Loading...
1992-08-20 Special MeetingJerome Selby, Mayor Donna Smith, Clerk Judi Nielsen, Deputy Clerk STEVENS, seconded by MONROE VOTE ON MOTION MOTION CARRIED APPROVAL OF AGENDA Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 A special meeting of the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly was held August 20, 1992 in the Assembly Chambers of the Kodiak Island Borough Building, 710 Mill Bay Road. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The invocation was given by Pastor Mark Houg1L.7 of St. Paul's Lutheran Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. There were present: ROLL CALL Jack McFarland, Presiding Betty Fitzjearl Gordon Gould Suzanne Hancock Mary Monroe Gary Stevens absent: Mike Milligan comprising a quorum of the Assembly; and Assemblymember Milligan was in Anchorage and unable to return to Kodiak for the meeting because of the Mt. Spurr eruption that halted air traffic in Anchorage. Mr. Milligan called and asked to be excused. moved to excuse Assemblymember Milligan. Unanimous voice vote MnNR(IP a t , moved to approve seconded by FITZJEARL agenda as submitted. K1BS104815 REGULAR MEETING Volume XV Page 221 -1 HANCOCK, seconded by STEVENS FITZJEARL seconded by GOULD moved to amend agenda by postponing Executive Session, Contract No. 92 -38 Clerk's Employment, to August 27, 1992. VOTE ON MOTION TO AMEND MOTION CARRIED Unanimous voice vote VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED Ayes: Fitzjearl, Gould, Hancock, Monroe, Stevens, McFarland Noes: None Absent: Milligan MOTION CARRIED Unanimous OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS A. Resolution No. 92 -32 Establishing a Joint Kodiak RESOLUTION Island Borough /City of Kodiak Fiscal Year 1994 NO. 92 -32 Capital Project Priority List. Presented for consideration was Resolution No. 92 -32 which, if adopted, established a City /Borough capital improvements list. GOULD, moved to adopt seconded by STEVENS Resolution No. 92 -32. Mayor Selby explained that the resolution was completed earlier than in previous years at the recommendation of the Borough /City lobbyist. He noted that the Assembly and City Council agreed to the projects on the list. moved to amend Resolution No. 92 -32 by substitution. Acccmhlvmemher Stevens appreciated the positive outcome of the joint Borough Assembly /City Council work session. Assemblymember Gould concurred with the above statement and added that the list was representative of the region's needs. Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KIBS1O4816 Volume XV Page 221 -2 VOTE ON MOTION TO AMEND Ayes: Noes: None Absent: Milligan MOTION CARRIED Unanimous VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED Ayes: Hancock, Monroe, Stevens, Fitzjearl, Gould, McFarland STEVENS, moved to adopt seconded by MONROE Resolution No. 92 - 37. Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KIBS1O4817 Gould, Hancock, Monroe, Stevens, Fitzjearl, McFarland Noes: None Absent: Milligan MOTION CARRIED Unanimous B. Resolution No. 92 - 37 Authorizing the Preparation RESOLUTION of a Consolidation Petition. NO. 92 - 37 Presented for consideration was Resolution No. 92 - 37 which, if adopted, authorized the staff of the Kodiak Island Borough to prepare a petition for consolidation of the Kodiak Island Borough and the City of Kodiak for presentation to the State of Alaska and the Local Boundary Commission. Mayor Selby explained that the resolution was drafted at the request of Assemblymember Stevens. He said it authorized staff to prepare a petition for Assembly approval that could be sent to the Local Boundary Commission who would place the question of consolidation before the voters. Assemblymember Stevens emphasized the fact that staff would only prepare the petition _ ^d bring it before the Assembly for review and deci.=ion. When Assemblymember Fitzjearl questioned the benefits of consolidation, Assemblymember Stevens responded that it was appropriate to study consolidation because of decreasing state revenues. He reiterated Volume XV Page 221 -3 that the resolution was not a request for consolidation but a request for guidance from the State of Alaska as to the steps required to consolidate. Joel Bolger, Borough attorney, was questioned about the regulations on consolidation set by the Local Boundary Commission. He responded that a consolidation petition could be submitted either by petition of the voters or by petition of the municipal governing body. He reaffirmed the fact that the vote to consolidate would go before the voters. Ms. Fitzjearl expressed concern that the public was not educated about the difference between unification and consolidation. Assemblymember Stevens again directed attention to the fact that the resolution only requested guidelines for consolidation from the Local Boundary Commission. Assemblymember Gould read his prepared statement noting that the best interest of the residents of the community would not be served by consolidation. He contended that bigger government was not better government and the Borough and City should resume efforts to combine regional functions. Assemblymember Hancock was of the opinion that the resolution was merely the mechanism to bring the question of consolidation to the public and was the right thing to do. She explained that consolidation was the dissolution of two or more municipalities and formation of a new municipality. Assemblymember Fitzjearl agreed with the comments of Assemblymember Gould and felt the responsibilities and concerns of the Borough and City were too diverse to consolidate at this time. Assemblymember Monroe felt the resolution was a good process in that it brought the question before the voters. She felt an obligation to provide prudent and efficient services to the residents. Although Presiding Officer McFarland was not convinced that consolidation was an improvement over the current form of government, he agreed it was important to give residents an option. He thought he would not serve the community well if they could not compare different municipal governments. Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KIBS104818 Volume XV Page 221 -4 VOTE ON MOTION Ayes: Noes: None Absent: Milligan It was noted for the record that Assemblymember Gould changed his no vote to be eligible to apply for reconsideration and Assemblymember Fitzjearl changed her no vote in support of Assemblymember Gould. MOTION CARRIED Unanimous Monroe, Stevens, Fitzjearl, Gould, Hancock, McFarland C. Contract No. 92 -37 Kodiak Spruce Cape U.S. Navy CONTRACT Cold Weather Training Facility Water & Sanitary NO. 92 -37 Sewer Project. GOULD, seconded by MONROE moved to postpone Contract No. 92 -37 Kodiak Spruce Cape U.S. Navy Cold Weather Training Facility Water & Sanitary Sewer Project to a special meeting on August 27th at 7:30 p.m. in the conference room. Mayor Selby recommended postponement because the $800,000 Navy contract for construction work had not been received. He anticipated the contract would be received the following week. He added that there was a November 15th completion date. VOTE ON MOTION Ayes: Noes: None Absent: Milligan MOTION CARRIED Unanimous Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 Stevens, Fitzjearl, Gould, Hancock, Monroe, McFarland KIBS104819 Volume XV Page 221 -5 PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEAR All ordinances and resolutions presented at this meet_ng were introduced by title only and copies had been made available to the public. A. Ordinance No. 92 -16 Placing the Question of ORDINANCE Extending the Womens Bay Service District Area NO. 92 -16 on the October 6, 1992 Ballot. Presented for consideration was Ordinance No. 92 -16 which, if adopted, placed on a ballot the question of extending the Womens Bay Service District to include a road not in the service area that was used by residents. The ordinance was amended at introduction to exclude an area from the north boundary to and including Lash Dock. GOULD, moved to adopt seconded by FITZJEARL Ordinance No. 92 -16. Mayor Selby explained that the ordinance proposed to incorporate a small area outside the service district that supplied driveway access to three homes within the service district. Presiding Officer McFarland noted there were 259 public hearing notices mailed with four returned- - one supporting and three opposing. The Presiding Officer opened the public hearing. Roy Madsen, Womens Bay Service Area resident, requested that action be deferred because only one access road was included while two other similar roads were not included. He suggested that action on the ordinance was potentially unconstitutional and that a response from the Borough attorney was in order. He referred to Mr. Still's forceful insistence at the August 6th meeting that the Lash Dock was a federal maritime terminal entitled to fire protection by the U.S.C.G. He recommended that Mayor Selby ask for an opinion from the U.S.C.G. He requested amending the ordinance to include the area from the present boundary to and including Lash Dock or give the residents the opportunity to piesent a united front by initiative petition. He presented a petition, signed by 29 residents of the Womens Bay Service Area supporting his statements. Wayne Barry concurred with the statements of Mr. Madsen and requested that the ordinance as introduced be considered. Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KIBS1O482O Volume XV Page 221 -6 John Burt recommended placing the question before the service area residents at the annual meeting. He suggested a specific committee be formed to draft a plan of action because the whole road system maintenance plan needed reviewing. Janet Wente, Bells Flats resident, opposed the ordinance unless the other areas were included. Leticia Robb, Bells Flats resident, asked for postponement until the ordinance was complete in that it addressed all areas. Bill Farling, Womens Bay Service District Board chairman, opposed adoption of the ordinance until the whole picture was included. He spoke to Captain Barret, Commanding Officer of the Support Center, and was told the obligation of the U.S.C.G. was the Coast Guard Base, the airport, and mutual aid agreements with Bayside Fire Department and Womens Bay Service Districts for fire protection. Karen Burns, Womens Bay resident, felt that closer review was important before the ordinance was adopted. Jim Ripper, Womens Bay resident, called in and said that the whole community system needed reviewing, not one driveway. He suggested a community meeting. John Burt did not agree that the service district should continue to service the road. Tom Schwantes, resident of Womens Bay, asked that the assembly defer action because existing problems were not addressed. Bill Farling announced that the next meeting of the service district board was September 14th at the fire house at 7:00 p.m. He noted that on two occasions the board voted - -five ayes, two noes - -to continue maintenance on the road. When Mr. Berry was asked how long he was chairman of the service district, he responded that he was chairman from 1984 to 1991. The Presiding officer closed the public hearing and reconvened the regular meeting. KIBS1O4821 Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 Volume XV Page 221 -7 Assemblymember Fitzjearl explained her purpose in introducing the ordinance as amended was to bring the question to the voters in the service district. She noted that the three homes were in the service district but unable to use the driveway in the service district because it was too steep. Assemblymember Gould noted that he was more comfortable with a petition from the service area residents. VOTE ON MOTION Ayes: None Noes: Fitzjearl, Gould, Hancock, Monroe, Stevens, McFarland Absent: Milligan MOTION FAILED Unanimous Presiding Officer McFarland announced the Assembly would meet in a special meeting on August 27th at 7:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers and regular meeting on September 3, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the Assembly Chambers. There being no further business to come before the ADJOURNMENT Assembly, the meeting adjourned at 8:42 p.m. ATTEST: • ' ) Y tc C 1) Borough clerk Special Assembly Meeting August 20, 1992 KIBS1O4822 Volume XV Page 221 -8