Loading...
2015-01-12 Special Meeting Kodiak Island Borough Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes January 12,2015 Code Update Special Meeting 6:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers CALL TO ORDER VICE CHAIR SCHMITT called to order the January 12, 2015 special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission at 6:32 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VICE CHAIR SCHMITT led the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL Requested to be excused are Pat Olsen and Jennifer Richcreek due to being out of town. Commissioners present were Jay Baldwin, Alan Schmitt, Kathy Drabek, Maria Painter, and Scott Arndt. Excused were Pat Olsen and Jennifer Richcreek. Community Development Department staff present was Director Pederson, Martin Lydick, Jack Maker, and Shelia Smith A quorum was established. COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to excuse Pat Olsen and Jennifer Richcreek. VOICE VOTE ON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY APPROVAL OF AGENDA COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to approve the agenda and change the time from 3 minutes to 5 minutes. VOICE VOTE ON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY CITIZEN COMMENTS A) Items Not Scheduled for Public Hearing: Limited to five minutes per speaker. Local telephone number: 486-3231 Toll Free phone number: 855-492-9202. Kyle Crowe thanked the commission and staff for their service. He thanked the citizens that have contributed so much time and effort to the Code Revision review. The department has been entrusted with developing the laws that govern the way we use our lands including our private property, and for administering those laws. They've also been permitted over time and circumstances to achieve an unhealthy influence. Last summer he had to work through the department to perform some work on his property. While that experience was painful he's grateful that it opened up his eyes. He is shocked, alarmed, and appalled by the power and authority that we citizens have allowed this small department to achieve. He doesn't think the current status as the high priest of the land was achieved as a result of any conspiracy or effort by any particular individual and it seems more likely to him that this unacceptable situation developed naturally when you consider the given conditions and environment in which the department has evolved. Over the years we have let them draft the original laws which were complex and vague and we approved them. We became dependent on them for their interpretation, we let them guide and advise our elected officials and appointed advocates, we let them write the agendas and scripts for the commission meetings, we let them keep the minutes and maintain the records of all proceedings. They have become the virtual sole source of information and advice on the meaning of the code and anyone who speaks to build, repair, or replace anything on their property needs to see it is allowed or how it must be done. Hedges, vegetation, barbeque grills, swing sets, sandboxes, smokehouses, banyas, woodsheds, woodpiles, hoophouses, greenhouses, doll houses, dog 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 1 of 25 houses, chicken coops. We are all at the mercy of the department and their determinations, opinions, and their almost exclusive knowledge of and familiarity with this code and their unique processes for granting approval and making conditional approvals if allowed, how, what, and where you can do it. He expects our representatives to act quickly and decisively to ensure our rights are adequately protected and that this department is better and more closely supervised and managed to ensure that they perform their duties as responsible servants with assisting us in the wise use of our lands. Jamie Fagan thanked the commission for the thankless hours spent on this. He submitted an unofficial survey conducted over the past few weeks that have 420 signatures of people who feel strongly that this code has to go away. Fagan believes these draft codes cannot work, it cannot be made to work, and he suggested that we go back to the old code and fix what's wrong. This code is UN Agenda 21 which stands for the United Nations Action Plan for the 215' Century. George H. W. Bush signed the treaty in 1992 and in 1993 President Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development for the sole purpose of getting into every city, county, and state in the U.S. through federal rules, regulations, and grants. This is a global plan but is implemented locally. The following feel good type of language is used: smart growth, green, social justice, sustainable development, consensus, partnership, stakeholders, diversity, visioning, open space, heritage, comprehensive planning, greenspace, etc. He suggested that the borough assembly and city council pass a resolution similar to the Fairbanks Anti-UN Agenda 21 Resolution passed in 2013 condemning UN Agenda 21. This code, in his opinion, is an assault on our property rights. It makes all property owners guilty before they commit a crime, it blatantly violates at least 3 of our Bill of Rights, it concentrates power in the hands of a small minority of bureaucrats. Jascha Zbitnoff stated that the commission may want to consider a bigger venue due to about 250 people being in the hall and the parking lot is full which all those people cannot hear the meeting and he recommended postponing to a larger venue. He suggested having it in the auditorium tomorrow night. VICE CHAIR SCHMITT stated there will not be a meeting on this this week but there will be another special meeting on January 28" and February 4t" and will occur in this room. Jascha Zbitnoff stated we need to figure out another time when we can get more people involved in a bigger venue that you can announce with the proper time and do it in the auditorium. There is plenty of time to get that set up. Someone on the commission could make a motion to make another meeting. Peggy Rauwolf stated this board is just like the Parks and Rec Board. When P&R were having issues with trails they reconvened at the high school. She feels that the commission should think about this because there are a lot of people who are concerned and they can't fit into this room and we are Kodiak. Jascha Zbitnoff stated he would like to hear someone make a motion for another time in another venue that everyone can get into. COMMISSIONER ARNDT stated it's the commission's intent to take all the public testimony that we can but now this isn't working out in the assembly Chambers. There's the meeting schedule that one has to go through for advertising and it's usually 3 -5 days that ideally we want to get the notice out to the paper to the people. Scheduling the venue we have to check to see when it's available so there are hoops to go through. We don't have the meeting scheduled but we have some tentative dates and the next date was January 28'�' and he's leaning towards moving to postpone this until January 28"'. We don't have a location right now but we'll be trying to find another location and advertise it. This is the fullest that he's ever seen the assembly chambers. That says a lot for the issues we are dealing with and the intent is that no one will be short changed. If everyone can keep this civil he would recommend continuing but he's concerned that this is going to get out of hand. COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to postpone until January 28"'. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 2 of 25 COMMISSIONER ARNDT withdrew his motion. PUBLIC HEARINGS Limited to five minutes per speaker. Local Telephone Number: 486-3231 Toll Free Number: 855-492-9202 A) Case: Update of KIBC Title 16-Subdivisions. Request a review of the recommendations for amendments to Title 16 of the Borough Code. The applicant is the Kodiak Island Borough and the agent' is the Community Development Department. The location is borough-wide and the zoning varies. The motion on the floor from the October 1, 2014 Special Code Update Meeting is: COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to advance Titles 16, 17, & 18 to the Assembly forpassing. The public hearing is still opened for public testimony on Titles 16, 17, and 18. Leonard Roberson (caller) stated he arrived tonight there are people standing in the rain and he thinks it should be postponed to a bigger venue so all the people can hear and give testimony. He's also opposed to the draft codes. There's too many things already put into law without citizen's input such as giving the Code Enforcement Officer the same authority as a police officer to issue monetary citations. There's already been changes made that resident's haven't had the opportunity to weigh in on and now we can be fined or given tickets by the discretion of an individual which was before you even started talking about rewrites. You created the Code Enforcement position, then created the ability for the Code Enforcement Officer to issue monetary tickets, and now you want to make it where it becomes a money grab: we've got the person, the authority, the ability to receive funds, and now we need to make just about everything illegal for a person to do on their personal property so we can gain income.We the people have had enough of this money grabbing and everyone's a criminal type attitude from our assembly. We want you to know we are paying attention. He wants the new assembly members to take a step back and look and listen to the people and realize all the issues we've had with the trash and roll carts, there's been a lot of deception and dishonesty by this assembly and borough management toward the residents. Tthe borough residents have been treated like second class citizens when it comes to dumpster use, we're being charged more than city dwellers even though they put dumpsters back for city residents the borough residents still pay for the cleanup around those dumpsters. We were told there would be transfer stations and now there are bears running around in our neighborhood with bullet holes. Stop the lying, stop the deception, and stop the dishonesty and start being straight with the residents of this community. Look out into that hallway and listen to we the people. Sarah Thayer (called) stated she's been in Kodiak for the last 35 years and in any civilized society there are laws, rules, and codes. Some in many may need to be revised because they are outdated. In April 2013 the Fairbanks City Council voted unanimously to not partake in the UN Agenda 21 but Juneau and Sitka did. Maybe someone can tell us how the residents of these cities feel now about their decisions. Locally there are questions that need answers. How does the city council feel about these code revisions because the city is in the borough and who would enforce these codes? Does the Borough have enough manpower? She requested the commission consider the consequences that would and could be. Denise May, Port Lions resident, stated she's an Afognak native born and raised in Kodiak. She's read through this document and if you go through the color coded document almost every page has new changes and there's a lot of changes. It's impossible to please everyone but trying to please the majority is important. You've heard a lot about how the majority feels about this. She serves on the Alaska Federation of Natives Board representing the villages on Kodiak Island of which the largest is the Kodiak village. One thing she read was calling the road system urban. In calling the road system urban you affect the subsistence rights of the Kodiak community. That designation comes about every 3 years and has to be voted on. AFN works hard to make sure certain communities do not lose their subsistence rights. It would be very difficult for her to address every issue that she has concerns about. She agrees with taking the old code and taking a look at 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 3 of 25 it. When a ship is being steered in the wrong direction and a new captain comes on board they usually try to change the course to accommodate the right direction to make things work right. Neal Cooper thanked everyone. He stated he's talked to everyone here and Kodiak has spoken. Kodiak has finally woken up. He hopes the commission will represent us because we are the voting public. Cooper is now prepared, he has researched and found that some of the responsibilities that are going on in this. He started taking notes and people asked him for help understanding this. One thing that bothers him is "If the use is not listed in the code it's prohibited unless the use is listed as prohibited the code specifically describes permitted uses for each zoning area." If an activity is not listed as prohibited, he reads it as saying it isn't prohibited. Some of the things that when this code was written it didn't apply to Kodiak at all like "Since it's not written we can't go hunting, since it's not written we can't go shooting. What really bothers him is concerning private ownership of property "The Kodiak Island Borough Community Development Department will interpret, determine, resolve to their satisfaction, deem necessary, deem appropriate, may allow, approve, prohibit, compel, require, specify, grant, authorize, rule (inaudible) or view, charge additional fees, and designate by line. He reads this as I am the alpha and the omega, nothing happens unless I say it happens. We had someone intimidated badly by a borough employee. A little tiny lady just read her up the riot act and she was shaking in her shoes. People say this doesn't happen. When borough people are looking in their windows and then going next door looking in their windows for any violations, that is a violation of the constitution. He contacted attorneys in Anchorage to see if he was reading the draft codes correctly, are they really writing it like this. We really need to evaluate this because he didn't appoint anyone God in his life. This is Kodiak and we've spoken. Brent Watkins stated he was on the commission when this process started. He has thirteen years of board service with 7 of it on the commission. When this process started we were faced with a broken code; it's unorganized, it was unclear to the citizens, you couldn't pick it up and figure out what you were supposed to do or what you weren't supposed to do, and it's open for too much interpretation by Community Development Department staff. The last 2 are the worst. The unclear can be explained but the interpretation has been an ongoing problem and a historic problem. You can't get a consistent definition of what the law is; you get inconsistent application of what is permissible and what is not permissible. Two people can go in on the same day and you get completely different answers from the same person. It's led to the code being historically applied by who you are; certain people staff will bend over backwards for and disregarded ethics and could be questionably legal to push things through. Staff has trespassed to make cases and generally misrepresented things. We've had cases in Bells Flats where from one angle a photo was presented as a pile of trash but in seeing it from the background of another photo you could see that someone was building a living fence out of recycled materials so what was presented as a pile of junk tires was actually a garden project in process. These people had to come in here to explain themselves on that and a lot of other issues. What's junk? We've had staff act on lumber piles, material piles for projects that were being done and those have been listed as junk. Staff interpretations was one of the biggest things we were trying to fix with this rewrite and all we've done is gone backwards in this process. We've assigned more power to staff and a much more liberal interpretation for the code. This is a disservice to the people. To throw it out now would cost us a lot of money, to implement it would cost us a lot more. Dr. Bob Johnson stated he had his 89th birthday this Christmas. Seventy-seven of those years have been spent in Kodiak. He came to Kodiak in 1938 with his father who was the first physician in Kodiak and has been here ever since. He's seen taxes established that were to be short term and be terminated. The 6% sales tax was not supposed to be continued, it was never sunsetted as it was supposed to have been. He's seen property taxes grow with the community; he's seen the borough formed with the help of his father who established the first Planning and Zoning Commission. His family was involved with this for a long time and we've been very proud of Kodiak. We liked it first because it was so beautiful, so quiet, a small town where everyone knew everyone. Johnson resented some of the regulations that told us what we could and couldn't do but they were necessary it seemed and on this went until his father died in 1964. After the Good Friday 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 4 of 25 earthquake and tsunami the borough was involved in urban renewal and we started all over again downtown. When Johnson was on the borough we reviewed the borough code, every year we made adjustments to try to fit the changing times. Kodiak was always growing but since the turn of the century we have not grown. Our population has not increased yet the City Council and the Borough Assembly and the people in government have continued to act as though we're still growing, and we still have a good bond rating so we're still able to borrow money and build. That would make sense if we were still growing but we're not. Our bond rating is still good though and we can still borrow. The habit has been established, we're over building, we've built edifices here, we were going to build a new post office on Near Island but the people voted that down. We were going to build a new library 2 or 3 times and it was voted down. We did build a new police station that is beautiful and we built a new library that's beautiful. We spent a lot of money on both and we're still spending money. We are still acting like we are growing, we're still spending and the spending is what's increasing the cost of living. The cost of living should not be growing when we are not growing as a community and yet it's because we are still spending and we're still paying the interest on what we owe. That is being paid by taxes. Now someone with their wisdom or lack thereof has decided they are going to rewrite the borough code. He has read a lot of it and it sounds too militant to him. Go back and adjust what you've got and give us something to vote for that we can suggest changes to. We can't suggest changes to this; the only change we could suggest is just get rid of it. Julie Kavanaugh stated she's 32 year resident. She wanted to highlight that she does understand that many things in this revision are in reality already in code. Currently under the proposed Title 17 the property she owns in Kalsin Bay would be rezoned from Rural Neighborhood Commercial to Neighborhood Commercial. We are not in favor of this rezoning designation as it unduly limits their ability to serve the needs of Kodiak and its love of outdoor activities. She specifically does not understand discontinuing or possibly not allowing recreational cabins, warehouses, agricultural buildings, or restricting the lot coverage on her 10 acre lot. She visualizes a whole number of opportunities on this property that would serve public need, safety, and provide convenience services in a logically underserved area. Combining rural and urban neighborhood commercial into 1 designation does not work and should be left as is or edited with the input of the property owners that it affects. She and others would be willing to attend these meetings. Combining the rural and urban neighborhood commercial does bring up our subsistence lifestyle. There are many revisions in current codes that concern her: the noise standards, animals being restricted, the way she reads it is if she has a fish tank full of 12 goldfish then she can't have the dog that she owns which is ridiculous to her. The code also adds turtles, ferrets, hamsters, rabbits and she doesn't understand why the borough would tell her how many animals she can have. She understands health and safety of the animals and unwarranted odors or noise of some sort although she doesn't know if it should be that specific. It concerns her that the borough is going to tell her how many animals that she can have on her property. Another concern, the wording was vague like they were going to discourage having livestock on properties of 20,000 or 40,000 sq. feet if they were over 55 lbs. Her son has a puppy that's going to grow to be about 190 lbs. but if he wants to raise sheep for wool you are going to discourage or possibly not permit him to have that sheep but he can have a 200 lb. dog that already poops more than a sheep ever would. She doesn't believe that the borough should dictate what types of animals she can have. She's opposed to limiting Bed & Breakfasts to 2 rooms. She would agree that adequate parking should be provided but right now she has a 4 bedroom house and at some point she may want to utilize 3 of those rooms, and we have more than adequate parking. This code limits people's basic ability to adjust later in life to a set income in retirement where the income could be crucial to their desire to stay in Kodiak. She's concerned with the provisions that allow the borough to establish escrow and performance guarantees, these are found on line 670 and 279. These provisions allow the borough to collect a deposit to cover additional staff time and effort; no limits are described in this escrow policy and to require a deposit of 130% of the improvement cost to ensure compliance and completion respectively. The performance guarantee can be used for administrative and legal costs. She referenced 17.40.020- Conditions of Approval—Line 418 — Where authorized by this title the commission and borough assembly may, as a condition, approve the request to apply reasonable requirements. Those are 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 5 of 25 not reasonable requirements. She's not in favor of these fees or guarantees, they feel subjective and potentially unduly hinder average residents. It's a negative, harsh, and difficult criterion to comply with. She has many more concerns with the draft codes Mike Rostad stated the recurring theme with Iver Malutin was common sense. Malutin deplored that we're losing common sense. From the testimony tonight you wonder where is the common sense in these draft codes. Common sense tells us to beware of 2 extreme attitudes towards government; on one end you hear people say we don't need it, we don't need taxes, and then on the other end you have people who never question government and they trust the government will take care of you. Even our forefathers told us that we needed to have a healthy mistrust of government; it's a necessary evil basically that we need as a country but we should also treat it like a ravenous wolf. Rostad shared a quote with the commission; Eternal vigilance is a price of liberty. What we are seeing tonight is a valid concern of government overreach. He thinks we are seeing this in the proposed borough codes. Hard working, tax paying people have taken the time to spell out the implications of these codes and which if enacted will deflate the spirit and vigor that has attracted tourists and citizens to this beautiful island for centuries. Those in the borough government get their salaries and benefits on the backs of fisherman and other hard working people. It appears this proposed code will be piling more burdens on those weary, sagging backs. That's your tax base, why propose more burdens on them. Rostad thanked Mr. Fagan, Kyle Crow, Betty McTavish, and others who have studied these codes and tried to make them understandable. It is a sad commentary when we have to be watchdogs to monitor our public servants and elected/appointed officials because you represent this community and you promised when you ran for office that you would take our interests at heart. Rostad strongly recommended that P&Z do away with the proposed codes which seem to give unlimited authority to the Community Development Director. He suggested that P&Z revise the existing codes that need to be changed. Kodiak does not need this. He knows what the fisherman go through and they need to be supported, not burdened with more foolish requirements. Remember borough employees and elected and appointed officials, you work for we the people and we the people have spoken quite clearly and loudly tonight on an issue that has united many of us but also it has the potential to divide. He thanked the commission. John Neff stated he's a fairly young man who grew up in Kodiak. He's a private land owner and enjoys Kodiak. He appreciates the amount of freedom he's currently able to use when it comes to his own property. It's disconcerting to see how far and overreaching the draft codes are. It's a communist agenda and it needs to be gotten rid of. Rob Lyndsey stated he's taught by Jesus' example; obedience, submit to authority, to all laws good or bad. That means whatever comes out he's supposed to submit to. He's also commanded, if able, to speak out for the minorities and defend those who may not understand things that may affect them. In Luke 3.13 Jesus told the tax collectors don't collect any more than you are required to. He believed this borough would live under the code enforcement that it was enforced by complaint only. He's not sure if that's been stricken from the code or if it's true. If this goes through as proposed it's going to be deeply reviewed with a lot of comment. Lyndsey was a P&Z commissioner for 6 years and he feels the commission's pain. He knows how hard it is to go up against staff. If you disagree with staff they will just leave you out in the cold. Lyndsey feels it is not how it's supposed to work and now you have a referendum that can be changed. He wants to continue to live here in the manner that he has been. He thinks this all started out as Watkins explained so well and it just got in the hands of staff. As the commission rolls over, well that didn't roll over, it just kept rolling and rolling and it has snowballed. He agrees with Dr. Bob, let's scrap the whole thing. There's a true, factual, psychological bias, it's human nature to keep throwing good money after bad. We have all paid into this money that's been spent, so be it. Let's start over. Mary Brown stated she's recently had some issues with the borough where they took her to court for things that she has on her property that the borough says she shouldn't have. She's on Social Security/Disability and it was tough to do everything. The judge decided that since she owns her own property she is able to own some of the animals and things. The borough officer was out 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 6 of 25 taking pictures from everywhere, he would be out every week, and it was very intimidating. She agrees that these codes should be thrown out. She thanked the commission and the public. Brian Large stated it sounds like the codes have been made up. He knows how this works and you are kind of sneaking in the back door until someone gets a flyer in the mail. The definition of a junkyard is 100 sq. feet, everyone has treasure and they like to keep it on their land. It is America, the land of the free and home of the brave. Uses not listed are prohibited, that's a little too much for him. Interpret, determine, resolve to their satisfaction, deem necessary, deem appropriate, may allow, and approve. He feels this draft code is too much for Kodiak to handle. Judy Kidder stated she appreciates the commission listening to everyone. Language is a very important thing. The biggest problem she has is what's throughout this code is everything that is not allowed is forbidden. Where this phrase came from and relates to is the U.S. Constitution; Everything which is not forbidden is allowed. It's a constitutional principle of English law which is the basis of United States law, an essential freedom of the ordinary citizen. The converse principle, everything which is not allowed is forbidden applies to public authorities whose actions are limited to the powers explicitly granted them by law; that means interpretation should be as written, your job is to interpret the law as written, not as interpreted. You could interpret that you don't like Brussel Sprouts but because it's not allowed, it's prohibited, just because one person doesn't like something basically because it's not written as being allowed it's off the table. Exact language and wording is important. You find it all the time with the Supreme Court; they go by specific, exact language in the interpretation of the exact language. All of what you need to apply interpretation to should run through a flow chart of yeses and noes, does it fit this application yes or no and that should determine how you interpret it but the interpretation is to be based on exact wording, not fuzzy logic. The basis is the 9' Amendment of the United States of America, the enumeration or listing in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. It has its basis when the frame is worth considering all these things. The federalists support a ratification of the constitution without a Bill of Rights originally because they believed any enumeration of fundamental liberties was unnecessary and dangerous. That's basically a listing of what you're allowed to do versus a listing of what you're not allowed to do is dangerous because if you say what is allowed then basically everything else is not allowed. That is what is dangerous, that is why you should list what is not allowed and everything else is allowed. The federalists were also concerned that any constitutional enumeration of liberties might imply that other rights not enumerated by the constitution would be surrendered to the government, and this code has been written exactly like that. A Bill of Rights they feared would quickly become the exclusive means by which the American people could secure their freedom and save off tyranny, that's why they didn't want the Bill of Rights. We now have the Bill of Rights and those are the guarantees of the rights to the people, Kodiak we the people. Federalist James Madison argued that any attempt to enumerate fundamental liberties would be incomplete and might imperil other freedoms not listed. A positive declaration of some essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude. Madison said if an enumeration or a list be made of all of our rights will it not be implied that everything omitted is given to the general government. So what you are saying in this code is if it's not listed everything is prohibited so you aren't allowing us anything. Anti-federalists argue that if there was a genuine risk that naming certain liberties would imperil others then an additional constitutional amendment should be drafted to offer protection for all liberties not mentioned in the Bill of Rights. Such an amendment the anti-federalists argued would protect those liberties that might fall through the cracks of written constitutional provisions; this idea became the 9'" Amendment. It was plausible Madison believed that the enumeration of particular rights might disparage other rights that were not enumerated. The exceptions to power here or elsewhere in the constitution made in favor of particular rights shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution but either as actual limitations on powers or as merely inserted for greater caution. She said you cannot legislate or something might happen and you need to give it something defined. Ginny Shank stated in 1966 her and her husband bought their property on Woodland Drive, started building their home in 1980, and moved in in 1982. She wants this neighborhood to retain the rural 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 7 of 25 environment for which it was originally intended with as many trees as possible. We don't want our neighborhood to look like Woodland Acres with no trees. We don't want the population density to increase. In a borough memo it stated that as many as 100 potential additional building sites could be added with people owning 1 acre lots subdividing into '/z acre lots. The population density would also increase if people owning 1 acre or if allowed to subdivide to % acre were allowed to have an accessory dwelling unit to rent out on their property. We don't want increased traffic on Woodland Drive. We want to keep the 1 acre lots as they are now and not chop up the area. Apparently, some people think there is a reasonably priced property shortage for building. It may have been at one time but not now. Shank doesn't believe it's her responsibility to provide more lots. Why doesn't the borough sell off some of the borough land? She understands if property owners in the area want to subdivide their lots in order to sell them or rent out an accessory dwelling to help meet expenses however, when these property owners bought their property they must have been aware of the zoning restrictions. Why should the rest of us have to lose what we have because of their needs? Petitions have been turned in to the Community Development Department from both sides of the issues. There are fifty-nine lots involved on Woodland Drive, a small part of Sunset Drive, and Seabreeze Circle. The petition in favor of the rezone and ADU's represents eleven lots out of fifty-nine so that equals 19% of the lots that were for changing the zoning. The petition against RR1 and ADU's represents nineteen lots out of fifty-nine equaling 32%. These numbers gives you an idea of what the neighborhood wants. Ron Kavanaugh stated the legacy is this bureaucracy that we are going to be left with. We don't have more money for stuff. All this stuff in the draft codes that you are coming up with, how do you think they are going to pay for it, how do you think they are going to pay for these new trucks. It's by the stuff that's not being enforced, it's on the code maybe but it's not being enforced. It's like we have 2 dog catchers now, how do they justify their job, they catch more dogs. If you look at these 100+ pages, it should be a half dozen pages. He doesn't have anything constructive to say about the draft codes except it needs to be streamlined so that a twelve year old can understand it. He shouldn't have to go to the borough office to have them explain to him what their interpretation is; he should be able to understand what he can do on his property. He has hoophouses that are illegal because they're over 36" high. You need to start over Athenia Large stated she also had issues with the hoophouse section and she couldn't find in the code where it said what they are allowed to do and how they can sell the products. The number of chickens you can have is limited which makes it hard for people to have a small business here. Another issue is home based businesses can only be in operation from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. so she can't give someone a massage in her house regardless of how quiet she's being after 9 p.m., and she feels that limits her as a property owner and a small business owner. It mentioned that any kind of home based business that interferes beyond the property line with lights, fumes, or anything is not allowed. It just feels like it's getting harder and harder for a young person to start a small business and grow it into something. If you want to have your home over 1000 sq. feet be used for a home based business there's something like 40,000 sq. foot of building space is required if you need more than 1000 sq. feet. The codes seem to be written for a big city, and she values Kodiak still being a small town, and that mom and pop shops are still encouraged here but these codes as written make it very challenging. She encouraged the commission to try to remember what it's like to be a young person starting out wanting to make something of themselves in this town without being bogged down by unrealistic and confusing codes. She also thinks if it's on your property, if it is your business then you should be able to have the hours of operation that you want, you should be able to have the materials on your land that you want even if those materials are fishing materials. If it's your property you shouldn't have to put up a fence or wall to hide what's on your property. As property owner's we should have the right to keep what we want on our property and to do what we want on our property regardless of hours of operation. She also believes the noise ordinance goes until 10 p.m. and if that's the case she doesn't know why home based business should be required to shut their doors at 9 p.m. if as a community we are still allowed to be loud until 10 p.m. As property owner's and people running businesses from our homes we should have the right to do what we want and keep it open until 10 or 11 p.m. if we aren't bothering our neighbors or community. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 8 of 25 Patrick Adams stated he's taken over properties that may have been run down but he fixed them up. To this day people are still living in them and they look a lot better than when he first acquired them. He is on the same type property now but it's a little bigger which it came with a lot of old Quonset huts, buildings, fishing gear, and stuff that's buried. He loves Kodiak and doesn't like seeing this crunch of his freedoms. He has a lot of things to do on his property and he has great plans but first he has to get permits because if code enforcement comes to his house he'll be in trouble. That costs money. He works 3 jobs. He's an honest citizen and tries to do things the right way, he tries to get the permits that he needs, and he takes all his garbage to the dump. You really need to take an open ear to the people here; there are probably 500 people in the hallway right now. If we took a vote right now with the people in this room the nayes would have it. Let's go through the existing code to see what we can fix up, make the definitions easier, and let's not cram something down our throats that is just going to make the people in Kodiak angry. People like me have worked really hard to get where we're at but we may have to roll up and leave then you will lose the tax base. He has collected a lot of construction debris that he will use and he's trying keep in neat piles to keep the yard from being unsightly from the front. He sees yards that are full of stuff be he doesn't pay the taxes on that property. This is a fishing community and we are a simple people. If we wanted to live in Seattle we would live in Seattle. if we wanted to live in California we would live in California. This is Kodiak. He appreciates the commission's work but he just wants them to have an open mind on this and really think before any decisions are made. Mark Lovinson stated the reason we're all here tonight is if you impose this new code, he realized he would be a code breaker and he'd have to pay extra money and come under code to fix it. He thinks everyone here is in the same position. If this goes through that code enforcement truck will pull up your driveway to tell you what you need to fix. It's a hardship for people barely making it and those people would have to sell their property for taxes or you would force them out of town. That's why everyone is here because everyone would be a code breaker if this goes through, we'd all be criminals. He thinks the commission should scrap the whole thing and not put so many burdens on the people making them criminals. The commissioners would probably be code breakers too. We don't want to be criminals; we want to comply with the law. He thanked the commission. Matt Corriere stated he's only addressing 1 part tonight but it does not in any way mean he's in favor of the rest of it. He should have paid more attention to the workings of the small island community's government however; he assumed like most people here that his friends and neighbors, people on the board, and the borough offices would have him and his community's best interest at heart. He will not make that mistake again. Correire said this is a true definition of government, a group of individuals in a geographical area who remain the monopolistic, moral, and legal right to initiate force. This document is nothing more than an initiation of force from an overreaching government. The first line in the draft codes speaks volumes and is nothing short of an Aurelian statement; Uses not listed are prohibited, this may be in the existing code but he's never seen it. That's not the way laws are written, laws are reactionary not open ended and ambiguous. If for no other reason than this one line the entire draft code should be thrown out and all work on it stopped immediately. It doesn't matter how much money has already been spent, passing it will have far reaching detrimental consequences for our community. The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it. On the crux of what he wants to speak about tonight is Section 17.40.70, Performance Guarantees-Corriere has read Title 17 from front to back several times and he has many issues with it. However, this particular part is very troubling to him and his small contracting business. This section consists of an intent paragraph as well as 7 paragraphs that explain the intent. What he gathered from it is that it doesn't make clear when, where, and to whom these performance guarantees will apply and to whom or by whom. It looks like it would be left up to the discretion of the officials in the Community Development Department. This could easily lead to problems with personality conflicts or parts being applied to one project and not another. It's also asking a person to finance their project to 230% unless the borough is willing to work as a bank and hand out the payments to the vendors and suppliers from this bond. He can tell you that construction projects are a real stretch for most people and this would make any project impossible for nearly everyone. This action would force every small contractor to close 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 9 of 25 their business, only the largest companies would be left, and the prices would rise even more. It's unworkable and completely unnecessary; you are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with a bigger problem. Building here is already very expensive and very challenging. In Section 5 it states "The borough finance department shall return any remaining funds to the applicant, the borough may retain up to 10% of the performance guarantee to cover administrative and consulting costs directly associated with reviewing and inspecting any improvements." If you cannot cover the cost of running this code with the property taxes and fees then the cost is too high. Property taxes increase every year with made up inflated property values', asking for more from us is not only unfair, it's unconstitutional and he will not stand for it. Corriere owns 6 real properties in Kodiak and he pays an incredible amount of money in property taxes to the borough. As well as being taxed on his business, his business provides good paying jobs for several people with families and provides a needed service to our community to keep the properties that you tax in good condition. He trusted that he would be represented by his local government but he can clearly see that's not the case. He will not make that mistake again. He'll fight this code change with every means available to him. This code change is a complete overreach of our local government and is a direct attack on all the property owners of Kodiak Island, and we are being made to prove that we will do no harm when doing harm is not the intention of most people. Monique Lewis stated her observations still have been that the existing code and the revisions seem to be surprising to her as an Alaskan. She wouldn't have expected things, like the inspector to be able to come onto someone's property at a time that they see as reasonable, she wouldn't expect to see that code in any city in Alaska much less on Kodiak Island. We were attracted to Kodiak because we thought it would be a little different than any place that we had ever lived. That seems like it's a 4th Amendment issue. She understands that it's in the existing code as opposed to a new addition, so like so many other people have said she thinks we need to be looking at revising the verbage because she's sure the intent is not to trample on anyone's constitutional rights. We need to look at rewording some of the old code as opposed to spending a lot of time and effort in reinventing the wheel or adding things that don't need to be added. Another issue is language like reasonable and opinion, she doesn't see that opinion has any place in a legal document and she has seen opinion written a lot. It's the opinion of the inspector or it's the opinion of the department, she's never seen a code that has the word opinion or this department deems reasonable as many times as she's seen it in this one. That is a simple verbage change that can be made. Some simple things with the procedure like what does voting really mean, when you say we are going to go through it line by line if necessary particularly with Title 17 and vote, does that mean the people in the Chambers will vote or does that mean that the commission will be going to listen to comments and then you'll go back in a room and huddle and vote. Other things like some comments she just heard as far as if this passes 90% of us are going to be law breakers. She just bought a house that has out buildings that definitely aren't up to code so if this passes she will be a law breaker. Are there any provisions for grandfathering? She has a septic system that's 20 years old and she doesn't think ADEC existed when it was installed. It was installed based on the current standards but is there a grandfather provision. There needs to be clarification on those types of things. Ben Ardinger stated he feels the only fair way to decide this matter is to have the people of this community vote on it. He doesn't mean a special election where it's going to cost money but to have it at the November elections and keep it simple. Stephany Wiscowski stated she's a B&B owner and she's seen several things that are very concerning. She contacted the Visitor's Bureau to find out how many B&B's are currently in Kodiak and it came to her attention after contacting them that more than half of those B&B's have more than 2 rooms. She's baffled to see that in the code as a change for a variety of reasons. First, she has 4 rooms in her B&B and she's worked hard to build her business. She sees a very strong give and take between the business that she's able to provide to the community in respect to attracting business travelers to the area who are seeking alternatives to hotels, in the way of tourism travelers that come in the summer and also in the way of sports organizations that come for track & field, swimming meets, and wrestling meets that are looking to house a group of players in 1 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 10 of 25 location so they can keep an eye on the kids. Those larger B&B's and vacation rentals allow us to assist in keeping the larger groups together in a space they can all reside in. Additionally, the tax benefits that are seen by the community and by way of the benefits we provide if she would resell her business with being grandfathered in with her 4 bedrooms she would be at a negative because she wouldn't be able to offer to someone coming in to use all 4 of those bedrooms to run the business as she has. There's also a huge need in the summer and different times of the year where there is not enough rooms in the hotels, vacation rentals, or B&B's which is another reason that this would be a huge hit to the B&B owners and tourism in general. When she was reviewing Title 17 tonight she noticed that there was a change that there could be no vacation rentals in R1 and some of us may see that as a blow to us immediately but she thinks with the growing age of the people in Kodiak and the opportunity for people to go see their additional family in the lower 48 and continue to rent their properties to help their income in the future that this would just be a tremendous blow that people may not realize now but will in the future. Wiscowski is also a realtor and twice in the last few years she's had buyers for properties where the sellers have had nonconforming, grandfathered property and in both instances these buyers were unable to purchase the homes because the lenders will no longer loan on a property that cannot be rebuilt if there's a fire or something like that and continue to maintain its same nonconforming status. It literally stopped and halted 2 purchases; 1 about 5 days before closing and she knows that property is still up for sale, She also knows there are many more properties that people are completely unaware of this being an issue which is why she sees it as such a concern in the code and creating further non-conforming, grandfathered property for the community. As we see more grandfathering we'll see more problems especially with zoning violations and other factors, and people being able to resell their properties to people using banks for that purpose instead of coming in with cash. Elijah Hiner stated he's twenty-two years old and wanted to speak for the youth. Hiner wants to start his own business and family in Kodiak. It seems real hard for him to do that with all these laws and also the laws that you want to start. He suggested sticking with the existing code and just change it to make it easier for the youth and the older people. When his grandfather came to Alaska he started off with 35 cents in his pocket, a canoe, and went crabbing. Over the years he has produced, then Hiner's father took over. It was easier for people to start fresh but it seems impossible to do now. With these rules it seems that Kodiak would depopulate Chiniak, Pasagshak, and people who live off the land. Someday he wants to own his own property out the road but it seems very hard for him to be able to do that. A lot of his friends have left Kodiak who wanted to stay but couldn't afford it because of the property taxes and down payments. If you want to succeed in life you have to work hard but it seems like for us to work hard it seems impossible for this document to go through. Racheal Whiddon stated her grandfather came to Kodiak in a Cadillac. She's a homeowner and wants to raise her kids in a community that takes care of each other. Some of the reasons she loves living here are the skiff they take to get halibut for dinner; what you may think is trash in our yard is tires that we've repurposed so we can try out a new way for potatoes, her children have sandboxes that her husband built, and she likes to walk off her back porch to collect chicken eggs in the morning without stepping off her porch because her husband built the chicken coop against the porch which she understands will no longer be legal. She went through and read the existing codes as well as the draft codes and even with a degree there are parts that she just doesn't understand still. She will be attending future meetings. She found 7 or 8 things that will make her a law breaker if this goes through. They are very simple things that should not be making her break the law. She has eighteen chickens and her 3 year old son is much louder than her chickens are. Chickens don't always lay eggs everyday so restricting it to twelve chickens is ridiculous. Hoophouses, we have lids her husband created that flip open and they catch sunlight in the summer, and they won't be allowed anymore because of the height requirements, it's a corner lot violation. She didn't see if it's in the existing codes. There has been a lot of issues with bears and trash. She was reading through the electrical fences section and she has concerns with that also. As she sees it you aren't allowed to use electrical fences for anything other than to keep your livestock or poultry safe. The restriction to 6 animals is too small a limit and she thinks that includes 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 11 of 25 cats and dogs. There's a lot of things in this draft code that she finds too restrictive to the nature of Kodiak, to the community feeling, to what makes us so wonderful that we can garden and give it to our parents and family, that we can work on our crab pots in our own yard, that we are able to take care of these. She appreciates the need for laws because there will always be that neighbor that takes it too far, too late at night and she understands we have to come up with codes that we can all live with to make it safe and neighborly. Again, her son makes much more noise than most equipment that she knows of. Unless we're going to ban all children from the island there's a lot of noise restrictions we need to look into and a lot we need to look at with livestock and regulations on heights. She is finding too many restrictive rules for the nature of Kodiak. She drove around Kodiak looking at properties and as far as she can tell you will not meet these new regulations and codes. On every property she could find a violation going through line item by line item. She is college educated and working on another degree, she's a manager of 2 coffee shops, and she works very hard and had a very hard time understanding these draft codes. The language is very difficult and it's too restrictive. She wants to live and grow old here but her and her family will be out of here if you take away all these rights from us. We want to garden and have chickens to bring the cost of living down so they can afford to stay here. She encouraged the commission to look over everything and take those things out that make it so difficult on us. Jim Rippey stated he's lived here since 1967. He worked with contractors on the base and was able to save enough money to buy a lot in Bells Flats. He lived in a 12x20 sq. foot shed for 3 years while building his house. As young adults it was cheap enough we didn't have any restrictions on how you can make your life better to get to where he is today. Today he owns 3 pieces of property, invested in his community. At this point in time he's paying 16% of his income on property tax. In 1990 we redone the code and we had a Community Development Department manager who sat in her office for 2 years writing the codes and when it came out it's the code we have now. When it came out Rippey wasn't pleased with it because it was so vague and put too many stipulations on everybody across the board. What it did more than anything was it created„ instead of neighbor dealing with neighbor issues, once the code went out it gave the public an avenue to go complain about your neighbor that you didn't have to engage with your neighbor. The borough government became that cop. Animosity grew from everyone. Everyone here tonight and everyone who owns property here, we are the employer. Our borough government is our employee. We should be telling them what to do and they shouldn't be dictating everything we're doing here. He has issue with that. We really need to look hard and close to that. Rippey's daughter just moved away because she couldn't make it here because of the cost of living. Our youth don't stand a chance. Rippey stated what we should also look at is the fuel surcharge that hasn't went down with our freight companies, we're getting killed here. Another issue is our bond indebtedness is getting ready to hit the ceiling once the high school bond comes on board. The borough keeps saying the feds and state are going to take care of our land dump but somehow he thinks the tax payers are going to end up taking that on board. If he has to go more than 16%, of his income for property tax he can't afford to live here anymore and no one else can either. We really need to look at that. We need to scrap the draft codes and tighten up the vague language in the existing code. If you own property, it's your property. We all have a homeowner's association, it's called property taxes so do what you want on your own property, be a good neighbor, and make it work for everyone. Don't complain, go talk to them. He thanked the commission. Frank Bishop stated if this code goes through he won't be able to sell his home because it doesn't conform to the new code. Is that going to say that everyone in the Aleutian homes that's under that old HUD Housing because their foundations are on pilings are not in compliance too. He knows you are thinking about the cost of having the consultants who wrote the draft codes, it's way by far less costly to scrap the whole thing and go back to the existing codes and change what needs to be changed to fit our community than to fight with the community over what's going to happen because it's going to be a fight. He doesn't have the time to talk about all the things he sees in this code that he's appalled at. There are a lot of people in this room that are his age, and most of us went off to war to fight for what we are standing here trying to tell you about. You are taking away our freedoms that we dearly like and he doesn't think the borough has the right and never will have that right. He will do everything he can to fight it, whatever it takes. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 12 of 25 Judy Hamilton stated she seconds a lot of what was said already. It's terribly complicated, confusing, overreaching, and she would like to see it scrapped. She does not believe the borough should be limiting any resident's ability to grow their own food, whether it's poultry, hoophouses, or anything. It's a basic right and we should all be free to do that as we see fit. The proposed definition of chickens and ducks as domesticated animals is ludicrous and it's confusing. Why you would include chickens and ducks with dogs, cats, and rodents, she has no idea. She can't imagine the basis for this determination but she supposed there are some people who consider their chickens and ducks to be their pets. For her, a pet is something she doesn't intend to eat. That should come out of this document. To limit residents to some number of poultry, and this number is also confusing; she's seen 5, 10, 12, and 12 seems to be the upper limit. You are limiting resident's abilities to produce their own food. Arguably twelve chickens can provide some food for a household but who on the commission or the borough can determine her needs. Who's going to choose how much she needs to feed her family. She has a small family but they require several times more than that number on an annual basis to provide adequate eggs and meat for our needs so to pull an arbitrary number like twelve is unnecessary. She imagines the reason for that is to minimize some negative impact on a neighbor. She's never had an interaction with a neighbor that didn't end in a mutually beneficial and understanding relationship which she thinks that happens a lot. There may be cases where that doesn't happen and perhaps the borough needs to be involved in some kind of conflict resolution but don't limit these very basic rights. The wholesale prohibition of roosters also makes no sense whatsoever. Roosters are an essential part of the picture for some of us who take self-sufficiency very seriously; they are an essential part of how she produces their food. She would rather hatch her own chicks on her own property from her own birds than to subject them to the stress of the postal service. She thinks that should be her right as well. The borough already has a noise ordinance so enforce it. If a responsible resident of this community can keep their rooster quiet and not impact the neighbors inside of those quiet hours then there is no problem. She would bet far more people in this community are negatively impacted by their neighbor's dog than by any number of roosters. Thankfully no one is proposing we eliminate them. She's against the restrictions and sees them as unnecessary. As a resident of Woodland Drive she proposes change from RR to RR1. She respects the rights of her neighbors to develop their property as they see fit. She also respects those neighbors who have fought hard to win that designation in the first place, and who bought their property because of the way the regulations were written at that time that would preserve the character of that neighborhood. She pinches herself every day to get to live there. She loves Kodiak and appreciates the work the commission is doing, but do this differently. Jennifer Webster(caller) stated what she's heard most of the night and what she's read in the draft codes is that it sounds like this code wasn't actually written by people who understand and know what it's like to be a resident of Kodiak. The consultants from outside can't truly understand what it's like to be a member of the community here. She lives in Kodiak for a reason; she chose to live here because she values the freedoms that it affords. She lives in Bells Flats because she appreciates the freedoms and she appreciates the honest, compassionate, and reasonable people who live in Kodiak. This code is written for a place much larger than Kodiak. If she wanted to live in Seattle she would move there. She's been proud to be a part of this community for the last 10 years and she would like to continue to do so without limitations on her ability to live the way that she does. We've heard tonight from a lot of people who have said they worked in the past to be a part of making this code in the past revisions update, they are all members of this community. It is evident tonight we have more than enough brain power and commitment that the people who live, work, and play in Kodiak can actually come together and write a better code than the one in front of us. Every person who spoke tonight has a different issue with this code; animals, noise, small businesses, B&B's, you name it. It doesn't seem to be one aspect of this draft code that's worth keeping. Not to mention the constitutional issues that is front and foremost. She suggested another meeting be scheduled where everyone can attend without having to stand in the hall, and let's re- look at the old code line by line if necessary. Forget about the money that was spent, it's water under the bridge so look at it with a Kodiak perspective given this unique community we have. Let's do it the Kodiak way, together. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 13 of 25 Terri Storch stated she feels the borough is trying the best they can and sometimes we just have to get help from other people. Sylvia Kavanaugh stated she recently purchased her first property. It's a business lot with an existing building; a horse boarding facility with a conditional use permit. She tried reading through the draft codes but couldn't figure out how it affected her or her business so she went to the borough office to ask how she would be affected and where she fits into the big picture. She was very unsatisfied when there wasn't any clear response to her pretty direct questions. After going to the only available resource, the borough, she still doesn't understand how the code affects her and what it will mean to her future plans. This new code doesn't make it any clearer and creates more grey area that will be open to interpretation. Ron Painter stated he's here to talk about a specific issue but it seems trivial when the larger scene today has been about freedom and specifically freedom of our personally owned property. If we take anything away tonight that's the main theme going on here and that along with the even handed enforcement of whatever code we end up with that it's not subjective but that it's objective, defined clearly and precisely to where all of us can read and understand it, and that the code itself was put together in each section where everything that applies to that section is clearly stated in that section so you don't have to go back and forth to another section, another book, another chapter. You wouldn't even know to go there to find out the full understanding of that code. Twenty years ago there was an issue with a little 10x12 sq. foot shed; three adjoining neighbors had sheds, like he wanted to build, right up against the property line on the back corner. He went to the borough and told them he wanted to build a shed right beside everyone else's but he was told he couldn't because he had to build it back 5 feet on each side. Painter told them it will look crazy because his neighbor's sheds were right up against the fence. That was his first dealing with the borough. When he first came here forty-seven years ago he lived in Cy's horse barn and thank god it wasn't a code that he couldn't live in a horse barn. Painter is in favor of the code change on Woodland Drive from RR to RR1. Our current code is RR and we don't even meet the definition of what we are there. Rural Residential says you if you have water and sewer you can subdivide down to 20,000. We don't even meet that now. Right now he if you have 1 or 2 acres you can't subdivide down to what the code says. They are trying to make this limited code for this little section. The original designation there was RR1 and the people who originally bought there; even though they bought 1 acre lots they understood and knew it was RR1. There are discrepancies and he finds it disheartening that if he has to deceive you to make you believe or side with him it's just not right. It says 2 or 3 property owners out of sixty parcels will benefit but then a little further down it says it will put massive amounts of traffic on the road, so only 1 or 2 will benefit. How is that going to put massive people on the road? Give one or the other, not both. It says it will significantly change the neighborhood, again if it's only going to affect 2 or 3 people how is that going to significantly change the character of the neighborhood. Painter doesn't understand some of their logic or reasoning in the draft for not changing it back to what it originally was. Earlier tonight someone said there could be one hundred additional new lots, there are only sixty lots there and at the most there will only be sixty more lots. He hopes the commission will consider changing it back to what is originally was which is RR1. Kate Ballenger (caller) stated she's a forty-seven year resident in Kodiak. She thanked the individuals who sent out the information notifying all of us of what was going on. It sounds like the consensus is we have to abolish this before it gets started so she is also against all the revisions. Sara Dunn (caller) stated she's a twenty-six year resident. As a property owner it is clear this needs to go away. When she came to the borough to get a copy of the draft codes the first office she went to wanted to charge her for this document. She just didn't want to help Dunn. After refusing to quit she went to another office and thankfully was helped which she appreciated and was handed a whole code packet. When she asked if she needed to pay for it she was given the best answer that anyone in that building has ever been given; she was told that she was a property owner so she already paid for that packet. She's encouraged by the attendance tonight and foresees this happening at the rest of the meetings until this code is stricken down. She believes it was outsourced and outsourcing is one of the many things that is killing our country Kodiak's 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 14 of 25 population may not be on the decline but growth has stopped. Back when sales tax was increased against most people's will some people had to move away. They were very clear about that when it was being talked about and voted on. Things are too expensive here and this is an overbearing outreach for more money and more power, and it's not necessary. The borough and citizens do not need this; it will do more harm than any good. The wording is too ambiguous, it's a money and power grab. She's very happy that Kodiak has shown up. Mel Stephens urged the commission to make a motion to table indefinitely, get rid of it in that manner because this needs to go. Do not try to correct something in this to make it a little better, this can't be made satisfactory. It is markedly worse than our current code and it's harmful to the Kodiak community. He's practiced law in Kodiak for over thirty-five years and he's familiar with the existing code as far as zoning and land use goes, and he can tell you those titles are not perfect but they have no defects or short comings which cannot be addressed by the usual process of from time to time bringing forth limited carefully focused amendments which address concrete problems and difficulties which have actually arisen or needs which people actually feel. The problem with what you are doing is we've got over two-hundred pages of stuff in front of us, there are who knows five-hundred different issues. There's no focus to your meetings when you try to do something like that. If you use your existing code and based upon an actual showing of need, you talk about a half dozen provisions in it, then it will be focused, and then if you want to talk about Woodland Drive and how that should be rezoned, fine. You'll have some people come forward and say this is why I feel this way and other people will say the opposite quite possibly but the process will be much better. Without any changes our current code is far superior to this. You don't, in a community like Kodiak, go and revise your code because it's old. Codes aren't like sandpaper, they don't wear out just with a period of time. If you've had explosive growth in population and industry then maybe you consider it. You consider something like this in Matsu. In 1990 to 2010 Matsu grew by over 51,000 people, a 130% increase in population. Kodiak lost one hundred sixty-nine people during the same period of time. We shouldn't have ever started a code revision process like this. It couldn't have been justified. This is a big deal. Listen to these people who have come out. He's been here thirty-five years and has never seen anything like it, listen to them. Art Zimmer (caller) stated he stood in the hall tonight along with about two-hundred other people. He has a fair feeling of the sentiment. Some of the individual issues raised grow out concern in this code but behind the whole thing is the UN Agenda 21 which was mentioned. Kodiak is a member of the ICLEI (International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives) that is a United Nations sponsored group which designs and writes policies for your area on the land use, energy goals, and measurement and water usage. It is a paid consultant and receives dues from your taxes. ICLEI was formed at the United Nations and one-hundred-seventy-eight other nations met at the United Nations Real Earth Summit in 1992 and agreed to use certain principles as guidelines. Those guidelines include major reductions in energy and water usage and huge increases in the number of living units in city centers, this is called UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. In 1993 President Clinton formed the President's Council on Sustainable Development and gave a multi-million dollar grant to the American Planning Association to write "Growing Smart-A Legislative Guidebook" to bring UN Agenda 21 to the United States. Smart growth was the result. Multi-story condos and apartments over small retail with little parking crammed into your town center. The reason for this style of construction is that UN General Maurice Strong said "the affluence of Americans is a threat to the planet." Single family homes are a threat across the nation in large cities and small towns like this one. Identical programs are being rolled out, land use restrictions, ordinances reducing energy usage, smart meters, school programs, and candidate trainings are designed and implemented without your vote. You may be invited to city visioning meetings but the outcome is decided before you enter the room. Using ICLEI greenhouse gas emissions (inaudible) your local government is in the process of controlling where and how you live, what you eat, what your children learn, and what laws you will live under with a cover of "environmental concern." Your personal rights are being restricted. Soon you will lose the right to travel freely without being asked for your ID, lose the right to water your garden, lose the right to refuse a smart meter, lose the right to live in a rural area, lose the right to drive a private vehicle, under the guise of "this is the underlying principle of this whole code, Sustainable Development, 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 15 of 25 your property and civil rights are being systematically eliminated." Zimmer feels this is the background reason for all of this code that's being pushed upon us, and we don't need it. In 2013 Fairbanks voted unanimously to reject UN Agenda 21 and Kodiak should too. He thanked the commission. Andi Cronn stated she's excited about the fact that everything that she wanted to say has already been said. She is against the draft code in its entirety. She appreciates all the hard work that our public servants and borough assembly do on behalf of this island. She doesn't doubt that this started out as a good idea. She attended one of the meetings a couple of years ago when it was gone over line by line and she was assured that it would be made OK and that the rural designation wouldn't be changed and not hamper anyone's subsistence rights, don't worry they said. It seems this version of the code has snowballed out of control with too much input from outside sources and those people don't even have a stake in the community. She doesn't believe it can be salvaged and we need to go back to the drawing board and present the new regulations in manageable chunks. We need to debate each piece of the code individually until the majority of the town agrees. We have to live under these laws and we should have the right to agree to them. When something is outdated the responsible thing to do is make some minor adjustments, so minor adjustments could be made to the existing code. This is too much regulation and it's happening all at once. Scrap it all, keep the existing code, and go back to the drawing board. It will take a long time to pass the code in smaller chunks and even longer for all of us to agree but she will wait as long as it takes to ensure her property rights and those of her neighbors are protected. As far as the money is concerned, it's her money too because she's been paying taxes in Kodiak for twelve years now. She does not want any more money spent on this project. No, don't pass it. VICE CHAIR SCHMITT called a five minute recess. VICE CHAIR SCHMITT reconvened the meeting. Oliver Holm stated he's been a Kodiak resident for over fifty years and he was a member of the Project Advisory Committee. The committee spent a couple of years on this and he believes if the residents hadn't been involved it would have been a lot more restrictive especially considering where the consultants came from. The current version of the draft code definitely has a lot of differences from the draft that came from the committee. Restrictions on poultry keeps coming back. Staff or whoever was writing it kept putting these restrictions on roosters and poultry. When it would go out to the public concerned citizens would come to the meetings and then staff would remove it but he sees most of it is back again restricting roosters and poultry. Other things in Title 17 like the home based businesses, home occupations for commercial fisherman-he sees staff recommendation is to change that to move it into a home based business which has a bunch of different restrictions than the home occupation. If there wasn't any change suddenly any commercial fisherman that had a lot less than 20,000 sq. feet would appear to no longer comply because he'd have to comply under the home based business rules which requires a 20,000 sq. foot lot or bigger. We talked about fencing the smaller lots for home occupation, commercial fishing for screening and that was somewhat reasonable. If a lot is under 20,000 sq. feet he had argued that if there was existing screening from trees and natural vegetation it doesn't make sense to have to cut them down to put in a fence, but that's not in there anymore. If you have to put in a fence it would be a major expense. He's also concerned by other small businesses in the community that are run out of people's houses and lots all over town. We rely on a lot of these people, there's a lawyer who works out of her home and there's retired Coast Guardsman that works on outboards not too far away and that's not a problem. It just seems that a lot of us don't have government jobs and we have to make do with what we can scrounge up. In reading the code he rapidly realized even without a ten foot tape measure that he was living in a junk yard and was going to get fined. If you change the home occupation status of commercial fishing as a (inaudible) the lot we bought above our lot for future use for his son who is also a commercial fisherman it's only 10,000 sq. feet. If you change the rules like staff wanted to make it home based business you have to have a 20,000 sq. foot lot so he couldn't ever store any fishing gear there. There are people with home based businesses that have been there with lots less than 20,000 sq. feet and Holm doesn't want to see them go out of business. There's so much detail and restrictions in the code. Maybe it was a 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 16 of 25 mistake to pass the fines first because people realized right away that this was going to turn the community upside down. Bill Fida stated he decided to build his own house. Under this Title 17 he'd have to put up 130% value of the project and there's no way he would have been able to lay the first 2x4 nor anyone else who wants to have a future and build their own home. Mr. Chair, you authoratively said you are going to vote on Title 18 at the next session. He respectively requested that you do not make a vote on that because this needs to go away. Greg Egle stated he's a thirty year resident and he ]snows every community needs rules to keep us safe but these draft codes seems really vague and it's kind of scary to him. He'd rather have it spelled out. He doesn't agree with this document because it's flawed and divisive to the community. He thinks it should be tossed out and go back to create a citizen's advisory committee to go over the existing code and approach things as they come up item by item, not come up with a big picture that's just too much. Dennis Symmons stated the commission is not the enemy, they are volunteers whether we agree with them or not. Like our service districts, they are volunteers of the community. A lot of what is in this proposal undermines this very commission. Their jobs and anyone else sitting in those seats is in serious jeopardy. There's a scripture that talks about a sour apple, well, there's a whole bunch of soured apples in this barrel. One of the darkest hours that management and Community Development Department is experiencing is this. We are going through some pretty troubled times here. Obviously he doesn't have to point out how big of a deal this is. He sincerely commended the Community Development Department and the management under the borough roof for successfully succeeding in doing something that a handful of us have tried to do for years and that's bring people into the trenches. He thanked the public for showing up. Laurel Earl (caller) stated she owns property on Anton Larsen Island. A few years ago she submitted an application to subdivide on the island. It took about 6 months to be approved. (Inaudible). The commission relies heavily on staff recommendation (inaudible) which makes their decision difficult. (inaudible) She couldn't read through the whole draft Title 17, it's very confusing and difficult to read. She doesn't understand what she's reading. She has to (inaudible) to address her application issue (inaudible) it's even more confusing to her. She has to ask the director, staff, and the borough, and we talked over the regulations and they would tell me their interpretation which would be different from one staff member or the director's. The revised code gives the director and staff the power and control over her application. The code itself should clearly state the validity of her application request. The code should be written in a manner that's clear to her that her question is yes or no (inaudible). It shouldn't be based on the (inaudible) interpretation. Not to mention the code enforcement and the power and control this code will impose on a property owner. It violates her civil rights, freedom, and property rights. She implores the commission to dump this code revision and work with the existing code. (Inaudible) Remote property owners are not ready for this revision. (Inaudible) It's necessary for property owners to maintain their property which in turn increases the property values and the tax base. This code will impose a burden on the community that will affect the borough future growth and development. Jeremiah Gardener stated it seems the one resounding notion is that it seems no one quite understands this draft code. It lacks a lot of transparency is the biggest problem. It's written in such a way that it's meant to bewilder and confuse, leaves so much of it open for general interpretations of government employees, and that there is no black and white with way too much gray area. For all of that is more than enough reason to vote no. He's against this draft code and he agrees with Mel Stephens when he said we should postpone this indefinitely until it can be figured out in such a way that it does work for everyone and is cut and dry, not open to interpretation. Gerald Anderson (caller) stated he's a fifty-four year resident to Kodiak. He owns property on Spruce Island and plans on making improvement to make it better. (Inaudible) It is scaring the heck out of him. You should listen to the voters and go with what they say. Rethink this. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 17 of 25 Mara Michalski (caller) thanked everyone for showing up. She was raised in Kodiak. She's going to grad school but she plans on coming back to Kodiak soon. She wants to return to the same spirit of the community that her family fights to keep alive. She's proud of her stepfather who builds our community beautifully and strong, and he has a lot at stake in the planning and zoning on Kodiak Island. She can't wait to come back to Kodiak and she hopes the borough doesn't do anything while she's away that will hurt her family or impede her future when she moves back. We all want Kodiak to grow and prosper and this code sounds like trouble in that regard. She appreciates the borough's willingness to listen to our community and she hopes there will be more meetings to be heard. Rick Baker stated his big concern is that he owns a 5 bedroom B&B in Pasagshak that he built. It was a righted use and has been there for fifteen years. Now they want to change the zone to where it would be a nonconforming use because they are going to change it to 2 rooms. There are about fifty B&B's. He personally has been in a battle with the borough about the existing code. Mel Stephens said it best when he said that code is not worn out, it's not sandpaper, not a fishing hook, or a sawblade, it just needs a little work. He's seen the dark side of borough staff but he still won. The community said wait a minute, this isn't right. All you have to do is give them a few more definitions so they don't make it up as they go. Get rid of the draft codes, you've dumped this much money before no problem, we won't lose that much. We could fix the code we have, it's not worn out. You just can't go around and change all the zoning. Nonconforming, he has hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in his property. Two words could make him sing soprano. What is going on here, it's just not right. Baker said to dump it, get rid of it now. Start over and he volunteers to help with it. When we were in those original groups everyone said to keep it simple. How many small businesses are on this island, everyone except Safeway and Wal-Mart, and that's it. We're all small businesses, make it easy, and don't cut us off at the knees. Think of the ramifications, the financial burden. Is this constitutional? Put it up for a vote and I bet everyone on the island will say dump it. Michelle St. Clair stated she agrees wholeheartedly with Mr. Baker. To have things changed after you've been living in a place for a period of time or having a business for a period of time it's unfair for just a few people who want those changes. She is a Seabreeze Circle resident and there are code revision changes being made to change her neighborhood from 1 acre lots to 20,000 sq. feet. She didn't move into this neighborhood for that, she moved in here for the low density. If there is an additional fifty + homes that could be an additional one-hundred people if there's at least 2 people per home which could also be an additional one-hundred cars on her street. She does not want that in her neighborhood, that's why she lives there. She appreciates the opportunity to speak her mind. She also appreciates all the public attending tonight. Get rid of it and move on. Sully Sutherland stated he's a tax payer and he's part owner of the Port Bailey Cannery. He can't imagine how he would deal with this with all the buildings out there. He doesn't think there's much that he can add to all the great comments he's heard here tonight. He's really proud to be a part of this community. Is there any way we can get a refund from the consultants that put this together? Will Nelson stated he's a Chiniak property owner and drives forty miles every morning to work and pay taxes. His whole family was born and raised here. His father moved here in 1969 and started with nothing but a duffle bag and ambition and he achieved the American dream by coming up in the fishing industry buying equipment to have his crane service. His parents had to sell their house and move to the lower 48 because of the property taxes and all the astronomical spending going on in the last 20 years. It's out of hand. There's a lot of Federal money that's been coming into the community like for the landfill project, and we've bit off more than we could chew and now we're stuck halfway through it. They want us to conform to the lower 48's zoning codes for earmark money but what we need is to stand up and say we aren't going to take this, this is what Kodiak is, this is how people have survived here forever and we're not going to stop now and live in condos. He has junk vehicles and woodsheds in his yard that probably doesn't fit the code. He's a single father and has a lot going on like many others in the community. He respects the commission's service and he hopes the commission will vote accordingly because this will affect each and every 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 18 of 25 one of us. Nelson hopes he can raise his son in Kodiak where he can be a productive member of the community also. Sandy Pearson (caller) stated a lot of people addressed a lot of things that she finds bothersome in the new code but she hasn't heard anyone address this. The number that you are giving for the villages to call in is missing a digit. In the old code there are Comprehensive Plans that cover a lot of different sections of the island. They cover all the villages, all the villages have Comp Plans, Shuyak Island has a Comp Plan, and even Monashka Bay has a Comp Plan. The new code has 1 Comp Plan for the entire island which doesn't set. She thinks the new code should be scrapped. Mike Brechan (caller) stated he's already submitted comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the proposed changes to Pasagshak. His concerns about the Industrial property has some real problems and he thinks you are getting the general impression that most of us feel this whole plan should be scrapped and take one section at a time to make it work better. One comment that was made by someone about Clarence Selig and how difficult it was for Assembly members or Planning and Zoning Commission to stand up to staff and say wait a minute, and that's something we need to commend them for doing more of. It's a difficult time with this whole thing going on and he has to agree with Mel Stephens, you should table this indefinitely and make another approach to solve the problem. He's read it twice and what he hasn't seen is a revision to come out. When it does come out he hopes it's categorized by section so we can at least make a reasonable evaluation of what's likely to come out of it. He commends the public for having the time. It's really difficult in reading this comparing the old code, the new code, and the Camp Plans that were originally done back around 2000. There are some big discrepancies. He thanked the commission. Jascha Zbitnoff stated he counted one-hundred-sixty-four pages in Title 17, forty-three pages in Title 16, and forty-six pages in Title 18. In Title 17 there are 5,578 lines, Title 16 has 1,772 lines, and Title 18 has 1,886 lines of code to read. A total of 9,237 lines of code to read for all 3. He had an email from earlier this year when he requested some records, Contract 2011-02 was the contract for LSL, the first Change Order. The original contract was for $268,450, they asked for one change order for $5,200 for a total of$273,650 so far that the borough spent. There may have been additional change orders after that but he doesn't know. Zbitnoff has been here since the beginning of the process and went to the big meeting at the high school where everybody went into little groups; contractors were in one group, fishermen in another group. He went to probably a dozen work sessions with the commission and they went through line by line and it gets very difficult to read even when you're in those meeting. He agrees with everyone else, it's not what we need, we aren't Seattle, we are Kodiak. There are only 13,000 in Kodiak now and this town is dying. Regarding the price of the landfill, the community doesn't even realize what that's going to put on them. We're talking about over$42,000,000 that borough will spend, and everyone needs to think about that the next time your taxes go up. There is $60,000,000 to $80,000,000 in the high school right now not included. He owns a couple pieces of property and like Jim Rippey said, it's getting to the point where people are going to have to leave town due to the increase in property taxes. If we keep hindering the town people will leave. You can't keep putting more and more burden on the community members and expect them to keep paying. The one violation in here is $1000 per violation so if you have 13 chickens you get a $1000 violation for your chicken. How can someone pay $1000 for a chicken. The foreclosure list is going to keep getting bigger and are you just going to keep foreclosing and then start kicking people out of their homes because they can't pay their taxes and fees you are imposing on them. You need to table all 3 sections of this code. If these responses don't get put into the code you are going to have one heck of a fight on your hands because these people aren't going to give up their property rights. He guarantees if you come onto his property or anybody else's unasked about you better be careful. They aren't going to just stand by and let you come on there and start taking stuff. He thanked the commission. Linda Suydam (caller) stated the commission should just table this forever. The people of Kodiak don't want to hear anymore. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 19 of 25 Sid Pruitt stated he sat through a work session during the summer, and it's now the 3 I night of work he's taken off to be here. He spent about 3 days going through this trying to figure out what it meant and how it will affect him. If you pass it the way it is there's not anyone who's not going to be guilty of something. There are a lot of rules and we need as few rules as possible and don't make them unless they are really needed. He likes Mel Stephens idea of tabling indefinitely and take one issue at a time so you can figure out what affects you and what doesn't. He has 3 lots that are 2 acres each and if he wants to subdivide he feels he should be able to along with Woodland Drive. He remembers when all of that went through, they were all 1 acre lots, and then sewer and water went in, and then everyone went down to change it so they could subdivide it into 20,000 sq. foot lots. People want big lots and people want short lots. He likes his privacy so he bought the lots around him. Pruitt doesn't like that the borough enforcement can come onto your property and police what you're doing. He's had his small business for thirty-five years on his property and according to the code it's illegal. Someday he'll sell his property and someone else will need to do it and it will probably be someone like him in his position. There are noise restrictions. When he started building his house there were no rules and he'd like his kids to be able to do something similar. Several young people stated that they would like to live in Kodiak but it's hard with all of these rules. It seems you can't do anything and you have to beg for permission. When you get permission you still have to comply with so many other things. Mr. Fida spoke about the bond and Pruitt still doesn't understand that if you build your own house you have to put up $50,000 to build your house. If that's true it's absolutely ridiculous. Pruitt would like to see these codes tabled indefinitely, take one issue at a time and then people can address it. Right now you just have a bunch of angry people and they should be. The commission has put in a lot of time on this but it should be made as simple as possible and not wordy. Back in the King Crab days people would buy lots and then put five-hundred crab pots on them. That should be screened because we don't want that in residential areas but reasonable storage should be allowed on your lot. Carlene McChesney stated she was born and raised in Kodiak. She said a lot of her friends are leaving Kodiak because it's too expensive to live here, and some of her friends cannot afford to heat their homes. Maria Nault (caller) stated she's a sixty-eight year Kodiak resident. This fall she received notification from the Community Development Department listing the meeting dates to discuss the new regulations and also provided a map that included her downtown property on Yukon Street that's been owned by her family since 1940. The map further stated a request for a rezone pursuant to KIBC 17.205 to rezone portions of downtown Kodiak from B-Business to the new DB- Downtown Business. She contacted a couple of longtime downtown Kodiak property owners and asked them if they knew anything about this and no one knew anything. She never requested a rezone of downtown property and she doesn't know anyone who did. At first she was concerned about how this would affect her but after she attended a couple of the October meetings listening to the concerns of other property owners that's when she came to realize how large a project that this is encompassing. At this point she doesn't care about the rezoning of her downtown property because these concerns seem petty in the face of the big picture of the potential impact of this major code revision on our borough citizens. She thinks the code revision should be tossed. Normally she would be concerned about the money spent but in this case let's cut our losses and toss out this code revision in its entirety. We need to attend all meetings and don't assume you can attend 1 or 2 meetings and your feelings will prevail. Attend P&Z meetings, borough work sessions and meetings, provide written or oral testimony, if you can't attend ask a family member or friend to attend in your place. It's that important. Above all, we recently elected new borough assembly members; that wasn't an accident, we did it for a reason because we want a change. Please support these new members. Let's not leave them out to dry like we did to Mel Stephens who served us well. It's the only way we're going to see the change that we voted for. Gary Kavanaugh stated he's sixteen years old and he's concerned about the revision of Title 17, the restriction on accessory buildings. As a fisherman he sees himself buying property and building a modest house and by doing this he'd be limiting the size of his secondary buildings to the same square footage as his house so the shop, shed, and banya can't be more than the house. This 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 20 of 25 means he has to build a larger house, buy more land, or accommodate his career. He's a fisherman and needs to store his gear and personal things. It's also ridiculous that the borough might require as much as 230% financing on any improvement that he plans. How can he expect a bank to finance 230%. What if he builds without financing, he could never come up with an extra cost for that. He likes to believe Kodiak will be his home, maybe not; maybe he'll have to leave and take his income with him. Chris Ford stated a few of the complaints about the code revision are if the use is not listed, it's prohibited, how much authority is given to the Community Development Department Director and its designees, the inequality of the codes between the city, villages, and the rest of the borough. Some of the wording can be so vague that it can be open to a wide interpretation. What can be considered a junk yard, one hundred sq. feet or a 10x10 sq. foot area maybe parts or pieces that someone's using to make into a project or rebuilding something. In her interpretation on electric fences in the draft there is conflicting information, and in her opinion shipping containers should be allowed as accessory structures if they so desire. It's cheaper to purchase a shipping container than it is to build something the same size for storage, and people have been using them in Kodiak for years. She feels a person does not need to get a permit for a sign let alone pay for a permit for a sign. She feels there are too many rules for signs considering there are 4 pages on signs alone in the draft code. She doesn't agree that a person needs to get permission for a home based business and if someone so chooses to have heavy equipment; dump trucks or backhoes on their property she feels they should be able to do so. In short, the code revisions that have been set before us needs to be scrapped and the people of Kodiak need to revise the codes themselves. Steven Foust (caller) stated he's concerned about these revisions and he doesn't know why they have to be bundled up into a big jumbled mess that they are. He knows there has been a lot of time spent on them but he thinks the best place for them is the garbage can. If you want to change something, change one thing at a time as it needs changing. What you are trying to do is a waste of time and a waste of money. He's not very happy with it and it sounds like there are a lot of other people that's not happy with it either. Chaco Pearman stated he was here earlier but the hall was full and people were standing outside too. In general, he hasn't heard anyone jump up and down screaming let's pass this, we have to do it, you have our support. That's not the message being delivered tonight. Pearman came here in 1972 from a fairly sheltered background and Kodiak has been great to him. He planned on dying here but is now having second thoughts about it. He's worked as a commercial fisherman, roofer, and carpenter, he's worked on the North Slope, and he's been a laborer. Like everyone else in Kodiak he's fiercely independent and he likes to do things himself for himself. If we keep going down this path there will be 1 thing accomplished with this, we would have created a new classification of job, and it will be like going on the website for healthcare, you'll need a navigator to get through this to get anything done to build anything or to do anything because it will be so complicated none of us that are working a real job somewhere else are going to be able to do it ourselves because of the complexity of it all. Let's keep it simple. Cart Neff stated he's a thirty-five year resident and a contractor. He loves Kodiak and he started out in Bells Flats with a little camper on a friends land. He got to hunt and fish, and really enjoys Kodiak. He feels for people that have to buy a home on a 10,000 sq. foot lot for $400,000. Regarding the codes, over time he's seen things that has happened with people, the borough's attitude, and the borough used to be a friendly place. The inspectors were nice but he does feel that with the requirements put on them, pressures of new regulations made it where they had to protect the integrity of what they were doing so they had to be less friendly with people. He doesn't like the Code Enforcement because one thing he saw changed was the borough will tell you how we enforce things is complaint based, it's a neighborly thing, if we look at it if the neighbors are irritated they can complain and then we can do something about it, otherwise we aren't going to look for trouble. He'd like to see that eliminated and he'd like to see the code we already have revisited to see what we can take out. He hasn't seen buildings falling down or flaming up. He hasn't seen anyone say that they wish the borough would make more rules because of my neighbor's chickens. People in the villages build however they want. He doesn't see disasters 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 21 of 25 happening or people saying they are worried about the people in the villages. He doesn't see anyone that wants more regulation because they are concerned about safety, the environment, saving the planet, or whatever the reasons may be. People want less government involvement and want to see less property tax. Recently a contractor told him that full engineered foundations will be required if they aren't a full slab foundation and that means thousands of dollars more. Cort said to scrap the Code Enforcer and see what we can do to remove a lot of that stuff from the code. Mathew McNerney (caller) stated he's been a thirty-five year city resident. He recently purchased a house and he's trying to make it a better place. He's storing building materials in his yard which would make it a junkyard and he'd be out of compliance. It sounds like he's in the same boat as most of the constituents of the community. He doesn't remember requesting an updated code. It appears that his home was built by getting around the code. He realizes there are important facets of code that we have to go by to make sure structures are compliant with the safety values that we need today, but he thinks we should be doing it on an open basis so we all know what's going on and can agree that's a necessity. He appreciates everyone that showed up for the meeting. He knows the commission is putting their best foot forward on this. Tim Booch (caller) stated there were so many people in the hall so he just went to the library to listen on the computer. He was surprised by the first person to speak tonight because he was spot on. We will all agree that the commission needs to make a motion for a resolution to table this vote next week. All of us and many more will be at the next meeting. It's obvious that you can't be voting on this next week. Todd Hiner stated he has 5 kids who want to raise families here and Hiner doesn't want to see them leave Kodiak. He's been in Kodiak over fifty years and he was raised in a King Crab fishing family. He's seen a lot of people talking about building houses out of pocket and that's his dream for his kids. There's not a lot of big money paying jobs that people can afford to get into a house and raise kids in Kodiak. Until you're affected by something you don't get on the wagon and he sees that people are starting to realize that this affects them. If we could group together even if we have to get an attorney and all put in a little money to have someone represent us. Even if there are a couple thousand of us, that makes a better statement than these testimonies. A lot of times he felt sad walking away from his testimony because he's sees the council members rolling their eyes. Looking at the Wal-Mart and what it did to our town and how it took away all the mom and pop stores, the specialty stores, and looking at what downtown did to us and its huge companies and corporations that are pushing this. This is an Agenda 21 item that's being forced all over America, they are trying to ruin America and other nations. He's proud of our community for coming up here, there are a lot of young people that want to build out of pocket and make it work; they want to live here like their families lived here. Kodiak is an awesome place and when we get outsiders coming in telling us how we should do things, why are we going to outsiders because they've already screwed up the lower 48. Why do we let them come into our community and let them tell us what they think we should do? He used to like to ride his four wheeler around and go fishing just to have fun in Kodiak, and now he doesn't even know if he can launch a boat from his property anymore. There are so many little things in this mess he thinks it should be tabled. Mark Alwert stated he and his father own 2 boats and multiple properties. He keeps hearing people say throw out this document and to table it, and Alwert agrees. He also hears of outsiders coming in to write our borough revisions for the codes and he heard a story about ObamaCare and the architect of that was quoted as saying "American people are stupid, we're just going to pass this thing and no one will read it, and we're going to get it passed." In all accounts it looks like it's failing and that guy called us stupid. The idea of someone coming onto his property and looking into his windows without permission is not right. If someone's looking into his windows they will likely get shot. It's just an American right to have privacy and if the borough wants to know what he's doing they can ask him and Alwert would be happy to adhere to what they want to some limit. In this Agenda 21, it's incredible what's going on around the world. There was three-hundred people when he in the parking lot earlier. There's about one-hundred-fifty out in the hallway, and this room is packed with people sitting everywhere. You have people here for a valid point and not one person has said they are in favor of this. It's a resounding idea that this isn't the way we should go. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 22 of 25 Having the high school go over budget and a borough that has allowed that contract to go over upwards of $60,000,000 above what the community voted in, it's a travesty when Mary gets up here and tells us that there are people who can't afford heating fuel but we are OK with spending an extra $60,000,000 on a high school that's way out of line for what we need in this community with a shrinking population. When it comes to borough code and addressing the high school, there have been a lot of problems in the lower 48 with people walking into schools and shooting. He advises everyone in our community to take a walk through the high school, it's a glass building with safety glass but it's not bulletproof glass. He has children in that high school and it's a little scary because no one is protected, and borough code should be protecting our children. There should be steel doors that the teachers can lock where no one can get in. Ted Panamarioff (caller) stated he was on the Project Advisory Committee for over 2 years. He was very disappointed in the consultants and in the way the process ended up working out. He doesn't think they accomplished anything. The work that PAC did added seventeen pages because they chose to simplify it by adding more details into it. For whatever reason because it was longer Planning and Zoning didn't accept it and then (inaudible) he's ashamed. He's lived here his entire life in Kodiak. He's always been proud of Kodiak but he's really ashamed of these people doing work in the name of his community. Whoever put this forward, what kind of delusions do they have? Many of the people on Planning and Zoning sat on the PAC (inaudible) the work that we did and then the consultant's would bring it back to us at the next meeting but it was totally foreign with different wording. He doesn't think there was a meeting where the chickens didn't come up. It was constantly being manipulated by the consultants who probably didn't have any real experience in true rural America, especially Alaska. He's frustrated and he thinks this should be tabled indefinitely. This is America. It's embarrassing. He and all the members put in a lot of hours to simplify it do the degree we were able. To see all of that thrown out and all of this come in here is like militaristic. COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to postpone until the January 28, 2015 Planning and Zoning regular meeting. COMMISSIONER ARNDT stated this is not being passed at the next meeting or any foreseeable meeting. All this is doing is moving it on to get some additional testimony since there are people that weren't able to get up here tonight. We need to try to find another location to accommodate so people don't feel that they're being alienated because they can't get in the room. This is not going forward for any approval. It's a long process ahead of this and he's so happy to have all the public testimony. ROLL CALL VOTE ON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY COMMUNICATIONS 13) Code Update Submitted Comments REPORTS C) Meeting Schedule: • January 14, 2015 work session-6:30 p.m.-KIB Conference Room • January 21, 2015 regular meeting-6:30 p.m.-Assembly Chambers • January 28, 2015 Code Update special meeting-6:30 p.m.-Assembly Chambers • February 4, 2015 Code Update special meeting-6:30 p.m.-Site To Be Determined • February 11, 2015 work session at 6:30pm in the KIB Conference Room • February 18, 2015 regular meeting at 6:30pm in the Assembly Chambers COMMISSIONER BALDWIN MOVED to accept reports as presented. VOICE VOTE ON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY CITIZEN COMMENTS Local number: 486-3231 Toll Free number: 855-492-9202. Limited to 3 minutes per speaker. 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 23 of 25 Brent Watkins stated we're repeating the mistakes of tonight if we're going to try to hold it in this venue, it's not going to work again and we'll have to postpone it. He requested that the commission seek a different venue for all of these meetings from here on out. Chaco Pearman asked what the process is and how does this go forward now. You have these work sessions and at some point the commission votes on it-up or down and it moves on to the Assembly and what's the timeframe. How does it work and please enlighten us. When it gets to the Assembly is there a comment period for the public there. VICE CHAIR SCHMITT said you are covering a lot of ground and some of it we haven't covered yet but in theory we will at some point vote. His personal view if we get to that point it's going to be a long time to do it if we actually go through the code and talk about things to change but when we would ultimately go to the Assembly. The timeframe, there is no set timeframe, as long as it takes. There will be public comment at the Assembly. They do it by ordinance which requires 2 hearings having a public hearing at the 2"d hearing. COMMISSIONER ARNDT wanted to clarify that in the process this will come back and amendments by the commission will be introduced and voted up or down by the majority which he foresees many amendments if we are able to get that far. It's a very extended period of time that this will take. Members of the commission will be looking to make based upon the testimony that we've received over these meetings, making amendments to the code and see how it goes with the commission but it would also be his personal feeling that we go back out for a public hearings on that revised draft. Judi Kidder stated she would just like the commission and assembly to be looking with a vision to how they can expand small business in Kodiak instead of telling us what we can't do, see if you can work with part of this code to promote small businesses which will increase the tax base, employment, which will help this town to grow. She doesn't see this in this draft code, it's all about what you can't do. STAFF COMMENTS None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Kathy Drabek thanked everyone that came tonight and she wants the people to know it's not us versus them; it's we. Jay Baldwin stated he's the newest on the commission but he was very impressed. It was very moving to see all the people come. He thanked the public for all the support. Maria Painter stated she wanted to let everyone know that at the appropriate time she, as a commissioner, will make a motion to table indefinitely the proposed code. She believes private property is the most important guarantee of our freedom. She thanked the public. Scott Arndt thanked everyone for coming. It's been a long process in reviewing this. He's been a commission for only a year and it's been frustrating going through some of the work sessions because many times he found he was in the minority. He thanked the public for coming. Alan Schmitt said by his unofficial count we had sixty-nine people testify tonight. The 7 people that serve on the commission, 2 are out of town, have lived in Kodiak for a combined total of two- hundred-eighteen years. He will give any commissioner the opportunity to disagree with this but he thinks he's on firm ground when he says that we all enjoy living here. He considers himself most fortunate to be able to live here. The concept of 13,000 people living in safety, generally good health, and comfortably while surrounded by this awe inspiring, natural beauty and on an island by any stretch of the imagination is remote. It's a privilege to live here. Each of us takes the job of serving on the commission seriously. We've been working on this for 1 Y2 years if not longer, we're all motivated by what is best for the common good, not what's good for 1 person, what's good for the common good. He points this out not because he wants you to think that we somehow are better equipped than any of you, no, we are invested in this community as well. It's our home; we 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 24 of 25 want it to continue to thrive and continue to be a place we want to live. We've had public hearings beginning in the summer of 2013 and through 2014. Not to fault anyone but it's about time. We've wanted to hear from the public. We've made the chances for people to come forward and tell us what they think. We took what the PAC put together and some people have commented and that was done primarily by an outside consultant. We took that and tried to work with it to make it something that would be best for Kodiak so that's the product of the 7 people on the commission. It's not the product from someone outside, it's what we tried to put together. People have complained on the one hand that the existing code is great and it doesn't need to be fixed, but on the other hand that there's a lot of vagueness and uncertainty. To get rid of the vagueness and uncertainty unfortunately you've got to add words, you've got to add definitions, and you've got to get specific. That's what we've tried to do. The borough has a lot of money invested, we've got a lot of time invested and he'd hate to just throw it out because he thinks we're at something we could work with To make the code work you have to have specific definitions and to get more specific to take away the opportunity to interpret things, well it takes more words. You can't have both; let's not have any rules but let's not have staff not interpret things. When need more words if you don't want staff to be able to be arbitrary. That's what he's heard people imply. Schmitt feels there's a lot of good stuff in the draft code. As Mr. Arndt noticed the commission didn't agree with a lot of things in the draft but we got to the point of let's get it out to the public to see what they have to say. We'd like to move forward on this. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONER ARNDT MOVED to adjourn. VOICE VOTE ON MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY VICE CHAIR SCHMITT adjourned the meeting at 11:10 p.m. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION By: Scott Arndt, Cllair ATTEST Bye Sheila Smith, Secretary Community Development Department APPROVED: April 15, 2015 1/12/2015 P&Z Minutes Page 25 of 25