Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-06 Harbor Commission SummaryKENAI HARBOR COMMISSION Special Meeting, Decembe~ 6, Kenai City Hail John Wiiiiams, Chairman 1983 AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. AGENDA APPROVAL · APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 8, 1983 4. GUEST SPEAKERS a · P~esentation by Jack Lloyd · COMMUNICATIONS REPORTS a · Review of TAMS Report on F~edrickson Proposal 7. OLD BUSINESS a · Response from TAMS RE: Boat Ramp Project 8. NEW BUSINESS · PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 10. ADJOURNMENT KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION, SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 6, ~98}, 7:00 PM KENAI CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING CHAIRMAN 20HN WILLIAMS PRESIDING 1. ROLL CALL P~esent: Williams, T. Thompson, Dragseth, M. Absent: Houtz, Welle.~, Quesnel Quesnel arrived 8:45 PM. Thompson 2. AGENDA APPROVAL Chairman Williams asked that into the Lease by Fish Pak. item 7-b be added, Inquiry Commission approved the agenda as changed. ADDED ITEM: Chairman Williams apologized for he will be leaving till 3anua~y. the off-schedule meeting, MINUTES, Nov. 8, 1983 a · Chairman Williams asked that page 1, item }, the last sentence should ~ead, "In the last large paragraph of page one, change to 'the f~eight should be brought in at the airport for shipment of thei~ f~eight to all parts of Alaska instead of into Ancho.rage.'" MOTION: Commissioner T. Thompson moved, seconded by Commissiones M. Thompson, to approve the minutes as amended. Motion passed by unanimous consent. 4. GUEST SPEAKERS. 4-a 3ack Lloyd Chairman Williams asked to speak for Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Lloyd represents Reynolds & LLoyd, an Anchorage public relations firm. Chairman Williams distributed literature regarding their proposal. He explained the purpose in bringing Lloyd into the picture is to get an idea what public relations would look like regarding the harbor. He was recommended by Mike Horton, TAMS. They did the public relations for th'e KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1983 P age 2 Nome pcojec[ las[ year. They go[ [he p~ojec[ before [he Legisla[u~e. The problems we.ce on Ihs poli[ical level, bu[ ii was well presented. There may be a s[a[e s[a[u[e agains[ using g~an[ funds [o gel g~an[ funds. Bu[ Ihs C i[y can use [heir own funds. He had a cee[lng wi[h Finance Direc[o~ Brown, Ci[y Manager Bcigh[on and Mr. Lloyd. They [hough[ Ihs bes[ way was [o g~oup Ihs 5 major regional capi[al imp~ovemen[ p~ojec[s [ogethe~: - Library - Airport Apron Extension - Harbor Bulkhead, Dredging Dock - Civic Cen~er - North Taxiway Extension - Airpor~ They asked Mr. Lloyd ~o make a proposal for ~he whole ci~y. Mr. Brighton and Mr. Brown felt ~ha~ doing ~he eoncep~ on all projects, we can go ~o Council ~o ask for funds. $18,975 was proposed. Wi~h $7 Million worth of projects, i~ is no~ ~ha~ much money. Even wi~h jus~ one project, i~ is no~ much. He asked Har.bo.r Commission secretary Loper ~o send lea[ers ~o all commission and committee chairmen ~o ask ~hem ~o join in support. I~ is his in~en~ion ~o go ~o Council Dec. 7 and ask ~hem ~o s~udy ~he proposal, ~hen come back on Dec. 21 for Eheir answer. The legislative session is soon, we need ~o move on i~. Commissioner T. Thompson asked if ~he oos~ would be from City budge~, no~ Commission. Chairman Williams replied yes. He added, interes~ ~o ~he City from Harbor Commission monies would be more than ~he cos~ of ~he project. Mike Hot,on, TAMS, explained he recommended Mr. Lloyd because he worked wi~h him on ~he Nome projeo~ and was impressed wi~h his work, as was the City of Nome. Chairman Williams explained Reynolds & Lloyd are no[ lobbyists, jus~ public relations. I~ would s~ill be up [o Mr. Brighton, Mr. Brown and Chairman Williams ~o do ~he lobbying. There would be newspaper reports and presentations [o agencies lis~ed in ~he proposal. Commissioner T. Thompson no, ed in Mr. Lloyd's lis~ of clients, he deal~ wi~h single organizations, selling a single produc~. Can he adequately cover such diverse [hinge? Wha~ will he be selling, ~he City or ~he merits of ~he projects? Chairman Williams explained, he will s~ress ~he importance of ~he regional developmen~ plan. Kenai sends much ~o ~he S~a~e wi~h oil and ge~s li~le in re~u.rn. On a per capita basis, we should have $12 Million, we received $600,000. This campaign should have been undertaken years ago. Mr. Hot,on added, ~hey do no~ generate ~he ~ex~ ~o ~he KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 198~ Pegs ~ media, the City tells them the message, they would issue p~ess eeIeases. Councilman Acke~Iy asked, if the $18,000 has to be done by bid, what happens in this ease? Engineer LaShot ~epIied, it does not have to be on a contract. We usuaily seek mo~e lhan one p~oposaI, but we do not have to. Commissione.~ T. Thompson said ~t wouId appea~ a new approach ~o ou.~ saIes effo~t would be weiI adv±sed. Chairman Williams noted this is 1/3 of 1% of ~he ~equested p~ojects. MOTION: Commissioner T. Thompson moved, seconded by Commissioner M.Thompson, [o ask Council to consider approval of Ihs Reynold & Lloyd proposal. Mo~ion passed unanimously by cell call vote. COMMISSIONER QUESNEL ARRIVED AT THIS TIME (8:45 PM) COMMUNICATIONS None 6. REPORTS Review of TAMS Report on Fred~iekson Proposal Commission went into recess for informal review of proposal. Chairman Williams explained, when the Commission was formed, they were assigned review of the ha~bor and use of the ~iver. Fo~ this they ~eceived a major source of funding, this has been used. They still have $75,000 left for engineering studies. This p~oposal is within the scope of thei~ wo~k. The City may neve~ be involved in this. But the City could scl.1 tax-free municipal bonds on behalf of a private citizen if it benefits the City. The~e a~e also outside sou.~ces, the state could be looked into as potential buyecs of the facility. ,, It does not mean the City will have to buy and operate. We are just going to see if this is viable. Chairman Williams added, he will not be voting on this because of a possible conflict of interest. Commissioner T.Thompson asked M~. Ho~ton if he had any information on the Anchorage dock. He had heard the pilots say there is a sand bar in the area that causes a lot of difficulty, they have to come in certain times. Also, they have a dredging problem. What is the future of the KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 198~ P ~ge 4 Anchocage dock? M~. Horton ~eplied, they do have a d~edging pcoblem. They spent $1 Million last yea~. The.ce is a difficulty with the Knik Arm shoals. The Corps. of Engineers has tcied to clear but it has filled in. The~e is .cest~iction but it will not get any worse. If the Co~ps. will not pay for the d.cedging it will be a t~emendous cost for Anchorage. Anchorage has paid off all thei~ bonds though. They can see Homer, Whittier and Sewacd as competition. They a~e fighting Alaska Railroad fo~ land, Sewacd is not. Councilman Acke.~ly asked, what would be the life span? Mr. Ho~ton .ceplied, they do not do on those te~ms any more. They look at the most p~obable and fa~ end figure, then figure the income to make it pay. They are speculative; if you sell it well, it will do well. Five yea~s is as long as anyone will p.~oject. Seward is doing very well, they a~e wo.~king ve.~y ha.~d. Chairman Nilliams said one of M~. F~edcickson's ideas was to have dredging into his pcope~ty to bring bacges in. Ne a~e not locked in to one concept. Councilman Acke~ly noted it canges all the way to mid-channel in possibilities. Mr. Ho~ton said a formal dock st.cucture in mid-channel would not work, it would be too expensive. The basin idea would be fairly cheap. Commissione~ Quesnel asked, what size ~ail cats? Mr. Ho~ton ceplied, 200 ft. long by 80 ft. beam. They do not d.~aw as much as the standa.~d 8 to 10 ft. and take 20 to 22 cars. Chairman Williams asked Commissioner Quesnel his opinion on hauling urea. Commissione~ Quesnel replied, the~e is a pcoblem of tides, tidal .~ange, and cu,.cents. Loading f~om ba.~ges to the facility would be impractical. They load PO0-1000 tons pe.c hour, ~ail.~oad cars would take 40-50 ton. All ba~ges have to be moved when one hold is loaded. They do not shift in full current. The amount of time needed to load railroad ca.cs would not make it economical. Mr. Ho.eton agreed, adding the only good thing is if you could of fcc 2-way ba.cge shipments. Crowley barges go up empty. A facility like this would be distribution fente.c fo~ the Kenai a~ea. This is the favored area fo~ Reninsula development. Commissione~ D~agseth noted the only economical way would be similar to Rig Tenders, right on the river bottom. It would not block rive~ navigation and the.~e would be no maintenance. Councilman Ackerly asked if the ba~ge terminal would be less than the ha.cbor. Mr. Horton .~eplied, yes. If it is mo~e than $8-$10 Million you cannot aFfo~d it. Commissioner T. Thompson asked, in view of the fact it may 100% p~ivately owned, is it p~ope.~ to use public funds fo~ the study? Chai.~man Williams explained, if we a~e approached for municipal bonds, we can make the decision if KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1983 Page 5 we have the study. Councilman Ackerly asked Mr. Horton if all financial options will be explored - industrial revenue bonds, pass-through monies, part-owners, etc.? Mr. Horton replied yes, they would then suggest their choices. Chairman Williams noted, private enterprise continuously goes into projects studied by the Federal government. Oil companies use them. Mr. Horton noted economic benefits from this can be seen better than a small boat harbor. MOTION: Commissioner Quesnel moved, Thompson, to have the City proposal. seconded by Commissione~ T. engage TAMS to go ahead with the VOTE (Passed): Yes: T. Thompson, Quesnel, No: None Abstain: Williams, Dragseth M. Thompson .ADDED ITEM: Chairman Williams asked the Commission to review the material passed out this date, an example of a marketing report by TAMS for Haines. ADDED ITEM: Chairman Williams asked the Commission to .review the PMWA newsletter. If any members wish to go, contact him. The~e will be meetings in Ro~tland, Newport-Ore. and Spokane. ADDED ITEM: Chairman Williams reviewed the newsletter from the Corps. of Engineers. The City did not ask for our $2 Million. At one time we were trying to obtain this. He asked if Secretary Lope~ could investigate whether we are still progressing for any type of Corps. funding. He noted some ports are on-going projects, Nome is 60 yrs. ADDED ITEM: Chairman Wil.liams asked Secretary origin of the OCM letter received Loper to check into the in this office. KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1983 P age 6 7. OLD BUSINESS 7-a RESPONSE FROM TAMS RE: BOAT RAMP PRO3ECT Chairman Williams explained the Public Works Dept. was directed Eo write a le~er of concerns regarding ~he project. Mr. Hot,on is here ~o address ~hese concerns. Mr. Hot,on replied to lhe ls~ i~em, ~ha~ i~ should have been rebuilt. This could have been included, ~his was par~ of ~he big design job ~hey did. When Chairman Williams wen~ ~o Ouneau, ~here was no funding for i~. They were asked to figure ~his as cheaply as possible. They were ~rying ~o keep ~he oos~ down This approach wen~ in~o everything ~hey did. He recommended the City have closer con~ac~ wi~h ~he project, ~hat was when Rublic Works Director Kornelis became involved. Chairman Williams added, one of ~he main factors is ~ha~ on ~his projec~ i~ was buil~ as a s~op-gap measure. They ~ried ~o ge~ i~ done for ~his season, bu~ did no~. NOTE: There was considerable discussion after ~his but was aot'a~ible~o~ reco~e~. point, Chairmen Williams no~ed ~he City cleans ~he ~amp on an annual basis. M~. Ho~on suggested ~o spend money on a re~eining wall and a parking lo~ would be good. Chai~men Williams said ~hey will ~ake a look a~ i~ in ~he Sp~ing, we have some funds from ~hie p~ojeo~. If we have no funding for ~he fuel p~oje¢~, we may go back in ~and eho~e up on e pe~menen~ basis. Chairman Williams proposed a e~a~emen~ ~o Council, e~e~ing ~he Harbo~ Commission wee satisfied wi~h ~he project, end ~he ~eaeone fo~ ~he ove~-bidding. Conua~ss~on agreed to the statement. ADDED ITEM: Chairman Williams asked Mr. Horton to review the dock dispute in Homer, information regarding this was in the packet. Mr. Horton explained, he was not actively involved. There were p~oblems with piling of the dock, they went further than expected. TAMS gave advice to the City that they did no~ take. We suggested they go through the courts, they wanted to go to arbitration. TAMS rejected all claims. The 1st overrun was $350,000 with a one-liner explanation. TAMS rejected it, they replied with $650,000 overrun. Then a ~Fd one for $1.3 Million. The court went against the City on 4 counts. Arbitration said they could not have a 1-2 slope, they are all over Homer. Now there is no way ~he KENAI HARBOR COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1983 P age 7 City can go back. The damage report has If the City decides to go against TAMS, oountecsuit. no~ been subm~ed. the~e w~ll be a 7-b TAMS SMALL BOAT HARBOR ENTRANCE Commission recording. ~eviewed this in informal session w±thout Chairmen Williams said they will continue the study till they have a definite conclusion. Mr. Horton said it should be ready by Dec. 16, will be to the Commission before Christmas. They would like comments before the }rd week in 3an. Chairman Williams asked that it be scheduled for discussion at the 3an. 10 meeting. He asked Secretary Loper to distribute copies to the Commission and the Engineering Dept. as soon as possible afteF receipt. 7-c INQUIRY INTO THE LEASE BY FISH PAK Chairman Williams explained the Harbor Commission refused to approve the lease. They wanted to tie up the rest of the waterfront area. Commissioner Dragseth said he tried to get this property~ but could not because of the permits. Commissioner M. Thompson asked~ what would they use it for? Chairman Williams reviewed the minutes relating to this. He added~ it came to Council & P&Z before it came to Harbor Commission. Councilman Ackerly said the reason they did not like the original request was they could not secure it and it would be a divided piece of property. They wanted some place that was contiguous to the present property and could be fenced. Chairman Williams asked that Administration furnish an update on the status of the Fish Pek lease application and send to each commissioner. Council agreed to the suggestion. ADDED ITEM: Commissioner T. Thompson asked about the set net lease sites that the City has. If' we wait too many years and do ~othing, we may lose all possibility of ever doing anything about the situation. Chairman Williams asked that Atty. Rogers investigate if the City fails to take definite actio~ in the question of shore fisheries set ~et leases, will they run the risk of losing title to any of those shore fishery tFacts withi~ the City boundaries because of adverse KENAI HARBOR DECEMBER 6, P age 8 COMMISSION 1983 possession by the shore fisheries lease holders. He noted it has no~ been 7 years since we obtained ~itle. They have no~ paid us in recent years. We are dealing wi~h 6 leases. The S~ate collec~s $40 per year. Commission agreed ~o ~he suggestion. 8 NEW BUSINESS None 9. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 10. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 PM. NEXT MEETING WILL BE 3AN. y~ anet Whelan City Clerk 10, 1984.