the nature of the governmental activity involved, APUC relies on State v. Hammer, 550 P.2d 820 (Alaska 1980) as authority for its determination that the relocation expenses are not merely dan►num absque Injuria but compensable interests. (R. p. 306-307) Hammer involved an exercise by the state of its eminent domain power in condemning land for a highway. The land had a business operating on it that was forced to shut down all operations and relocate. The relocation took many months during 14Under the federal constitution, relocation expenses are damnum absque injuria and are not a- taking or damages that require compensation. Norfolk,Redevelopment and Houait�q Auth, v. Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Co. of Virginia, 464 U.S. 30, 104 S.Ct. 304, 78 h.Ed.2d 29, 34 (1983); pew Orleans das Co. vM rainace Comm., 197 U.S. 453, 462, 25 S.Ct. 471, 49 L.Ed. 831 5 22 y; (1905); 4A Nichols, Eminent Domain 51 . 38 I which time the business owner made no profits. The issue on appeal was whether these lost profits were compensable under the Alaska Constitution. The court held that they were. Hammer is inapplicable here. In that case, the business itself was a property interest that was directly damaged by the condemnation of real property. Here the utility has no property that is being taken by the municipality. The municipality owns the property already. The relocation "damages" occur due to the subordinate position of the utility's interest in the use of the municipality's property to the police power of the municipality rather than from the municipality's taking something from the utility. Other Jurisdictions consistently deny taking protection for the utility's interest in situations where the utility is required to relocate as opposed to being denied further use of the right-of-way altogether. Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. v. City of Burlinaton, 130 Vt. 75, 286 A.2d 275 (Vt. 1971); Urban Renewal Aa. of the City of Eugene v. Pacific Northwest Hell Telephone co., 23 Or. App. 384, 542 P.2d 908 (1975); Hichigan Bell Telephone Co. v. City of Detroit, 106 Mich. App. 690, 308 N.W.2d 608 (1981).15 IDAppellant has located one jurisdiction where the relocation expenses were compensable under the state constitution taking clause: Ark"gas State Ric way Com. v. Arkansas_ Power Iiyht Co., 231 Ark 307, 330 S.W.2d 77 (1960). • But see the dissent, 330 at 81, which recognized that cases to the contrary "are numerous and unanimous." Arkansas may be alone against the weight of authority. See 4A Nichols, Eminent Domdin, 615.22. f39 t. . Thus, while the utility will incur expenses due to the relocation, and could therefore be said to suffer some damage to its facilities due to the construction of public improvements, the "damage" suffered is actually an operating cost that a utility must anticipate when utilizing the right-of-way of another entity rather than purchasing its own easement. The interest of .the utility granted pursuant to AS 42.05.261 ia'in the nature of a license that a municipality cannot refuse, rather than a vested property right. Rochester Telephone Cor . v. village of Fairport. et al., 446 N.Y.S.2d 823, 84 A.D.2d 455 (1982); Borough of Hichspire. et al. v Pennsylvania Power and Light, et al., CCH Utilities I,aw Reporter, 823, 733 (Pa. 1982). it can be withdrawn by the state at any time. As such, the 't utility's use remains subordinate to the needs of the public.16 APUC incorrectly determined that the interest that a utility has under AS 42.05.251 in using a municipal right-of-way is Unlike the situation in Alaska, the Arkansas utilities paid substantial user fees, a factor considered by the Arkansas Court. ! No user fee is involved here. r, 1 16"Charters, - franchises, statutory grants and permits affording the use of public ways to utility locations are subservient, expressly or by implication, in the exercise of governmental functions, to public travel and to the paramount police power and relocation of utility facilities in public expense, a common law streets or public ways are at utility liability unless abrogated by the clear import of the language used in a particular statute." 4A Nichols, Eminent Domain, i 515.22. t. �c • �'i �y f: 40 L L 7 n "property" under Art. I, Section 18 of the Alaska Constitution. This Court should accordingly substitute its judgment and invalidate Order No. 7. B. 0 In the event that the Court finds the utility interest in the right-of-way is property for takings purposes, no taking occurred. The general rule in Alaska is: "...a taking does not occur until: 1.) legal title vests in the State, 2.) the State enters into actual possession, or 3.) the State takes constructive possession either by causing damage to property or by depriving the owner of full beneficial use of his land. Stewart & wrindle. Inc. v. SState, 524 P.2d 1242, 1246 (Alaska 1974). In the present situation, the utility's property interest, if there is one, is a permit, or license, to use municipal rights -of -way. The fact that a utility may be required to relocate facilities due to the superior interest of the municipality acting for the public health, safety or welfare does not deprive a utility of its "property." The utility still has exactly what it had before the governmental action: a right to use the right-of-way. City of Wichita v.-Kansas. was & alec. Co., 204 Kan. 546, 464 P.2d 196, 205 (1970). The utility has not been "deprived of the economic advantages of legal ownership." Brant V. State_, 560 P.2d 36, 39 (Alaska 1977). Rather, the utility has _ %i 41 "*I r- i simply incurred a foreseeable expense associated with the ownership of this type of "property" that is normally incurred in the course of its operations. The only conceivable manner in which this interest could be damaged is if the City denied the utility a permit to use the right-of-way altogether, but this possibility is precluded by the statute. In this case then, the City has legal title to the right-of- way; is already in possession and; has not (cannot because of A8 42.05.251) denied the utility any use of the right-of-way. Accordingly, this Court should invalidate Order No. 7 to the extent that it declares a taking. IV APUC Erred In Determining That Municipalities Have No Proarietary Interest In Municipal Riaht-Of-Way Order No. 7 APUC interpreted Alaska statutory and case law as voiding any proprietary interest that municipalities have in their right-of-way. (R. p. 299-309) Alternatively, APUC determined that any permit fee for the use of the right-of-way must be based on, and directly correlated to, any actual relocation expenses incurred by utilities, with the burden of proof on the municipality before APUC, prior to recovery of any is fee. (R. P. 310) Any existing contract agreements between 42 L municipalities and utilities that may be inconsistent with the APUC order by allowing for such a fee are declared void. (R. p. 311) All three of these points are based on the existence of the municipality's proprietary interest in the right-of-way. All three determinations are erroneous. A. Alaska Statutory And Case Law Have Not Voided The Municipal Rroprietary Interest In Rights -Of -Way._ Order No. 7 cites Chuaach Electrical Association v. City of Anchorage, 476 P.2d 115 (Alaska 1970) and AS 42.05.251 as authority for its conclusion that "...it seems clear that judicial precedent and statute in Alaska preclude any compensation being paid by a utility for the value of engaging in a utility enterprise within municipal boundaries or even within its rights -of -way." (R. p. 295) Chugach, according to APUC, prohibits a municipality from charging a fee, exacted from a utility, as a condition of entry upon its right-of-way. The interpretation of the ChugachghugAch decision in relation to a statute is a question of law requiring application of the substitution of judgment standard of review. Earth Resources Co. V. Dep't of 665 P.2d 960 (Alaska 1983). Prior to the Chugach decision, the Legislature enacted AS 42.05.251 which expressly entitles utilities to a permit for the use of municipal rights -of -way. According to the APUC reasoning, with the passage of AS 42.05.251, "the municipality; by -logical 43 "r• • implication, was denied authority to grant or withhold such [use] rights and, with it, the authority to negotiate on a value basis with the utility." (R. p. 296) APUC then concludes, through implication, that the sole purpose of the "fee" under A8 i 42.05.251 is to compensate the municipality for any costs • i incurred in policing right-of-way usage under the regulatory authority reserved to municipalities by the Chugach decision. - - - (R. p. 296) Neither the Chin each decision nor AS 42.05.251 prohibit a municipality from charging utilities a reasonable fee for the use of its rights -of -way. Chugach involved a utility authorized by r the Public Service Commission (PSC) to operate within the city zt limits of Anchorage. The utility was requested to provide service to a consumer within the city, but the city took steps to prohibit the utility from doing so without first receiving a a permit from the city. The city then refused to issue the permit since the utility did not demonstrate a need for the increased service as required under the city ordinance criteria, and sought an injunction against the utility's operation. -i :7 The trial court granted the injunction, finding that the t utility's facilities were an encroachment absent a permit from the city. On appeal, the utility reiterated its argument that the legislature had preempted the field of utility regulation and the city lacked authority to prohibit its use of the right -of- 44 L 0 j I way. 475 P.2d at 118. The Supreme Court declined to address this issue since the legislature had in the interim enacted AS 42.05.251, which expressly granted utilities the right to a permit to use the municipal right-of-way. Ld. The issue that was determined in Chugach was whether a municipal ordinance requiring a permit to provide service or the statutory authority of the PSC (now APUC) to grant permission to service an area would control in a direct conflict between the two. It was a decision on home rule. The Alaska Supreme Court subsequently restricted any further authority of that case: "...this court's opinion in Chugach must be confined to the specific facts and particular legal issues in that case, and any broader implications must be disavowed." Greater Anchora a &rea Horgp h v. City of Anchorage, 504 P.2d 1027, 1035 (Alaska 1972) overruled on other grounds 595 P.2d 629. The r-hugach decision, therefore, does not address the issue of whether a municipality has proprietary interests enabling it to charge a fee for a utility's use of its public rights -of -way. In fact, read in conjunction with Greater Anchorage Area Borough and H-C _ Cab1e, the Chugach decision actually retains municipal authority over proprietary rights in public rights -of -way that have not been expressly proscribed by the legislature and are not in conflict with APUC enabling acts. 45 A . A further question raised by the Order is what happens if the APUC order is valid and municipalities have no proprietary interest that justifies a user fee? Does that mean that municipalities in Alaska will be precluded by APUC from collecting franchise fees they are entitled to under federal law from economically unregulated utilities? As an example, federal legislation permits an annual five percent of gross revenue franchise fee to be assessed on cable television companies by municipalities. (47 U.S.C. 542(b)] If APUC is correct and municipalities no longer have any proprietary interest in public rights -of -way, municipalities have no franchise authority justifying a franchise fee on cable television even though federal law prescribes one. This result is inconsistent with Alaska case law and statute. APUC erred in finding void or in voiding municipal proprietary interests in rights -of -way. This Court should accordingly substitute its judgment and invalidate this portion of the APUC order. H. L As a policy the APUC order attempts to allocate utility ca costs and expenses on a cost causer/cost payer basis. The test �. applied by APUC to determine the allocation of expenses is the benefit/burden test. The Order analyzes the reasonableness of any fee under AS 42.05.251 by applying this test and by analyzing 46 a the municipal action in equity for discrimination. (R. p. 301) Since HEA sought a surcharge, APUC assumed as a premise that the relocation expense is a fee recoverable through a surcharge. The APUC reasoning appears to be that the surcharge under this test is only allowable if the expense has "...a rational or substantial connection between payment of such expenses by ratepayers and cognizable benefit received or burden occasioned by the utility in the ordinary course of providing utility service to the ratepayer." iR. p. 290) Since the municipal construction "causes" the relocation expense, as the APUC reasoning goes, there is no benefit to the ratepayer or burden that the utility bears in its ordinary activity of providing utility service to the ratepayer; since the ratepayer does not benefit, he should not have to pay for the relocation; since relocation expenses are not a burden of ordinary operations, the . utility should not have to pay for it either; the surcharge is unreasonable under the benefit/burden test, and the municipality ,i pays the expense. APUC subsequently explains that, since municipalities have no proprietary interest and can no longer charge "rent," any fee collected from the utility by the municipality would have to bear k: .... .... i l i a direct correlation to relocation expenses actually incurred by �..... the utility; but since of the City follows the Order's reasoning) any such "compensation" to the municipality would have Y to be based on fair market rental value of the right-of-way, the fee for any given year could never exceed the fair market rental value for that year even if relocation expenses incurred that year far exceeded such value. (R. p. 299-300) Through all of the benefit/burden fee analysis APUC is misapplying its own standards. The benefit/burden test is being used to dete=mine whether a city or a utility has liability under the law to pay certain expenses rather than to determine how acknowledged expenses of a utility are to be recovered by the utility. The two issues are distinct. One is a legal issue and the other a policy issue. A policy test for the latter cannot be used to determine the former. The Order characterizes the relocation expense as something that has come about through no fault of the utility. (R. p. 293) The expense is caused "...primarily, if not exclusively...." by municipal discretion irrespective of utility activity. (R. p. 293) This line of reasoning in the Order only confounds, or avoids, the nature of the relationship between the utility and the municipality. The argument on this issue echoes earlier arguments in this brief. f . First, relocation expense liability pursuant to the common law rule is not a fee, term, or condition under AS 42.05.251 that is subject to a benefit/burden analysis. Second, the utility's use of the right-of-way is subordinate to the municipality's _ _..... a 48 r ------ ------ --- ----- J5 f{ J right to make improvements for the public health and safety. Third, a utility that utilizes rights -of -way of a municipality rather than purchasing its own easement must anticipate, as a normal operating cost, relocating its facilities within the right-of-way when the owner requires it. The relocation expenses are not "caused" by the municipality. A utility must expect them to occur under the circumstances. This is particularly true when the utility has placed facilities in.the middle of an unimproved right-of-way without regard for future development; (See, R. p. 210-213) If the expenses are "caused" by anything, relocation expenses are "caused" by the utility's failure to acquire its own private easement, or by its short-sighted location decisions. The error made here, in requiring a correlation between any fee and actual relocation expenses, is that APUC confused the issue of appropriate fee recovery mechanisms, a ratemaking policy matter, with the issue of liability for the relocation expenses, a question of law. This Court should substitute its judgment and invalidate this portion of the APUC Order. C. i MS%a Sntt[, ArAar etaplies the decision to all existing i ind permits between utilities and 49 L 7 i • municipalities that require the utility to pay the municipality for the use of the right-of-way. (R. p. 311) (As opposed to a I regulatory fee, which is still allowable.) These existing agreements are declared void, and future agreements to that effect are prohibited. APUC relies on H-C Cable Co. v. City & Rorouch of Juneau-, 613 P.2d 616 (Alaska 1980) as authority for jj the proposition that existing franchise agreements are subject to -- - - - -+ f APUC regulation. The reliance on H-C Cable is, however, C misplaced. i in 8-C Cable a utility had a franchise agreement with the municipality that required the utility to pay a three percent franchise tax. After the parties entered into the franchise agreement, the Legislature adopted the APUC Act. The utility �f discontinued payment of the tax, claiming all franchise agreements were rendered invalid by the legislature.'? The .t municipality sued to collect its three percent fees and prevailed at trial. On appeal, the Alaska Supreme Court reviewed the scope of j the APUC Act, and particularly AS 42.05.251 and AS 42.05.641. 1 The utility contended that these statutes removed all regulatory ::.'. authority over utilities from municipalities and placed that 1. authority with APUC, thereby voiding all existing municipal I'Order No. 7 had the same effect. A gas utility notified Kenai that it might not honor a City franchise tax due to Order a No. 7. The utility did eventually pay. 50 L • .yr � ti V a franchise agreements. 613 at 618. (emphasis added) The court a cases disagreed. The court identified the franchise fee in question as having two purposes: "That fee was originally designed to compensate the city for the use of municipal streets and for the cost of municipal supervision and regulation." Footnote 4, 613 at 618. The court's ruling was that APUC Act did not "...either expressly or by clear implication nullify the rights 'and liabilities of the parties under the franchise agreements..." and therefore the state's general saving clause, AS 01.10.010, kept the franchise agreements in force. 613 at 619. The authority of APUC identified and defined in 8-C Cable was authority to review the reasonableness of the amount of the use fee, not to abolish it or declare such fees void and .. unreasonable under AS 42.05.251 as contended in the Order No. 7. The a-C Cable decision is in keeping with the Greater Anchorage ,s:i Area Sorouah v. City of Anchorage, 504 P.2d 1027 (Alaska 1972), _c overruled on other grounds, 595 P.2d 629, that explains the limited authority of APUC. Nunicipalities are expressly allowed to charge a fee under AS 42.55.251, and that fee may be for the :...nde use of rights -of -way. APUC exceeded its authority outlined in the b declaring void all existing or future franchise agreements which provide for a user fee paid by a utility to a - municipality for the use of a right-of-way. Accordingly, this •;r� Court should substitute its judgment and invalidate Order No. 7. it 51 I Lr 10 i' I! i y M� V CONCLuszoN APUC Order should be invalidated because APUC lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the issues surrounding the validity or modification of the common law rule concerning municipality- directed relocations of utility facilities in public rights-cf- way. The common law rule can only be modified by theexpfess -- — directive of the Legislature or courts and no such modification has taken place. -APUC has exceeded its authority under AS 42.05.251, and in -.. addition to invalidating the Order, City requests that this Court give proper construction to that statute and to the issues of law f raised herein. DATED: This day of 1%�� 1987. CIT ENAI Hy Tim s y Attorney i 7 M The University of Alaska 97.480 .� 3 Mining and Petroleum Training Service 155 SmithN ay, Suite 104 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 } (907)262.2788 Memorandum Date: 8 August To: Fred Ali, Ginger Steffy From: Dennis D. Steffy - Mining and Petroleum Training Service RE: Kenai Fire Grounds As I have related to both of you. I believe that it is time to seriously consider moving the current fire training grounds to a more remote location. We have several reasons for this: One. weare training many more people than the facility was designed for, and have many. many more companies and groups demanding the use of the grounds. Two, increased use of the grounds has for the first time begun to generate complaints from local residents. I believe in the good neighbor policy whether or not the complaints are valid. Three. the area available for expansion at the present location is limited. Any direction we would go would remove the screen of trees and vegetation which is important to the esthetics of the campus. Four. I am — really reluctant to spend very much more on permanent improvements if in fact we are going to move the grounds. I have begun to investigate the availability of lands within reasonable distance of the Kenai det determining potential sitSoldotna area for es asiwe 1 as Mayor numb re Thompson in erested individuaals assistance of the Boro 1n Since the location of the facility on the Kenai Peninsula brings in over $1,000.000 to the local economy each year, and that amount could be easily doubled or tripled I would hope that the local legislative delegation would consider an appropriation or grant to assist us and be able to have the new grounds commissioned by the 88 season. We will be looking for between 15 and 25 acres, located a minimum of 2 miles from the nearest domicile or business. Road access is mandatory as is Electrical Service. Natural gas would be a decided asset. I have structures available for donation to house the classroom space. change rooms. shower facilities, warehouses and shop. Most of the existing props can simply be moved to the grounds as can the pump. manifold. water tank and fuel system. I am working with Billy Harris, Al Willis and Steve Force in designing a facility which would be sufficiently sophisticated as to attract business from outside the state and outside the country. We are aware of a particular need in the Pacific rim nations and a more urgent need for Alaska's fishing fleet to have this x training available. Please let me know your feelings on this matter, and thank you for your consideratiom f cc. Steve Force. F. Tressler. A. Wft.13. Harris, A. Mcomsey. J. Williams. S. ThOmpson, 0.13omotq t A— `1 • LA ,i A CHEMICAL & GEOLOGICAL LABORATORIES 5633 E1 STREET • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 995% • TELEPHONE (907) 562.2343 +� 49 ; :I FED TAX ID p92-004OW, Order Date sAPR 29 97 RECEIV EO INVOICE 49 " Invoice Date s APR 29 87 Client Po s822B1/82369 MAY 1 19�1 - - CAses1Nb Ref h Client Req.1s ICP Ordered By MITH KORNEBIS pANiW401111016 Report Printeds APR 29 87 0 08s19 CIM N 001 SEND REPORT TO: Bill To: KENAI CITY OF wX $80 BOx so KENAI, AK. 99611 KENAI, AK. 99611 SEND REPORT TOs.�•...�.�, •Contact Person s Phone- s l ! ; ififi_�; �iEtL oyobl Shi sn Inat s DP 9 Special Ins s i INdi` Har�s,M © j Cheolab Cl tent Suple 0 Saoele Description Matrix Parameter Tested Method � Charge Water INOROANIC CHEMICALS/TITLE 18 AA/6F 195.00 } 1 WELL HOUSE 41 4-14-87 1 WELL HOUSE 11 4-14-87 Water GROSS ALPHA EPA ICP 75.00 60.00 1 WELL HOUSE 01 4-14-87 Water ICP-25 ELEMENT SCAN 1 WELL HOUSE 11 4-14-87 Water TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOM 35•00 2 WELL HOUSE N2 4-14-67 Water INORGANIC CHEMICALS/TITLE 18 AA/6F 195.00 2 WELL HOUSE 12 4-14-37 Water GROSS ALPHA EPA 73.00 2 WELL HOUSE 12 4-14-87 Water ICP-25 ELEMENT SCAN ICP 60.00 2 WELL HOUSE 12 4-14-87 Water TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOM 33.00 TOTAL DUE S 730.00 7 FIEMICAL & GEOLOGICAL LABORATORIES OF ALASKA, INC._ 9633 B STREET - ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518 - TELEPHONE (907) 562.2343 Client PH : 62281/92369 Req 1s Client Smpl 10: WELL HOUSE 11 4-14-87 Sample Rec'd i APR 15 87 Ordered By : KEITH KORNEBIS REPORTS ADDRESS 11 KENAI CITY OF BOX 580 KENAI, AK. 99611 Special Instruct: Chemiab Ref 0:5939 Lab Smpl 10: 1 Parameter Tested Resul t INORGANIC CHEMICALS/TITLE 18 ARSENIC BARIUM j CADMIUM CHROMIUM FLUORIDE LEAD i MERCURY NITRATE -NITROGEN SELENIUM SILVER TURBIDITY GROSS ALPHA ICP-25 ELEMENT SCAN ALUMINUM x; ARSENIC .. BARIUM - - 80RINf - CALCIUM CADMIUM ". CHROMIUM (TOTAL) COPPER " IRON (TOTAL) LEAD MAGNESIUM MANGANESE r - MART - - NICKEL PHOSPHORUS (TOTAL) POTASSIUM SELENIU3 i SILICON _ : f SILVER , 1 I ,t �i i( ANALYSIS REPORT BY SAMPLE Invoice No. 149 Client Account : KENAICP Date Report Printed: APR 29 67 @ 1109 Released By :)dcv REPORTS ADDRESS 12 KENAI PUBLIC WORKStK KORNEBIS 210 FIDALGO BT 041, AK. 99611 Matrix s Water Detection Allowable Units Method Limits Limits n/a n/a AA/6F 0.007 mg/I ADECISAACSO 0.001 0,05 0.05 a9/1 ADECIBAAC80 0.05 1.0 NO (0.002) mg/i ' ADECISAAC80 0.002 0.01 0.014 mg/1 ADECISAAC80 0.01 0.05 0.30 mg/l ADECIMAC80 0.10 2.4 00.01) mg/1 ADECISAAC80 0.01 0.05 ND(0.0002) mg/l ADECISAAC80 0.0002 0.002 ND(0.10) mg/1 ADECISAAC80 0.10 10.0 ND(0.001) mg/l ADECIBAAC80 0.001 0.01 00.01) 29/1 ADECISAAC80 0.01 0.05 0.62 Nil! ADECISAAC80 0.05 1.0 PREY. SENT pe i / 1 EPA n/a n/a ICP NO mg/1 1CP 0.05 NO 09/1 ICP 0.05 0.05 49/1 ICP 0.05 0.08 mg/1 ICP 0.05 6.7 m9/1 ICP 0.10 NO mq/1 ICP 0.01 NO mg/l ICP 0.05 NO m4/1 ICP 0.05 0.19 09/1 ICP 0.05 NO m9/1 .... V- 0.05 , 6.6 m9/1 ICP 0.10 ND mq/l ICP 0.05 NO 011 - ICP - - - 0.05 ND m9/1 ICP 0.05 0.42 mg/1 ICP 0.05 4.7 mq/l ICP 1.0 ND mg/l ICP 0.05 21 29/1 ICP 0.05 ND NO) ICP 0.05 40 1.. 1 +1 h CHEMICAL A GEOLOGICAL LABORATORIES OF ALASKA, INC. >833 8 STREET • ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99518 • TELEPHONE (907) 582.2343 ANALYSIS REPORT BY SAMPLE ' Client POI t OMI/82369 Req Ii Invoice No. : 49 Client SrpI ID: WELL NCO I1 4-14-87 Client Account t KENAICP Date Report Printed: APR 29 87 111110 Sample Rec'd t APR 15 87 Released By t Ordered By t KEITH KORNEBIS REPORTS ADDRESS I2 REPORTS ADDRESS I1 KENAI PUBLIC WORKS+K KORNEBiS KENAI CITY OF 210 FIDALGO ST Box 580 KENAI, AK. 99611 • KENAI, AK. 99611 Special Instruct: Chemlab Ref It 5938 Lab Smpl IDt 1 Natrixt Water Detection Allowable parameter Tested Result Units Method Limits Limits SODIUM 32 m9/I ICP 0.10 STRONTIUM 0.08 m9/i ICP 0.05 TIN ND mq/1 ICP 0.05 VANADIUM NO m9/1 ICP 0.05 ZINC ND a9/1 ICP 0.05 ZIRCONIUM ND malt 1CP 0.05 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (MCI 4 29/1 s A f1EMICAL & GEOLOGICAL LABORATORIES OF ALASKA, INC. i633 B STREET - ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99518 - TELEPHONE (907) 662-2343 Client POM : 8=1/069 Req N: Client Smpl ID: WELL HOUSE t2 4-14-87 Sample Reed : APR 15 87 Ordered By : KEITH KORNEBIS REPORTS ADDRESS M1 KENAI CITY OF BDK 380 KENAI, AK. 99611 Special Instruct: ANALYSIS REPORT BY SAMPLE Invoice No. : 49 Client Account : KENAICP Date Report Printed: APR 29 87 8 08115 Released By REPORTS ADDRESS N2 KENAI PUBLIC WORKSW KORNEBIS 210 FIDAL60 S1 KENAI, AK. 9%11 Chemlab Ref t: 5938 Lab Smpl I0: 2 Matrix: Water Detection Allowable Parameter Tested Result Units Method Limits Limits INORGANIC CHEMICALS/TITLE 18 n/a n/a AA/GF ARSENIC 0.004 mg/1 ABECISAAC80 0.001 0.05 BARIUM ND(0.051 mg/1 ADECIBAAC80 0.05 1.0 CADMIUM 00.002) m9/1 - ADECIBAAC60 0.002 0.01 CHROMIUM 0.048 ag/1 ADECIBMC80 0.01 0.05 FLUORIDE 0.51 mg/l ADECISAACSO 0.10 2.4 LEAD 00.01) mg/I ADECISAAC80 0.01 0.05 MERCURY ND(0.0002) mq/l ADECISAAC80 0.0002 0.002 NITRATE -NITROGEN ND(0.10) mg/l ADEC18AAMO 0.10 10.0 SELENIUM 00.001) mg/l ADECISAAC80 0.001 0.01 SILVER 111)l0.00 mg/1 ADECISAACSO 0.01 0.05 TURBIDITY 1.0 NTU AMC18AACBO 0.05 1.0 GROSS ALPHA PREY SENT pC T / 1 EPA ICP-25 ELEMENT SCAN n/a n/a ICP ALUMINUM ND ag/1 ICP 0.05 ARSENIC ND mg/l ICP 0.05 BARIUM ND mg/i ICP 0.05 BORON 0.17 m9/1 ICP 0.05 CALCIUM 2.2 moll ICP 0.10 CADMIUM NO m9/i ICP 0.01 CHROMIUM (TOTAL) ND 29/1 ICP 0.05 COPPER ND ag/1 ICP 0.05 IRON (TOTAL) 0.10 09/1 ICP 0.05 LEAD ND m9/1 ICP 0.05 MAGNESIUM 2.2 m911 ICP 0.10 MANGANESE ND mg/1--- ICP 0.05 MERCURY ND mg/1 ICP 0.05 NICKEL - - No 0911 - ICP- - O.QS_- PHOSPHORUS (TOTAL) 1.0 moll ICP 0.05 POTASSIUM 4.5 mg/1 ICP 1.0 SELENIUM NO mg/l 1CP 0.05 SILICO:I 18 04/1 ICP 0.05 SILVER NO 09/1 ICP 0.05 L 4 f CHEMICAL & GEOLOGICAL LABORATORIES OF ALASKA, INC. 5633 STREET • ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99516 • TELEPHONE (907) 562.2343 ANALYSIS REPORT BY SAMPLE Client POt : BY281/BM9 Req Mt Client Smpl 108 MELL NOOSE 12 4-14-87 Invoice No. t 49 Client Account t KENAICP Date Report Printedt APR 29 87 @ 08115 Basel a Rec'd : APR 15 87 Released By Ordered By t KEITH KORNEBIS REPORTS ADDRESS i2 REPORTS ADDRESS 01 KENAI PUBLIC WOItl(Stit KORNEBIS KENAI CITY OF 210 FIDALGO ST BOX 50 KENAI, AK. 99611 KENAI. AK. 99611 special Instruct: Cheslab Ref As $938 Lab Sspl ID: 2 Natrix: slater Detection Allowable Parameter Tested Resul t Units Method Limits Limits SODIUM 54 NO 89/1 09/1 ICP ICP 0.10 0.05 STRONTIUN TIN NO 89/1 ICP 0.05 VANADIUN ND sq/1 ' ICP 0.03 ZINC ND 09/1 ICP 0.05 ZIRCONIUM ND aq/1 ICP 0.05 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (YOU 6 mg/l 0 n r, ssS� :m:.1Tt:aa� Lr1 1 .1 OF. 9%1 DALQO ST.` 4.P RPOUA1 AI ACKA r •S. ' - i(.i1J � Tf�}•..�Z• �r Il 'yW/1:>b T'..•j-1y�' Y. J' • rt•1 �� .t a 11 1(�" �,�_y jJy•1'li.-1.��1d i(t %t�j. 1. s: }'.,, 2 > '�S ••^ y'�',�,J�aV'�y' 33}Y SJYttf}i 'j,:. 1,5`ti.K-.•'^.'� S- L'��� a:'�` � ,t. ����:, Y``t'� y ,`.`' x<)t-'i+•'{y L\ 51,:,-v sltr;I, f'A ,.k 7•r. 1•.'j�':� ' rs, (!} �k�`� �'..P:;3 ,rti S r�;:rt�;: �'--1.,,, ' 5�7�}%(y:ilj��zr��,•':� ;t,..t;:�(�, ` Y�.�p �j��t(�.:?�r� S �;•;,iY K;tr Sr'1s;' ry,� -' A.�f�`:-fY>t'c'Xc.'•YU[.'w-Ck'!;;�i+,IX:.JP?'�Y.-Z`::���ifl;%.{brt�Cir i,�Jf�!:�'.�..'u'c..,,�o.,-•'i'[�:�r).i! . '+c ;• -' ' ( �,1{ �- 1 \1 �` -�d. i'.r ,,ray,,; Lam,: •,r-, �! ct5�i ` ` I J'•IV �t 5 : • �fittF,�':d;'�%���:,iF`•;,,t -i'� >vyPd;. .•4L: �v ;y•f:`:1 �,��y;t�,�s-.��• i r 5 � S 1`%rr + ('�,.'S' � 'Sj"�i f�,?'���1�-J' ( r•; t.. .c.4 ?- Cx�� d��i ii`f �{s,��rh r��1 } , V 'i.i' �1, .r: ; •x1;.`v;•` ",r��- k- t (f I 'fir?�+�"6J,Yt 113%:ti�,�,�ri'.R� Y5 p'•lh •'yj�•i�. �t(�,jrrJ�yr,. :3r;�'t,+ 6� .;.y"• -�{�i .��,ryl'�c t\:��! i-:.�lif�r 1'.'• .^s(• ,1.: ii r, '�S jr`:,^�y,J f�y' - �•i. 1n: ,J• �i,l � �wyJJ../M'; ��� "•{11(�..w;'4 !(; i}-. J�`.I•.i1 •. �'J 'f)f•;'.`.,.ti '( `i�Fr i� Y� tr'�y (, !•At sra C=';�'s' , �i,;��f, •Y: } ,�,.r• '*'•+�, ;.,r% • � •1 ?',( +lip. f c, I A;,'�: r< ��� Y' ,:y�r" r.;s• �'" vc' ;,}} ,.. �'. �- , �.!�C,� S '3 J L: 4_� G• It"5.-•i.j'"'F �, ,7i rr `�• ,,� J1.' `y, r•'?ii r". "t; •� ( r; `�{ ;y rY r?_1 '':,:(�drr -4/?. ,i.�,,;: i,�(-j � .�V�l, ty�. '•�, t `�;wt;,�`.t•, �Y .� i�'si{,+,,�.��k� ,> •'rrJ� iv5r�. s .� �. i�h'r���b+,"4•@t� }�';'!t� Ifx;•� yt•'��.y:};;.`r�.��p. ti�r���l�f��,,,:.t._+ 9>?}t' r K "C�/ 3�r"r�j.[,y 'c�{{i�• ?r lrhr ')�}I„� .�l:.it{..L �ls �1 J.tr P' � r ',} "Cr 1,}x'.}°'1{•'~' S:,�i%�i '�'>,/,+i:rt) ~�rujSt Tt./,yy,` J _ iJ1\•rye}�r1'. ;,, •by.l4 .r'( G,cr _ . •-+.f'f.?` 1'` ,'.�, �7.1{' ' j�✓';fy--r L�. �� '. * •�,�'�`a KN1 �T�'•�f,. .r}:lr.. 's'�>,, ��- t .� ter., .t;.,. . OP > � k •':(�(a'�.3i).' '1) �� Yh:r ,� � `l,, i I:rr1t;-�5 f - i + -�•+. �'% i��j ^•'��r(.14.�t �- .ni .�C[',�X•. '�h(`'r,.•-r Ik`- �. J:1.'>.'••��^�(�'y+ ;.t '.,+it,'F 7 '� ��'+;F }'`�, u J�;+ 1vur•Y��J M�k•,•j' ^1'1� r�>,s �. .� .. ;y .d',. �r t . �'$fi j ��. �'�((��,,.. 3`?�.;V*' v .r�•�: tea,'?, ��•:..s.,' .la ._:-,,�;i 4'( �" :"*'}, �� • ;_t*� }'. y, tS ,t Y.j?' " .11 \�' Jtr:f •�:•3i •! L'•7r'(�,'t•�. µ h� ��� yi .! Y'rtt,T`�'f:'r .. <',7�� 5 ' l ::. r'tt':l . `��,1�. . rt't••�. f^.:ryu.���:��• •� �•i,, ii�}r�,y,�>T �.'. ` i- V .�y1.4i _ /�i'�!�� r, ... o�� r,i ' :.: �'� YS1`"'�S={lj _l}v�5• (�.5��'N tJ.4cYlf�vr F°"iy,i 4i',,?vr- (+r �'.:`t-. .: ��' T., C`°F;f fJ?'Yi�.'FP,•� �,t` iS';� r ';'.1 '` 1 '+�e�' j'�",�.�`tv -�.. ". j:�/ < Sa, � _.rI,.r;}L�(�jj'+>. �ti•;..t'�.r �,y_{".,�,•.rt�, .Y,`y,�,__ � ��.,.� Xr; `C. •,, '!'.w;.}i �' e``+r_ .. v(, {` N.:'.t ;`N> >Jf1•.:' J{'i- }:,,, y, _ f + �« ;tr 3 FIDALQO ST"-,rt+;" PHONE 283.763E i�,a;/YiacJ+ kCIUAl AI ACKA RAR11 '4q.ftYa0 • � aZOO . tirBs�r�i'�n�'•�•'S ��Y� hf•%� j�::r..,� • r: J •4rj��t.�1��,C ��: _y, I.t .. "N.• { Ir :�� ..;yr�`��w�5,d .rf�;l �1-�i''�I�Z �i;,,. '� 1.af. t•: SiU..,. � r • � •Irl :liL'..-,y�i.._a.5���."1�i �.•i :. a .Y��v� .yn �'r. �n �-sw.. �I ,l,b �• •�t iy„ • ��� � � • •� • • 1 �- •1;.,-r�� 7-','�Y4,l • ��I�r r� .C{{•IIi8iP11.11i:>���J.':•1�C1� t 1{B 1 r r� r •.. r r l r 1 � � }t� L ��'^n}� /i +;�f�' r, t;fr'q,.. n�fy`��,'y,,%sjY,,iT,y/�rf�r�ti:f' pf-t .�.1�v �r7i �yxp�y� yr. .l`n'";•.K:'ril:,,'1• `+"T' ., y,�.j..._` 'r' 4tf,".rt;t ('. , a' :ISM �'f 'f/•J� jWy- p1 4d ' Y�v�'" �: fir. 5..-f r rvCiFt l�`'�•i'�l�` t 11"... ,�- �y/ r ty, i' -$ �t t.G-L•P9S.t15 _ , , �a � .,�11.!�;r�V I• 4.: �jo.r 1 .`.t'`r'�`. Sl��c f,��� _"y,lt " FI �'KS+ >,r� G 1�• �')/,i �'Z- �r pf' 1','�.... _ Y�', d,C'Ji,�,.' t '��R.>i�✓ � S `'.ti ry�.Tt..fS' •{.�< pr r } ' j-y` ,} N• rl � r�.:, ,i ^si: a,Z� 1. :i.%1., r S,: �.,t4�e� ���. j. 7� � � r j _'�• �!�;: ..J �����. � � �l.!• YA�� �-1 ,��� f1�Y�t F.1'+r Y.= 4'�:'S ..e� )L. .�.i�i1'l 1 �1 �. :I�Rf,;,�,• !{ry`A"" ..�,,'t - :.4�i�'r 1J:�j�j7' �i� nr{�t��+`"•�y,�LliTyf{ri. M r. •' • -. l,�l• J-W 'f� • �`'iif�;i••'1'f • • fir. .a�.2-i���.a. jQ. .�` ..Yr�' ;V• ��:� ,� rf.-1�•. VrJ t?�1 �•••f. _ �� / �r _ ��,.•t. J ,e�K,'i z r.�?,1, „.1:'j�..'%a.{ •� —r rni. ,• ��, i.;,.•.: Jr: 4.� �.� .,1 .,,-p ,y .T..—...•_- , S., }�i�.'.Jr11Kn`l.(•. .1.4,fJ, �., �. t�`.?.� �:: J(f, ..�., �i1 ".1 r� .�\._•t..yy. ,-�•`;', 'L.: ir, i� _ .. C- ,i+`l"' i�� - - ` NORTHERN TESTING LABORATORIES, INC. 600 UNIVERSITY PLAZA WEST, SUITE A FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99709 907479.3116 i 2005 FAIRBANKS STREET ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99D03 907$77 S37S t City of Kenai Date Arrivedl 4116187 210 Fidalgo Street Time Arrive& 1700 Kenai, Alaska 9%11 Date SampUdl 4114107 ! Time Saspledl - Date Cospletedi 5/04107 Sources Kenai Vallhouse 11, 112 Sample IDIII A041697-617 • aafaataafaaafaaataaasa.faa�.laatafaafaaMaatataap.afatapal/�a�ptalapaaaasftaf Mellhouse 01 Kellhouse 12 Paraseter Unit A041607-6 A041687-7 ' Result Std, Bev. Result Std. DIV. sassssssesasessssasaassssaasaasaassassssssasassssssssssasssssswswsssasssasssn Color C.U. iS - 40 Total Organic ag/L 7.2 - 5.7 - Carbon PH Units a Beg C 8.! a 19.7 - 8.6 a 1900 - Alkalinity ag/L as CaCO3 101 - 121 - Calcium ag/L 5.19 0.05 1.63 0.02 Magneeius ag/L 6.06 0.07 1.77 0.01 Hardness III& as C&CO3 44 - 15 - Total Dissolved Solids eg/L 148 164 - Iron mg/L 0.15 0.02 0.13 0.00 Manganese ag/L 0.028 0.002 OsO22 0.002 - n a. ``^ — -=-- -- - —= - - - ---- Reported-Byt_ - f // Mel _ - $106/07- sasaroaaasaass San no a ss as a Miss aiasasaasasausassroass Carol J. Garrison, Vice -President 4 •' ssssssssssasasa+ssaesaasssssssssssssssansronssusssasaaassssrossrsasssgssssss t% L T rt (y; s:. ti { j r .x'd L n NORTHERN TESTING LABORATORIES, INC. 500 UNIVERSITY PLAZA WEST, SUITE A FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 09709 9074*3115 2505 FAIRBANKS STREET ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 907.2774 3378 Quality Control Report Oiiml7ammOCOQOQQOnaaamnn Clients City of Kenai ID#a A41687-6,7 Listed below are quality control assurance reference samples with a known concentration prior to analysis. The acceptable limits represent a 95% confidence interval established by the Environmental Protection Agency or by our laboratory through repetitive analyses of the reference sample. The reference samples indicated below were analyzed at'the same time as your sample, ensuring the accuracy of your results. Sample# Parameter Unit Result Acceptable Limit ooamommaQQomamaomammoommmaaaocammomaaamnmmaaaaaaaamoanaomomonoaomaaoemos� pHydrion 8.0 pH Units 8.0 7.9 - 8.1 EPA WP384 Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 35.7 31.1 - 37.7 EPA WP384 Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 137 127 -- 142 384-2 Calcium mg/L 0.531 0.452 - 0.612 2 Magnesium mg/L 0.183. 0.137 - 0.215 2 2 Iran mg/L 0.753 0.695 - 0.882 284-2 Manganese mg/L 0.328 0.304 - 0.387 i.. `f i : Rej._rted Bye Dates 5/06/87 C-zrrison, Vice-President »>aanumaaeeaaamaoeaoaaacamaamnoammaaanonaaamannmQgartesarYmmm.�nnmaa®meaomnaaaaea L L "'1 F L r— August 14, 1987 -= -y CITY OF KENAI "Od Oap" *j 4"" 210 FIDALOO KBNAI, ALASKA Nil, TBLBPMONB M - M5 To: Council ' Froms Janet Whelan !'Y # City Clerk -- Re: 1990 Census I have been appointed Census Liaison for the 1990 Census. I will submit material for your information as I receive it. -.� If you have any questions regarding the 1990 Census, please contact me. JW/ras i i 01a MA- W. NFf E of eCensus STATES ARTMENT OF COMMERCE D•701L1 15.871 Washington, O.C. 20233 �4%m THE DIRECTOR t OFFICE OF E FROM THE DIRECTOR i BUREAU OF THE CENSUS \y`y� The census is the only Federal program explicitly required by the U.S. Constitution. Although the primary purpose of the census is to determine how many seats each state will have in the U.S. House of Representatives, there are numerous other uses of the data. Some of the other uses are: implementing the "one person --one vote" principle in state and local redistricting programs and providing the basis for determining how Federal and state governments distribute billions of dollars to local areas. In addition, local and American Indian tribal governments use census statistics for planning and administering community programs. The Census Bureau developed the Local Review Program to help achieve a complete count, and we request your voluntary participation. While conducting the census, we will provide housing unit counts, by block, to each governmental unit for comparison with locally derived estimates. We also will ask each governmental unit to identify, using local records, the blocks that might contain major discrepancies. The enclosed Information Booklet describes how you can prepare local housing unit estimates. In a letter sent on November 7,1986, the Census Bureau invited each governmental unit to designate someone to coordinate its area's participation in the 1990 Local Review Program. The liaison will review and substantiate major discrepancies, if any, between local estimates and census counts. If you have not designated a liaison or wish to change any of the information originally provided, please contact the appropriate regional office listed in Appendix 1 of the Information Booklet. The liaison you designate should be someone who can represent your locality throughout the duration of the program, which ends in 1990. As they conduct local review training workshops throughout your State, the agencies listed in Appendix 1 will assist the Census Bureau in updating mail and telephone information. This means that it will be necessary to release current information, Including that pertaining to your liaison, to these agencies for verification or correction. If you do not wish us to release this information, please notify the appropriate Census Bureau regional office by August 1,1987. The Census Bureau looks forward to working with you on this very important program. { ` Sincerely, JOHN G. KEANE 7 P 0 '1 !i fi 12�31�F 15>6��, � Jv CGr of KENp� t, %��BftZ�'� f :i ,i ;i T - I it TELEPHONE 071586.1325 August 10, 1987 Tat Municipal Clerks FROMt Scott A. Burgess, Executive Director REt Conference Hotel Reservations 105 MUNICIPAL WAY, SUITE 301 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99801 Attached are reservation forms from the Hotel Captain Cook and the Sheffield Anchorage (soon to be the Westmark Anchorage) which should be used to ensure the special room rates for the 1987 AML Annual Local Government Conference. Please feel free to photocopy them for the elected and appointed officials in your community who plan to attend the Conference, scheduled for November 11-14 in Anchorage. I also encourage you to photocopy page 7 of the August AML Newsletter, which includes further information about hotel arrangements and an Advance Registration Form, for distribution to officials in your community. The Hotel Captain Cook will serve as the official headquarters hotel, and pre -conference activities and the annual banquet and dance will be held there. Other Conference activities will be held at the Egan Convention Center, just down the street from both hotels. Please show your appreciation to the hotels for the special conference rates by making your reservations early. With the elections coming up, it may be difficult to give the hotel names, but, to ensure the type of accommodations you prefer, it is advisable to reserve rooms in the names of current officials. Name changes or cancellations are easier to handle at the last minute than new room reservations. As is noted in the article on page 5 of the August Newsletter, AML and Alaska Airlines are currently negotiating special rates for conference attendees, and AML has requested similar discounts from Markair. We will be sure to let you know the details as soon as they are available, but we anticipate that some sort of discount coupon system will be used and that advance registrants will receive these coupons directly from AML. It is, thus, even more important that those planning to attend the 1987 Conference register in advance. ' Thank you for helping us spread the word about the 1987 Conference. If - --you-have-any-questions-about conference -or -hotel arrangements, please-call .d.- fU. ­ee ­ COG_1 99C IB OR CITIES AND THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES L i T y DEPARTMENT OF R EV ENUM 550 W. 7th Avenue ALI. mucBEVERAGBcDNTmsoARD Anchorage. Alaska 99501 ( - i� [ August 6, 1987 4 uptown Motel/VIP Lounge -Backdoor M.,'`2 UA r Schilling Alaska, Inc. P.O. Box 7155 Nikiski, AK 99635 Your app�ication for transfer of license holder of the Beverage Disp. License and Du cate to the above rom was approve y e an Alcoholic Beverage Controloar at is meet ng o T••�y 29 1987 The enclosed license is to be posted conspicuously in your place of business I where it may be easily read by everyone. Please return the license of the former holder to this office. It is no ' longer valid and may cause suspension or revocation of your license if used ... illegally. Sincerely. ce 44 j kBet y L C lhoon Records and Licensing Supervisor (907) 277-8638 ; Enc. city of Kenai cc: Governing body - 9(enal eommunity 1'/�ta7y A PUBLIC LIBRARY IN SERVICE SINCE 1949 163 MAIN STREET LOOP KENAI, ALASKA NS11 REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 1987 . S�g/1191�ti�6 Circulation Adult Juvenile Easy Books Fiction 1702 902 1871 438 Non-fiction 1812 259 Total Book Circulation 6984 385 1 Films, Phonodiscs, Pamphlets, Periodicals Total Circulation 7369 t Additions Adult Juvenile Easy Books Gifts 16 -- 1 1 17 5S Purchases 51 3 e I Total Additions 72 ,. ` Remedial and Re -Worked Books Adult Juvenile Easy Books A .'. ; 173 4 4 2 183 S Interlibrary Loans Ordered Received Returned Books 68 62 22 AV 7 37 7 Interlibrary Loans by our Library .. 74 ,t Volunteers Number .. 29 Total Hours .. 73814 Income Fines and Sale Books 752.65 f 9(enai Community 1.dna%q A PUBLIC UBRARV IN SERVICE SINCE 1949 163 MAIN STREET LOOP KENAI, ALASKA 99611 Library Cards Issued July, 1987 Kenai 147 Clam Gulch 12 Kasilof 11 Nikiski 20 Soldotna 41 Sterling 3 234 Library Patronage .. 8,338 Persons o�dLe Forget w 9G 4 - !l►� ��� Sp Alonsored der Flyer Alaskans s on 1 fOR ~-� si and City of Kenai L KENAI SENIOR SERVICES - - -- Program Coordinators Liz Schubert' Phones 283-7294, 1104 ?0:9nion �4a. j Activity Specialists Louise Earle Service Hourss 9s00 - 3:00, M-F --- I ' atc / 98 7 l 41 MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY -� 3 4 5 6 ' I -Panel Art Bingo Gallon Picnic at the Cookie � l� Change Decors- Volleyball Fort Bake tion/Bulletin Bible Share Boards oaldtalnd I f 10 12:00 oMprt i1 Movie 12 13 14 j Cookie Bake Bingo Arts And Sing a Long OUTTRIP (++ Cards/Games Bible Share Crafts Four Score Ninilchik Fair e. 18 19 20 21 17 k 3{ Story Time Bingo BAR - B -QUE Balloon Cake Sake HAPPY BIRTHDAY I TO ODMAN. Scrabble i Bible Share Volleyball Movie ! �I � 8 P e k Shape Bingo a64d sleights Dancing 24 25 26 OUT TRIP 27 28 ! Cookie Bake Bingo Arts and Picnic at Group Discussi n Crafts Liz's House Movie - -- -----� -- - --- - Cards/Games Bible Share Home Made ice { Cream ----L 31 DAILY ACTIVITIES ` Generations 9s00 -Arrival/Greetings/Snacks 11s00 -Intellectual Quiz/Reminescence i the Game 9:30 -Group Exercise 1100 - Devotional IOs00 -Active Game 1200 -Lunch Card Bingo 10:30 - Open Ac;ivity 100 -Games/Garde 2:00 - Open Activity CALENDAR HIGHLIGHTS FOR AUGUST 6- Picnic/band at the Fort 11- Caregiver Support Group -12ZOO a„� (eel) 14- Outtrip to Ninilichik Fair-i5.nn���nk / 21- Bar-B-Q/ Odman'sBirthday Party 27- Picnic at Liz's house, Kasilof A MESSAGE FROM THE COORDINATOR Its hard to believe_that__i,ts the month of August! I hope that everyone got their share of fishing in. Its been a busy r summer here at the Center. New supplie.` for a variety of activities have arrived and the participants have been enjoying CARGEGIVER SUPPORT GROUP trying them out. We feel especially grateful for the many contributions that The Caregiver Support Group will meet were made over the last year, which have on Tuesday, August llth at noon at Ft. allowed us to purchase some of the newest Kenay. Family member caring for loved activity kits and games for the Center. y ones with dementia are welcome. We will be meeting Mr. Rick Nault, from the At the present time the census of participant Community Mental Health Center, who will is very low. Word of mouth seems to be i be replacing Mary Boutesles. Our subject the best way of communicating the benefits ` this month is "Who Cares for the Caregiver" of attending the Center for memory impaired Hope to see you there! persons. Liz, is available to come and speak to church and service groups, if HAVE YOUR PICTURE TAKEN you would like to arrange for such a talk Charles BaileyPhotography Studio has a please let her know. Special Photo offer for Seniors, on Aug.14th Sunshine in the Canter: Yes, indeed. The regular price for 2 50's and 8 wallet Eight new VITA lights have been installed j sized is $60....Mr. Bailey is offering in Ft. Kenay. Studies have shown that the these for only $25. Give his studio a call to Vita light gives off light similiar to the arrange for an Might natural light from the sun and is a benefit 1 ideaappofor Christmas! be a nice gift idea for Christmas. to persons spending time indoors. 3 CHOPS SUEY ,. 4 ROAST BEEF 5 SALISBURY STEAK 6 BAR-B_ UE � -----'— � 7 HALIBUT j �. RICE BROCCOLI POTATOES/RICE PAR. POTATOES WON TON SOUP MASHED POTATOES CUCUMBER SALAD SALMON%HOTDOGS PEAS MOLDED SALAD APPLESAUCE HOT MUFFIN BAKED BEANS BEETS FOLL RUIT JUICE ROLLS RHURBARS CAKE MACARONI SALAD . EBB.. 40,.�n..*T HOT ROLL SNICKER DESSERT 10 NAVY BEAN SOUP 11 BAKED HASWEGG 12 GLAZED HAM PORKCHOPS OR PANCAKES SWEET POTATOES POTATO PANCAKES BACON P/PEAR SALAD MELON CUP ORD OLI 1APPLESAUCE ; LETTUCE WEDGE V-8 HOT R LL ROLL / ICE CREAM CHOCg E PIE 17 BAKED COD OR 18 EEF ST 19 sea C ICKEN i SALMON PATTY RR /PEAS KE EAN 1 BAKED POTATO LA SA {! COLESLAW SI IT ! CR. PEAS APPL CRISP ROLLS ROLL/ COOKIES B1�ti HDA CAK 24 CLAM CHOWDER 25 OAST : OLT SANDWICH SCALLOP PO A `' RED SLAW ITALIAN B C FRESH FRUIT MUFFIN ---.--------------------_._-.# ICE CREAM BANANA CR.. P 31 ROAST PORK CORNBREAD STU TOMATOES i LETTUCE W GE I ROLL rKIE I PUDDING/C 26 HUNGARI 13 KNOCKWURST SAURKRAUT GERM POT. SALT COTTAGE CHEESE STRAWBERRY CAKE SR, BREAD 0 PA HETTI 14 SACK LUNCHES D Sandwich Fruit . Cookie 2 S G "• BARBQUE MEAT SAUCE Chickeh --vesBED SALAD Potatoe Salad GARLIC BREAD -Baked' Beans GREEN BEANS Fresh Fruit BLUEBERRY SUCKL Birthda Cake iH -BAR 28 VEGETABLE SOUP B QUE EGG SALAD OR CORN ON THE CO R CASS• HAMBURGERS' BOLOGNA SAND.. RROT SA D HOTD--- OGS PINEAPPLE SAL. IE PUDDING PLUMS ROLLS - LETTUCE .TOr;ATd ICE CREAM FRESH FRUIT �G�L~ L SUITE 204 f r—Q — # t T July 30, 1987 City of Kenai 210 Fidalgo St. Kenai AK 99611 KENAI, ALASKA 99W I RECEIVED JUL 3 0195? STATEMENT . #8616 Kenai Boating Facility mI a � � CONTRACT AMOUNT t $78,000.00 ✓ PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED:��� 1 7y73/,k7 ^4 . Professional Services through 7/29/87 ; PRINCIPAL ENGINEER 4,275.00 j 57 hrs. /75.00 ✓ - WM. A. KYGE & ASSOC. 663.30 603.00J+ 10% - . LONGSTAF1j ENGINEERING 921.80 jjj 838.00dd+ 102 i NORTHERN EST LAB j 1035.00�+ 10% 1,138.50 TRYCK, NYAV 6 HAYES 1,179.56 j 1072.33✓+ 10% � _ . TOTAL: $8,178.16 BALANCE DUE: , f fGR COUN,.IL MEBI ...—[) city Mqr. •'aQPub,ic Woks --C3 City CA fln�n ee�� -.r� ���' Ori I' �` Submltl d a7��+ l Well OK 13NO 1306 ----+• C11' AA Z06, Y?o00, 1-0 97 �i �1 =+t NP 7 f ea.k AIAYKAHH6Y9 CO SULTI R Eo smog-p--fiwl �e n. REc:Ej y <GD AUG 0 51987 Anrust 5, 1987 piaft Waft OWL Oftemom STA'1EMFNT City of Kenai Box 580 Kenai." Alaska 99669 JABBA-City of Kenai Project No.87039 Progress Billing NwWmr 3 Through July 19t 1987 Professional Serviass Principal Engr. 1.30 Hours @ $78 -"' $ 101.40 Engineer I - 19.50 Hours @ 067-' 0130650 Engineer IV - 57.50 Hours @ 035" 2 Man Survey Crew 36.50 Hours @ $100"' 02012:50 3650.00 TestiSieve 130.00 Analysis 2 @ 065 r a Mann An _ 7 F ---------- " '" / f 'fY from m,vvncu. mrr.r. m v _ city a wr. AMMU u llt oinks — ' Clint MAY - -"- - - - -- -- . • Dt1gUw1 Yo�-�� SuDmHted By--r— �-- :lNntll OK LING [aYrs ---Of 1 ra Alf— 7-10. Y9000. eO 9 7 . yJ, '_ -•"-.- �.�'.... ... .._ _. _. -__. ._�,. 1. I STEVE, , nn`` IW F ^&T. OF COMMUNITT & REGIONAL AFFAIRS o ao. aoxe JUNEAU. ALAW 09811•2100 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER PHONE: (eon 404700 o wa E. 36TH AVENUE, SUITE 4W ANCHORAGE, ALABKA 09508.4M i PHONE: (907) 563.1073 July 21, 1987 ` g111a f9?°aim CERTIFIED/RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED u r 1 Co The Honorable John J. Williams - - - - - dayor of Kenai 210 Fidalgo 9s ►;y Kenai, AK 99611 's�c'11 1 z, Dear Mayor Williames REs FY 87 STATE REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM -- FINAL PAYMENT Enclosed is the FY 87 final entitlement payment for your munic- ipality under the State Revenue Sharing Program. Final entitlements have been calculated based upon the results of the special appeal period of April 20, 1987. The calculations used =s to determine your municipality's share of the $4.5 million _ withheld were based on the results of the appeal period pur- suant to a court order in Municipality of Anchors a v. State of k Alaska, Case No. 3AN-87-25 1 CIV. Included In thle letter To —a reak own of how your municipality's final entitlement was determined, along with an explanation of the restrictions placed on the use of revenue sharing funds by state law. FY 87 Entitlement Summary Your entitlement summary is as followss Total Entitlement $453,318 Less Prepayment 243,903 Less Provisional Payment 180 762 FINAL PAYMENT subject to $28,953 prorationing (see below) PRORATED FINAL PAYMENT $28,643 All final payments for FY 87 have been prorated at .999660522. , . . This prorationing occurred because of the distribution of min- I _ imam entitlements prior to -the special appeal process.__-- r- i ,j. Y t i } of ,j .E Mayor williams July 21, 1987 Page Two Enclosed is a detailed breakdown of how your municipality's entitlement was determined from the Miscellaneous Services Account, and where applicable, from the Tax Equalization Account. This information should be provided to the municipal- ity's finance officer for monitoring compliance with the limitations placed on the use of these funds by state law. Generally, except as noted below, state revenue sharing funds may be spent at the municipality's discretion for any public facility or service for which the municipality has the power to expend public funds, as provided by Alaska Statute (AS) 29.35 and local ordinance. You should, however, be aware of the provisions' of 19 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 30, which may, in some cases, establish further restrictions. Addi- tionally, these funds are subject to State of Alaska audit requirements provided at 2 AAC 45,010 (copy enclosed). Restrictions on the Use of Funds SERVICE AREAS - An equalization entitlement generated by the tax levy of a taxing unit may be used only for authorized expenditures of that taxing unit. However, please note that no more than 15 percent of the areawide equalization entitlement may be used for non-areawide services. ROAD MAINTENANCE - By the end of this fiscal year, you must spend at least 20 percent of the funds received in the Road Maintenance Category for that service to demonstrate that a minimum level of service was provided. The remaining 80 percent of funds for roads may be used for other municipal services and facilities. HEALTH FACILITIES - By the end of this fiscal year, at least 20 percent of the funds you receive for health facilities must be spent for the operation and maintenance of health facilities. The remaining 80 percent of funds for health facilities must be dedicated for health facilities at a later date. HOSPITALS - All- funds provided- to local hospitals must be promptly transferred to the hospital. By the end of this fiscal year, the hospital must spend at least 20 percent of the funds it receives on hospital operation and maintenance. The remaining 80 percent of funds may be spent only on hospitals at a later date. r) 9 0 f a Mayor Williams July 21, 1987 Page Three If your revenue sharing funds are spent improperly, this department will either reduce your entitlement next year or demand the return of the money paid. Any questions you have should be directed to Bill Rolfzen, State Revenue Sharing Program, at 465-4733. Thank you. Sinc rely, David G. ffman Commissi nor Enclosuress Miscellaneous Services Account Breakdown Tax Equalization Breakdown (where applicable) Audit Requirements State of Alaska Warrant cc: Jim Sanders, LGS, MRAD, Anchorage L Gam_ 1'y � L. -I J ,. .0 Register 95, October 1985 ADMINISTRATION 2 AAC 45.010 i CHAPTER 4S. (2) generally accepted auditing standards, as t GRANT ADMINISTRATION accepted by the American Institute of Certifie • - Public Accountants on July 1, 1985, for th Section —' ' entity being audited. 10. Audit requirements (d) The audit report required under (b) of this 2 AAC 45.010. AUDIT REQUIREMENTS. section must address the following: (a) As part of the financial Information re- quired under AS 37.OS.030, a state agency that (1) the systems of internal control. and enters Into a finandial assistance agreement to whether the recipient entity has effective provide financial assistance to an entity shall, In control over, and proper accounting for. coordination with any other state agencies pro- revenues, expenditures. assets, and liabilities; viding financial assistance to that entity, submit to the Department of Administration through (2) the systems established to ensure compli- the state coordinating agency an audit of the ante with state statutes and regulations, and,. recipient entity if that entity Is subject to audit applicable financial assistance agreements, under (b) of this section. The audit must be con- affecting the expenditure of state money, and ducted and submitted as- described In tills whether the- recipient entity has complied with section. In order to ensure compliance with this those statutes, regulations, and agreements; subsection, At audit sequkmmts of this sec. _ lion must be contained in any financial assis. (3) the recipient srttity*a burr dd trans- tattce agreement entered into by a state agency. actions. financial statements, and accounts; whether those financial statements are presented (b) An entity ttiat'eriteis lnto a financial assis- fairly in accordance with generally accepted tance agreement, or agreements, with a cumula- accounting principles; and whether the financial tive total of statements contain fellable financial data pre- sented In accordance with applicable financial (1) 5300,000 or more during a state fiscal assistance agreements. year shall submit to the state coordinating ( j agency, within one year after the end of the (a) An audit report required under (b) of this audit period, an annual audit report covering the section need not evaluate the effectiveness of a audit period; or program funded -by state financial gWstance. i However, a program •evaluation may be con. (2) at least 5100,000 but less than 5300,000 ducted or requested by the state agency which i during each of two consecutive state fiscal years entered into the financial assistance agreement. • shall submit to the state coordinating agency (f) An audit required by this section must (A) a biennial audit upon covering the cover either the entire operations of the sedp- . SO& period, due vidd&. one yeas after the 'lent entity, or at the option of that smtity, only ••--• end of the audit period; or ; :. y the departments. agencies, or -establishments of that entity which received. expended, or other. (H) if the recipient entity chooses, or the wise administered state financial assistance dur state requests, an annual audit-rdport covering Ing the audit period. The state coordinating the audit period, due within one year after agency may consider a series of audits of a recap• the end of the audit period. lent entity's individual departments. agencies, or establishments for the same fiscal year as a (c) An audit required by this section must be single audit. conducted by an independent auditor, according to the following audit standards: (g) A recipient entity snail provide the state coordinating agency with sufficient copies of (1) Standards for Audit of Governmental each audit report to allow submission of Oraanizattons. Programs. Activities acopy and Munc. to each State agency providing financial tions. 1981 revision adopted by the comptroller assistance to tine entity. The state coordinating general of the United States; or agency shall determine if auditing standards ha a - 2.18.8d.1 - — - -- 7 I . y i•dnf ' ...p..�.-..�...v.wa f 7 1. 'Register95,October 1985 ADMINISTRATION t 2 AAC 45.010 been met and will forward a copy ;,f the audit (A) for an annual audit under (b)(1) of to the Department of Administration and other this section, the recipient entity's fiscal year appropriate state agencies. The state coordi- in which the entity entered Into the financial nating agency shall coordinate resolution of assistance agreement or agreements; audit exceptions and further audit work In accordance with (h) of this section. (0) for a biennial audit under (b)(2)(A) of this section, the recipient entity's two con- ` (h) Unless additional audit requirements are secutive fiscal years in which the entity . imposed by state or federal law, a state agency entered into the financial assistance agree - that provides financial assistance fo an entity ment or agreements; shay accept the audit required by this section •-• �-- •- - In satisfaction of any other audit requirement. If .(C) for an annual audit under (b)(2)(B) additional audit work is necessary to meet the of this section, the recipient entity's fiscal needs of a state agency, the audit work must be year in which the entity entered into the based on audit required by this section and be financial assistance agreement or agreements; Paid for by the stata agency. Audit exceptions noted during an audit required by this section (2) "entity" does not fnclude,the University must be resolved by agreement between the of Alaska or any other state agency; recipient entity and the state agency responsible for the financial. assistance award .agreement In. - (3) "inancial assistance" means state grants, volved zontracts, provider agreements, -cooperative agreements, and all forms of state financial • (i) A third party that receives financial assis. assistance to an entity, and includes aq forms of tance through a recipient entity, In an amount state financial assistance provided through an described in (b) of this section. Is subject to the entity to a third party; "financial assistance" applicable requirements of the section. A does not include public assistance provided recipient entity that disburses S 100,000 or more .*under AS 47; nor does "financial assistance" In state financial assistance to a third party shall Include goods or services purchased for the 44 ensure that the third party complies with the- direct administration or operation of state requirements of this section. That recipient government; for a third party. "financial assis- entity shall - also ensure that appropriate cor- tance" does not include goods purchased from rective action Is taken within six months after a the third party by a recipient entity for the third party's noncompliance with an applicable direct administration or operation of the re- itate statute or regulation, or financial assistance cipient entity; .. agreement, is disclosed. - (4) "state coordinating agency" means the Q) This section takes effect on August 1.1985 Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for an entity subject to audit under (b)(1) of Office of the Governor, or OMB's designee. (EfL jhh section end whose Abed year ends ou or 811185. Re& 95) after June 30,1986. ' ' ( Authority: AS 37.OS.020 AS 37.05.0 • (k) This section takes effect on July 1, 986 AS 37.05.19 0 for an entity subject to audit under (b)(2) of this section and whose fiscal year ends on or after June 30,1987. 0) For purposes of this section. If an entity has not identified its fiscal year, that entity's fiscal year is July I through June 30. (m) For purposes of this section, . (1) "audit period" means 2-18.8d.2 L_ 7 T -1 :t p H C A !- t -. - - - - - - - - -- A O O cw r A -1 0 N r r r �+ r• O O C� M+ O N -� :0� " a r :o p O o w r c► -1 -1 W x m O o • p a n • r 2 O /mil -1 [ rn ? ►� 2 A r JD m S p O O r T p n O N 0 N N N 40 'v to �7 P ~ N O n C ' N r W few 1/fit W4 I- H H a1 C/ M r s. sc -+ -� x Of m 044 w In :1 nl p X. .4 «. N N T_ s UI N a m ►� V► at sl p jo v x 0 N H O x 07 m O } 11 w O N w A O p - < x x n m US -I I.1 ! m O O •-• �o m O a• M O N 0 0 C OU • m IInn o In O m m tMii « M * w a Itco r z n x m m x w N O Z 70 .• ITS r r u n s• Z -1 � N -+ 17 • x � +t O O o v O • IA !A p • ►• m 2 b N 11 A P A x -• ! a W 54 "� ►• .. x �e �♦ .+ • .n a m A O Z r M -1 lrl m 7D O A A O • IV A A 0to Z r ~ A A a ell 2 CV. w m of r o o ...'" Z v �` � p bl C -4 y v • • �' A Pf In q ac i A ac .♦ O 0 •o O -� O _. pN. rN i t, r r �+ +1 s 1t ♦ V1 N in Z ! toV1 -4 V ^ r► O v v W N O -1 ►�• A O O 0 2 n n n O a r VN to 0 a O v iC 30C w0 in m v -1 l�C 0 '0 A C ,1 M %0 N Z 11 O x it •d O V O O y -1 '� Z ,o •Z O y i• s 3 -t n � N 70 111 -1 H O ►• VI z W A 3b 3w H z 20 9 ! 0 2 N'f: �C m .. o -+ -4 O ;u 0 o Z 04 70 y " M O O N A ! r w % Z T. 11 m p n -t n f1x Z .. r N If 1• 71 n 0 0 0-4 Z N f r . P 7D A Co 7D O N fA 11 11 ! 70 O O M N Cm cm ! -1 = w in N ! -4 11 '� '0 i o 11 v H „-4 n• N 11 O a ^o a o s Zo 0 0 0 0 /♦+1 ai s o C w x C -1 v v NQ - - -1 -1 !..' O a y O O 76 C C In 00 • • 2 ?_ I: 1O V ! 1O `O 70 W O► p N c A 41 OI N y%A r lu A a -0 a P IN i • Rb..ktvtD Page AUG /a 1987 t � wlaft wept. owt , _.,,....�.....�. d athra� ,,. 7-3i- If PA Y ESTIMATE N•0-: 5 ' CITY OF KENAI ..........:�.....� ' 1 AIP NO. 3-02-0142-03 KENAI MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 1986 IMPROVEMENTS Project AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE, GA APRON, IS TAXIWAY IMPROVEMENTS ZUBECK, INCORPORATED - Contractor r • � -- -- — .- Address 7983 SPUR HIGHWAY i KENAI, AK 99611 Pro j ect No. M/A 1 Phone (907) 283-7369 Period From-1-6-6-1 to ANALYSIS OF ADJUSTED CONTRACT AMOUNT TO DATE {{' / i • Original contract amount $943.007.00�✓ 20 Net change by change orders 4,Z�p, gy a�a J2o,s� O3 Adjusted contract amount to date7�2b't.57 ANALYSIS OF WORK CO?IPLETED ® Original contract work completed 9S4 O5 Additions from change orders completed As 110 4 OMaterials stored at close of period �•. 0 Total earnedO+O+Oo '9S(, Less retainage of 5% percent ejL}'7 dZ QTotal earned less retainago�7 -0 QLess amount of previous payments 42G �, ✓ 11 Balance due this payment CC: McLanes Associates /�iC.0 ""y ieyr. ---13Atamej _ Q9ruuliC Works ..—p caw c1119R 1//, rlglnal T Submitted By. rneU Of( QNo E Yrf 7 0 7 Page a of 10 1 PAY ESTIMATE N 0 : sx__ AIP NO. 3-02-0142-03 KENAI MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 1986 IMPROVEMENTS AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE, GA APRON$ & TAXIWAY IMPROVEMENTS CERTIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR•' According to the best of my knowledge and belief. 1 certify that all items and amounts shown on the (ace of this Periodic Estimate' (ol Partial Payment are correct: that all work has been performed and: or material supplied in full accordance with the requirements of the referenced Contract, and ear duly authorised deviations. substitutions, alterations. and/or additions; that the locegoing is a true and correct statement of the contract account up �PPlirallr Iltle) to and including the last day of the period coveted by this Periodic Estimatel that part of the "Valance Due This Payments* up been received. and that the undersigned and his subcontractors have•fe:hoea S. a Complied with all the labor provisions of said contract. b. C Complied with all the labor s. (;tons of said Contract oseept In those instances where an honest dispute exists with re• spurt to said labor provisions. (it (e) is eheched. describe f•rlelly tellers of dispute.) i. • i ZUBECK, INC. By (Cum.attoq (tiasnoatve of Authoraeed r0 a nlatavelo .19-J" Title AL-0 r �l MNels�t.n—�MIwtS.s CERTIFICATION OF ARCHITECT ORrENGINEER 1 terti(y that 1 have checked and verified the above and fwt•puint: Periodic F.etimate for Partial Payment; that to the boat of my knowlaJpv and belie( it it a true and career: stattment tit wwk rt•ritarmt•J and%or mata•ri.tl wupplival by the contractor; that all nark anJ-'ur malvtial incluJeJ in thitt Pt•rndic F.timale has been ln%pt•ctvJ by my and ar by my Jun• authttrircJ fvrrceantattve of arsi•tant+t and that it h.ts been pvftsumed and 'tot hurplivJ in full a::alJanee ttith rvquirements ad the rvterenev cumr.ta: and that partial payment claimed and requentcJ by the contractor is corrtctly campuleJ un the basis to uaak pIvnVe V and ; and rial .upplavJ to Jaty. ciltneil tArahnt•et tit rnalnra•ri McLane & Associates Dale _a •1 • � ■ PREPAYMENT CERTIFICATION BY FIELD ENGINEER Ch.•ta yPt• a/ 104a&'ma•nt rerltlerdt KI have eh&'Aa•.1 thi. e.rllnale a..tina tale cuntr.fa.•r'. 5eltf•thste of dmtafoll. for C.slrrave I'rnrown►h. life natev..still reports, yr my an.p•.tf.•ti. a.l flie rratvtt, ant life lr rto.iia tty.ot..ul•ti1l11V4 I.t the .110141v4•1t &'nFfnea•r. It t% me dru►san that the .titvmen, of ua•rc ren.•rtre 1 .tna lot mmetmi% i, a:eurate. ttlat the aaovaa•tt•t 1% oU.vnenp tile reyuavthweeta tot the contra". And that the ctmlt Clor .Ifuuld av Pahl tine an►aum rcyue.ltJ abut'&'. a 1 .artist :teal A.i a.14 an.i nr rtatt•flal. un.ttt tilt aa•Btf.l.l 11•1.:ato in.laalaJ t•1 tin• and that It he• hvvn nrl.•rmea anJ'.of sup rinJ in 661l attvr.tan:v ttithtne rvquuvment. al elk a4gstra:1. 4_e`_ ` �• I t " V 7 lvv:a $'netmrq Moot McLane 6 Associates . I 0 0 h p b � f ct ' i` N cz Go let 0 o MOiI O i ca IO a 10 K o ( I a M � 1 b A r • ' 1 ii�� w • ro rn f J�J i y r--- --- - - - AML Volume 8, No, 3 M 070 -$ IN ���L E m EWS ETTE R ALASKA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE August 1987 Downtown Anchorage as viewed from the f brt of Anchorage. �I Y Elected Officially ..r A -So who are new to elected office '�Mn Ala nd those who want to refresh their Ngyn nding of the basics of Alaska local ment should plan to attend the Newly ed Officials Seminar, scheduled just prior to the AML Conference in November. - Noted Alaska local govemment experts Gin, ny Chitwood, former AML Executive Direc- tor, and Dr. Clive Thomas, professor of poli- tical science at the University of Alaska - Juneau, are once again assisting AML in put- ting together an excellent program, one that will help take the mystery out of Alaskan local government operations. The seminar will be held at the Hotel Cap- tain Cook all day on Tuesday, November 10, and at the Egan Convention Center In the morning on Wednesday, November 11. Ses- sions will address Title 2% Alaska's local government statute, how and why to write ordinances; budgeting for your municipality; parliamentary procedures; relations with the ')Anchorage --Site of 1987 AML Conference municipal staff and the public; and effective feparticipants deral lobbyingthe state and level.mee key state As Alaska strives to keep pace and find its other niche in the business world, something provide services and improvements to its 248,050 residents, who have waited patiently leaders and hear from the professionals about the operations of local government. unrelated to petroleum, Anchorage is lead• ing the pack of local governments and pri- through the development stages. The contin. uation of the Eklutna water pipeline project Meeting other newly elected officials from around Alaska is another benefit of the vate Industries to diversify Alaska's potential and develop other markets that will ensure will provide water well Into the 21st century, and the new municipal landfill will serve as seminar, and those attending will be well prepared to participate fully in the AML greater stability in Alaska's changing Anchorages garbage disposal for 3S-40 years. The Eklutna water project and the municipal Local Government Conference, which be - economy. The creation of the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation will use this landfill, as well as the Ship Creek pod expan- slon, Anchorage Telephone Utilitys equal ac- ins on November 11. g More details about the program and ad - vane registration forms will be mailed soon theme as Anchorage promotes itself to new markets. Formally created and approved by cess campaign, and Municipal Light and Power's electrical system and undingare of Anchorages 1987 utility capital im- to all m nici municipalities, in care of the municipal pa clerk. For further information, call the AML the Anchorage Assembly, the Development Council Is the brainstorm of Mayor Tony all pad provement projects, worth $145 million. at 586.1325. Knowles. As Anchorage is home to nearly With the growth of any major city comes half of all the jobs In Alaska, naturally, Its the need for additional access and greater employment rate fell faster than that of any means of transportation. An estimated addi- other area In the state during this recent tional $W million will be spent on Public economic downturn. The need to diversify, Works' road and drainage projects, acceler- to gain additional revenue at the local level, ated roads projects, expansion of the An - is a step In the right direction, and the im- chorage Coastal Trail, completion of the Bart - pacts will be nothing less than positive for left High School pool, traffic and pedestrian Anchorages economy in the years to come. safety improvements, neighborhood park The new public facilities —the William A. and trail improvements, and water quality ' Egan Civicand Convention tenter {the site- -projects. The Municipality of Anchorage stretches of AMIN 37th Annual Local Government Conference). Sullivan Sports Arena, Loussac for some 1,955 square miles and traverses - 71.ibrary,-and the -soon -to -be -completed Per- some 19 creeks, four rivers, and numerous-, 'forming Arts Center —are the right ingredi• lakes. Intermeshed within this are 13,244 Its to help attract new enterprises. Th are acres of parkland and a new 1&hole $goff ;just the fix that Anchorage needed to add to o verse. Anchn rrage Ise wwilllihile providing its growing tourist trade. As Ancholage overcomes the oil setback stable base to those who remain and grow that has slowed the state, it must continue to with our changing economy. t Official Notice .The Alaska. Municipal League aw nual.tsWnwjA,4 l,gwill be held in the Egan Convention Center, Anchor. age, Alaska, at 12:00 noon on Friday, November .13, 190,, as part of the r 37th Annual Local Government Con- ference. Major agenda items include review of -the - Board of ' Drectors' ` Strategic Plan, adoption of the 1987 Fbilcy-Statement, and election of AML _ } officers and directors for the upcom• ing year. only delegates of member municipalities In good standing (dues . paid) are eligible to vote. i An open letter to President Reagan The Honorable Ronald Reagan President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: I am writing on behalf of the public elected officials of the nation's cities and towns because we are confused about the statements you have been making recently with regard to federal tax increases. We very much would appreciate your clarification. You have stated repeatedly in the last two weeks that you intend to veto any tax increase sent to you by the Congress to help pay for increased federal spending for defense and to help reduce the deficit. Yet, in the budget you sent to the Congress, you requested the Congress to enact some $17.3 billion in new federal taxes over the next three years. The largest tax increases you have requested would be imposed directly on states and municipalities. Your proposal to require us to pay approximately $8W million in gas and excise taxes on municipal vehicles would require either a reduction in essential emergency and public works services to our tax- payers —or a tax increase from our citizens to pay for the federal tax increase. Your proposal to impose some $5.2 billion in mandatory Medicare taxes on our municipalities and employees would mandate similar increases. Do your recent statements mean that you now no longer support your re- quested tax increases and intend to veto them If passed? Have you formally re- quested withdrawal of your federal tax increase proposals? Secondly, given your requests to impose federal taxes on the essential active sties of state and municipal governments, what is your position with regard to the immunity of the federal government from state and municipal taxes? If the federal government is going to be in the business of imposing sales, use, and gas taxes on municipal vehicles, would you support federal laws to permit the im- position of municipal gas, excise, and use taxes on federal vehicles which use our city and town streets and roads? Would such laws --at any level --be consistent with our Constitution? It is our responsibility to advise our taxpayers of actions we are required to take which either increase their taxes or reduce essential public services. Your willingness to provide us with your specific position on these proposed federally -inflicted tax increases would be helpful to us in providing this advice. Sincerely, Cathy Reynolds, Coundlt,woman-at-large, Denver President, National League of Cities 6,1987 Wanted: Fire Hose A We need We' fire hose that has been taken out of service from the fire services for 'g utility use in the Public Works Department. If you have hose that is not suitable for fire -T service, -we are -interested. (lease call -or ', write: Mike McKimens, Director of Public Works; City of Craig; ,Box 23; Craig, AK 99921; phone 907426.3405. t AML NEWSLETTER )_TPA Guide Issued The National Association of Counties has recently released "Job Training Partnership Programs: A Guide for Local Officials," Steven G. Pines. The publication, one o. series of NACo Issues Papers for the employ- ment and training community, focuses on the key benefits, systematic elements, and partnership opportunities contained in the Job Training Partnership Act OTPA). )TPA is a $3.5 million program that pro• vides the structure and resources for local elected officials to begin to close the gap be- tween work -force capabilities and work- place needs in partnership with business, labor, and other community organizations. According to the author of this guide, JTPA is ,,not an overly complex federal program; in fact, most of its policies and programs are de• veloped at the state and local level." The cor, nerstone of job training partnership pro- grams lies with the local official and the private industry council. Elected -officials are well positioned to provide leadership focus- ing the resources of public agencies. JTPA merely provides the structure for effective partnerships; the rest is up to the individuals who must give it local meaning. John Horsley, Past President of NACo and County Commissioner from Kitsap County, Washington, said, "The National Association of Counties views the job Training Partner- ship Act as a model vehicle for addressing many economic and social imperatives. The Association has worked extensively wig" . Congress and the Administration to prase a key role for local elected officials in job training. We hope that this guide can provide you with information and ideas to better confront the range of economic and employ ment policy issues facing you today and to assure that you are an equal and active part- ner with the private sector in stimulating a local economic and social revitalization:' In Alaska, the )TPA program isadminstered by the Department of Community and Re- gional Affairs. For more information on JTPA in Alaska, call the Anchorage office of the department, 563-1955. Job Training Partnership Programs: A Guide for Local Elected Officials" is available from Employment and Training Programs, National Association of Counties, 440 First Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001. It may also be borrowed from the AML Lending Library by calling AML at St16.1325. 105 Municipal Way • Suite 301 • Juneau, Alaska 99601 • (907) SWI325 i STAFF: Scott & Burgess, Executive Director and Editor _ .. _ ...... Chrystal Stallings Smith, Programs Manager. - Phyllis H.-Larson, Administrative Assistant Page 2 Audtut 19 7 L J L.. i r'— r - -- — On behalf of the AML Board, Trustees, staff, and Frank B. Hall, thanks to the munici- plities and school districts who showed sup - ,.art for the AML Insurance Program by re- cently renewing their coverages under the program. As of July 1, 44 member munici- palities and school districts are receiving worker's compensation, general liability, auto liability, and excess coverages under the AML-sponsored program with Frank B. Hall and the Old Republic Insurance Company. This is a significant degrease in participation from past years, but it has not slowed AML's efforts and support of developing a Joint in- surance arrangement 01A►, or pooled risk management program. The AMUIiA Interim Board of Trustees and AML Board of Directors delayed the imple• mentation of the IIA until 1988 in order to ensure that a sound progam is developed and that the benefits can be communicated to the membership. This became possible when the AML and Frank B. Hall negotiated a new program for continued and expanded coverage with the Old Republic for all member municipalities in May. Several other insurance companies returned to the muni- cipal market this year, offering coverage at discounted rates to a limited number of municipalities through other brokers. None of these companies has been endorsed by the AML. While many of our members A ught their coverage through these com- 'inies, many also Indicated continued sup- port and interest in the IIA by paying the $250-$500 development fee. All municipalities will be sent invoices by AML for the development fee in the next few weeks. Hazardous Materials Planning Assistance for Local Alaska Communities by David Wiggleworth, Alaska Health Project Reprinted with permission from Local Government Hi -Liter • In Crown Point, residents were evacuated from their homes when a railroad tank car began leaking toxic vapors. Prevailing winds carried the vapors into the residen- tial area. (March 1986) • In the North Slope village of Wainwright, three residents died after spiking a punch with methyl alcohol from a barrel that washed up on the beach. (September 1986) Members Show Support of insurance Program The AMUIIA Interim Board of Trustees is continuing to work to implement the )IA. The Trustees recently met with lack floyd, Executive Vice President of the Tennessee Municipal League Pool, to get his views on the AML program. He was very impressed and optimistic, and he offered several helpful suggestions to the Trustees. Plans are under- way for the presentation of the AML/►IA on Wednesday, November 11th, at the annual AML conference. Again, thanks to the following municipal- ities who are participating in the current AML Insurance Program: Akutan Nenana Angoon Nome Rarrow - Noorvik BrevigMission Nunapitchuk Chignik Old Harbor Copper River School Ouzinkie District Palmer Eagle Quinhagak Elim St. George Emmonak St. Mary's Gambell Sand Point Golovin Sand Point School Holy Cross District Hooper Bay Scammon Bay Huslia Seward Kake Shishmaref King Cove Skagway King Cove School Tanana District Thorne Bay Kotzebue Togiak Larsen Bay Unalaska School Lower Kalskag District Mountain Village Wasilla Napakiak White Mountain grams in place to eliminate the risk of hazar- dous materials accidents and protect public health? Do emergency response personnel have the necessary training and equipment to protect themselves and the community when responding to an incident? The burden of protecting public health and property from the dangers associated with industrial hazardous materials is shifting to the local government. Budget and staffing limitations at both the federal and state levels, lack of enforcement of existing laws, and the overwhelming abundance of hazar. dous commercial products are forcing local governments to shoulder more of this responsibility. Local Assistance ANaII&Me As disturbing as these incidents are, they To help local communities meet this In - Ado not present the entire. picture. There are creasing responsibility, the Alaska Depart - hundreds of other documented hazardous ment of Health &-Sociat Services -provided materials incidents in Alaska. Many more are funding to the Alaska Health Project to -ite likely never reported. The exact figure develop and deliver the Community Hazar- _...,ay never be known. dous Materials Evaluation Program. This is a Ws a matter of when, not if, another hazar- program designed to provide hazardous ma- i At ka terials planning guidance at the local level. Pamela Plumb, Porttana, name, rim VIGC President/President-Elect of the National League of Cities, will be a special guest at the 371h Annual AML Local Government Con- ference in Anchorage, November 11.14. NLC President -Elect to Address Conference Pamela Plumb, First Vice President/ President -Elect of the National League of Cities, will be a special guest of AML during the 37th Annual Local Government Confer- ence. Plumb, a member of the Portland, Maine, city council since 1979, will address conference participants duringthe Thursday luncheon. In 1981.82, Plumb was the mayor of Port- land, and she is currently president of Port- land's Metropolitan Transit District and a member of the board for the area's regional waste agency. She has served on the Maine Govemor's Advisory Council since 1979 and chaired the group from 1981 to 1984. In 1984 she chaired the Coalition of Northeast Mun- icipalities, and she is a member of the Leg- islative Policy committee of the Maine Muni- cipal League. Prior to her election as NLC Second Vice President at the 1985 Congress of Cities, Plumb had served on several NLC policy committees and task forces, was vice -chair of the Community and Economic Policy COm- mittee in 1983, and was elected to the NLC Board of Directors for 1984.85. Plumlfs work in Portland includes two years as executive director for Greater Port, land Landmarks, Inc. (from 1969 to 1971), two terms as director of the convention and Visitors Bureau, and numerous positions with cultural -and historical- groups. She is a director of the peoples Heritage Savings Bank, and she also holds the title of Honorary FrenchConsutforMaine. _ Plumb was born in St. Louis, Missouri,' received her undergraduate degree at Smith College, and holds a masters degree from the New York University Institute of Fine Arts. dous material incident will occur n as She Is married and has two children. Is your community prepared? Are local pro- (continued on page 6) Parr 3 AML NeWktter 7 Another View ... many rural people who feel they lack con- trot over the things most important in their specifically give municipalites the power to establish a "quasi-judicial board" which i This column appears periodically in the AML Newsletter presenting views on issues of lives. Distant administrators make decisions about many of the elements of day-to-day could mediate local disputes and address or - dinance infractions of a non- criminal naturrg, This Department will work with the Rur - " general Interest to all municipalities. The views are those of the author, and are not life that Alaskan Natives have managed to control for thousands of years. Distant courts Governance Council to determine whethL. "quasi-judicial hoards" can be suc- necessarily those of the AML. The articles are printed at the discretion of the Executive make decisions affecting intimate details of community life that until recently were sub- local cessfuily established. We will also examine Director. Views on other local government topics, or in response to the one presented ject to a scrutiny no further removed than the traditional beliefs held in common by the possibilities of establishing other "diver- sionary programs" which might provide t� here, are welcomed. community members. The sovereignty movement seeks to local alternatives to the existing court system. These local boards and diversionary pro - 6 g A Stronger establish Native communities which are establish autonomous from the state and, as indepen- grams could provide a more appropriate and cost-effective means of dealing with many 1 j Rural Alaska Presented to the Bill Egan Forum dent governments, would relate only to the federal government. The expectation is that community legal proceedings. They would of course operate in compliance with all sec• March 24, 1987 this new-found autonomy would provide Alaskan Natives with the vehicle to shape tons of the Alaska Constitution with respect , to treatment of both Natives and non- ' ►uneau, Alaska by David G. Hoffman, Commissioner Department of Community and their own destiny. The federal government does have -a trust responsibility to provide Natives. The Department will also be ex - amining the possibilities and constraints Regional Affairs certain educational, health, and other ser- vices to Native people. However, I think the regarding the extension ofthis concept tothe unincorporated community setting. If ap• Governor Cowper, in his State of the State address, emphasized that rural Alaska is a continuing struggle of lower 48 Indian tribes to break the yoke of the federal government propriate, legislation could be developed for the next legislative session to provide for an vital and important part of our state. He said that villages are fundamentally different from demonstrates that reservation status does not necessarily provide the local control desired expanded approach as well as to more clear - ly define what types of offenses could be urban Alaska .—economically, historically, and culturally —and that state government by Ala communities. I believe that the State, because it is closer, more accessible, heard by these boards. Fiscal Accountability Assistance. local must recognize these differences and. build and more sensitive to rural Alaskan needs, to governments in many small communities are beginning to face severe financial and ad• appropriate programs to help rural Alaskans face the considerable challenges and can be more responsible village concerns than can the federal government. We can ministrative difficulties now that the flow of changes they face today. Rural Alaskans are expressing two major work together with rural Alaskans to develop a system of local governance that provides state dollars is diminishing. The Governor Is Introducing legislation to assist villages in the concerns. They want to achieve greater self- determination in the area of local govern- increased local control; that reflects the special characteristics of traditional Alaskan resolution of anticipated problems resulting from the implementation of the State's slno-` - ment and they need to develop greater economic self-sufficiency through stable and community life; and that Is consistent with our State constitution. audit regulations. This legislation is intern._ ed to help communities avoid major flnan- sustainable local economies. The state has a definite role to play In helping rural The Department of Community and Regional Affairs is charged with the primary cial problems which may arise as the result of these audits as well as to assist com- c residents achieve these goals. In working toward these goals,) believe we can build state responsibility for implementing a pro- gram to assist communities to realize these munities in maintaining appropriate levels of fiscal accountability. A major focus of this a greater and stronger state for all Alaskans. goals. There are five parts to this program: assistance will be an increased emphasis on the financial management training which the ` Stronger Local Governments • Rural Governance Council. Governor Cowper, in his speech before the Village Par- Department's local government specialists now provide to communities. To this end, Rural Alaskans are seeking greater control over their lives and communities. This In- Conference this February, made tics commitment a commitment that he would create a coup- the Bill establishes a Rural Alaska Training Committee. This committee will assure that i sistence on local control over their govern- cll of knowledgeable people with whom he could work to addressr real concerns about the Department of Community and Regional ments is not a temporary fad; rather it is a broad -based and powerful political ground- the structure of government in rural Alaska. Governor Affairs, the Univenty of Alaska (including the Cooperative Extension Service), and the q swell. As I understand it, this movement has To this end, the will be Introduc- ingna legislation establishing the Rural Cover- Alaska Municipal League cooperate with `f grown in response to the dramatic changes in rural communities during the last several Hance Council in the Office of the Gover• their efforts to provide effective training to the small communities in the area of accoun• years and the sense among rural Alaskans nor. This council will consist of seven peo• ple, Including the chairman of the local ting and financial management. This step that they are losing control over their com- munities. They believe that strong local Boundary Commission, a designee from the Office Office the Governor, and flue public would in effect formally recognize the ac• of the already existing Consortium for governments can help them regain and maintain control over their lives and resolve of representatives who live in rural corn- munities and who are deeply involved on Alaska Municipal Training (CANT). • Department Decentralization. The I _^ the social problems impacting theft com• the social l think their concerns are genuine a day-to-day basis in local government issues. 1, as Commissioner of the Depart- dec n Department Is being gradually decemraliz• ed to establish closer contacts with rural con - and I believe their desire to have stronger local government will not only benefit them, ment of Community and Regional Affairs, also sit on theou as a nonvoting stituents, Three planners from the Depart• ment's urban offices have been reassigned -� - but In the long -run -wil!-contribute to the. overall well-being of all Alaskans. Their will - _cncil ex-offfcio member, The council will be ode budgeted to hold hearings and do fo regional -offices where they can - -- - more thoroughly involved with regional - desire to assume greater responsibilities at -- - - - quately -research on Issues relating to the promotion _ - Issues. Additionally, four employees of the the Community level is especially welcome S. during these times of tight budgets. of more effective local governments. Grants Administration Section i t Some Alaskans are promoting the cause • Local control of Legal Proceedings; Ex- Municipal and Regional Assistance Divisi qq of sovereignty as a solution to local Pro- istin statutes (AS29.20.320) authorize cer- will be transferred to regional offices next g year. These Individuals will primarily work ; blems. l believe the sovereignty movement fain legal proceedings to be treated ese as at ad -Les With communities to address their fiscal and is a result of the accumulated frustrations of ministrative adjudication. These statutes ` Aupd 1907 management problems and improve their financial systems. The Department will also be reinstating, within the next few months, pular program referred to as the Circuit er Training Program. This program pro- vides for regular contact between regional office staff and communities to devlop solu- tions to specific, and mutually agreed upon, community concerns. Stronger Rural Economies The rural areas of our state are the ones that are now most economically vulnerable. This is largely because they have become so dependent on state and federal spending, As government spending is reduced in the rural areas we have an obligation to try to pro- mote new types of self-sustaining economic development of the state, with resultant in- creases in migration to urban centers, welfare payments, and social problems. Rural Alaskans want to preserve their com- munities and they want to pull their own weight. We must help them find ways to do so. My departmental program for the development of stronger rural economies in- cludes the following major elements: • Establish Rural Development Divi- sion. The Division of Housing Assistance and Community Development are being merged to create a division more focused on rural economic development. The Rural Development Assistance Program will be transferred to this division from the ='-�unlcipal and Regional Assistance Division J provide a more coordinated approach with the Community Development Block ' Grant Programs. • Agreement with the Department of Com- merce and Economic Development (DCED)• Our Department is cooperating with OCED to develop a detailed Memoran- dum of Agreement (MOA) that will coor- dinate mutual concerns. A major element of the MOA will be provisions for staff cross - training and coordination of program im- plementation to maximize the capabilities contained in the respective departments. The agreement will take advantage of our stoners of Fish and Game, Commerce and Economic Development, Labor, and Com- munity and Regional Affairs. This mini - cabinet will develop a long-range plan that will help provide some stability to the Alaska fishing industry. The Department, for Its part, will be working to ensure that the particular economic development concerns of smaller rural communities are appropriately incor- porated Into the Staters plan of action. a Land Issues. The land provides the economic and cultural foundations for all rural communities. For economic reasons, as well as for reasons of justice, it is important that Alaskan Natives maintain control of their land. The Governor has stated his strong sup- port for the passage of a "1991" bill in Con- gress that will keep Native lands in Native hands. Our Department will continue its ef- fort to.assist in the expeditious transfer of land to municipalities under section 14(c) of ANCSA. The Department will also be ex- amining the possibilities and requirements for setting up a state "land bank" program comparable to the federal land bank established by ANILCA (Sec. 907). A state land bank program could offer undeveloped Native lands significant protection against in- voluntary loss through taxation or seizure to satisfy judgments. • Subsistence.Subsistence as practiced by Alaskan Natives has a far larger meaning in Native life than is implied in the term sub- sistence "economy." The material end results of subsistence efforts represent only the sur- face of a lifestyle deeply integrated with the land and its resources. The promotion of a cash economy in rural Alaskan settings should recognize the significant social and cultural implications of thi- transition. In pro- moting economic development efforts, we must be sensitive to the valuable qualities in- herent in traditional subsistence lifestyles. Wherever possible, we should promote the accommodation of the subsistence economy within the expanding cash economy. A prac- tical example of this concept would be the promotion of innovative and flexible job - sharing schemes for force account projects h" b• tions. In large part, this Is simply an "educa- tional" problem. Rural residents need to know that the register system exists and they need to learn how to ,work, that system. I believe that efforts to level the playing field will lead directly to more rural Alaskans in the state civil service positions. As a first step, I have arranged that the Local Government Specialist and Community Development Specialist Registers will open up during the months of April and May. We have already begun to advertise this "open season" through various rural Alaskan media chan- nels. In my recent travels In rural Alaska, 1 have been working with several people who will make an effort to motivate qualified individuals to submit applications for these registers. Assistance in the basics of filling our state applications will also be provided. Conclusion This rural program is geared at both strengthening local governments and strengthening the rural economy. It will pro- vide benefits to all Alaskans. These efforts will help rural Alaskans to continue to live and work in those communities they call home. It will help prevent a massive migra- tion away from distressed rural areas which would in turn have a severe social and economic impact on the Staters urban centers. I believe that the rural program i have outlined here provides an appropriate role for the State in helping rural Alaskans to help themselves. Ultimately the future of rural communities lies in the hands of those people who live there. I know for certain that those communites could be in no safer hands. Editor'; Notes The proposed bills Commis- sioner Hoffman referred to in this March speech-HB 286, establishing the Rural Governance Council, and S8 263, relating to fiscal accountability assistance. -were in• trodured during the 1987 session at the re- quest of the Governor. Neither was approv- ed before the Legislature's May adjournment date. regional offices to ensure that rural residents have convenient access to DCED programs. which would permit workers to s are su sistencer' and "cash" economy respon- r This agreement will also provide an sibilities on cooperative economic develop - assurance that rural Alaskans can participate ment efforts which build upon traditional In the international trade development pro- foundations of communal sharing. gram that Governor Cowper outlined in his . Enhanced Access to the State Employ " State of the State Address. " ment System. The Department will be tak- • Agreement with the Department of Labor ing a more active role in addressing the pro- (DOL). I will be working with DOL to blem that many rural residents experience develop an agreement on a coordinated ap- in accessing the Staters employment system. proach to local hire issues. Our concern is When state jobs located In rural Alaska that local hire policies take into account the become open, they are often filled by per• employment needs of rural Alaskans sons from outside the re because there in their community and regional settings. are no qualified focal residents on the lob Steps to promote local hire should recognize class register. Entry Into the state employ - - - - - - - the priority need for rural residentstobe able - - --ment system is -not a straightforward -process. _ Set the jobs that occur In their own This is particularly true for many rural .immunity. Alaskans, unfamiliar with the bureacratic ap- e Fisheries Mini -Cabinet. Governor Cowper has established a cabinet -level proach, who may be intimidated when con. fronted with the Staters "system" of job fisheries group consisting of the Commis- classifications, applications, and examina- AMCNemletler ;p. k t;. V 7 P1 Municipal Calendar 7.26 AML Board of Directors Annual Summer Meeting, Palmer, For more Information, contact AML, 586-1325. August 30 - 8th Annual National Conference on Rural Public Transportation, September 2 Ashland, Oregon. For more information, contact Denise Penner or Sheldon Edner at 503-229.4042. September 24.26 Southeast Conference, Sitka. For more information, contact Ayers & Associates, 463.3221. October 22 - 24 NLC's Sth Annual International Trade Conference, Houston, Texas, For more information, contact Virginia Mayer at NLC, 202.626.3170. November 8 - 10 AML Municipal Association pre -Conference meetings, Anchorage. For more information, contact your association officers, November 10 - it Newly Elected Officials Seminar, Anchorage. For more informa• -- tion, contact AML, SW132S. November 1104 38th Annual AML Local Government Conference, Egan Conven- tion Center, Anchorage. For more information, contact AML, 586.1325. December 12. 16 64th Annual NLC Congress of Cities, Las Vegas, Nevada. For more Information, contact NLC, P.O. Box 17413, Dulles International Airport, Washington, D.C. 20041, or call 202-626.3200. Note: Early registrations must be postmarked by September 4. international Trade Topic of Conference International trade is a top priory—` throughout the nation this year --particular. here in Alaska where Governor Steve Cow- per has stressed Alaska's potential as an inter- national center of trade and finance. Local government officials will have an opportun- ity to learn more about the tools and strate- gies that cities use to keep competitive in the world economy at the NLC's 5th Annual In- ternational Trade Conference, scheduled for October 22-24In Houston. This year's conference, with the theme ,vies, MakeTheir Move;' will include Expo 187, featuring exhibit booths with key foreign and domestic, public and private Interna- tional trade experts and organizations. Work- shops will focus on all aspects of trade, from Identifying trade leads and new markets to coordinating- federal, state, and local re- sources for an effective trade program. Con• ference participants will learn how to weigh the costs and benefits of establishing a trade office in their city or abroad, how to finance a city trade program, what trade programs succeed and why, what role local officials can play in promoting trade, and what cul- tural activities are important to overall trade initiatives. For more information, contact Virginia Hazardous Materials (continued from page 3) Mayer at NLC (202.626.3170). The Alaska Health Project recently pub- lished the Community Hazardous Materials bibliography and resource listing for those communities that want additional informa- ! Formation of New Borough Evaluation (CHME) program manual. The tion and assistance. Studied CHME manual Is designed to help Alaskan villages, towns, and urban areas prevent How Can 1 Get a Manual? In response to a request from Senator Fred j hazardous materials incidents through a community evaluation and then develop- Community Hazardous Materials Evalua- tion manuals are available through the Alas- Zharoff and Representative Adelheid Herr- l mann, the Department of Community and ment of local management plans. The man. ual will help local government officials, fire ka Health Project, 417 West 8th Avenue, An- chorage, Alaska 99501, 907-276.2864. The Regional Affairs Is studying the feasibility of forming a new borough in the Southwest Re - fighters, EMS, Village Public Safety Officers, emergency response personnel, and other fee for the 76-page manual is $7.00 plus gional Education Attendance area, which in - eludes ten communities surrounding Dilling• Interested community members. Briefly, the postage. ham. CHME manual includes procedures to: Community Trainingoftered The study, requested because the reglods legislators and other concerned citizens felt • encourage communit Involvement in y A 12-hour CHME training program is avail- g that all revenue sources should be explored � evaluation and the control of current and able to help communities conduct a com before local services were cut, will provide potential hazardous materials concerns; munity hazardous materials evaluation. The information about forming a borough, bor. • identify local hazardous materials sources and handling practices; training program will teach participants how to Identify hazardous materials sources in the ough operations, and available revenues. Ac- tual borough formation must be initiated by • determine the community's ability to re- community, set up a local task force, and de- local petition and approved by area voters. spond to an incident involving hazardous velop a local management plan. Common The DCRA study has two unique aspects, materials; hazardous materials found in Alaskan com- The first is that a property tax will not be ex- l • evaluate existing management strategies; munitles and their associated health effects plored as the major revenue source. Eyisting • develop local programs and policies to are also explained. Those participating 1'n the and alternate forms of revenue from sales of � prevent and control incidents involving In. training course will in turn be able to use the raw fish will be studied as a major revenue dustrial hazardous materials, course information to train other community source. The second thing that makes the • assist local communities with implementa- members In conducting a community evalu. study of this Southwest area different is that tion of Title III of the Superfund Amend- ation. Contact the Alaska Health Project for data are being collected on a community ments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 course fee information. In addition, limited specific basis to allow a portion of the region _(SARA).-..._ . _..-..- --- - .. _..- -- funding may be available to offer this pro• to assess its ability -to support borough-gov-- Title III establishes requirements for local, gram at no cost in three representative com• ernment should the concept not prove to be state- and federal- governments- regarding munRies (rural, village, and urban commun- feasible for the entire region. o o emergency planning and community report- tries). Interested communities s u c ing on hazardous and toxic chemicals. the Alaska Health Project at 417 West 8th The manual also includes hazardous mate- Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, or call vials evaluation forms and an extensive 907.276.2664. P&J# 6 L L n 1987 AML ANNUAL CONFERENCE HOTEL INFORMATION The Hotel Captain Cook will be the official headquarters hotel for the 37th Annual AML Local Government Conference. Both the Hotel Cap- in Cook and the Westmark Anchorage (formerly the Sheffield Anchorage) are holding blocks of rooms for us at special conference rates; de - lied information on rates is available below. Please show your appreciation by making your reservation with one of these hotels early. With the elections in October, it may be difficult to give the hotel names but, to ensure that you have the accommodations of your choice, make reservations now in the name of a current municipal official. If that individual does not run for re-election, or is defeated, the name can be changed at that time or the reservation can be cancelled. Reservation cards were enclosed with the mailing of this newsletter to each AML member. They may be photocopied for the use of anyone who wishes to reserve a room at either the Hotel Captain Cook or the Westmark (Sheffield). Reservations may also be made by calling or writing the hotel; be sure to identify yourself as an AML Conference attendee to obtain the special rates. Hotel Captain Cook Reservations Department P.O. Box 102280 Anchorage, Alaska 99510.2280 907.276-M direct ON 478.3100 within Alaska 800443.1950 outside Alaska Single: $68.00 plus tax Double: f 72.00 plus tax Twin: $72.00 plus tax Suites: $145.00 - $275.00depending on size and amenities Reservations must be accompanied by an advance deposit equal to one night's room rent or guaranteed by a major credit card. Westmark Anchorage (formerly Sheffield Anchorage) Reservations 720 West Sth Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Central Reservations, Westmark Hotels 907-274.6631 800-544.0970 Single, Double, or Twin: $54.00 plus tax AML CONFERENCE ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM Name Title Municipallty/Organization Address Telephone — - City State Zip Code Advance R ervatku On 41te Registration j (postmarked by Oct. 23) (after October 23) ........................................ $135 i165 Member ................... ... f11S Non-member........................................................... $160 f Spouse................................................................ f 90 f100 Spouse's Name Of attending) moss mail registration form and fee(s) to Alaska Municipal iksgue►105 Municipal Way, Suite 301, Juneau, Alaka 99801• - Watch the AML Newsletter andspecial Conference- bulletins for hotel information and program details, or contact AML staff at 907-586-1325. No refunds will be made on registrations cancelled after November 6. - �. , REGISTER NOW -ADVANCE REGISTRATION SAVES MONEY AND TIME AT THE REGISTRATION DESK ! ! I - - - -- -- - f } AML Newsletter 7 PROFESSIONAL DIRECTORY All tLLeeag have for local governmentMemberming affiliated with their suprtport League. Pea ettaake time tiations o looikdth through he directory and show your for our Associate Adak Regional School District Copper River School District Lower Yukon School District Pill Box 32089 URS Engineers NBA Bullding P.O. Box 34 NAS-Adak,Atoka PO Box 108 GlBnnallen,Alaska 99508 Mountain Village Alaska99632 301WApjortherntights Blvd. SuiteFPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Cormn & Black, Incorporated Office of Management & Budget Alaska Ahlines,Inc. SeaTacinternational Airport 4220851reet Anchorage, Alaska99510 Div. OlGevernmenlCoordination .O.box Wohlfotth,Flint, and Gruening Suit 900WFlkhAvenue,suite60D 90 W Fift, FU Box 66900 Seattle, Washington 90168 Juneau,Alaska99811 Alaska 01 Dain Bosworth, Incorporated Alaska Municipal Bond Bank 9" Third Avenue, Suite 1500 Seattle, Washington 98104 Ott Water Engineers, Inc. Bldg. B 601 W. Fifth Ave., Suite 430 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Alaska Assn. of Assessing Officers Anchorage, Alaska 9901 Department of Community& Gary Lewis, President Annette Islands School District Regional Affairs P•O Box OH neat, Marwick, Mitchell and Ca 601 W. Sth Ave., Suite 700 PAX Box B Palmer, Alaska 9964E PA. Box 7 Metlakatla, Alaska 99926 Juneau, Alaska 99611 Anchorage. Alaska 995011 Alaska Assn. of Municipal Clerks Appraisal Company of Alaska Ernst and Whinny Preston, Thorgrimson, Ellis & Holman Linda Murphy, President 39WArctic Blvd., Suite 304 301 W, Northern lights Blvd. " Flhh Avenue bia eaBrstCenter P.O. 167 Alaska9%64 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Suite 601 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Seattle. Washington 99104.7011 ARCO Alaska, Incorporated Alaska Assn. Chiefs of Police RO Box 100360 Financial Guardian, Inc. Pribilof School District District Office Building P41Shely, President Anchorage, Alaska 99510.0360 3301 C Street, Suite 200 PO, Box 307 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 St. Paul, Alaska 99660 Valdez, Alaska 99686 Arthur Young and Company 1031W.41hAwe.,Suite 600 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 First SoulhsvestCompany 1807 Commerce St., Suite 800 Prudential-Bache Securities, loc. III Third Avenue, Suite 2750 Alaska N. Ahmaolia Mayon George N. Ahmaogak, Sr.. President = Dallas, Texas 75201 Seattle, Washington 98101 pA.Box 69 Bank of America•Publk finance Barrow, Alaska 99723 SSS California Street, 9th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 LawOBkesof Scott T. Flaming Rainier National Bank P.O.Wx39661T17.11 10928 Old Glenn Highway Eagle River, Alaska 99377 Seattle, Washington 98124 DrA"ska lroCh ll. Pr tidenlon oe seas, President Bitch, Horton, Binne6 PLestingerand �w� Anderson One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 301 Frank & Hall & Company Rasmuson Library Cordova, Alaska 99574 Juneau, Alaska 99801 slot street, suite 200 Alaska 99S0f University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, Alaska 9977S-1010 Anchorage, Alaska Municipal Attorneys Assn. Boettcher & Company, Inc. lack Coyne, (Resident SSO W 711% Ave., Suite 1980 Hogan, Mecham, Richardson & Ca Robertson, Monagte, & Eastaugh PA. Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99501.3594 1734 Tongan Avenue P.O Box 1211 Anchorage, Alaska 99519,6650 Ketchikan, Alaska 99WI Juneau, Alaska 99802.1211 CH2M HIII 2550Denall, loth Floor Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Hughes, Thonness, Gantt, fbweli & Seattle -Northwest SecudtiesCorp. Alaska Municipal Management Ann. Ron A. Ga►zinl, President Btundin SeaBrst Fifth Avenue Plaza P.O. Box 167 509 W 3rd Ave. 800 Fifth Avenues Suite 3400 Seward, Alaska 99664 Chatham School District Cha Cha Anchorage, Alaska 9901 Seattle, Washington 98104 11011109 Angoon, Alaska 99020 Alaska Parks & Recreation Assn. Idharod Area School District Setpoint Alaska, Inc. Steve Weber, President Chevron USA A Chevron PO Box 90 McGrath, Alaska99627 SW E. 341h, Suite 20D Anchorage, Alaska 9903 PA. Box 307 Valdes, Alaska 99686 Box 10. Anchorage, Alnka 99510 John Nuveen and Company Shearson Lehman Brothen,Inc. Alaska ChagedAm.Planning Assn. GinnyChttwood&Ca 240 Main Street, Suite 601 999Third AvenuGSuite 4000 Seattle, Washington98104 Fart Flnkler,president 1981STkslthAvenue, N.W Juneau, Alaska 99801 W.8m629 Seattle, Washington98177 Barrow AlaskaW23 Chugaeh school District Ch Kramer, Chin & Mayo 124 W., Fifth Street South West Regional School Ditttict 196 COIII Bam, Municipal Finance Officers Assn. BOx 6>0 VyNgo Alaska 99691 Juneau, Alaska 99801 nth Alaska 99576 tarry Semmens, President PAs 8080 - ..- - s e -. -- - - _ Co - _ .ndlyDrard . .. Lovei_lwkokwimSchoolDtstnn TBnott" aCenlrolcouncR Soldotrra, Alaska 99669----- -- -- S0 W 71h Axe.. sake 700 Anchorage, Atoka 99501.3558 P.Dt Box 305 Bethel. Alaska 99559 320 W Willoughby, Suite 30D Juneau, Atoka 99901 • ftps L. An ad 111111117 ig L�C1�ii ill �I;P +� ', P t t R Is - igirl fE IL jr Its RIM r1.Et06 tit ILI t rj `Pgi[`� iSF'{i�[�p �Qee�lo�e p P 'il�v Hv� �1 IiQf�P G Ito Ll wit �ts BRi E�=� lotwit all it f��� R 04� lit II. ?"1111WHi fill i b-O�NT L. J Q1KS order +� pf OMB order - - -------------- ----- thy AMI adAIS SCMn � 10 Cathy wynt*le;, totEMSW aRNI-at lap /ran pouek►t and shifted to the ram 6 Compo. 0 8dum of water o'Cranapoetatlon ttme nerve of the coma at Omws "quest. In to work DMwr and the NI.0 rmklwt. "w dhmctlw room Mil came with but *"me, thb means dw the followias o Fvblk sewer o Labor Yon infownsdon will trot be avaUable at the o Fuel for hnun.ghome o Work last year --- - _ rNseh's na ft n Cmw oMclab wtet anew block level. o Heitins equipment for - dow up the* fleet venlona to the IM 7, W and w Uw e A b OMd fa MW o Fuel wN headal water DATA TO as submATED a Cat of udUde and tads paoM 1"0 CENSUS LONG IORM o Number of bsdknonu 'OMd and the Cansua I mm rMwdociMi it Am., pddw►Cmsw o Data moved In "'Slow tam HwA ft Dw Data o Fire. hsstud and Aaod insutance oVslwafhon+e oRatdnxssyaas+ t l Dsasaltshsaatalnaityaars,aa pnvluvof the qusstiorr that wW appar on the oT*Wpbone numbw 0 FirM o mow o Rent o Hours wow fat week a 1un�.�giss �� 1!!0 CwwM. ThseOhm, tM tint of i q data mma and the movwm t of o Cmmh w&Am to + oh.wi fray dw 100-paco barb b the coutpoMekkoithesmsuawWele o MobM beans less 1b adik�riy yeuc oone w^Mae at an to rite Im Cetius a• weY, Datdt�'Arbkd�ls at the Oil" of Man- ,dewiopadbyths- aMataataad�udpat►.New>l+tak+A"Of. - -,--�wrwwid - _ Cunwskrwwtwaeload.tbsaoetklWionai - - - - - fie su mm& 7: Jae atn 1'Iass:' NW. -an sulsrfaW aoniant p-dopswktt W4 and We ieaosmnsnkMd O.C. 2W befam Atlsks� 7. 1. As "We piton* aERmuch.27, 1"7 farto* Sw7m.•ldtw M wan�id a ophsto Nt�C W WMIM suite, A040 Ob Now OM$ IkNatdi to 1 'go? No& Ipdkatoft, nxeae forOw�� ppa 1de Fbkis. strww � the Catesse#, iy.G ?9233: G1. >." data 10 ens m* te+tuttbaeraf housttig wilts ae an addtoar oe , ht a sttwatirre,. *YAM WA om" wW lm w wsattW saaate of eoortoare dw "M& you$ The dato for coeswtnts and for the Census Bureau 4 , Ci=a ilium has Itistoelotsr to respond to WD has boon changed to August 21. sad Utat dit'eattttot paldo This extension will allay stirs 1094 :oveOMIGnts iIts6r4MRttitsoknsa. to expross their eoaeertts about the .proposed' . w� . deletion of questions free tits Census loses.WA U6. ► INI' !lease convoy your _cossoesns to hose people poestbls p gtwn the loss ataD tine oew identified in the article reproduced above #ad biak Mw>:� 'thee ptaoAM s�p,die inlgitlsat� send a copy of any correspondent* to Greg Niliiaas• State Demographer• Research i Stat:ietice. P.O. sox 25301 Jutt+tsu Alaska haaY M to tnpt slats and rta Depast o nt of Labor, • i Greg at "7:43-4S10 beallbndaorpetralgdewlop atMds. w111dbappaKy►dtMaeaiatsdbatwv► "802-5501. You can also _call it you noel more iniorsatioa about .this lssae. 1 end ttee+spoetattstt now and 7` j sitsntpatwwWbeellteeitrMsdLroatUte I� 1"0 Ceasw suew�' . i About twoahie{da ot>Md on 4 alaa+eatt••rsnt and *10 at�'�,w d �Tpt�atldldbdow his void ,� be"i>baipstsd ti6a► iht�00 paraaki oDs� _ ` � I c 1 I. � 1 L !e� .M .A sit AOl;9w o m g:a9ro a ;HIS $g11 . n. - I e FOR CGUNU6 MU111.3 OF -l-d197 City 149r. --j3 Attorney ublla Works ----(] City Clerk !a9 Flnllny�,� �-- (� ---may Original 10 �^' Submitted gys—K Uomll OK QiiO QYW - 0 o v o Z > -�a 03 r V 000180 84-° O� g >a o 7 1 1 •r � A w i • g g op ; o .Q °� °61 Por Si o 5' Q A� fa b of r • r O L gt/�M�1 t N� - KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH I REGULAR ASSEMBLY MEEt1N0 1987 AUGUST "' + 7+90 PILD BUILING BOROUGH ADMINISTRATION SOLOOTNA, A(ASKA p Steve 7,00 P.1( D.O PRESENTATION A reeeneatton wt1L be made y e D.B.T, regarding higher speed limits orn sn ann s or or o - on secondary roadways. Assembl •AGENDA• Carey Ctaw Ord . A. CALL TO ORDER Glick g, PLEDGE OP ALLEGIANCE Hedging Keene C. INVOCATION Rev. Gale O. Johnson Cod Soldotna Johnson E First Assembly McGehee D. ROLL CALL McLane VACANCY DESIGNATION OR SEATING OP 11SSENBL1MEMgERS Moore Mullen t Z. Nash APPROVAL Of MINUTES+ August 4. 1987 O'Connell .+ p, Phillips G. COMMITTEE REPORTS Swell O'Connell. Nash, Skoggeted (s) Finance (Crawford, Carey. Valli Moore, Johnson) lSkogstad, Johnson. NcGahan. 1 (b) LsndslRssources Mullen, O'Connell) Legtelstiw/Policies (Oliek. Phillips, Gorey, i (e) Crawford) (d1 Local Affairs (Moore. Phillips. Mullen. i ' Valli, Rodgins) VorkslEducatn (McLane. Skogacad. Valli. io t 4� (a) public Ncoahan. Ksanol (f) Data Processing (Johnson) task Force interim Report (61 Alternative tax Revenue H, MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER by gseky Gay. Diractoe of the Risoures i (a) Presentation Development Commission g yma --t Cof ouncil Membership AUika- (b) Ras, S7.75 i uthOriResource ; es or Dsvolo Ina." (SewalliGlick) ORIENTE 614 wIMTR, MIOORE AGENDA APPROVAL AND CONSENT AGENDA J. ORDINANCE HEARINGS .a (sl Oed. 87-34 "Accepting and Appropristin6 State Grant Eor Grant as antra Rsaatn- NEW to ro�ect Accounts ' We ins from the State of Alaska totaling 5198 11 ( Mayor Laws of Alsa a 198b" (Mayor) by Chapter 11S, Sssston „ Appropriating Grants from (b) Ord. 87-35 Acaspting and me P of Cosh and t e State of 1Q epartment Ova Alaska to Update the gorough Overall Economic Develop - the Formu►atton of an Economic �,.. Sent Program and Examine Development District (Mayor) tc) Ord. 87.36 "Authorising the Receipt of s Grant Leos E:._.._. t a tees otsession Laka wslofgAlaska 19573fordthey Chappter ro rtattag Funds P /lnchoe o:nimet Accountstat"o(Mayor)pp 0 ,j K. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES ta) Ord. 11 -44 "Authorising the Receipt of Various Grant$ rom tFie State of Alaska Totaling $183,000 Made by Chapter 3 Session Laws of Alaska 1987 and Approprt- I ating Funds to Project and Equipment Accounts (Mayor) i (b) Ord. 87.45 "Inlet Salmon Application for Credit on isTax" (Mayor) P ' (c) Ord. J-EaRR hpchatrt°! tipeninsulBovougsoolDisic(Sewall) (d) Ord. 87.47 "Amending the Kenai Peninsula Borough Code�� Dealing with Assembly Member Attendance" �--- = o r nances (Moore) r (e) Ord. 87-48 "Adopting the Kenai River Comprehensive Plan oa s an Objectives for the Kenai River Corridor (Lands Committee) - - ! G (f) Ord. 87-49 "Adopting a Community Use Plan for Kenai `Borough Area of Hope (Lands Cmee) I - en nsu a Lands in the L. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS 1 (a) Res. 87-70 "Awarding a Contract to n t e unt of 8 Eor aconstruction of the Anchor Poin re at on (Mayor) (b) Res. 87-71 "Awardingg a Contract to D i L Can, for the Espansion of the n t e unc of 814,787.00 1 Sterling Pine Station Parking Lot Project" (Mayor) t (c) Rea. 87-72 "Providing for the Selection of Cereafr Land* cothe Hope/Sunrise Area for Conveyance from the te n I State of Alaska to the Kenai Peninsula Borough' (Mayor) e (d) Res. 87-73 "Providing for the Selection of Certain Lands from the cote n the Moose Pass Area for Conveyance the Kenai Peninsula Borough" (Mayor) j state of Alaska to fe1 Res. 87-74 "Providing for the Selection of Certain Lends Cato n the Cooper Landing Area for Conveyance from the State of Alaska to the Kenai Peninsula Borough" lNsyor) 1 (f) Ree. 87-76 "Requesting the Department of Transportation -and Public Facilities to Not Raise Speed Limits on Several Secondary Roadways within the Kenai Peninsula f Borough" (Moore)IIpr {, gg (g) Recete7-7n theoSeward AreatforSConveyancetfromtthe State - } of Alaska to the Kenai Peninsula Borough" (Mayor) M. PENDING LEGISLATION (This teem lists legislation which will be addressed at a later r© l� time as noted, not for action this meeting.) (a) Ord. 67.41 "'Accepting and Appropriating State Grant Funds for an Energy Conservation Grant and Appsoprt• - i l ating Matching General Fund Monies" (Mayor) HEARING 9.1-87 (b) Ord. 87.43 "Authorising the Receipt of a Grant from the State of Alaska Totallin66 S50,000 Made by Chapter j {. Session Laws of Alaska 1987 for the North Kenai 16-0 Up rode and Appropriatingg Funds to the Project fi Account (Mayor) HEARING 9-1-87 ----------"—- - - --- - - - - - - - - --- ----- - -- ---- - f N. FORMAL PRESENTATIONS WITH PRIOR NOTICE UPON SUBJECTS NOT ON TNP MEETING AGENDA (a) Cooperative Extension Service) Alaska Craftsman Nome Program (energy efficient building) i (b) Janitorial Services 0. PUBLIC S AND ICpRESENTATIoriS UPON MATTERS NOT CONTAINEDMNNTR ASSEMBLS AGENDA P. MAYOR'S REPORT . ,. (a) Veto of Res. 67-65 - (b) Delinquent Sales Tax Report 11 Q. OTHER BUSINESS R. ASSEMBLY AND MAYOR'S COMMENTS - - — S. INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS AND REPORTS - - - (a) Status Report Ploodpiain Management Program ' - �e T. NOTICE OF NEXT MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT (September L. 1987) iJ t ,1 s � fi Sul 0 aL&S DEPT. OF COMMUNITY A REGIONAL AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER July 20, 1987 SIEVE • T Iq F O �` p P.Or 80X 8 JUNEAU. ALASKA 09811.2100 PHONE: (907) 4654700 CJ 949 E. 30TH AVENUE, SURE 400 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 095054= PHONE: (907) 503r1073 CERTIFIED/RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 9- The Honorable John J. Williams Mayor of Kenai 5��'�., ,,•� U 210 Fidalgo Kenai, AK 99611 Dear Mayor Williamst REt FY 87 MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM -- FINAL PAYMENT Enclosed is the FY 87 final payment for your municipality under the Municipal Assistance Program. Final entitlements have been calculated based upon the results of the special P P appeal period pursuant to a court order in Municipality of Anchorage v. State of Alaska, Case No. 3AN-87-2 41 C v. Those results were use to determine your municipality's share of the amounts withheld pending completion of the special appeal. FY 87 Entitlement Summary Your entitlement summary is as follows: Total Entitlement $794,345 Less Prepayment 725_337 FINAL PAYMENT $69,008 Generally, municipal assistance funds may be spent at the municipality's discretion for any public facility or service for which the municipality has the power to expend public funds as provided by Alaska Statute (AS) 29.35 and local ordinance. However, these. funds are subject to State of Alaska audit requirements provided at 2 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 45.010 (copy enclosed), and a portion of these funds are subject to the notice requirement found at AS 29.60.370 which states in parts f K 3 r Mayor Williams July 20, 1987 Page Two (a) If the amount in the municipal assistance fund at the time of distribution exceeds the base amount to be distributed under AS 29.60.360, the excess amount shall be distributed to each municipality on the basis of population... (b). The intent of (a) of this- section is that a municipality that levies propertX taxes (emphasis added) reduce those le v es in reasonable proportion to the amount of increased state aid received by the municipality. The overnin body of each munici a- ity shall furn sh a notice with each tax statement describing iis use of i s ingrease state a (emphasis added). The amount of increased state aid received by your municipality from the FY 87 Municipal Assistance Program is $648,380. If you have any questions on any of the above, please call Bill Rolfzen of our Juneau office at 465-4733. Sin erely, David a. H fman Commissio or Enclosuresi State of Alaska Warrant Audit Requirements cep Jim Sanders, LOS, MRAD, Anchorage L Register 95, October 1985 ADMINISTRATION CHAPTER 45. 'GRANT ADMINISTRATION Section 10. Audit requirements 2 AAC 45.010. AUDIT REQUIREMENTS. (a) As part of the financial information re- quired under AS 37.05.030, a state agency that enters Into a finandial assistance agreement to provide financial assistance to an entity shall. In coordination with any other state agencies Pro- viding financial assistance to that entity, submit to the Department of Administration through the state coordinating agency an audit of the recipient entity If that entity Is subject to audit under (b) of this section. The audit must be con- ducted and submitted as described in this section. In order to ensure compliance with this subsection, the audit requirements of tltts-sec- 21= roust be - contained in any Anancial usis- tanee agreement entered into by a state agency. . (b) An entity ti it•t:riteis into a financial nail lance agreement, or agreements, with a eumula- five total of (1) S300,000 or more during a state fiscal Year shall submit to the state coordinating sgency, within one year after the end of the audit period, an annual audit report covering the audit period; or (2) at least S100,000 but less than S300,000 during each of two consecutive state fiscal years shall submit to the state coordinating agency (A) a biennial audit report covering the ' .audit pedad..due withia; one Y=-Afitr she •••--• end of the audit period; or ; ,i (8) If the recipient entity chooses. or the state requests, an annual audit rdport covering the audit period. due within one year after the end of the audit period. (c) An audit required by this section must be conducted by an independent auditor. according 2 AAC 45.010 (2) generally accepted auditing standards, as accepted by the American Institute of Certified - Public Accountants on July 1, 1985, for the entity being audited. V) The audit report required under (b) of this section must address the following: (1) the systems of Internal control. and Whether the recipient entity has effective control over, and proper accounting for, revenues, expenditures, assets, and liabilities; (2) the systems established'to ensure compli- ance with state statutes and regulations, and, applicable financial assistance agreement% affecting the expenditure of state money, and whether the tecipieat.entity hassasttplkd with those stawtes regulations, and agreements; (3) the recipient . entity's financial - !tans• • actions. financial statements, and accounts; whether those financial statements are presented fairly in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; and whether the financial statements contain reliable financial data prr rented In accordance with applicable financial assistance agreements. (e) An audit report required under (b) of this section need not evaluate the effectiveness of a program funded -by state financial assistance. However, a program -evaluation may* be con- ducted or requested by the state agency which entered into the financial assistance agreement. (1) An audit required by this section must cover either the entire operations of the secip• Sent entity, or at.the .optlan of that entity, only the departments, agencies, or establishments of that entity which received, expended, or other - .wise administered state financial assistance dun Ing the audit period. The state coordinating agency may consider a series of audits of a recip- ient entity's individual departments. agencies, or establishments for the some fiscal year as a single audit. to the following audit standards: (g) A recipient entity shall provide the state coordinating agency with sufficient copies of (1) Standards for Audit of Governmental each audit report to allow submission of a copy Oreanizations. Proerums. Activities and Func- to each state agency providing financial z (:•�' tto�s: t98t revision adopted by the comptroller assistance to the entity. T1to state- coordinating • general of the United States: or agency shall determine if auditing standards have 2-18.8d. i L L .rc�••.�z^rY. _9i� • Register 9S, October 1985 ADMINISTRATION 2 AAC 45.010 been met and will forward a copy of the audit (A) for an annual audit under (b)(1) of �• to the Department of Administration and other this section, the recipient entity's fiscal year i appropriate state agencies. The state coordi• in which the entity entered into the financial Bating agency shall coordinate resolution of assistance agreement or agreements; audit exceptions and further audit work in accordance with (h) of this section. . (B) for a biennial audit under (b)(2)(A) ' of this section, the recipient entity's two con- (h) Unless additional 'audit requirements are secutive fiscal years In which the entity • imposed by state or federal law, a state agency entered into the financial assistance agree• that provides financial assistance to an entity ' . ment or agreements; shall accept the audit required by this action •-• •-- • •- - ' In satisfaction of any other audit requirement. If (C) for an annual audit under (b)(2)(B) additional audit work Is necessary to meet the of this section, the recipient entity's fiscal ' needs of a state agency, the audit work must be year In which the entity entered Into the based on audit required by this section and be financial assistance agreement or agreements; paid for by the state agency. Audit exceptions • • _ i - noted during an -audit required by this section (2) '"entity' does n9t Include the University - must be resolved by agreement betweea the • ..of Alaska orany other state agency; recipient entity and the state agency responsible ..for the financial assistanceaward agreement in. • 43) "financial assistance!' awnas state grants. valved. contractsprovider agreements, cooperative • -agreements. and all forms of .state financial s • m A%third party that receives financial assis- assistance to an entity, and includes all forms of lance through a recipient entity. in an amount state financial assistance provided through an described In (b) of this section. is subject to the entity to. a third party; "financial assistance" applicable requirements of the section. A does not include public assistance provided recipient entity that disburses SI00,000 or more .*under AS 47; nor does "financial assistance" in state financial assistance to a third party shall Include goods or services purchased for the ensure that the third party complies with the- direct administration or operation of state requirements of this section. That recipient government; for a third party, "financial assis• entity shall • also ensure that appropriate coc Lance" does not include goods purchased from active action is taken within six months after a the third party by a recipient entity for the third party's noncompliance with an applicable 41rect administration or operation of the re- i *late statute or regulation, or financial assistance c1plent entity; agreement, is disclosed. n (4) "state coordinating agency" means the (J) This section takes effect on August 1.1985 Office of Management and Budget (OA1B), for an entity subject to audit under (b)(1) of Office of the Governor. or OMBs designee. (E!'L . ...this section -and whose .fiscal year end -as or 811/85. Reg. 95) afterJuae 30.1986. :. ' ? I Authority: AS 37.OS.020 i AS 37.05.030 (k) This section takes effect on July 1. 1986 AS 37.05. t 90 i for an entity subject to audit under (b)(2) of ' this section and whose fiscal year ends on or i a' after June 30,1997. .. ;; M For purposes of this section, if an -entity i has not identified its fiscal year, that entity's fiscal year is July 1 through June 30. (m) For purposes of this section, f . J / v J u ^,7 e 5.5 C- Oj: Nr G1 1 06, �Y`2 vl aov ��� �L42'LL1rt �1�14'�'LiYYt