Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-01-08 Harbor Commission SummaryREVISED AGENDA - JANUARY 4, 1980 KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION P.O. Box 580 Kenai, Alaska 99611 REGULAR HARBOR COMM ISS ION MEET I NG: January 8, 1980 - 7:00 p.m., at the Publ i c Safety Bui 1 ding Kenai, Alaska HARBOR COMMISSION MEMBERS: Mr. Robert Peterkin, Chairman Mr. John Wi 11 iams, Vice-Chai rman Mr. Tom Ackerly, Member Mr. Wil 1 iam Burnett, Member Mr. Bob Tepp, Member Mr. Tom Wagoner, Member EX-OFFIC IO MEMBERS: Mrs. Mr. Betty Glick, Councilwoman V i nce O' Rei 1 ly, Mayor A-G-E-N-D-A 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Approval of Minutes - December ll, 1979 e Introduction of Guests (a) Colonel Lee Nunn, District Engineer, Corps of Engineers (b) Jim Swalley, Airport Operations Manager 6. Communications From: Letter of Resignation - Chester Cone David' L. Robbins, Chief, Construction/Operations Division Senator Mike Gravel Clarence L. Bingham, Regional Commissioner- Ref: Port of Entry Joan L. Specking - Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc. 7. Reports 8. Old Business (a) Preparation for January 22, 1980 Meeting With LNG Representatives 9. New Business 10. Persons Present Not Scheduled To Be Heard ll. Adjourn KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION MEETING PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING KENAI, ALASKA 99611 January 8, 1980 HARBOR COMMISSION MEMBERS: EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO oRDER® ROLL CALL: AGENDA APPROVAL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES DECEMBER 11, 1979 Mr. Robert Peterkin, Chairman Mr. John Wi 11 i ams, Vi ce-Chai rman Mr. Tom Ackerly Mr. Wi 11 iam Burnett Mr. Bob Tepp Mr. Tom Wagoner Mrs. Mr. Betty Glick, Councilwoman Vince O'Reilly, Mayor Mr. Vi nce O' Rei 1 ly, Mayor Captain Wayne'Reynolds, Corps of Engineers Mr. Jim Swalley, Airport Operations Manager iMr. Jim Hendricks, Borough Senior Planner Mr. Bob Roper Mr. Miles Dean Commissioner Robert Peterkin called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 'Tom Ackerly, Present Wil 1 iam Burnett, Present Robert Peterkin, Present Bob Tepp, Present Tom Wagoner, Present John Nil 1 iams, Present The agenda for January 8, the fol 1 owing changes; 1980 was approved with INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS#5 - 5(a) Colonel Lee Nunn ........ to (a) Capt. Wayne Reynolds m COMMUNICATIONS#6 Add Letter from Don Statter * Input from Mayor O'Reilly NEW'BUSINESS#9 _ , Chairman Peterkin extended an invitation to members of the Harbor Commission to attend a luncheon in Anchorage, January 9, with Anchorage Legislatores regarding Capital Improvements. The minutes of December l l, as written. 1980, were approved U $. CORPS OF ENGINEERS: Captain Wayne Reynolds, U.S. Corps of Engineers, Report Section of the Planning Branch, spoke to the Commission. His understanding was that the Commission had some new information for the Kenai River Study. He said that there were two authorities that they could use to build a small boat harbor. The first is Congressional Authority, and as far as cost construction we can expect 10 years. The second, is Section 107, Continuing Authority Program that the city or borough could act on. Section 107 is limited to 2 million dollars. Under this authority construci~ion could be completed in a 3 year time frame. That would, of course depend on the availability of funds Even if it was approved as a project, that does not mean that the funds would be available. The objective of the Corps involvement is not to compete, but step in when private sectors, local government, city or state does not have enough funds. They can only build breakwaters, entrance channels and turning bases. He then referred to The Kenai River Review Study done by the Corps of Engineers, Cook Inlet Shoal Alaska- Feasibility Report done by the Corps of Engineers, and one done recently by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Kenai River Flats. He then went on to discuss the 1976 report, which was Congressionally authorized. In that study they elected eight alternatives and studied these to determine they:re feasibility, Of those alternatives the best was the benefit - cost ratio of ,44. Costs more to build than the benefits accrued. ~n our discussion later on this evening you can tell me things that increase the benefit, or things you know might decrease the cost. Costs were high due to annual maintenance because of the silt in the river and dredging. The first cost in 1976 was $2,177,200. In the letter we received from you I got the impression that you had information concerning the benefit increase. The benefits are damages that will be prevented by building a small boat harbor. The specific areas of benefits are: harbor of refuge, reduced delay time, (time it takes the fisherman to off load his boat), damages prevented, re- duced storage costs, increased fish catch (increased yield without loss to other areas'), and recreation. Commissioner john Williams pointed_out that there has .. been a fleet increase in Kenai, due to disaster (c~n ~ -- nery fire).. Captain Reynolds said he believed that would be considered a benefit if the cannery would not be rebuilt. He then asked for any questions that the Commission might have. Chairman Peterkin said he would like to say a few words, before the meeting had a open discussion, on the general over all feeling of the community and for the commission. The Kenai River is probably the largest salmon run capacity, not withstanding, the tremendous number of salmon that CHAIRMAN PETERKIN' (continued) go up the Kenai River for Sport fishing. The Kenai River has been classified as a navigable waterway all the way to Kenai Lake. There approximately 400 boats bringing their catch into the mouth of the Kenai River. The congestion in the mouth of the river is just unbelievable, not only when the boats are coming 'in to unload their fish, but when they are not fishing, boats are morged in the mouth in all areas. It makes it almost impossible to move around. There is no way to get from the boat t~ the shore with- out a pair of hip boots and walking knee deep in mud. There are no facilities to tie up, no facilities to work on your boat at all, only a few sheet piling docks that people pull up and tie on to. ! think that a boat harbor facility is one of the single items that is slowing the entire fishing industry in the Kenai River down because of the congestion. No cannery is willing to spend any type of money or i~o do much improvement over what there is, because of the mass confusion.and limited facilities. This is not a problem that developed this year or last year, we have been living with this problem since there was a Kenai, probably. It just gets worse as years go on because we find ourselves now instead of 20 ~oot boats we're running 30-50 foot boats and we"re getting into aloto of power and the larger the boat of course, the more room it takes up. Chairman Peterkin then turned the meeting over to Commissioner Tom Wagoner and Tom Ackerly. GENERAL D I SCUSS ION OF CORPS STUDY- Commissioner Wagoner referred to the letter he wrote to COlonel Nunn. From the commercial aspect there were some points that would have a bearing on the ratio. When the Corps of Engineers did their report the average commercial fishing boat was listed as 20-25 feet. Larger boats are now being used. Value listed was very low, about $18,000, now we have boats that value $60,000 to $120,000 and more. Captain Reynolds referred to the~1976 Study, pages 22 & 23 and made the point that 'damages to the boats is what we are talking about. He said these figures should have been coordinated with us, he did not know if they were. Chairman Peterkin explained that the Harbor Commission was not quite a year old and then asked Mayor Vince O'Reilly to elaborate. Mayor O'Reilly added that prior to the Harbor Comm.~ission there was only an ad hoc group, Now the City has an ordinance (11.10.010) requiring a Harbor Commission. It is'a change the Captain should be aware of. Chairman Peterkin commented that this Corps of Engineers Report has cut' off the City in every available instance for financing for harbor development, because everybody refers to this study. Commissioner Wagoner referred to page 17 of the report under the title Fishin~ Craft. It estimates 400 boats, while the actual figure for use permits for salmon alone is 540. That does not include halibut, which has more than double the salmon Permits. He did a random count and got a fairly accurate figure of over 350 boats dry docked in Kenai right now. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION- (Continued) COMMUNICATIONS- RECESS' RE-CONVENE REPORTS' TRAC-T A' This commission will be considered the transportation authority and wil 1 receive al 1 ,reports', The Mayor would welcome input in selecting members. Jim Swalley went on to explain that he· approached the Mayor to develop an Ai.rport Commission and it eventually developed into the 'idea of the Transportation Commission. He would like the Harbor Commission's help and suggestions. Commissioner Williams commented that 3 members of the Harbor Commission were on"the Airport Advisory Committee and new members should be air'port orientated. Chairman Peterkin thanked Mr. Swalley for attending the meeting and giving his comments to the Commission. Communications were received from' Chester Cone - Letter of Resignation David L. Robbins, Chief, Construction/Operations Division Senator Mike Gravel Clarence L. Bingham, Ref~ .Port of"Entry Joan L. Specking - Ak. Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc. Don Statter, Director - Div. of Harbor Design & Construction There was a general discussion of Clarence Binghams' letter on prerequisites to a Port of Entry and how Anchorage, Valdez and Fairbanks were made Ports of Entry. Commissioner 'Burnett.agreed to provide an outline on the procedures, for the next meeting and will contact customs for a list of Port of Entry. It was agreed that Charles A. Brown should wait for more information before answering letter. There is to be a letter sent to Chester Cone thanking him for his services on behalf of the Commission' Concerning Don Statters' letter it was agreed that Mayor O:Reilly would construct a letter in reply to Mr. Statter~s letter of January 2. At l l:O0 p.m. Chairman Peterki~ called a 5 minute recess. At l l'05 p.m. the Harbor Commission re-convened in regular session. Commissioner Tepp reported on his rematch with Cordova. Funding was done through Don Statter's office and State Representatives. Builders industrial park is all leased, they do not have fuel "deal" because of spillage. There were comments on silt and ice surveys. Chairman Peterkin referred to the December l l minutes regarding Tract A. (_It was requested then that the Acting City Manager try and find the amount of money GENERAL D I SCUSS ION OF CORPS STUDY: (Continued) There was some discussion as t~ the number of boats the Kasilof River handles. We are waiting the resUlts of an inspection by the Coast Guard on this. Commissioner Tom Wagoner told of an instance where a life could possibly have been saved, had there been a harbor. He then refered to page 22 where it says "Private industry elected to go elsewhere". I think that is an assumptive statement. This helps negate development. It is very~ economically feasable to charter out of the Kenai River - but you do. need a docking facility and protective harbor. Fire loss would be lower with equipment to put it out. I have seen 3 boats in the Kenai River burn, because the Fire Department could,~nt reach them. Commissioner Tom Ackerly added that on the river itself there are 5 canneries, but there are others located away from the river that must be off loaded on the river. . .... The number seems to be increasing with the canneries'~ located down Kal ifonsky Beach Road and out the North Road. He then referred to a question asked by Mayor O'Reilly earlier as to whether the value of the harvest meant, the number~of fish or the dollar value. Captain Reynolds mentioned~..that it would be dollar value. Commissioner Ackerly mentioned the number of complaints brought to the Commission regarding damaged fish. With less handling we could cut down on the damage to the fish. Commission Wagoner brought up the situation that developes when the tenders pick up and deliver the loads. They must wait 2 - 4 hours, 6 - 8 hours if the tide is wrong. When the tenders get into the river it is filled with fishing boats and it is especially bad with high tides. The Harbor Commission also had complaints on the location of buoys in the River. RECESS: RE-CONVENE At 8:00 p.m. the meeting stopped while Tom Ackerly and other members showed Captain Reynolds pictures of the mouth of the river and canneries, and there was general discussion of the pictures and problems of the Kenai River. At 8:10 p.m. Chairman Peterkin called the meeting back to order. Commissioner Peterkin described another problem of the area. Homer, Seldovia, Seward and Whittier boat.harbors are filled to capacity with years of waiting lists. All of these faciliti.es are now in the process of dramatically enlarging the facilities. Whittier is also trying to put one in Shotgun Cove. This rubs the people in the Kenai area the wrong way because we don't have one to start with. It's not a question of need - if you bought a boat now and tried to put" it i~n any harbor on the Kenai Peninsula, you'd be lucky to get it in in 5 yea rs. GENERAL DISCUSS I'ON WITH CAPT. WAYNE REYNOLDS' Commissioner Wagoner discussed the 'fisherman_ from Halibut Cove and Homer that run their boats all the way up into the Upper Cook Inlet, each period,~ and then go all the way back because there is' no place to moor. If we had a harbor they could use it as a transient area, where ~they could leave the boat safely between periods. Commissioner Burnett pointed out that with the advent of the 200 mile limit, bottom fishing will increase and the need may go to 800 to 1,000 slips. Commissioner Wagoner added that although alot of time and money went into the study by the Corps of Engineers is shows a lack of knowledge. F~e referred to page 17 ~here it says "Cannery owned boats are stored in warehouses on the edge of the River". That is a mistatement as there are no canneries that have warehouses, .that they store boats in, in the area. This type of study is good for only a couple of years especially in an area like ours where the popu- lation is increasing, .international laws are changing, and fishing is becoming more important. The report is no longer accurate. At the time the report was made there were 3 major processors at the mouth of the Kenai River. Today there are 6 at the River and this dosen~t include the one down Kal ifonsky Beach Road. Today they are doing not twice, but 3-4 times the amount of processing they were doing at the time of the study. One other thing we'd like to look at is the recreational benefit that would come about if we had a small boat harbor. The boating industry has increased since the time of the report. We now have numerous marine related industries. There is a definate increase in recreational needs of the area. Three or four years ago, we had no direct supplier for recreational boating equipment, now we have 3 retail outlets dealing primarily in recreational boating. There are numerous marine related businesses that have come into the forefront~in the last few years. There are 3 major boat- barge building companies. The fish processing plants~we are talking about are multi-million dollar plants. One thing we touched lightly on was holding barges. One of the new local industries related to fish industry is the" IRS Marine Company. Last year it was contracted to build 4, 26 foot holding barges and this year has contracted to increase the size of one of those to 36 feet, and to build 4 additional 36 foot barges. The need~for this was brought about by another entity that wasn't even in existance at the time of the report and that is the Aquaculture Association. Their prime reason is to pro- liferate the spawning of salmon and increase the yield. They are presently working in Crescent River area, and the number of salmon will increase about 5 times, which will increase the need for processors. The Aquaculture Assoc. is changing the over-all picture of our needs in the area. GENERAL D I SCUSS I ON: (Continued) The increase expected in the Kasilof area did not materialize for several reasons. One, there are few services there, it is a lon'g way from alot of the fisherman's homes, there was a fire in one of the fish processing plants, and the~'ofisherman's coop was dissolved. Because Kenai is a central service district, fisherman tend to congregate here. What we need is a new study to take a look at all the things that have changed dramatically, and show a need of increase harbor facilities. If the Corps of Engineers felt there was no need for a harbor, why did they issue permits to two entrepenaures to build a harbor? Captain Reynolds then referred to his earlier statement that the Corps of Engineers does not compete with private industry. They may not help, but would not prevent private industry. Commissioner Williams brought up the fact that with inflationary costs, private industry cannot finance a project of this magnitude. Could the Corps finance a turning b~sin? The Captain answered that No, the project must be complete, cannot do a portion of a project. Above $2 million, the sponsoring agency must pay. The Corps portion must be, breakwater, entrance channel and turning base, but must have a 1:1 ratio. Chairman Peterkin asked .if we went to another financing agency, must it be predicated on the Corp of Engineers? Capt. Reynolds said yes. Chairman Peterkin referred back to the benefit/cost ratio. Basically, the Kenai River is salmon processing. There is going to have to be room for more processors. If there were facilities and unloading areas, what would this do for additional industry in halibut, herring, herring roe or even clams. There is nothing plugged in for potential growth and this is a very important fact that would go in with future development. Since this report, we have 2 new canneries, on the rive~. We have a tract record set up and we can relate it to a past report, and we are still in a single species zone. The Harbor Commission would like to see the fishing industry develop further than the salmon. Captain Reynolds reported that he did not know if future benefits could be considered on benefit cost ratio. In order to be credited as a be.nefit, it must be substantiated that benefit is more than opinion. Chairman Peterkin added in regard to benefit cost ratio, that we started processing with salt, then canned, now frozen, and we may go to fresh. He then brought up the problems of the Bristol Bay area, with loss of fish due to the time element involved in processing. They lost millions of dollars because by the .time the fish got to the processors the processors turned them down. Basically, we have about the same problem in this area and it's going to get worse and worse, the longer the stack up is out there to unload the fish. When you are processing fresh fish, or frozen SMALL BOAR HARBOR: (Continued) or gas tehyrol, you must have a very good quality of fish. Fisherman leave the'area early to avoid waiting at unloading areas. These could be benefit cost.ratio's,' Captain Reynolds commented that this must be substantiated. Chairman Peterkin pointed out the stack up, with time element, how long it takes the last boat to unload. There will .be no historical records to back this up. This will have to be new due to the changes in processing. Captain Reynolds mentioned that damage to the fish may not always be due to delay, fuel and damage must be considered separately and cannot overlap. Mayor O'Reilly suggested that if we had an annual better P~ice for fish (say 2%) and capitalize that at'8%, then we are looking at an investment. This may totally change this benefit cost ratio. Commissioner Burnett mentioned 5 warehouses in Seattle of fish that should have got $2.30 to $2.49 per pound, but the bid price was $1.17 per pound because they are number 2's instead of number l's. Commissioner Ackerly added that Senator Clem Tillion has more information on thd~s. ~It .was Suggested by Commissioner Williams that the loss in these 5 warehouses could cover the cost of the harbor. The Corps should consider that Carter's Embargo Act of bottom fish could have a major impact. The study does not fit our time and should be redone. RECONNAISSANCE ~STUDY' Mayor O'Reilly added that we are making major efforts to the State Legislature for financing. He asked if the Corps had an interim 6 month study, so we wouldn't be tied up in lon.q term study. Captain Reynolds referred to Section'~107, 2 million of' the federal portion, 3 years verses 10 years, but limitations of money. It's broken down into a number of steps. The first part is a reconnaissance study .... It-is a $5'000 study and done in approximately 90 days. We call it the "Windshield Reconnaissance Study". We g6t all the info- mation we can and' try and make a shot at benefit cost ratio. Then we go on to the next stage and make an lin depth study, and make the determination again and get benefit cost ratio, and submit the proposal. The 90 day reconnaissance would cover request for interim. A great deal of information must be developed to bring up the benefits. The costs we came up with in the 1976 study are extremely high. Things said tonight will show increase benefits, but benefits will have to be great to off set the cost. Now we need to show great decrease in costs. When we do the reconnaissance study there is going to need to be a great deal of information provided to make those benefits Come out. Before we even start 107, we must be given assurances by the City that it is willing and able to make the agreements with us. Does it have the authority, right of way of roads, etc.? Mayor O'Reilly answered,~'Yes we do have the authority. / RECONNAISSANCE STUDY' (Continued) BENEFIT/COST RATIO' Captain Reynolds added that the $5,000 for the reconnaissance study does not come out of the 2. million dollars, but the detailed study does. Evidence for claimed benefits is the key, we must justify the benefits. Cost is established, benefits are brought out tonight and others are damages to boats, lost time, etc. The 1976 study was an in depth report, but was stopped because the benefit cost ratio was so low. Commissioner Tepp asked if the report could be changed, and asked how we would go about getting a 90 day study. Captain Re~/nolds answered that we must have a 'new report. We must apply by letter, and authorize funds from State. There is no quicker way, but help from the Harbor Commission would mean the $5,000 would go further. He went on to explain the process of going to the State Clearing House and the Clearing House must send back comments. This takes about a month. He reinerated that at the end of the 90 day study the Corps of Engineers could go ahead in more detail, or could find it not economically feasible (benefit cost ratio) and drop it. Commissioner Williams brought to the Harbor Commissions attention that about 2 months ago we asked for $5,000 from the Citv Council to do a reconnaissance study. Some members said that $5,000 wouldn't do much. Here is an ~opportunity for the study to be done, time is on our side for once. Each month that goes by brings that cost ratio factor closer together, but the thing that isn't working with us is that we can't get this to our legislators right now and we should keep them aware of what web"re doing. Chairman Peterkin talked about benefit cost ratio in regard to sport fishing recreation. There is absolutely no place on the river to moor an 18 foot boat unless you or a friend lives on the river. You have to trailer it every time you use it. There. is no storage yard for people from Anchorage, they must trailer boats back and forth. How can we get a benefit cost ratio here thats acceptable, the impact here is sensational. Captain Reynolds asked why recreation was not mentioned in the study. Chairman Peterkin explained that there is a disl i ke between the hook fisherman and net fisherman. It's likely this was why it wasn't discussed. Commissioner John Williams made the point that Deep Creek now has a time limit on the length on parking in the area. It makes everyone more mobile and they tend to come to Kenai. In 1976 you could park there all summer, now only for 3 days, therefore it puts more pressure on the Kenai River. Chairman Peterkin added that there are no facilities that benefit the sport fisherman on the Kenai, no fuel facilities, no place to load and off load boats. RECONNAISSANCE STUDY' Captain Reynolds reinerated that it is very important to get the letter in, and anything the Harbor Commission could do to give information wOuld be helpful. Commissioner Tepp asked if the Corps had any type of questionaire that we could send out to the fisherman. No, they did not. Commissioner Williams made the s~ggestion' that Commission members' each take a responsibility and do his speciality to develop information. Mayor O'Reilly mentioned that we are seeing legislators tomorrow and we are asking for the whole thing - engineering, design and construction for boat harbor. Our request must be in for this session and we want to show that the 1976 report i..s inoperative. Captain Reynolds replied that the Corps could not say anything of value until the 90 day report is done. Until then we would have to go by the 1976 report. There was discussion as to why the City couldn't do the reconnaissance report, since the Corps used our information. RECESS' At 9'25 p.m.'by general consent, a recess was called. RE-CONVENE At. 9'40 p.m. by general consent, the Harbor Commission re-convened in regular session. ACTION' Commissioner Burnett moved to; recommend to City Council to make application to the Corps of Engineers, for recon- ~ naissance report covering navigational improvements under authority of Section 107, of the 1960 River and Harbor Act, for the area of Kenai, with great haste. Commissioner Ackerly seconded, roll call vote, motion 'carried unanimously. CORPS OF ENGINEERS' (Continued) Commissioner Williams referred back to the 2 million dollars that the Corps of Engineers is authorized to .sPend. Since 1960, 'has Congress allowed for expansion based on inflation? Captain Reynolds answered that 3 million dollars is being -considered by Congress. Commissioner Williams asked if it would be of benefit if our Congressional delegates contacted Congress? Captain Reynolds answered yes. Commissioner Williams requested of Ben Delahay any information or the bill number, would he bring it to the next meeting, and as part of the agenda, we consider letters to our Congressional .delegates regarding the 3 million dollars being considered by Congress. The Commission decided to tie in a work session with a luncheon on Friday at the Katmai. Captain ReynoldS reinerated that the Section 107 study, could be negative' again, the cost may go up, because it is an environmentally sensitive area. Chairman Peterkin thanked Captain Reynolds and invited him to stay for the remainder of the meeting. JIM SWALLEY. AIRPORT OPERATIONS MANAGER TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION' Chairman Peterkin then introduced Jim'Swalley, Airport Operations Manager. Mr. Swalley mentioned that there had been some discussion on the possibility of combining the Harbor Commission and the Airport under one Port Authority. He commented that he woul'd like to work with the Harbor Commission, ~'..~He then gave a general outline on where the Airport is right now, and the direction he would like to see the Airport go. He pointed out that there was a "Mayor's Committee on Airport Lands" that was functioning in 1979 and dist.ributed a copy of their final report. The Airport lands consist of lands deeded by FAA. It is supported almost wholly by airport revenues. Of the 1979-1980 budget of' $360,766 only $20,675 came from outside sources which was Revenue Sharing. The 6udget~is in two sections, the Airport Terminal and .the Airport Lands System. Airport revenues are from leases, landing fees, fuel storage, and others. We are a FAA Certified Air Carrier. We are certified as an alternate to Anchorage up to the 727 size. Limitation there is runway length and weight bearing capacity. We have Wien, who just now cut back on their services to us and should be reiniating their Kenai - Seattle'flight in late April. We have AAI and Polar who is going through their hearing with the ATC (Alaska Transportation Commission) and plans on starting services about February 1, 1980. If Polar dosen't prove up, Andy'~s Flying Service of Kenai has been selected as an alternate, We. will. have a second commuter airline between Kenai and Anchorage. According to FAA statistics, we are the fourth busiest airport in Alaska. We are working on four Airport Development Assistance Programs (ADAP) grant preapplication requests for, (~.) Airport Electrical Generation upgrading (2) Pa'rking Ramp Extension (1200~ x 350:~), (_3) warm storage building(in shop area), (.4) 'snow removal equipment. We have lands to the north of the terminal building called the FBO Subdivision, broken down'into 11, lO0"x 400' lots wi th ramp frontage. Currently that land is separated from the airport by ]. security fencing. In .order for us to lease those lands and maintain security, we 'are going to relocate that~ fencing with the FAA's approval. Proposed future projects are' float~ plane basin, grass ski strip, airport terminal renovation, air freight terminal and warehouse (for fish related industry and oil industry), and BLM fire fighting facilities which are currently located in Wildwood. Some other projects are temporary operating area for fish processors and franchising/leasing airport parking lots. There was general discussion on ramp expansion and fish processing areas, and funding for security fencing. Mayor O'.Reilly added that an ordinance is being developed to create a Transportation Commission. The Harbor CommiSsion is now short 1 .member. It has been suggested that 3 members be added to the standing commission bringing the total to 9, and as terms expire it will drop to 7. TRACT A' (Continued) BOAT RAMP' the City spent on that). Lenore found several past City financial statements and we do'not have a handle on where the money came from. Malones survey was on Salamantof and Ken Branch in Homer did survey work on Tract A, but we couldn't get any ~additional information. _ Chairman. Peterkin then.referred to information from Phil Aber in Soldotna on $100,000 to be used for boat ramp. Also, information from George Navarre on $25,000 for a road to the boat ramp. Kim will continue to research thi s, Mayo~ O'Reilly'ire~d a draft of a letter to Don Statter. Commissioner Williams requested we find out legislature members who work on boat harbors and ports. Commissioner Peterkin referred to a call made to Don. Statters office with Ray Meketa concerning the $650,000 harbor development funds. Mr. Meketa indicated this money was still available to Kenai. Chairman Peterkin then referred to a memorandum to the Mayor, City Council and Harbor Commission from Roland D. Lynn dated March 2, 1976. It appears that Kenai would be eligible for $500,000 in the provisions of Bill SB 582, if approved. There was also a CH 86 SLA 1974 for $650,000 and right now we don't know which bill the City was granted. If SB 582 v~as'approved, Kenai would be eligible for a maximum of $1,150,000 for construction of a port facility He then referred to a letter from Deborah Daisy to Ray Meketa dated May 6, 1976 concerning a "tentatively reserved $625,000" pending receipt of the required feasibility study and formal application for grant assistance. We do have the form where we can apply for the money, What we can do here is wait until we get the Corps of Engineers feasibility study and then apply for the money. Then we can at least do what we want to do with Tract A. If $1,150,000 grant is available, we should apply for it, Commissioner Williams added that Fleur Corp, is the Prime. contractor for Alaska~LNG and also for boats, harbors and basins. Perhaps we could combine these. He estimated we should be able to start on the small boat harbor in 12 - 18 months. We have a prime contractor in the area that could do the job,~ Thereby eliminating unnecessary expenses such as moving equipment in and out of the area. OLD BUS INESS- It was confirmed that Len McLean would be at our January 22, meeting. Mayor O~Reilly requested committee of the whole and the meeting went off the record. NEW BUS INESS' There is a meeting in Anchorage, Wednesday at 12'00 if any members would like to attend. There was some discussion on this. ROPER NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING DATE: ADJOURN: Ben Del ahay reported on the Roper leases, Tracts B & C. Roper compl~ies with one of his l'eases, the insurance on. Tract B is alright. Tra.ct C, the insurance is insufficient and he has not compli.ed wi th that. The certificate is not in conformance. Mr. Delahay suggested that a letter be sent to Roper in reference to Tract C. The assignment of leases, the leases are different and his 1 ease could' be cancel I ed if the Harbor Commission wan~s to Pursue it, Chairman Peterkin commented that Roper.. never did sign over those leases to Kenai Development Corp. He signed an affidavit dictated by'his partners, that he would turn the leases over, but the City didn't record or accept it. They are still in his name, personally, "'.Chairman Peterkin then requested that Ben Del ahay write a letter from the !.egal department on the insurance of Tract C. Ben will get l.egal clarification and bring back to the Commission. The next r~egular scheduled meeti.n§ date i.s January 22, 1980, at the Public safety Buildi.ng, at 7:00 p.m. At 12:05 a,m, by. unanimous consent the meeting was ajourned; Respectful !y submitted, Kim Howard Administrative Assistant . . RobOt ~'~terktk~,'~-Cha ir~an' Harbor. Commi ss i on