Loading...
2026-09-10 Work SessionKodiak Island Borough Assembly Work Session Thursday, September 10, 2026, 6:30 p.m. Assembly Chambers Work Sessions are informal public meetings where the Assembly discusses the listed agenda items, reviews upcoming programs, receives progress updates, and reviews the draft regular meeting agenda. No formal actions are taken. You can view the live broadcast on the Borough's YouTube Channel and access meeting packets online. Any public documents related to the agenda that are received and shared with elected officials after the initial agenda has been released will be included in the Supplemental Materials section below. The deadline for releasing supplemental materials is noon on the day of the meeting. Page 1. CITIZENS' COMMENTS 1-907-486-3231 or Toll Free 1-855-492-9202 (Limited To Three Minutes Per Speaker) a Sign -in Sheet 3 2. MANAGER'S COMMENTS a 2026-09-10 Borough Manager's Report 4-8 3. AGENDA ITEMS a. Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation 9 - 39 Agenda Item Report - Pdf b. Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 40 - 63 Washington, D.C. Trip Agenda Item Report - Pdf C. Discussion Of Assembly Committee Assignment Workloads 64 - 65 Agenda Item Report - Pdf d. Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To 66 - 70 The Southwest Alaska Regional Planning Organization (RPO) Board of Directors Agenda Item Report - Pdf e. Discussion On Authorization For The Mayor To Join The Mayors 71 Alliance To End Childhood Hunger On Behalf Of The Kodiak Island Borough Agenda Item Report - Pdf Page 1 of 84 4. PACKET REVIEW The DRAFT regular meeting packet is available online at Kodiak Island Borough - Meeting Type List (civicweb.net). a. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS • Proclamation In Recognition Of The National Assessors Day PUBLIC HEARING • Ordinance No. FY2027-08, Amending Title 2 Administration And Personnel, Chapter 2.25 Borough Assembly, Section 2.25.060 Declaring And Filling Vacancies Of The Kodiak Island Borough Code Of Ordinances Regarding The Procedures And Timelines For Declaring And Filling Assembly Vacancies CONTRACTS • Contract No. FY2027-15 For KIB Facilities Snow Removal, Ice Control, And Sweeping With MK Enterprises LLC. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION • Ordinance No. FY2027-09, Amending Kodiak Island Borough Code Of Ordinances Title 2 Administration And Personnel, Chapter 2.30 Rules Of The Assembly, Section 2.30.100 Miscellaneous To Clarify Procedures, Limits, And Safeguards Regarding Meeting Recesses OTHER ITEMS • Appointment Of The October 6, 2026, Regular Municipal Election Officials 5. CLERK'S COMMENTS a 2026-09-10 Borough Clerk's Report 6. ASSEMBLY MEMBERS' COMMENTS 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 8. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 72-77 a. Agenda Item 3.c 78 - 84 Assembly Workload Framework Brief Presentation This meeting is open to the public and will be broadcast on the Borough's YouTube Channel. Meeting packets are available online. Please subscribe to get meeting notifications when meeting packets are published. For public comments, please call (907) 486-3231 or (855) 492-9202. Page 2 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #1.a. � , N `r r Y ° KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Da ALASKAIW Meeting Type: Assembly Work Session Date: September 10, 2026 Please PRINT your name legibly Phone number Page 3 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. \1 Kodiak Island Borough OFFICE of the MANAGER 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Phone (907) 486-9301 TO: Kodiak Island Borough Assembly FROM: Aimee Williams, Borough Manager RE: Manager's Report, September 10, 2026 Manager's Department Assembly Forum Attended the KIB Candidate Forum on Tuesday, September 8, 2026. Fisheries Debate All four gubernatorial candidates were on island for the fisheries debate last night. (September 9, 2026) There will also be a US House of Representative debate and a US Senate debate on September 12t" ALASKA'S ONLY STATEWIDE FISHERIES DEBATES FOR 36 + YEARS 2026 FISHERIES DEBATE SERIES Sumort informed dialogue IYU�I�T At I / "I r �IITI/w f. Page 4 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. Bear Management As directed from last week's meeting, KIB staff is continuing to work with our partners to find a solution for keeping bears out of the landfill and accessing solid waste. Current Recruitments • Two employees left Borough employment last week: Travis West, GIS Analyst and Patricia Valerio, Projects Assistant • Two new employees started work this week: Emma Christiansen as an Appraiser Technician in the Assessing Department and Tandy Ford -Roberts as a Maintenance Mechanic in the Engineering & Facilities Department. • We are recruiting for a Treatment Plant Operator 1; Two interviews have been conducted, and two more applications are in the review stage. Finance Department FY2026 Audit The auditors will be onsite in the week of September 14, 2026. Finance staff will be working with the auditors throughout the week to provide requested documentation, answer questions, and assist with their review of the Borough's financial records and procedures. Property Assessment and Taxation Implementation Project Now that all the major components of Finance's implementation is complete, Tyler is waiting to transition us from their Implementation Team to their Transitional Support Team once Assessing is ready. A date for this transition has not yet been established. Online Property Access Through the Property Information link on the Borough website, the public can now access and print property tax statements, make payments, view payments and history and other general property information. IT Department Systems Administration The IT department continues implementing the new Proxmox server cluster and is now roughly 50% complete migrating Borough servers over to it. Recent work has included upgrading network hardware and connections to support the new system, along with general troubleshooting and cleaning up outdated technical documentation. Cybersecurity and Risk Mitigation The Kodiak Island Borough cybersecurity infrastructure project continues to progress well, with a second firewall for the landfill now being prepared for installation. We have also continued building out secure remote access for employees working outside the office. Page 5 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. Personnel and User Support IT has been handling a steady volume of new user account setup, along with facilitating trainings and meetings with other departments. We are also assisting with transitioning a departing staff member's procurement -related responsibilities to her replacement. Assessing Summer 2026 Reviews will be for properties in the City of Kodiak Senior Citizen / Disabled Veteran Exemptions • NO PFD — o SC- 16 applicants o DV- 1 applicant • Undetermined o SC- 20 applicants o DV- 1 applicants • Good cause hearing is scheduled for October 15, 2026 o 3 Senior Citizen late file denials — late filers have until September 21, 2026, to provide good cause to Assessor. Exemption Updates The following timely filed exemption applications: • Kodiak Maritime Museum —sent to legal for review on August 19tn Kodiak Masonic Temple • Calvery Baptist Bells Flats Exemption Appeals 1. The Alutiiq Heritage Foundation 0 2023 Refund Case — Attorneys timely filed joint status report 0 2024 Appeal Case —AHF filed motion for attorney fees, KIB filed opposition to that motion. 0 2025 Reconsideration — On hold until the 2024 Appeal case is complete. (Conducted in house, not through the court) 0 2026 Application- Decision letter to SBE for review. 2. Alaska Supreme Court Case with KANA— Case heard in December of 2024 with no decision yet. Page 6 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. Community Development Planning and Zoning Commission The Commission held a work session on September 9, 2026, at 6:30 PM in the Assembly Chambers. The Commission reviewed Chapter 2: Land Use of PLAN 2045. In packet review for the September 16 regular meeting the Commission reviewed the following items: • CIP List • Cliff Point Rezone #2 • Anderson Variance • Sun'aq Parking Variance • Land Disposal for Beaver Lake properties • Election of a new chairperson for the Commission In addition, staff noted that under new business for the regular meeting is the election of the new chairman. The Commission will also make a recommendation to the mayor for a second commissioner to sit on the Borough Lands Committee. Multi -Jurisdiction Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan —Annual Review Staff created to questionnaires for the review: one that goes to municipalities within the borough and the other a community questionnaire. The community questionnaire may be access from the emergency planning website: https://www.kodiakak.us/738/Emergency-PlanninG In addition, community development staff will be contacting individual governments and agencies regarding specific mitigation projects for a status update. The final step in the annual review is a written report and presentation to the Borough Assembly, which is tentatively scheduled for one of the Assembly work sessions in November. Engineering and Facilities Solid Waste Contract Request for Proposals Staff met with Alaska Waste on September 10 to discuss the proposal and clarify expectations. This contract is expected to be reviewed by the Assembly at the October 81" Work Session ahead of a vote at the October 15t" Regular Meeting. Fuel Spill Assistance • Landfill Soil Remediation: Staff continue to till the soil and uncover the land farm in periods of good weather. Next sampling event is due by the end of November 2026.. • Long Term Care: Expecting a report from NWFF this week before sending to DEC • Karluk: 3-Tier Alaska is beginning to schedule trips and will be working with NWFF as the driller. Page 7 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. Small Projects • Port Lions School Painting Project: The contractor has completed painting and is completing the metal installation for the final trim. Staff coordinating a visit with KIBSD will conduct a site -visit when the sheet metal has been installed. • Annex Bldg. (old Red Cross) UST Removal: Final invoice received, awaiting close out documents. • Leachate Treatment Plant Citric Acid Dosing Skid Replacement: Staff are coordinating with contractors to schedule the installation and commissioning of the new skid. • KIB Main Office Roof Warranty: Building permit has been submitted, awaiting schedule of work. • KIB Long Technologies BAS AHU2- Timeline is unsure, but both KIB and KFRC projects will happen around the same timeframe. • KFRC Long Technologies BAS - project is being scheduled. • Landfill Bear Fence- Staff met with ADF&G and ADEC on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, for an update. The Defenders of Wildlife grant funded materials have partially arrived. We are still waiting for the remainder. Designs • NorthStar Roof- is in its final stages and is expected on 9/17 • Pool Small Scale Repair- is moving to 65% phase and is expected 9/17 • East Elementary Roof- is paused at Manager's request. • PKIMC ATS Replacement - Staff received the 65% design and will be reviewing and scheduling an Architectural Review Board Meeting. - ARB meeting today to discuss 65% design • PKIMC RO and Steam Generation - paused and awaiting feedback from Providence internal review. Upcoming Contracts Contractor Roster - Staff received submissions for this RFQP. Contracts will be awarded as a NTE $50,000 to the responsive parties. All 18 contracts have been fully executed. Borough Meetings • Solid Waste Advisory Board met last night (September 9, 2026) • Architectural Review Board met today • Health Facilities Advisory Board (HFAB) September 15, at 1:30pm at Providence in the Barometer Room. Page 8 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #3.a. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation ORIGINATOR: Jeffery A. Woods, Assembly Member RECOMMENDATION: Assembly review of the survey results and to discuss the annual cap on remote meetings to wrap-up the discussion on this topic. DISCUSSION: On July 9, 2026, Assembly Members Jeffery Woods, Caroline Roberts, and Bo Whiteside submitted an agenda item request form to amend the Kodiak Island Borough Code. The goal is to broaden the rules for electronic participation. The sponsors want to ensure that technical limitations or strict rules do not prevent remote Assembly members from fully engaging in local governance. On August 13, 2026, this topic was placed on the agenda, and a survey was distributed by the Clerk so that each member of the assembly, individually, completes the survey form and return it to the clerk. Each of those forms are attached to this agenda item, and a comprehensive memorandum summarizing those responses is attached to this packet. The Assembly reached consensus on the issues of quorum, weather exceptions, allowable remote circumstances, video requirements, notice deadlines, and executive session bans. Only one single issue —the annual cap on remote meetings —remains unresolved and will require further discussion. A critical legal question was raised regarding whether electronic participation rules can apply differently based on where an Assembly member lives. Assembly member Whiteside strongly advocates that remote village residents should have exclusive or expanded electronic privileges. However, Assembly member Roberts formally requested a legal review from the Borough Attorney to determine if a multi -tiered residency rule is legally permissible under municipal code. Note: Two Assembly members may request a legal review to determine if a multi -tiered residency rule is legally permissible under municipal code. This can be done during a public meeting or by filling out an agenda item & service request form. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Kodiak Island Borough Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation Page 9 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #3.a. Kodiak Island Borough Office of the Borough Clerk 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Phone (907) 486-9310 Fax (907) 486-9391 MEMORANDUM TO: Kodiak Island Borough Assembly FROM: Nova M. Javier, Borough Clerk DATE: August 31, 2026 SUBJECT. Comprehensive Survey Results & Policy Recommendations: Electronic Participation Policy Review (KIBC 2.30) 1. Executive Summary This memorandum outlines the collective feedback from seven Assembly members (Caroline, Jeff, Bo, Mark, Jeremiah, Scott, and Steve) regarding proposed amendments to the Electronic Participation Code. The Assembly achieved complete consensus or clear majority rule on quorum, weather exceptions, allowable remote circumstances, video requirements, notice deadlines, and executive session bans. Only one single issue —the annual cap on remote meetings — remains unresolved and will require further discussion. 2. Policy Decisions with Established Majorities (4+ Votes) The following areas have achieved a majority: • Quorum Integrity (Unanimous - 7/7 NO): Members unanimously reject allowing electronic participants to count toward the core quorum requirement. Code language will explicitly maintain that four members must be physically present in the main chambers. • Severe Weather Contingencies (Strong Majority - 6/7 NO): By a 6-to-1 margin, the Assembly opposes fully virtual emergency meetings during localized weather alerts. Physical presence must be maintained, and meetings will continue to be canceled/rescheduled if travel is unsafe. Jeremiah felt differently. Bo noted this should only change under extreme emergencies. Allowable Remote Circumstances (Unanimous - 7/7 NO to general expansion): The Assembly unanimously rejects expanding electronic participation for "any general Page 1 of 3 Page 10 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. reason". It will remain strictly tied to narrow exceptions (illness, employment, out-of-town travel). • Video Feed Mandate (Strong Majority - 5/7 NO to audio -only): Five members insist that visual presence via video remains mandatory. Audio -only connections will not count as official attendance. Jeff and Bo felt differently, favoring phone backups if internet bandwidth fails. • Minimum Advance Notification Window (Strong Majority - 5/7 to keep current code): Five members (Caroline, Mark, Scott, Bo, and Steve) preferred to keep the advance notification window at 24 hours. Jeff wanted to shorten to 12 hours (noting the code should be "amended to encompass unforeseen issues'). Jeremiah wanted to shorten to 2 hours. • Late Notification Cutoff (Majority - 4/7 NO change): Four members (Caroline, Jeff, Mark, Jeremiah) preferred to keep the 5 PM mayoral approval cutoff for late notifications to give staff adequate setup time. Bo, Scott, and Steve would like to eliminate the cutoff for emergency logistics. • Per -Meeting Remote Caps (Unanimous - 7/7 NO change): The Assembly agrees to maintain the cap at a maximum of three remote members per meeting to encourage in -person attendance. • Executive Sessions (Majority - 4/7 NO remote access): Four members (Caroline, Jeff, Mark, Scott) strongly oppose allowing electronic participation during confidential or executive sessions due to security risks. Jeremiah and Bo felt differently, favoring secure lines to allow for it. 3. Split Issues Requiring Floor Debate The item below does not have an outright 4 agreement on a single path forward and require deliberation: A. Annual Remote Meeting Caps (Question 5) • Keep the limit at 4 meetings (3 votes): Caroline, Mark, Scott. (Scott added a hand- written caveat: "3 meetings in a row max'). • Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings (2 votes): Jeremiah, Steve. • Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings (1 vote): Jeff added a note: "No more than two in a row". • Zoning -based eligibility (1 vote): Bo skipped the numbers, stating remote limits should be "only allowable for those who qualify" (referencing remote village residents). Page 2 of 3 Page 11 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. 4. Legal Clarification & Items of Note • Geographic Discrimination (Question 3b): A critical legal question was raised regarding whether electronic participation rules can apply differently based on where an Assembly member lives. Bo strongly advocates that remote village residents should have exclusive or expanded electronic privileges. However, Caroline formally requested a legal review from the Borough Attorney to determine if a multi -tiered residency rule is legally permissible under municipal code. • Security Oath Additions: Though the majority did not favor allowing remote executive sessions, Bo noted that if it ever passes, verbal security oaths should be given "under penalty of law". 5. Next Steps • The Assembly should discuss whether to pursue amending the existing remote participation ordinance to address Annual Remote Meeting Caps. • Two Assembly members may request a legal review to determine if a multi -tiered residency rule is legally permissible under municipal code. Page 3 of 3 Page 12 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. CAROLI N E Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. ® No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. • Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. [�] No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. r No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. ❑ Other (Please specify missing reasons): • Question 3b: Should electronic participation eligibility be restricted based on where an Assembly member lives within the Borough? WOO Carl IN Cotfi M i-C- 'AIj 0 1 t� ti ) ❑ Yes, electronic participation should only be permitted for member who reside in remote villages within the Kodiak Island Borough. Page 1 of 4 Page 13 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ No, electronic participation rules should apply equally to all Assembly members regardless of their residence. Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. ❑ Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? D9 Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? W Keep it at 24 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. Page 2 of 4 Page 14 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ❑ Yes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. f9l No, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated?A M ,'V-kV ty\-f_SOIyruel ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. ❑ Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidentiallclosed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ❑ Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. 1M No, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) h 10\ ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ❑ The remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no other person present or listening. Page 3 of 4 -M Page 15 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ Only audio participation should be used; no video feeds of sensitive materials Sample Code Language: 'The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session. " Page 4 of 4 Page 16 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. JEFF Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. 0 No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. • Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. 1Z No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. ❑ No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. Other (Please specify missing reasons): _%�n • Question 3b: Should electronic participation eligibility be restricted based on where an Assembly member lives within the Borough? ❑ Yes, electronic participation should only be permitted for members who reside in remote villages within the Kodiak Island Borough. Page 1 of 4 Page 17 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. Q� No, electronic participation rules should apply equally to all Assembly members /regardless of their residence. Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? 0 Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. ❑ Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting. ❑ No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? ❑ Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. 0 Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. Np Mon.n; -TNAA) TWO 'LN A fie W • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? ❑ Keep it at 24 hours. 'Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. 4MVL4Q To U1JrottSlZ(C,0 r7S5vMS Page 2 of 4 Page 18 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ZZYes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. ❑ No, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. ) Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidential/closed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ❑ Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. ZZ No, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ❑ The remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no other person present or listening. Page 3 of 4 Page 19 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ Only audio participation should be used, no video feeds of sensitive materials Nd Sample Code Language: "The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate. encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session. " Page 4 of 4 Page 20 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. )<No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. • Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during Vocalized travel or weather alerts XNo, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. KNo, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. ❑ Other (Please specify missing reasons): • Question 3b: Should electronic participation eligibility be restricted based on where an Assembly member lives within the Borough? Xes, electronic participation should only be permitted for members who reside in remote villages within the Kodiak Island Borough. Page 1 of 4 Page 21 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ No, electronic participation rules should apply equally to all Assembly members regardless of their residence. Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. XYes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting ❑ No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? , 1� a�ke �Q ��o ❑ Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year.Q1� ❑ Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? Keep it at 24 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. Page 2 of 4 Page 22 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ❑ Yes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. gNo, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidentiallclosed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? '120yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. ❑ No, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ter he remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no person present or listening. Un �e^al}� p� �&V-> Page 3 of 4 Page 23 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ Only audio participation should be used; no video feeds of sensitive materials Sample Code Language: "The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session. " Page 4 of 4 Page 24 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. MARK Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. ,Cg-No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. +No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. ❑ Other (Please specify missing reasons): • Question 3b: Should electronic participation eligibility be restricted based on where an Assembly member lives within the Borough? ❑ Yes, electronic participation should only be permitted for members who reside in remote villages within the Kodiak Island Borough. Page 1 of 4 Page 25 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. allo, electronic participation rules should apply equally to all Assembly members regardless of their residence. Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. ❑ Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting. LV No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? N( Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? .Keep it at 24 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. Page 2 of 4 Page 26 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ❑ Yes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. _Z,No, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. "'Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidential/closed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ❑ Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. TPNo, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ❑ The remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no other person present or listening. Page 3 of 4 Page 27 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. ❑ Only audio participation should be used; no video feeds of sensitive materials Sample Code Language: "The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session. " Page 4 of 4 Page 28 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. J EREM IAH Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. kho, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. ❑ No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. ❑ No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. Other (Please specify missing reasons): P @ (?CCCiS10 �6r (14%en G a GLttt�E Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable Page 1 of 3 Page 29 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting. ❑ No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? ❑ Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year. Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? V"'Keep it at 24 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ❑ Yes, eliminate the 5.00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. XNo, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. Page 2 of 3 Page 30 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidential/closed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ( Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive 'sessions. ❑ No, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. kThe remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no o er person present or listening. ❑ Only audio participation should be used, no video feeds of sensitive materials. Sample Code Language: 'The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session." Page 3 of 3 Page 31 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. SCOTT Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. [(No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. • Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. Ka/No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. Q No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. ❑ Other (Please specify missing reasons): Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable Page 1 of 3 Page 32 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. ❑ Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting. Le No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? /AA4 Q/ ED Keep the limit at 4 meets gs er year. ❑ Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? Keep it at 24 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 12 hours. ❑ Shorten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? [� Yes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. ❑ No, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. Page 2 of 3 Page 33 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. • Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ��It ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. (� Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidential/closed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ❑ Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. [;(INIo, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) KA ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ❑ The remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no other person present or listening. ❑ Only audio participation should be used; no video feeds of sensitive materials. Sample Code Language: 'The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session. " Page 3 of 3 Page 34 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. STEVE Electronic Participation Policy Review Part 1: General Rules & Quorum (KIBC 2.30.020) • Question 1: The borough code dictates that electronic participation is only allowed if at least four Assembly members are physically present in the chambers to maintain a quorum. Do you think members participating electronically should be allowed to count toward the core quorum requirement? ❑ Yes, a quorum should be achievable even if the majority is online. No, four members must always be physically present in the main chambers. • Question 2: If severe weather prevents four members from physically reaching the Assembly chambers, current code forces a total meeting cancellation and rescheduling. Do you support allowing a "fully virtual emergency meeting" if physical travel is deemed unsafe? ❑ Yes, allow meetings to proceed fully online during localized travel or weather alerts. No, a physical presence in the main chambers must always be maintained. Part 2: Circumstances & Tracking (KIBC 2.30.025(A)-(D)) • Question 3: Currently, electronic participation is restricted to specific circumstances (e.g., illness, employment obligations, out-of-town travel). Do you support expanding this to allow remote participation for any general reason? ❑ Yes, remote participation should be allowed for any reason. No, it should remain restricted to the current allowable circumstances. ❑ Other (Please specify missing reasons): Part 3: Technical Formats (KIBC 2.30.025(E)) • Question 4: Current rules mandate that a functioning video camera is essential to participate in regular meetings. If an assembly member experiences unstable Page 1 of 3 Page 35 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. internet bandwidth, should audio -only participation (via phone) be legally counted as official attendance? ❑ Yes, audio -only should always count if video fails. ❑ Yes, but only if the member notifies the clerk of tech issues before the meeting. No, visual presence via video must remain mandatory. Part 4: Caps, Deadlines, & Processing Limits (KIBC 2.30.025(F)-(G)) • Question 5: The current code limits Assembly members to a maximum of four regular meetings via electronic participation per year. How many annual regular meetings do you believe an Assembly member should be allowed to attend remotely? ❑ Keep the limit at 4 meetings per year. 10 Increase the limit to 6-8 meetings per year. ❑ Increase the limit to 9-12 meetings per year. ❑ Remove the annual limit entirely. • Question 6: Assembly members must currently give the borough clerk 24 hours' notice to join electronically. What do you feel is a fair minimum notification window? ❑ Keep it at 24 hours. *� orten it to 12 hours. horten it to 2 hours before the meeting start time. ❑ No advance notice required if tech infrastructure is already live. • Question 7: If a member misses the 24-hour notice window, they currently need the Mayor's explicit approval before 5:00 PM to connect. Do you support changing this to a more flexible rule, such as allowing emergency logins up to the start of the meeting if travel or tech issues arise? ❑ Yes, eliminate the 5:00 PM mayoral approval requirement for late notifications. r� No, the 5:00 PM cutoff is necessary for the staff to prepare technical setups. Page 2 of 3 Page 36 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. Question 8: Current code limits electronic attendance to a maximum of three assembly members per meeting on a first -come, first -served basis. Should this cap be completely eliminated? ❑ Yes, eliminate the cap entirely. ❑ Increase the cap to allow up to 4 or 5 remote members. Keep the cap at 3 members to encourage in -person attendance. Part 5: Executive Sessions (KIBC 2.30.030(F)) • Question 9: Current code explicitly bans electronic participation during executive (confidential/closed) sessions. To ensure members are not excluded from sensitive borough discussions, do you support allowing secure remote access to executive sessions? ❑ Yes, remote members should be allowed to fully participate in executive sessions. T�f_No, confidential discussions must remain strictly in -person to ensure security. • Question 10: If electronic participation is extended to executive sessions, what security protocols should be required to protect confidentiality? (Select all that apply) ❑ The remote member must sign a legally binding confidentiality waiver before the session. ❑ The remote member must verbally swear that they are in a private room with no other person present or listening. ❑ Only audio participation should be used; no video feeds of sensitive materials. Sample Code Language: 'The Borough Clerk shall provide a completely separate, encrypted, and password -protected electronic link or phone line for the executive session. At no time shall the public broadcast feed or public teleconference line remain active or connected to the line utilized for the executive session." Page 3 of 3 Page 37 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH AGENDA ITEM & SERVICE REQUEST FORM INSTRUCTIONS: This form is used to submit items for the Assembly agenda or to request staff services. Please complete the one section that applies to your request and submit it to the Borough Clerk. DATE SUBMITTED: SECTION 1: AGENDA ITEM SUBMISSION (READY FOR PLACEMENT) REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Per KIBC 2.30.060(B), items must be in a format ready to be placed on the agenda. I have attached the proposed ordinance, resolution, or item in its final format. Requestor: (Mayor, Manager, or one Assembly Member) Description: Note: Per KIBC 2.30.050(C.3), this item shall be included on an agenda within 60 days. SECTION 2: REQUEST FOR STAFF ASSISTANCE DRAFTING Use this section to request that the Manager, Clerk, or Attorney prepare a proposed ordinance or resolution (KIBC 2.20.070(C.1)/2.30.100(G.1)). Requestor: ❑ Mayor OR ® Two or More Assembly Members �- Description: grnw n d oY i'tgat oy l o► n4 wat -e to -er� c-Ayp CCt-yov) I OcAyr1 Cl Yo 1,00 ►nnPv►n 1� YSg ` t o I'lo f h al l'r Iom Yti u✓�ot h'yVi Note: Per KIBC 2.30.050(C.4), staff -prepared items will be scheduled within 60 days of this request. Page 38 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.a. SECTION 3: REQUEST FOR LEGAL OPINION Use this section to request a written legal opinion from the Attorney regarding borough business (KIBC 2.20.070(C.2) / 2.30.100(G.2)). 1 Requestor: ❑ Mayor & 1 Assembly Member OR �— 1 Two or More Assembly Members Description: Note: Completed legal opinions will be distributed to all Assembly members by the Clerk. FOR STAFF USE ONLY • Received by Clerk's Office: Date: • Date Copy Provided to Manager: (Per KIBC 2.30.060(B)) • 60-Day Deadline for Agenda: Scheduled Meeting Date: Page 39 of 84 Discussion Of Survey Results Regarding Electronic Participation AGENDA ITEM #3.b. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Trip ORIGINATOR: Aimee Williams, Borough Manager RECOMMENDATION: Review and discuss federal legislative and community project priorities to direct the delegation during the upcoming joint Washington, D.C. lobbying trip. DISCUSSION: Mayor Griffin, Assembly member Whiteside, and Manager Willians along with the City delegation have finalized a joint federal lobbying trip to Washington, D.C., scheduled for the week of September 21, 2026. Formal meetings with federal agencies and congressional representatives are scheduled on September 23 and September 24. The trip was coordinated by the Borough's federal lobbying firm, Robertson, Monagle & Eastaugh, LLC. To maximize the trip's impact, the Assembly needs to establish a unified list of local projects and policy topics for the delegation to advocate for. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: Travel and lodging expenses for the Mayor and Assembly member Whiteside will be covered under the approved Assembly legislative travel budget. OTHER INFORMATION: For reference, attached are the Borough's and City of Kodiak's State and Federal CIP lists. Kodiak Island Borough Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr Page 40 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH VERSION 2 RESOLUTION NO. FY2026-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH IDENTIFYING FEDERAL PROJECT AND PROGRAM PRIORITIES FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEARS 2026 AND 2027 WHEREAS, the Alaska Congressional Delegation has requested the views of the Kodiak Island Borough on which Federal projects and programs should be considered priorities, in no particular order, for rural Alaskan communities and their residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough's views and recommendations on priority Federal programs and projects for FY2026 and FY2027 are as follows. These recommendations are submitted understanding that Congress has not yet enacted a number of important FY2026 appropriations bills that include Borough priorities and therefore are reiterated below. Community Project/Congressionally Directed Spending Requests: The Borough submits the following FY2026 and FY2027 Community Project Funding (CPF)/Congressionally Directed Spending (CDS) requests, consistent with guidance issued by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. • St Hermans Harbor Infrastructure Replacement: St. Hermans Harbor has been a vital harbor facility for Kodiak's large and diverse commercial fishing fleet for 40 years. The facility provides safe moorage for over 400 vessels from all over Alaska and the West Coast. Unfortunately, its float system is aged, decrepit, and starting to fail. The City applied for MARAD Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP) grant funding for Phase One of the float system replacement project and was awarded funding in 2024 in the amount of $11.2 million. Pending in the final FY2026 appropriations bill is $5 million in CPF for the project. We thank Senator Murkowski and Representative Begich for securing these funds. These CDS/CPF funds combined with the PIDP grant will enable significant progress in the rebuild and upgrade of St. Hermans Harbor. Given the cost of the full renovation of the Harbor, the Borough is supportive of additional CDS/CPF funding requests as well as Delegation support for any other grant applications submitted to DOT, MARAD, or other relevant Federal agencies. • Russian River Erosion Control Project: Over a number of years, the Russian River has experienced significant erosion due to flooding, shifts in and bifurcation of river channels, and increased sedimentation. This erosion in areas has reached the point where it is damaging and will further damage public and private property in the Bells Flats neighborhood in the Borough. This threat extends to homes, public and private land that borders the Russian River, and a public road which is the only road access into and out of the neighborhood. The Borough needs the Corps' expertise to develop both short and long-term solutions to mitigate this threat to this important and vital community on Kodiak Island. The Corps has informed us that this early study work would cost $200,000 through its Flood Plain Management Services Program. The Borough would like to resubmit a request for funding for this project in FY2027 as well as submit a project authorization Resolution No. FY2026-13 Version 2 Page 1 of 4 Page 41 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 expedited study request for the Water Resources Development Act which Congress is due to consider in 2026. 2. Broadband Service To Rural Areas: Establishing or improving broadband service to the Borough's rural communities has been a high Federal priority for us for many years. We support continued deployment of high-speed broadband to rural areas through NTIA's Tribal Broadband Program; USDA's Telecommunications Infrastructure Loan Program & Community Connect Grant Program; and the State Broadband Grants Program created by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. 3. Groundfish Surveys: Our Federal resolutions over the years have consistently called for maintenance of effort of Federal groundfish trawl surveys in Alaska. This maintenance of effort is needed as part of the Federal science and data -driven fishery management process to establish sustainable groundfish quotas. It has been supported by the Alaska Congressional Delegation for which we are appreciative. This baseline is for six surveys, one of which is dedicated to movement of fish out of historical survey areas. That funding/directive is included in the Senate's FY2026 appropriations bill funding NOAA. We respectfully request that six Alaska groundfish trawl surveys be continued and funded in the final FY2026 appropriations bill, and for the FY2027 funding cycle as well. 5. Russian Seafood Import Ban: The dumping of seafood products by Russia into the U.S. and international markets has driven down the price of Alaska seafood and hurt Alaska harvesters, processors, and fisheries -dependent communities like Kodiak. In March of 2023, the Biden Administration issued an Executive Order to ban direct Russian seafood imports into the U.S. as part of its sanctions for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Unfortunately, Russia succeeded in bypassing the sanctions by routing its seafood through reprocessing in and export from China to the U.S. To tighten this loophole, in the Biden Administration issued another Executive Order to further ban Russian imports even if it is processed and sold from another country. We thank the Delegation for pressing the Biden Administration to take action and for persuading the Trump Administration to keep the two Executive Orders in place. Rerouting of Russian seafood through or for sale in other countries, including Europe, remains a concern. We urge the Delegation to remain vigilant and encourage State Department and U.S. Trade Representative engagement with these countries. 6. Fisheries Disaster Relief: Congress provided $300 million in fisheries disaster relief funds earlier in this year but unfortunately the Department of Commerce has not approved any of the submitted fisheries disaster relief requests over the past year. This includes multiple disaster relief requests submitted by Governor Dunleavy for a number of Alaska's fisheries, including for Kodiak's 2024 pink salmon fishery disaster. Our pink salmon fishery that year experienced a 68 percent in value when compared to recent annual averages. We urge the Delegation to press the Department to expeditiously review and approve eligible requests so that fishermen and fishing business can be compensated for their losses, including to the Borough for any foregone raw fish tax losses. 7. North Pacific Observer Program: Observers are an important part of managing the halibut and groundfish fisheries in the Gulf of Alaska. Gulf of Alaska fishery participants pay into the Resolution No. FY2026-13 Version 2 Page 2 of 4 Page 42 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 North Pacific Observer Fund to cover the costs of "partial coverage" for Gulf fishing sectors but there has been a shortfall in funding to cover observer costs in recent years. The Senate Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Bill level funds the program for FY2026. We request that an additional $2 million in funding be provided in FY2027 above base funding along with carryover of language concerning the cost -burdens on the fixed -gear fleet. U.S. Coast Guard Base -- Kodiak: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes major investment in Coast Guard activities and programs totaling over $24 billion. This is the largest infusion of funding for the Coast Guard ever. These are additional funds on top of regular appropriations which are about $13.5 billion/year. The next step in the process is for the Coast Guard to develop a detailed spending plan of how, when, and where the funds will be allocated. We are already excited about prior Coast Guard decisions and funding to homeport two Offshore Patrol Cutters and two Fast Response Cutters along with supporting housing and shoreside infrastructure projects at USCG -Kodiak. The additional funding from the OBBBA provides the opportunity for potential homeporting of a future icebreaker in Kodiak. We urge the Delegation to support that possibility with the Coast Guard. The Borough is aware that the depth and hard rock bottom of Womens Bay could be impediments. If dredging to the proper depth there is not feasible, the Borough supports other locations for a possible icebreaker including an effort by the City to seek Army Corps of Engineers construction of a breakwater and future deep draft dock off Near Island. Defense Community Infrastructure: The Senate version of the FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDM) for the third straight year included a provision that would have included the Coast Guard in the Defense Community Infrastructure Program, thus making local infrastructure projects like renovating our elementary school eligible for DCIP funding; unfortunately, the provision was again dropped from the final bill due to opposition from the Armed Services Committees over use of DOD funding for projects from another Department. We thank Senator Sullivan for authoring and pressing for enactment of the provision and urge its resubmission for the FY2027 cycle. 10. Payment -In -Lieu -of -Taxes (PILT): PILT is a very important revenue source to the Borough, given that there are over 2.8 million acres removed by the Federal Government from local taxation within our boundaries. This is land that would otherwise be available to the private sector to develop, creating jobs for the residents of Kodiak and our rural Kodiak Island communities. PILT funds supplement Borough resources to provide basic social services, including medical facilities, emergency fire and rescue services, roads, and schools to our island communities. In FY 2025, the Borough's PILT payment was $1,924,386 - an all-time high. We thank the Delegation for its long-standing support for PILT and urge continued support for full funding in FY2026 and FY2027. 11. National Wildlife Refuge Fund ("Refuge Revenue Sharing"): While not as significant as PILT, the National Wildlife Refuge Fund is a critical source of replacement revenue to communities like ours that have the presence of a large Federal wildlife refuge within their boundaries. The Obama, Trump I & II and Biden Administrations have all sought to terminate appropriations for the Fund but thankfully Congress has rejected these requests, including level funding for the Fund in the pending FY2026 appropriations bills. The Kodiak Island Borough opposes the termination of appropriations for this important program from which it received $180,258 this year. The Borough thanks the Delegation for its on -going support and seeks continued level funding in FY2027. 12. Essential Air Service (EAS): The Borough's communities are highly reliant on the EAS program, its support to air carriers and its requirements for island community service that otherwise wouldn't exist or would be provided at much higher rates. The FY2026 President's Resolution No. FY2026-13 Version 2 Page 3 of 4 Page 43 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 Budget Request requested no appropriations for EAS. Fortunately, both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees rejected the request and include full funding for EAS in their respective appropriations bills; in fact, the Senate includes a 12 percent increase. The Delegation has strongly supported EAS funding and opposed an earlier proposal under consideration for the One Big Beautiful Bill that would have terminated its funding derived from overflight fees. Overflight fees account for approximately 40 percent of total EAS funding, with the remaining 60 percent coming from regular appropriations. We thank the AK Congressional Delegation for sustained support of EAS. The Borough wants to reiterate the need for that support for full funding in annual appropriations for the program in FY2026 and FY2027. 13. U.S. Military Arctic Presence: The Borough appreciates the Delegation's prolonged effort at urging and directing the Department of Defense to further examine the Arctic's strategic interest to the U.S. Russia and China continue to aggressively push their security interests in the region as evidenced in recent years by the joint convoys of their military vessels that entered the U.S. EEZ in the Bering Sea as well as aggressive Russian flight incursions into Alaska -area air space. As has been included in our past Resolutions, selection of Kodiak as a potential military base or staging area as the U.S. expands its security presence in the Arctic is a long-term goal for the Borough. We understand this is a multi -year effort, but the Borough urges that Kodiak stay under consideration with the Delegation and Department of Defense for future Arctic security investment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough administration is hereby instructed to advise Congress, and the appropriate agencies of the United States Federal Government of the Capital Improvement Program and other Federal program priorities adopted by the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ed Griffin, y VOTES: ATTEST: 16 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Bor gh Clerk Ayes: Woods, Ames, Gardner, Johson, Roberts, Smiley, and Whiteside Absent: None Resolution No. FY2026-13 Version 2 Page 4 of 4 Page 44 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 VERSION 2 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH RESOLUTION NO. FY2026-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ADOPTING A STATE LEGISLATIVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS PRIORITY LIST FOR THE 2026 LEGISLATIVE SESSION WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough represents approximately 12,570 residents of the Kodiak Island Archipelago living in six incorporated cities and one community governed by a tribal council government per the Alaska Department of Labor and Work Force Development; and WHEREAS, a Borough —wide capital improvement program is adopted annually by the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly with recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission which identifies major needs of the island community for the next five years; and WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly has reviewed the borough -wide capital improvement program adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission and identified major projects to submit to the Alaska Governor, State Legislative Delegation, and Federal Legislative Delegation for funding consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that: Section 1: The Kodiak Island Borough's State Legislative capital improvement project priorities (unranked) for the 2026 legislative session are as follows: 1. Kodiak Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Estimated Project Cost $1,900,000 Funding Acquired $100,000 Needed Funds $1,800,000 The City of Kodiak provides water and sewer services to the Kodiak Island Borough residences and businesses that are located adjacent to City of Kodiak boundaries. The City of Kodiak treatment plant operates under an Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) APDES permits. The first phase of a larger project to upgrade the City of Kodiak Wastewater Treatment Plant to evaluate the facility for immediate system's needs. The last major maintenance upgrades to the facility was in 1999. The condition and evaluation assessment included all major components within the plant interior and exterior, the outbuildings and three aeration basins; including all mechanical equipment needs. Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (APDES) permitting requirements were included during this assessment. Included in the facility rebuild assessment is the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system to interface with the 34 sewer lift station pumps and waste treatment at the facility. This facility, with its labyrinth of connecting sewer lines, directly Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 1 of 9 Page 45 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 serves 2667 City of Kodiak and Kodiak Borough households including commercial businesses. The treatment plant also serves the U.S. Kodiak Coast Guard Base and the Pacific Spaceport Complex indirectly with our certified laboratory testing and waste disposal; not to mention NOAA vessels, the Alaska Marine Highway vessels and the expanding cruise ship industry stopovers in our Kodiak Harbors. The Kodiak Island Borough supports the City of Kodiak request for Federal funding in the amount of $1.9M to begin design efforts leading to the construction of this critical infrastructure Wastewater Treatment Plant project that will support the wastewater needs of the community for the next twenty years. 2. City of Larsen Bay Reservoir Spill Way Estimated Project Cost $1,200,000 Funding Acquired $0 Needed Funds $1,200,000 The water reservoir spill way in the community of Larsen Bay is eroding and is nearing failure. This reservoir provides drinking water and hydroelectric power to the residents in the second- class city on Kodiak Island's west side. The Kodiak Island Borough supports the second-class City of Larsen Bay's request for funding assistance. 3. City of Port Lions Water Distribution System Replacement Estimated Project Cost $8,000,000 Funding Acquired $0 Needed Funds $8,000,000 The original water and sewer distribution system for our community was built after the 1964 Good Friday earthquake and tsunami forced the displaced residents of Afognak to relocate in what is now known as Port Lions. In 1964 a new system was installed. However, the contractor did not complete the job correctly. Many homes were not connected to the new system and many homes were connected incorrectly. The now connected system is considered aged out because it is over twenty-five (25) years old. The City of Port Lions Public Works crew constantly has a list of leaks and blockages to repair. In some places the system is beyond repair. We are consistently over budget for our water and sewer utility due to the unexpected expense of purchasing parts and paying our crew to repair and replace section of the distribution system. The outdated system drastically hinders community expansion efforts. The City of Port Lions are working closely with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) for replacement project to be included in their funding pipeline as soon as possible. Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 2 of 9 Page 46 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 ill 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 4. City of Larsen Bay: Water Distribution Lines Estimated Project Cost $7,000,000 The City of Larsen Bay has a problem of leaks in the distribution system. They have a loss of 40,000 gallons of water every 24 hours, 7 days a week. They have fixed all the leaks they could find. In the summer, they have a hard time keeping up with the water usage. 5. Karluk Water Storage Tank Estimated Project Cost $1,882,087 Funding Acquired $987,094 Needed Funds $223,000 The purchase sand contracted labor for the water storage tank itself was recently quoted to ANTHC at $223, 000. The rest of the project costs include the foundation construction, access road to the new tank, and the 1500 ft. transmission line. ANTHC has two active projects in Karluk to deal with their water treatment and distribution system. One project is to replace the water treatment plant, and the second project is to replace the water storage tank and construct and transmission line pipe from the new tank site back tot eh water plant. Both projects are planned to be constructed together to be as efficient as possible. We are requesting funding for the water tank as there is a funding shortfall. The water storage tank and transmission line project has completed engineering design and we are in construction preparation, however, the preparation has stalled because of a funding shortage. This project was funded for $987, 094, and we are seeking an additional $894, 993 to complete. The original funding division for this project is $924,390 from the Indian Health Service and $62, 704 from the Denali Commission, which covers the ineligible costs that the Indian Health Service cannot cover. There are a couple of things that should be noted about the water tank project: o We are not planning on using the water tank currently in Karluk as the configuration does not meet current requirements for seismic activity in the Kodiak Region. The high earthquake probability would potentially cause the crated tank currently in Karluk to get damaged and collapse if the water inside moved around. o The community has been in violation of the Surface Water Treatment Rule drinking standards since they were updated in 2005 because of the overall configuration of the water treatment plant and water storage tank. In 2005, a modular water treatment plant facility was constructed by a contract with Udelhoven Oilfield System, and the final modules are expected to be delivered to the Anchorage- based ANTHC storage facility in August. We are projecting a 2026 construction date for both elements of the water project, provided we can receive the required supplemental funding. I have issued a supplemental funding requires for the water treatment plant project to the State of Alaska Capital Improvements Program (CIP) through ADEC and am awaiting the response. Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 3 of 9 Page 47 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 6. Karluk Sewer Truck Estimated Project Cost $150,000 The tribe needs a reliable way to pump sewage. Starting at the beginning of July, we are having to manually pump the sewer every few days due to the ongoing issues with the generator and drawing too much power. The sewer pump cannot be on all the time automatically until the generator issue is resolved. Cost includes freight. 7. City of Port Lions Fire Station Insulation Estimated Project Cost $35,000 Funding Acquired $0 Needed Funds $35,000 The fire station in the second-class City of Port Lions is not insulated which necessitates that the fire truck be left empty of water during the winter months when temperatures drop below freezing and limits the time and ability to respond to a fire related emergency. The City of Port Lions requests funds for purchase and installation of building insulation materials. 8. City of Larsen Bay: Upgrade City Hall Estimated Project Cost $700,000 The City Hall building houses the Senior Center, Teen Center, Library, City Market, and City offices. The building was originally built in 1985 and need numerous repairs. The kitchen in the Senior Center is outdated, and cabinets are falling off. The entire building needs to be rewired, replace light switches, outlets, flooring, windows, and doors. The roof needs repairs and is unstable due to water damage. The inside and outside needs to be completely repainted. The restrooms need to be updated and redesigned. All new plumbing needs to be installed. 9. Kodiak Island Borough Fire and Rescue: Phase 1 Design and Engineering Re: Fire Station Renovation and Expansion FY26 Estimated Project Cost $312,000 The Fire Protection Area 1 has the following campus upgrade, expansion, & renovation plan for consideration under the CIP Plan by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The plan encompasses priority components of the Fire Department's Long-range Strategic plans. The primary focus is to ensure the continued robust response model of professionally trained emergency personnel, who are predominately paid on call stipend employees. The expansion and renovation encompass 2 main phases which may or may not occur concurrently. First is the addition of a 600 square foot structure on the western side of the existing apparatus bay to house the fitness center. Also in Phase 1 is the construction of a 3-story combination training and hose drying tower behind the fitness center addition. Phase 1 is completed by a renovation of the second -floor area now housing a combination lounge 1 bunk room and fitness center. This will allow for a kitchen, lounge, dorm style bunk rooms and a lavatory with locker and shower facilities. Phase Two will comprise renovation Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 4 of 9 Page 48 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 of the existing classroom area and existing kitchen and Chiefs Quarters. The request is for funding to facilitate the planning, permitting, and design phase of the renovation/construction project. The funding request has not changed from FY25 CIP application. 10. St. Herman Harbor Infrastructure Replacement (Phase 1) Needed Funds $10,000,000 St. Herman Harbor (SHH) was built by the State of Alaska in 1982 and has been a vital facility for Kodiak's large and diverse commercial fishing, logistics, and subsistence fleet for over 40 years. The State of Alaska turned over all state owned facilities in St. Herman Harbor to the City of Kodiak in 1999. The facility provides safe moorage for more than 400 vessels from local, other Alaskan communities and the West Coast. With the exception of a few minor upgrades over the years, and annual maintenance the original float system is beyond its useful life and is in need of replacement. The proposed project would result in the reconstruction of St. Herman Harbor with the replacement of most of its float system in two phases. Currently, the harbor has been losing use of multiple floats per year due to aging and the saltwater elements, and increased storm activity, both in frequency and severity. Any float loss results in 2 vessel berths along with the revenue generated for the harbor. This rate of failure has increased exponentially in recent years as the existing docks further deteriorate. The latest inspection report shows many portions of the facility are in very poor condition. The forty -year -old float systems suffer from failing pilings, broken concrete decking, rotting walers and bullrails, and an outdated electrical system. These floats contain non -compliant electrical pedestals, failed fire suppression lines, no blackwater services and inconsistent potable water availability. In 2022, the City contracted with PND Engineers, Inc. (PND) to prepare a St. Herman Harbor Planning and Scoping Report that includes concept harbor layouts, cost estimates and construction phasing recommendations. The harbor replacement is scheduled in two phases, with local, state, and federal funding to begin the project. Total estimated cost is at $73-99 million. In the fall of 2024, the City was awarded a $11,250,000 grant from MARAD's Port Infrastructure Development Program to be used for phase one of the project with a $2, 812, 500 (25%) project match coming from existing project funds and sales tax allocations from the City of Kodiak. Phase one will see construction of a new "O" float with critically needed large vessel (100-foot plus) berthing, and a drive down dock capability. Initially, this float will be used to provide necessary berthing to facilitate the rebuild. Phase one is estimated at between $23- 33 million. In 2023, Turnagain Marine Construction was awarded a competitive contract to complete preliminary design and environmental permitting for the harbor reconstruction and that is expected to be complete in early 2026, which positions the City to initiate a final design and engineering contract in 2nd quarter of 2026. Modernizing and expanding this critical Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 5 of 9 Page 49 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 marine infrastructure is essential to maintaining Kodiak's competitiveness as one of the nation's leading commercial fishing ports. These improvements directly align with the goals of the Executive Order on Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic Growth (Executive Order 13921), which directs federal agencies to streamline permitting, strengthen domestic seafood production, and support the economic vitality of U.S. fishing communities. With no alternative harbors in Alaska capable of accommodating vessels of this size, continued investment in St. Herman Harbor is vital to sustaining commercial, industrial, transportation, and maritime needs throughout the State of Alaska. Pending in FY 2026 appropriations is $5 million in Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate Transportation -Housing Urban Development Appropriations Bill for the St. Herman Harbor project. The funds would be used to fund additional design and construction costs for Phase 1. We would like to thank Senator Murkowski and Representative Begich for requesting the funds and the Alaska Congressional Delegation for its support for this project with the Dept. of Transportation and MARAD. The City of Kodiak is requesting that the $10 million in Congressionally Directed Spending be retained in the final FY 2026 appropriations bill, or if not rolled over into FY 2027. 11. City of Old Harbor Septic Tank Replacement Estimated Project Cost $100,000 Funding Acquired $0 Needed Funds $100,000 The Kodiak Island Borough supports the City of Old Harbor's request for funding to Install a sewer septic tank in downtown Old Harbor which is a second-class city within the Kodiak Island Borough. 12. Kodiak Community Health Center Expansion Estimated Total Project Cost $25,850,000 Funding acquired $8,317,901 Estimated Design Cost $1,200,000 Needed Funds $1,200,000 The Kodiak Community Health Center (KCHC) is currently housed within the Kodiak Island Borough owned hospital facility and co -located with Providence Kodiak Island Medical Center. KCHC is in need of increasing the clinic space and is planning an expansion project. Due to various changes in the community in the past five years, patient and provider counts have increased and pushed this organization to the maximum of their space limitations. Additionally, an increase in patient population is expected to coincide with a local US Coast Guard base increase in employees and their families in the next few years. Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 6 of 9 Page 50 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 With appropriate funding KCHC proposes to expand and improve the clinic space and continue to provide needed services in the Kodiak community. KCHC has acquired funding in the amount of $8.3 million toward this project, however design activities are not eligible within this funding. KCHC is seeking design funds in order to move forward with the project and will continue fund raising efforts for the balance needed. 13. Hospital Facility Sterilizer and Boiler Replacement Estimated Project Cost $10,000,000 Funding Acquired $0 Needed Funds $10,000,000 The Kodiak Island Borough owned hospital facility boilers and associated system components are aging along with the facility. The system components that been identified for major repair or replacement include the oil -fired boilers, chiller unit, reverse osmosis water system, steam generation equipment and sterilization equipment are in consideration. The oil -fired boilers provide the major hydronic heating component for several associated systems at the hospital facility. They include the production of facility heat, hot water and the hot water component for conversion to steam via a steam generator that is distributed to the sterilizers required for the hospital operations. The sterilizer equipment has been maintained at an operational level. Due to the age of the existing equipment, increased frequent failures associated with the steam generator and sterilization equipment has affected the operational capacity of the hospital to the point where operating room availability is managed at times with the functional capacity of the facility to ensure property sterilized equipment. All of the system components need to be evaluated for replacement timeframes as and of the individual component failures may lead to services being suspended at the hospital facility. 14. City of Larsen Bay Equipment Repairs and Maintenance Estimated Project Cost $157,000 The City of Larsen Bay's existing equipment are all needing major parts and pieces maintained and/or replaced. The City currently has a 1996 Caterpillar 12G Grader, a 2001 Caterpillar416 backhoe-loader4WD, and a 2001 Caterpillar D-4 Dozer. These pieces of equipment are vital to the Community for water lines, power lines, road repairs, and maintenance, and is needed to keep our city going. 15. Native Village of Karluk: Karluk Community Food Security Project Estimated Project Cost $139,444 The community of Karluk is requesting to construct two community greenhouses on land owned by the tribe. The project is clear and significant priority for Karluk as food is limited. Global warming is changing the ocean environment and impacting subsistence. Food is flown to the community by small plane that are often delayed by weather and the cost is prohibitively high and the food is mostly shelf stable, meaning highly processed and not the appropriate food for the tribe. Karluk does not have gasoline for sale so the cost of subsistence has Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 7 of 9 Page 51 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 become prohibitively high and harvesting subsistence fish and game by ATV or boat is nearly impossible. The Covid-19 pandemic emphasized the importance of food sovereignty for this remote community. During the pandemic, supply chains were interrupted and the price for many goods increased greatly. As remote as they are with high costs already, interruptions to supply chains and increased prices were nearly impossible for the village to handle. Because of this, they have renewed their efforts to grow fresh vegetables and fruits as they work to provide consistent and traditional food for the village. The proposed project is to purchase and construct two community greenhouses on land owned by the tribe. The proposed site is Karluk Subdivision Tract C, Plat Number 78-16. The tribe will be responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the greenhouses. The greenhouses will be constructed with guidance from the Alaska Energy Authority Biomass - Heated Greenhouses: A Handbook for Alaskan Schools and Community Organizations and the University of Alaska Fairbanks Master Gardener program; a Master Gardener assisted Karluk with the development of this proposal. The two greenhouses will be 25' x 48' x 12.5', made with heavy-duty galvanized steel frame and 10 mm double -wall polycarbonate panels, 2 doors and 2double-door gates (one on each end), and an arched design allows wind, snow and hail to slide off. The greenhouse will support a snow load of 480 kg/m (98 pso and is wind -resistant up to 24m/s for high stability. The greenhouse is an expandable design. The greenhouses will use a biomass boiler to heat the interior of the greenhouse each spring when they begin planting. This project will also include the purchase of shelving and supplies including soil, fertilizer, water equipment, pots and stakes. The cost of freight to Karluk from Wasilla and the cost to assemble the greenhouse is also included in the cost estimate. Greenhouses are priced $29,500 each and the boilers are priced at $8432 each. Shelving and supplies is estimated at $3,000. The total cost of materials is $78,864. Freight is estimated at 50% ($39,432) and a contingency is included of 15% to offset any increase in cost ($11,830). Total material cost is estimated at $130,126. The cost of assembling the greenhouse is estimated at 80 hours for three laborers at $35 per hour ($8,400) plus fringe at 10.93% ($918). The total project cost is $139,444. The greenhouse will provide access to fresh healthy food which is at this time either unavailable or prohibitively expensive and will improve the quality of life for all the residents of Karluk. 16. Service Area Roads Improvements and Paving Estimated Project Cost $6,000,000 Local Funds $1,200,000 Needed Funds $4,800,000 This project addresses the on -going need to improve portions of the roads in the Kodiak Island Borough's Road service areas: Service Area No. 1, Womens Bay Service Area, Bay View Road Service Area, and Monashka Bay Road Service Area. These roads connect residential neighborhoods with the greater Kodiak community. Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 8 of 9 Page 52 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 Paving projects will address main thoroughfares or busy neighborhood roads. Improvements to major drainage courses, installation of guard rails, and other identified road improvement needs may also be addressed with this funding. Priorities for expenditure of these funds are determined by the road service area boards. Local contributions to road improvements may be funded through local improvement districts where those in the district are taxed a proportion of the project cost. 17. Women's Bay Service District: South Russian Creek Road Repaving Estimated Project Cost $1,842,301.30 The roadway was originally paved circa 1985 using mostly federal financing under the Intermodal Service Transportation Efficiency Act. Since that time the roadway has been maintained by the Womens Bay Service District with taxes collected from the residents for that purpose. The Service District mill rate is currently 2.5 mils which is the highest of all service districts. The current budget has barely been sufficient to keep roads cleared of snow and ice and also maintain the 12 miles of road in the district. Over the years the maintenance for the South Russian Creek Road paved area has increased as the asphalt has deteriorated and at this time maintenance attempts are becoming futile and exponentially more expensive. The estimate from Brechan Construction, LLC to repave the roadway is $1,842,301.30. If the road is repaved, it would reduce the overall maintenance costs and allow the service district to re -allocate money to other needed projects. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH r ed Griffin, y VOTES: ATTEST: 16 Ur l ' Qa�� Nova M. Javier, MMC, Bor gh Clerk Ayes: Whiteside, Woods, Ames, Gardner, Johnson, Roberts, and Smiley Absent: None Resolution No. FY2026-12 Version 2 Page 9 of 9 Page 53 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. CITY OF KODIAK RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KODIAK ADOPTING THE FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2027 SUPPORTED FEDERAL ISSUES LIST AND FISCAL YEAR 2027 FEDERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT LIST WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak uses a Capital Improvements Program planning process to identify the capital needs of the community; and WHEREAS, this identification and planning process plays a vital role in directing the City's administration and is utilized as a long-range planning and policy setting tool for City infrastructure maintenance and enhancement; and WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak is committed to paying its way, to the greatest extent possible, but the cost of some of the City's capital project needs are greater than resources available locally; and WHEREAS, Kodiak City Council has identified capital project needs for submission to the Alaska Congressional Delegation for funding consideration due to their significance and/or magnitude; and WHEREAS, changes may be required as to how capital funding contributions for smaller communities like Kodiak. Alaska can be made at the Federal level; and WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak faces several issues generated by Federal legislation or rulemaking that are of importance to the City of Kodiak, Alaska, and which may adversely impact life in Kodiak by placing undue burdens on those who work and live in the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the COLIncil of the City of Kodiak, Alaska, that the following projects and issues are high priorities for the community and are hereby adopted as the City of Kodiak Federal Fiscal Year 2027 supported federal issues list and Federal Fiscal Year 2027 prioritized federal capital projects list: FFY 2027 Citv of Kodiak Prioritized Federal Capital Projects List 1. St. Herman Harbor Infrastructure Replacement. (Phase 1) $10,000,000 St. Herman Harbor (SHH) was built by the State of Alaska in 1982 and has been a vital facility for Kodiak's large and diverse commercial fishing, logistics, and subsistence Fleet for over 40 years. Tile State of Alaska turned over all state owned facilities in St. Herman Harbor to the City of Kodiak in 1999. The facility provides safe moorage for more than 400 vessels from local, other Alaskan communities and the West Coast. With the exception of a few minor upgrades over the years, and annual maintenance the original float system is beyond its useful life and is in need of replacement. Resolution No. 2026-05 Page l of 5 Page 54 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. The proposed project would result in the reconstruction of St. Herman Harbor with the replacement of most of its float system in two phases. Currently, the harbor has been losing use of multiple floats per year due to aging and the saltwater elements, and increased storm activity, both in frequency and severity. Any float loss results in 2 vessel berths along with the revenue generated for the harbor. This rate of failure has increased exponentially in recent years as the existing docks further deteriorate. The latest inspection report shows many portions of the facility are in very poor condition. The forty - year old float systems suffer from failing pilings, broken concrete decking, rotting walers and bullrails, and an outdated electrical system. These floats contain non -compliant electrical pedestals, failed fire suppression lines, no blackwater services and inconsistent potable water availability. In 2022, the City contracted with PND Engineers, Inc. (PND) to prepare a St. Herman Harbor Planning and Scoping Report that includes concept harbor layouts, cost estimates and construction phasing recommendations. The harbor replacement is scheduled in two phases, with local, state, and federal funding to begin the project. Total estimated cost is at $73-99 million. In the fall of 2024, the City was awarded a $11,250,000 grant from MARAD's Port Infrastructure Development Program to be used for phase one of the project with a $2,812,500 (25%) project match coming from existing project funds and sales tax allocations from the City of Kodiak. Phase one will see construction of a new "O" float with critically needed large vessel (100-foot plus) berthing, and a drive down dock capability. Initially, this float will be used to provide necessary berthing to facilitate the rebuild. Phase one is estimated at between $23-33 million. In 2023, Turnagain Marine Construction was awarded a competitive contract to complete preliminary design and environmental permitting for the harbor reconstruction and that is expected to be complete in early 2026, which positions the City to initiate a final design and engineering contract in 2"d quarter of 2026. Modernizing and expanding this critical marine infrastructure is essential to maintaining Kodiak's competitiveness as one of the nation's leading commercial fishing ports. These improvements directly align with the goals of the Executive Order on Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic Growth (Executive Order 13921), which directs federal agencies to streamline permitting, strengthen domestic seafood production, and support the economic vitality of U.S. fishing communities. Pending in FY 2026 appropriations is $5 million in Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate Transportation -Housing Urban Development Appropriations Bill for the St. Herman Harbor project. The funds would be used to fund additional design and construction costs for Phase 1. We would like to thank Senator Murkowski and Representative Begich for requesting the funds and the Alaska Congressional Delegation for its support for this project with the Dept. of Transportation and MARAD. The Citv of Kodiak is requesting that the $10 million in Congressionally Directed Spending be retained in the final FY 2026 appropriations bill, or if not rolled over into FY 2027. Resolution No. 2026-05 Page 2 of 5 Page 55 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. 2. Water & Sewer Replacement —Aleutian Homes Hemlock Street $5,800,000 This project will replace approximately 2,100 feet (approximately 74 homes) of 50 to 70 year -old asbestos cement lined sewer main, service lines and manholes and 2,600 feet of cement lined ductile iron pipe water lines, service lines and appurtenances with C900 PVC pipe in the Aleutian Homes subdivision. Over the past 20 years, the City has been slowly replacing and updating utility infrastructure within the Aleutian Homes. The design phase of the project is nearly 65% complete. The City is seeking state loans through the Clean Water and Drinking Water Revolving Fund Program to complete construction. The City requests Federal support for the Water & SeNN er Replacement project. 3. Waste Water Treatment Plant Facility $1,900,000 The City of Kodiak Treatment Plant operates under an Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) APDES permit. The first phase of a larger project to upgrade the City of Kodiak Waste Water Treatment Plant was to evaluate the facility for immediate system needs. The last major maintenance upgrade to the facility was in 1999. The condition and evaluation assessment included all major components within the plant interior and exterior, the out -buildings and three aeration basins; including all mechanical equipment needs. Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (APDES) permitting requirements were included during this assessment. Included in the facility rebuild assessment is the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system to interface with the 34 sewer lift station pumps and waste treatment at the facility. This facility with its labyrinth of connecting sewer lines, directly serves 2667 City of Kodiak and Kodiak Borough households including commercial businesses. The Treatment Plant also serves the U.S. Kodiak Coast Guard Base and the Pacific Spaceport Com-plex indirectly with our certified laboratory testing and waste disposal; not to mention NOAA vessels, the Alaska Marine Highway vessels and the expanding cruise ship industry stopovers in our Kodiak Harbors. The City of Kodiak is requesting Federal funding in the amount of $1,900,000 to begin design efforts leading to the construction of this critical infrastructure Waste Water Treatment Plant proiect that will support the wastewater needs of the communih, for the next twenty vears. 4. Transportation Infrastructure Project Kodiak Short Trail Project (Phase 1) $2,500,000 The City of Kodiak is partnering with Island Trails Network to plan and design the Kodiak Short Trail Project (KST). The KST project will be a 12-mile, non -motorized, active transportation connection between the City, USCG Base and Housing, and the Bells Flats community. Presently the only way for people to move between these points Resolution No. 2026-05 Page 3 of 5 Page 56 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. is along the state highway. This carries significant risk �� i[h narro%\ shoulders tilled x\ ith debris and posted speeds of 55 mph. We are seeking funds to provide essential engineering, design, ROW partnerships, utilities, identify environmental issues, and encourage public engagement. The AK DOT &PF have developed a Schedule, Scope and Estimate for the entire project to be $28 million dollars: $2.5 for engineering and design and $25.5 million for construction. To date, this project has received funding in the amount of $453,378 in Federal ($170,000), City ($251,378), and private donations ($32,000). The City requests Federal financial assistance in the amount of $2,500.000 for engineering and design of the Kodiak Short Trail Project. FY 2027 Citv of Kodiak Supported Federal Issues: • Authorization & appropriation for a cost share General Investigation Study with the USACE for future development of a deep -water turning basin and additional pier space in the Kodiak vicinity. Attached is a white paper describing the critical need for the study. • Defense Community Infrastructure Program for USCG communities, or creation of stand-alone Community Infrastructure Program within the USCG. Attached is a white paper describing the benefits that a new program could support in the future. • Commercial Fishing Support in Farm Bill Reauthorization: Changes in global market and prices, combined with periodic and increasingly frequent fisheries disasters and resulting loss of fishing opportunities, has brought growing economic instability in Kodiak's seafood industry. We understand the current Farm Bill has been extended for one year while a multi -year reauthorization bill will be considered again this year. We applaud our Congressional Delegation for continuing to look at ways that our "fish farmers" can received similar support as their land -based counterparts. We think a price or revenue support program that is based on what some agricultural commodities participate in might work for certain sectors of the seafood industry and is worth considering. Attached is a separate paper on how such a concept might apply. Resolution No. 2026-05 Page 4 of 5 Page 57 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. CITY OF KODIAK MAYOR ATTEST: iC TY CLERI Adopted: Februan- 12, 2026 Resolution No. 2026-05 Page 5 of 5 Page 58 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. CITY OF KODIAK RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KODIAK ADOPTING THE STATE SUPPORTED ISSUES LIST AND FISCAL YEAR 2027 STATE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT LIST WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak uses a Capital Improvements Program planning process to identify the capital improvement project needs of the community; and WHEREAS, this identification and planning process plays a vital role in directing the City's administration and is utilized as a long-range planning and policy -setting tool for City infrastructure maintenance and enhancement; and WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak is committed to paying its way to the greatest extent possible, but the cost of some of the City's capital project needs are greater than the resources available locally; and WHEREAS, the Kodiak City Council has identified and prioritized capital improvement projects for submission to the Alaska State Legislature and Governor for funding consideration due to their significance and/or magnitude; and WHEREAS, the City of Kodiak relies upon the State of Alaska's legislative and matching grant programs and the Community Assistance Program to continue to keep its economy strong. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Kodiak, Alaska, that the following infrastructure replacement/improvement projects and issues are considered of primary importance and are hereby adopted as the City of Kodiak's FY2027 State capital improvement project and issues list: FY 2027 Citv of Kodiak Prioritized State Capital Project List 1. St. Herman Harbor Infrastructure Replacement. (Phase I) $10,000,000 St. Herman Harbor (SHH) was built by the State of Alaska in 1982 and has been a vital facility for Kodiak's large and diverse commercial fishing, logistics, and subsistence fleet for over 40 years. The State of Alaska turned over all state owned facilities in St. Herman Harbor to the City of Kodiak in 1999. The facility provides safe moorage for more than 400 vessels from local, other Alaskan communities and the West Coast. With the exception of a few minor upgrades over the years, and annual maintenance the original float system is beyond its useful life and is in need of replacement. The proposed project would result in the reconstruction of St. Herman Harbor with the replacement of most of its float system in two phases. Currently, the harbor has been losing use of multiple floats per year due to aging and the saltwater elements, and increased storm activity, both in frequency and severity. Any float loss results in 2 vessel berths along with the revenue Resolution No. 2026-04 Pagel of 5 Page 59 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. generated for the harbor. This rate of failure has increased exponentially in recent years as the existing docks further deteriorate. The latest inspection report shows many portions of the facility are in very poor condition. The forty -year old float systems suffer from failing pilings, broken concrete decking, rotting walers and bullrails, and an outdated electrical system. These floats contain non -compliant electrical pedestals, failed fire suppression lines, no blackwater services and inconsistent potable water availability. In 2022, the City contracted with PND Engineers, Inc. (PND) to prepare a St. Herman Harbor Planning and Scoping Report that includes concept harbor layouts, cost estimates and construction phasing recommendations. The harbor replacement is scheduled in two phases, with local, state, and federal funding to begin the project. Total estimated cost is at $73-99 million. In the fall of 2024, the City was awarded a $11,250,000 grant from MARAD's Port Infrastructure Development Program to be used for phase one of the project with a $2,812,500 (25%) project match coming from existing project funds and sales tax allocations from the City of Kodiak. Phase one will see construction of a new "O" float with critically needed large vessel (100-foot plus) berthing, and a drive down dock capability. Initially, this float will be used to provide necessary berthing to facilitate the rebuild. Phase one is estimated at between $23-33 million. In 2023, Tumagain Marine Construction was awarded a competitive contract to complete preliminary design and environmental permitting for the harbor reconstruction and that is expected to be complete in early 2026, which positions the City to initiate a final design and engineering contract in 2nd quarter of 2026. Modernizing and expanding this critical marine infrastructure is essential to maintaining Kodiak's competitiveness as one of the nation's leading commercial fishing ports. These improvements directly align with the goals of the Executive Order on Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic Growth (Executive Order 13921), which directs federal agencies to streamline permitting, strengthen domestic seafood production, and support the economic vitality of U.S. fishing communities. Pending in FY 2026 appropriations is $5 million in Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate Transportation -Housing Urban Development Appropriations Bill for the St. Herman Harbor project. The funds would be used to fund additional design and construction costs for Phase 1. We would like to thank Senator Murkowski and Representative Begich for requesting the funds and the Alaska Congressional Delegation for its support for this project with the Dept. of Transportation and MARAD. The City of Kodiak is requesting that the $10 million in Congressionally Directed Spending be retained in the final FY 2026 appropriations bill, or if not rolled over into FY 2027. 2. Water and Sewer Replacement — Aleutian Homes Hemlock St. $5,800,000 This project will replace approximately 2,100 feet (approximately 74 homes) of 50 to 70 year - old asbestos cement lined sewer main, service lines and manholes and 2,600 feet of cement lined ductile iron pipe water lines, service lines and appurtenances with C900 PVC pipe in the Aleutian Homes subdivision. Over the past 20 years, the City has been slowly replacing and updating utility infrastructure within the Aleutian Homes. The design phase of the project is Resolution No. 2026-04 Page 2 of 5 Page 60 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. nearly 65% complete. The City is seeking state loans through the Clean Water and Drinking Water Revolving Fund Program to complete construction. 3. Weather Proofing the Kodiak Police Department $1,250,000 The Kodiak Police Station was built in 2009. Kalwall Fiberglass Sandwich panels were used around the roof mezzanine to let in light above the administration and jail portions of the building. Over the years, the installation of these panels has failed, causing water damage in walls and electrical fixtures above these areas. This project would remove the fiberglass sandwich panels and replace with standard wall construction and non -opening windows to maintain light but provide a more reliable structural system. Existing wall components would be repaired as well as any light fixtures or other damaged features. 4. Transportation Infrastructure Projects Kodiak Short Trail Project (Please 1) $2,500,000 The City of Kodiak is partnering with Island Trails Network to plan and design the Kodiak Short Trail Project (KST). The KST project will be a 12-mile, non -motorized, active transportation connection between the City, USCG Base and Housing, and the Bells Flats community. Presently the only way for people to move between these points is along the state highway. This carries significant risk with narrow shoulders filled with debris and posted speeds of 55 mph. We are seeking funds to provide essential engineering, design, ROW partnerships, utilities, identify environmental issues, and encourage public engagement. The AK DOT &PF have developed a Schedule, Scope and Estimate for the entire project to be $28 million dollars: $2.5 for engineering and design and $25.5 million for construction. To date, this project has received funding in the amount of $453,378 in Federal ($170,000), City ($251,378), and private donations ($32,000). The City requests State financial assistance in the amount of $2,500,000 for engineering and design of the Kodiak Short Trail Proiect. 5. Russian American Magazin (RAM) Roof Replacement $950,000 The City of Kodiak is seeking a Legislative Grant in the amount of $950,000 for improvements to the oldest building in Alaska. The City owns the Russian American Magazin (RAM), a National Historic Landmark building and the home to the Kodiak History Museum since 1967. Not only is the RAM the oldest in Alaska, it is the oldest documented log structure on the west coast of North America and the earliest built Russian structure in the United States. In March 2022, in partnership with the City, National Park Service and the Kodiak History Museum, a Historic Structure Report (HSR) of the RAM was completed and it addresses management goals for rehabilitation and care of the site. The purpose of the report was to document building development, evaluate current conditions and provide treatments for rehabilitation based on anticipated uses. Resolution No. 2026-04 Page 3 of 5 Page 61 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. One of the top priorities identified in the HSR included drainage improvements and a re- roofing project. During the development of the HSR, a grant was awarded to fund 35% of the roofing replacement design. The City of Kodiak appropriated $75,000 in the FY 2024 budget and 100% design documents were received in December 2023. In Summer 2025, the City completed a site grading and drainage improvements project to eliminate water infiltration around the perimeter of the building and in advance of the re- roofing project. The goal of the project was to ensure the new roof will not be impacted by a deteriorating foundation or any efforts to replace the foundation. To date, the City will have contributed approximately $300,000 with general operating funds to design the roof replacement and site drainage improvements. The Citv of Kodiak requests State financial assistance in the amount of $950,000 for the Russian American Maaazin roof replacement project. FY 2027 City of Kodiak Supported State Issues: Support continued investment in Port and Harbors. 2. Support for legislative change to AS O4.11.405-Petitioning for additional Restaurant/Eating Place Licenses (REPLs) for certain local governing bodies and eligibility requirements. As written, the City of Kodiak and the Kodiak Island Borough do not meet the criteria because neither maintains both a local law enforcement department and exercises planning or land -use authority. These powers are split between the two entities. A legislative change would expand economic development opportunities through additional REPLs. 3. Opposition to HB 284 — Tax Compact; Sales Tax; Oil & Gas Tax 4. Support for legislative change to AS 29.35.131- 911 Surcharge to increase the $2.00 per month to provide sufficient funding necessary to operate and maintain the City's 911 system. 5. Support Water and Wastewater State Revolving Fund Program and Loan Forgiveness. 6. Support for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Rural Professional Housing Grant Program to provide funding to help recruit and retain essential Public Safety professionals in Kodiak. Resolution No. 2026-04 Page 4 of 5 Page 62 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3.b. CITY OF KODIAK MAYOR ATTEST: C Y CLERK Adopted: February 12.2026 Resolution No. 2026-04 Page 5 of 5 Page 63 of 84 Discussion Of Lobbying Priorities For September 2026 Washington, D.C. Tr... AGENDA ITEM #3. c. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discussion Of Assembly Committee Assignment Workloads ORIGINATOR: Jared Griffin, Mayor RECOMMENDATION: Review committee assignments and discuss a new plan to balance the workload among Assembly members. DISCUSSION: Every year, the Mayor assigns Assembly members to various local boards and committees. In the past, these seats were filled using a basic ranking sheet where members picked their preferred boards and committees. Mayor Griffin wants to try a different approach for the upcoming year. Instead of just using a favorite -choice list, the Mayor wants to group committees by how much time and effort they actually take. Seats will then be handed out evenly, so no single Assembly member is overwhelmed with extra duties. This work session is to have a discussion about this new workload -based approach and get the Assembly members feedback before final choices are made in November. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: KIBC 2100.030 Appointments. Members of boards, committees, and commissions, except for members of the board of adjustment, members of the board of equalization, and elected service area board members, are appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the assembly unless otherwise specifically provided elsewhere in this code. An appointment not confirmed by the assembly shall not become effective. The mayor shall appoint a new applicant until an appointment is confirmed by the assembly. The mayor may not appoint again the same person whose confirmation was failed by the assembly for the same board, committee, or commission until the next annual appointment process unless authorized by the assembly. Kodiak Island Borough Page 64 of 84 Discussion Of Assembly Committee Assignment Workloads AGENDA ITEM #3. c. AMENDED, CONFIRMED The Mayoral Appointments Of Assembly Member Representatives To Different Boards And Committees As Follows: Architectural Review Board Assembly Member Ames Borough Lands Committee Assembly Member Johnson Member Whiteside -Assembly Joint Building Code Review Committee Member Gardner -Assembly Kodiak College Council Assembly Member Roberts Kodiak Fisheries Work Group Assembly Member Smiley Assembly Member Woods Assembly Member Whiteside Alternate Kodiak Fisheries Advisory Committee Assembly Member Johnson Parks and Recreation Committee Assembly Member Woods Providence Health System Service Area Assembly Member Gardner School District Budget Advisory Committee Assembly Member Woods School District Facilities Review Committee Assembly Member Ames School District Strategic Planning Committee Assembly Member Roberts Solid Waste Advisory Board Assembly Member Gardner Health Facilities Advisory Board Assembly Member Smiley Assembly Member Johnson Assembly Member Roberts Solid Waste Contract Committee Assembly Member Whiteside Assembly Member Ames Assembl Member Smile ACCEPTED With Regret, The Resignation Of Mr. Craig Dagen, DECLARED The Seat Vacant On The Fire Protection Area No.1 Board Effective October 4, 2025, And DIRECTED The Borough Clerk To Advertise The Vacancy Per Borough Code AUTHORIZED The Borough Manager To Reimburse Providence Kodiak Island Medical Center For The Permitting, Construction, Installation, And Closeout Of Distribution Panel 6 (DP6) Replacement/Expansion In The Amount Of $121,000 CONVENED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION To Discuss The Evaluation And Scores Of The Legal Counsel Applicants, A Matter Which Might Include A Discussion That Could Potentially Prejudice The Reputation And Character Of The Applicants. INVITED The Borough Mayor, Assembly, Borough Manager, And The Clerk Into Executive Session; And ANNOUNCED That Direction Was Given To The Manager To Enter Into A Contract Negotiation With Landye Bennett Blumstein LLP View our website: Visit our Facebook page: www.kodiakak.us www.facebook.com/KodiaklslandBorough Page 65 of 84 Discussion Of Assembly Committee Assignment Workloads AGENDA ITEM #3. d. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest Alaska Regional Planning Organization (RPO) Board of Directors ORIGINATOR: Jared Griffin, Mayor RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the placement of the appointment on a future regular meeting agenda. DISCUSSION: On March 5, 2026, the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) passed Resolution 2026-03-01 supporting its official designation as a Regional Planning Organization (RPO). This designation was established in formal partnership with the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The primary mission of this newly structured RPO board is to provide direct policy guidance, identify critical regional transportation priorities, and strengthen local communication directly with the State of Alaska. Given the Kodiak Island Borough's reliance on marine and aviation transportation systems, maintaining an active voting seat on this board is vital to aligning our local infrastructure projects with statewide funding opportunities. Initial board members will serve staggered terms of approximately one (1) to three (3) years and will be required to participate in, at minimum, quarterly virtual meetings. Per the RPO bylaws and eligibility criteria, the seat must be filled by an elected official or key municipal staff member from within the SWAMC boundary. This agenda item is to discuss the possible appointment of an Assembly Member to fill this vacancy and represent the interests of the Kodiak Island Borough. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Attached: SWAMC Notice of Interest for RPO Board Seats SWAMC Resolution 2026-03-01 Kodiak Island Borough Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest A Page 66 of 84 AGENDA ITEM #3. d. Page 67 of 84 Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest A... AGENDA ITEM #3, d. SWAMC SOUTHWEST ALASKA MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE Notice of Interest for Regional Planning Organization Board Seat The Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) seeks interested and qualified individuals to serve on the board of the Southwest Alaska Regional Planning Organization (RPO). In partnership with the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), SWAMC is working to formalize recognition as the RPO for the region. SWAMC works to strengthen regional collaboration, planning, and economic development across Southwest Alaska. We have been engaged in regional transportation planning, advocacy, and project development for nearly 40 years. In March, the SWAMC membership passed Resolution 2026-03-xx seeking recognition for the organization as the region's RPO.Read the full text here. About the RPO Board A key component of the RPO is a governing board that provides policy direction and serves in an advisory role for the RPO's activities, priorities, and long-term goals. SWAMC is seeking individuals to be considered for service on the RPO Board. Initial board members will serve staggered terms of approximately 1-3 years and will be expected to participate in, at minimum, quarterly meetings (generally held virtually). You can read more about the RPO Program on the DOT&PF web page. Ellgibi0ty Eligible individuals include: • Elected officials representing local governments or Tribal entities within the SWAMC region • Staff of local or Tribal governments whose work relates to transportation infrastructure or services (e.g., city managers, planners, public works staff, port or harbor directors, etc. • Private sector representatives involved in transportation -related businesses that are based in, or provide significant service to, communities within the SWAMC region (e.g., marine transport, aviation, freight, construction, or infrastructure services) Call for Partlelpatlon If you are interested in serving and contributing to the development of this important regional program, we encourage you to respond to the questions below and submit your notice of interest. 1. Name First name Last name Source: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KSDYY2P Page 68 of 84 Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest A... AGENDA ITEM #3, d. S WA M C 721 Sesame Street 907.562.7380 Suite 1A director@swamcorg SOUTHWEST ALASKA MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE Anchorage, Alaska99503 swamc.org RESOLUTION 2026-03-01 Supporting the Designation of the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference as a Regional Planning Organization by the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities WHEREAS, the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) is a voluntary association of municipalities, Tribal entities, and regional stakeholders dedicated to advancing economic development, infrastructure coordination, and regional collaboration in Southwest Alaska; and WHEREAS, Southwest Alaska encompasses a vast and geographically dispersed region characterized by limited road connectivity, reliance on marine and air transportation, high infrastructure costs, and unique logistical and environmental challenges; and WHEREAS, effective regional transportation planning requires coordinated engagement among municipalities, Tribal governments, state agencies, federal partners, industry, and community stakeholders; and WHEREAS, Regional Planning Organizations (RPOs) serve an important role in facilitating public participation, identifying transportation priorities, coordinating regional project development, and strengthening communication between local governments and the State of Alaska; and WHEREAS, designation as a Regional Planning Organization by the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) would enhance SWAMC's ability to support long-range transportation planning, improve safety and mobility, align regional priorities with statewide plans, and increase competitiveness for state and federal infrastructure funding; and WHEREAS, SWAMC has demonstrated capacity to convene diverse stakeholders, conduct regional planning initiatives, support data -driven decision -making, and advance transportation and infrastructure priorities that reflect the needs of Southwest Alaska communities; and WHEREAS, formal RPO designation would provide a structured framework for collaboration with DOT&PF and strengthen the voice of Southwest Alaska communities in statewide transportation planning processes. -more- Page 69 of 84 Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest A... AGENDA ITEM #3, d. Resolution 2026-03-01Jw _ SWAMC designation as an RPO S SWAMC NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference supports and affirms its designation as a Regional Planning Organization for Southwest Alaska by the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities; and 2. That SWAMC commits to fulfilling the responsibilities of a Regional Planning Organization, including facilitating regional coordination, promoting meaningful public engagement, identifying transportation priorities, and supporting development of regional transportation plans consistent with state and federal requirements; and 3. That SWAMC will work collaboratively with DOT&PF, member municipalities, Tribal governments, industry representatives, and community stakeholders to ensure transportation planning reflects regional needs and enhances safety, connectivity, and economic opportunity; and 4. That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities; Governor Mike Dunleavy; the Alaska State Legislature; and SWAMC member municipalities and partners. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the members of the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference this Fifth day of March 2026. SOUTHWEST ALASKA MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE Signed: wz�x x Mayor Alice Ruby, President SWAMC Board of Directors Bristol Bay Municipal Seat City of Dillingham Attest: -Z Wenetta Ayers Executive Director Page 70 of 84 Discuss The Mayor's Appointment Of An Assembly Member To The Southwest A... AGENDA ITEM #3. e. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discussion On Authorization For The Mayor To Join The Mayors Alliance To End Childhood Hunger On Behalf Of The Kodiak Island Borough ORIGINATOR: Jared Griffin, Mayor RECOMMENDATION: Assembly review of the alliance framework and possible direction for a formal authorization on a future regular meeting agenda. DISCUSSION: The Mayors Alliance to End Childhood Hunger leverages the individual and collective leadership of local leaders to take meaningful action against childhood food insecurity nationwide. This nonpartisan coalition of mayoral champions works in partnership with Share Our Strength's "No Kid Hungry" campaign to amplify local voices at the state and national levels, ensuring every child has access to the nutritious food required to thrive. Currently, 643 mayors across the United States have committed to the Alliance, including the mayors of the City and Borough of Juneau and the City of Wasilla. Additional information regarding the coalition's mission and initiatives can be found at mayorshungeralliance.org. Additional information is available on https://mayorshungeralliance.org/. About Childhood Hunger in Alaska ALTERNATIVES: Place the authorization for membership on the next regular meeting agenda. Decline to join the Mayors Alliance to End Childhood Hunger at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Kodiak Island Borough Discussion On Authorization For The Mayor To Join The Mayors Alliance To... Page 71 of 84 SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 ELECTIONS UPDATE • Write-in Candidacy Filings: The filing period remains open for individuals wishing to submit write-in candidacy filings. The deadline to submit is 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 22. • Election Pamphlets: Election pamphlets were mailed today from Anchorage, fulfilling the timeline required by code. Voters should receive them within the next few days. Printed copies are currently available at the Clerk's Office and will be distributed to various local stores and canneries across Kodiak. The pamphlet is also accessible online and has been posted to the Borough's Facebook page in both English and Filipino. • By -Mail Ballots: By -mail ballots will be sent to registered voters in Chiniak and outlying communities next week. Residents who do not receive their ballots in the mail may vote early or contact the Clerk's Office to request a replacement ballot. • Absentee Ballots: Absentee by -mail ballots were mailed out yesterday. • Precinct Worker Training: Election training for City precinct workers is scheduled for Monday, September 14, followed by Borough precinct worker training on Friday, September 18. Thank you to everyone who volunteered. • Early Voting Location and Hours: Early voting will take place in the Assembly Chambers from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., starting Monday, September 21 and closing Monday, October 5. • Candidate's Forum: Irene assisted with the Candidate's Forum this past Tuesday. • Logic and Accuracy Test (LAT): The Logic and Accuracy Test (LAT) for our voting machines began today and will resume tomorrow for the City Precincts. This process includes testing memory cards against pre -marked test ballots. At the conclusion of each test, we will verify that the tabulator's printed results match the expected outcomes of the pre -marked ballots. Additionally, we are ensuring that reject codes function properly for overvotes and blank votes, and that the machines correctly separate ballots with write-in candidates. LICENSES • Marijuana Licenses: Two marijuana license renewals are currently pending: one for Wildflower and another for Wildflower's Smoky Hollow. The Borough will voice a non -protest against both applications. • Beverage Dispensary License (BDL): A Beverage Dispensary License renewal is pending for the B&B Bar, with a response deadline of November 8. RECORDS UPDATE • Fiscal Year -End Archiving: Departments are actively archiving records from their offices in the records center. The Finance Department plans to transfer its records next month following the completion of the current audit. Records Destruction: Staff members collaborated with the Borough Attorney to execute this year's destruction process. Page 1 of 6 Page 72 of 84 • Legal File Management: Staff are currently managing legacy legal files from the previous Borough Attorney and are coordinating with various Borough departments to determine their retention or disposal. Retention Schedule & Laserfiche Management: The Borough Attorney reviewed the comprehensive code rewrite for the Borough records code, which includes integrating the new Records Information Management Manual. Staff members are progressively implementing and refining these records management code revisions based on the attorney's guidance. Development also continues on the public -facing Boards and Commissions application portal via Laserfiche. • Public Records Requests: The office processed 46 public records requests during FY2026. Since July 1, staff have processed 7 requests for the current fiscal year. EVENTS CALENDAR • September 13, 4:00-6:00 p.m.: Event honoring Senator Gary Stevens' Public Service to Alaska, held at Kodiak College. December 7-11: Annual AML Local Government Conference in Anchorage. 711=I_1vL Reporting KIBC 2.25.070 No member of the Assembly may absent himself from any regular or special meetings of the assembly except for good cause. An assembly member who is unable to attend a meeting SHALL ADVISE THE Absences CLERK OR THE MAYOR of the contemplated absence. MISCELLANEOUS • Staff Training: Participating in some online training. Staff will attend the Alaska Association of Municipal Clerk's Training in December. • Code Updates: Released the latest updates to the Borough code. • 2027 Meeting Calendar: Drafting for the 2027 Assembly Annual Meeting Calendar is officially complete. The calendar will be presented to the Assembly for final approval in November. • Upcoming Training: Open Meetings Act and Parliamentary Procedures training sessions are being planned for after the election. These sessions will be available to municipal staff, boards, and committees. • Title 2 Amendments: Staff worked on two amendments to Title 2 regarding the process for filling Assembly seats and calling for a recess. Both ordinances will be before the Assembly next week. Page 2 of 6 Page 73 of 84 hrely►Y11 AW&jZf►GE.'Ljr BUDGET STATUS (AS OF JULY 31, 2026) • The Legislative Budget for FY2026 is currently at 25% utilization. • The Clerk's Office Budget for FY2026 is currently at 14% utilization JURASSIC PARLIAMENT NEWS Source: https://jurassicparliament.com/when-first-amendment-rights-and-public-meetings- clash/ When First Amendment Rights and Public Meetings Clash August 7, 2020 / Ann Macfarlane / 2 Comments Most governing bodies of cities, towns, counties, and special purpose districts have an interest in assuring that meetings are conducted in an orderly way and are not disrupted by threatening, irrelevant, or overlong comment. These same governing bodies must also avoid violating the rights of citizens who wish to comment during a public meeting or hearing. What authority does that body have to establish and carry out procedures that can prevent the interruption or delay of a public meeting due to disruptive or irrelevant comments? Page 3 of 6 Page 74 of 84 Legal Authority The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides protection to and opportunity for free speech in public forums. The public meeting of a board or council is considered a "limited public forum,' which means the government can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. Boards and councils regulate speech through the adoption of rules of procedure and conduct. When writing and establishing rules of conduct, the governing body must be careful not to violate the protections that meeting attendees enjoy under the First Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed this issue in Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013), indicating where the line may lie between council rules that are enforceable and those that violate constitutional rights. In that case, the court held that the First Amendment requires a person's speech in a city council meeting must actually disrupt a meeting before that person may be removed from the meeting. The case provides an example of language a council may adopt for such a proposed rule. The court looked approvingly on rules that stated: it shall be unlawful for any person in the audience at a council meeting to do any of the following ... (1) Engage in disorderly, disruptive, disturbing, delaying or boisterous conduct, such as, but not limited to, handclapping, stomping of feet, whistling, making noise, use of profane language or obscene gestures, yelling or similar demonstrations, which conduct substantially interrupts, delays, or disturbs the peace and good order of the proceedings of the council. Id., at 816. The Acosta court also approved prohibitions on disorderly conduct when it arises from a member of the governing body. "Members of the council shall not, by disorderly, insolent, or disturbing action, speech, or otherwise, substantially delay, interrupt or disturb the proceedings of the council." Id. Another case, Steinburg v. Chesterfield Countyy Planning Comm n, 527 F.3d 377 (4th Cir. 2008). concerns an action brought by a private citizen, Robert Steinburg, against the Planning Commission of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Steinburg attended a meeting of the Chesterfield County Planning Commission but was escorted out of the meeting when he refused to limit his comments to the matter at hand and engaged in personal attacks in violation of adopted procedures (See our 2008 blog post Balancing the Council's Right to Manage Meetings With Expectations of Citizens for a more detailed discussion of the case) 75 of 84 &[e7RJ10-MUZUEc� The Steinburgcourt explained that argumentative or disruptive behavior cannot be shielded by a claim of First Amendment rights. stating: Officials presiding over such meetings must have discretion ... to cut off speech which they reasonably perceive to be, or imminently to threaten, a disruption of the orderly and fair progress of the discussion, whether by virtue of its irrelevance, its duration, or its very tone and manner. Rules of Procedure Many city councils and county councils/boards of commissioners in Washington have adopted formal rules of procedure to govern the conduct of their meetings. In fact, city councils are authorized by statute to develop such procedures. See RCW 35A.12.120 for non - charter code cities; RCW 35.23.270 for second-class cities; and RCW 35.27.280 for towns. Councils in first-class cities are authorized to adopt rules of procedure by their city charters. While county councils/commissions do not have a similar statute, that authority is necessarily implied from the council's/board's authority (and requirement) to hold meetings and conduct business. MRSC offers sample rules of procedures from cities and counties on our Council/Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedure webpage, and a few samples from port districts (such as the Port of Olympia) in our Sample Document Library. What About Virtual Meetings? When members of the public are allowed to participate in remote public meetings the same rules of decorum that would apply to an in -person meeting should be applied to its remote counterpart. In ruling on whether a provision of the disorderly conduct statute (RCW 9A.84.030(1)(b)), is unconstitutionally overbroad and infringes on protected speech, the court in State v. Patterson, 196 Wn. App 451, 460, 389 P.3d 612, 616 (2016) noted: "A person generally has a free speech right to make his or her views known, but the rubric of free speech does not include the intent to substantially interfere with a meeting." The meeting chair should explain to the public the rules for participation in the remote meeting and warn that anyone who disrupts the meeting will be disconnected. The chair may also have to disconnect those that are inadvertently disrupting the meeting. such as due to sound feedback or too much background noise. Page 76 of 84 Actions That Can be Taken Governing bodies can establish rules that regulate public comment but these must be reasonable restrictions on time, place, and manner that are viewpoint neutral. Additionally. when enforcing the rules of decorum, an actual disruption of the business of the governing body is necessary prior to removing or disconnecting the speaker. RCW 42.30.050 allows the majority of the members of a governing body to clear the room and adjourn/reconvene a public meeting if the meeting is interrupted by a group of persons so as to render the orderly conduct of such meeting unfeasible. If a person merely uses profanity or states Iles without actually disrupting the meeting, than this behavior is not sufficient enough to justify ordering the individual to leave the meeting or clearing the meeting entirely. if the meeting room has to be cleared, council members may readmit an individual or individuals not responsible for the disruption. And, representatives of the news media. except those participating in a disturbance, are required to be readmitted to such meetings. Conclusion and Resources When the conduct of attendees at public meetings is disruptive, a governing body may take steps to assure that the public's work is carried out without fear of infringing on the First Amendment rights of citizens. Below are some additional resources to consult. Here are sample ordinances and codes addressing rules of conduct for public meetings: • Town of Yacolt, Ordinance 483 — Describes general rules of decorum to be observed during any meeting of the town council. • Downey (CA) Municipal Code Ch. 1, Sec 2105 — Lists the rules of conduct for council meetings, specifically those related to meeting protocol and behavioral conduct. • Cochecton (NY) Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings — Provides a list of 16 rules of conduct that apply to town board meetings, special meetings, and public hearings. Here are MRSC webpages that touch upon meeting rules of procedure or decorum: • Public Participation in Council/Commission Meetings, • Council/Board of Commissioners Rules of Procedure, and • Hearing Examiners. Page 77 of 84 D ca m a v m ?.y v 00 0 00 Assembly Board & Committee Workload Framework A simpler way to organize annual Assembly appointments FULL MODERATE LIGHT Discussion draft Assembly discussion draft • 1 KF v 0 00 Why change the appointment process? The current list counts assignments, but not the actual demand of each assignment. 1 Committee assignments are not interchangeable. Meeting frequency, preparation, follow-up, and leadership expectations vary widely. New members need an understandable map. A simple workload guide helps members express preferences without learning every board history immediately. J Turnover makes this the right time to rebalance. Several assignments already require reconsideration; a deliberate framework is better than one - for -one replacement. Assembly discussion draft • 2 0 ca m a CD v CD 00 0 00 The central idea Classify the workload of each Assembly seat, not the importance of the policy area. Workload * Importance A light workload assignment may still be important. The category only describes the expected demand on the Assembly representative. FULL More frequent • more prep • more sustained participation MODERATE Recurring • meaningful • limited burden LIGHT Occasional • limited prep • lower ongoing demand Assembly discussion draft • 3 KF v 0 00 P, Full workload assignments Regular and comparatively substantial commitments. Typical characteristics • frequent or sustained meetings • meaningful preparation • ongoing follow-up • significant policy or institutional role Examples Current/proposed Full workload assignments Health Facilities Advisory Board Solid Waste Advisory Board Providence Service Area Board chool District Budget WAMC General expectation: each Assembly member should expect to carry at least one Full workload assignment. Assembly discussion draft • 4 KF v CO N 0 00 Moderate workload assignments Meaningful recurring service, usually with less sustained demand than Full assignments. Typical characteristics • several meetings per year or approximately quarterly • regular participation • limited but real preparation • useful for balancing overall service portfolios Examples Current/proposed Moderate workload assignments rchitectural Review Board oint Fisheries Workgroup I RCAC ransportation Policy & Planning Moderate assignments help balance members who carry one Full assignment against those who carry two. Assembly discussion draft • 5 KF v CO W 0 co Light workload assignments Important work, but generally lower ongoing demand on the Assembly representative. Typical characteristics • infrequent meetings • limited preparation • smaller role within a larger body • lower demand across the year Examples Current Light workload assignments Local Emergency Prep Council KFDA Parks & Recreation School Facilities Review School Strategic Plan Light does not mean less important. It means less expected workload for the assigned member. Assembly discussion draft • 6 KF 3 W v CD 00 P, 0 00 P, How appointments could work Make the preference process easier, then use the categories to balance the final slate. 1 Organize the form Available seats appear under Full, Moderate, and Light workload headings. 2 Members rank interests Members identify preferences across the workload categories. 3 Mayor balances slate Appointments account for interest, workload, continuity, expertise, schedules, and board needs. The members do not have to do the math. The categories create a clear preference map for the appointment recommendation. Assembly discussion draft • 7