10.20.2026 Whittier City Council Regular Meeting

October 20th, 2026, regular meeting of the City Council at 7:12 PM.

Everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Before we begin tonight's meeting, please note that digital copies of the meeting packet are available on our website at www.whittieralaska.gov.

/Meetings. A QR code is on the door, um, please scan that and you may open up the packet.

Our first order of business is swearing in— the swearing-in ceremony for newly elected officials.

Mr. Mayor, uh, Mr. Pinquoch and Mr. Denrek, would you mind joining me out front, please?

Okay, could you please raise your right hand? And repeat after me. I—. Your name— do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Alaska and the laws and ordinances of the City of Whittier, State of Alaska, and that I will faithfully and honestly perform the duties perform the duties of the office of Whittier City Council member, of the office of Whittier City Council member, so help me God, so help me God. Congratulations.

Can you fill in your name?

Thank you. Congratulations. Uh, Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mrs. Borg, absent.

Mr. Wagner, here. Mr. Macaltao, Mr. Pinquoch? Mr. Denmark? Here. Mrs. Loan?

Here. Mayor Shen? Here. You have a quorum. Miss Borg has requested an excused absence as she is traveling and her travel was diverted, so she is not where she expected to be.

Oh no. Is there a motion and a second to excuse Miss Borg from tonight's meeting? I'll make that motion. I'll second. Thank you.

Any discussion?

Okay, hearing no further discussion, Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Voting on the motion to excuse Miss Borg from tonight's meeting. Mr. Wagner? Yes. Mr. Macaltao?

Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes. Mrs. Loan? Yes.

Mr. Denmark? Mayor Chen. Yes. The motion passes, and Miss Borg is excused from tonight's meeting. Thank you.

Okay, we— up next, we have election of mayor and the vice mayor. Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. At this time, I will assume the role of chair for the meeting to guide us through the election of our mayor and vice mayor, as outlined in Alaska State Statute 29.20.230B.

As you know, the mayor of a second-class city is elected by and from the council. So, um, the procedure that's in front of you in your packet is based on Robert's Rules of Order, revised 12th edition. Before we begin, the council must formally adopt this procedure or another procedure by motion, which will apply just to today's, today's election. So at this time, I'll ask for a motion from the council to adopt the procedure for nominating and electing the mayor and vice mayor.

I'll make that motion.

I'll second. Thank you. A motion has been made and seconded. Is there any discussion?

Hearing none, uh, we'll call for the vote. Mr. Wagner? Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes.

Mr. Macaltao? Yes. Mr. Denmark? Yes. Mrs. Loan?

Yes. Mayor Shen? Yes. The motion passes and the procedure is adopted. We will now proceed with the election of the mayor.

Nominations are open. Each council member may nominate one candidate.

Mr. Denmark? I'll nominate Tom Wagner. Mr. Wagner, do you accept? I do. Thank you.

Are there any further nominations?

Miss Sloan. I nominate Victor Shen. Mr. Shen, do you, uh, accept the nomination?

Yes. Thank you. Are there any further nominations?

Hearing no further nominations, I declare the nominations closed. We will now move to the vote. I will distribute ballots to each member. Please write the name of the person you wish to elect as mayor. And remember, funny rule, uh, you can vote for one of the nominees, council member.

Okay, I will read aloud the votes.

Victor Shen.

Victor Shen.

Wagner. Wagner.

Wagner.

Wagner. Mr. Wagner receives 4 votes. Mr. Shen receives 2 votes. Mr. Wagner is— has received the majority of the votes and is elected mayor.

Congratulations. We will now proceed with the election of the vice mayor using the same process.

Uh, nominations are open.

I would like to nominate Victor Shen. Mr. Shen, do you accept the nomination?

No. Thank you. Are there any further nominations?

I'll nominate Peter Denmark. Thank you, Mr. Denmark. Do you accept the nomination? No. Are there any further nominations?

My name is Jamie Loan. Mrs. Loan, do you accept the nomination? I do. Thank you. Are there any further nominations?

Mr. Denmark.

Mr. Macaltao, do you accept the nomination?

I respectfully decline. Thank you. Are there any further nominations?

Hearing no further nominations, Mrs. Loan is elected, um, by acclamation. Congratulations, Mrs. Loan.

This concludes the election of the mayor and the vice mayor. I will now turn the chair back to Mayor Wagner.

I have the script.

Oh, I will.

Standing citizen comments on any agenda item except those items scheduled for public hearing. Those who have signed in will be given the first opportunity to speak. On any agenda item except those scheduled for public hearing, time is limited to 2 minutes per speaker and 30 minutes total time for this agenda item.

First on the list is Mr. Eric Fleming.

Yeah, okay.

All right, Mayor and council members, I'm here to address a severe issue of municipal governance, a total lack of transparency and communication from the city manager that has dragged this city into a 20-month, 21-month legal dispute. This entire situation could have been avoided with a simple phone call. Instead, the city manager and city attorney initiated a lawsuit that has wasted over $100,000 taxpayer funds. Once the city discovered that my property retains valid grandfather rights under municipal code, the city, the city manager did not seek a resolution. Instead, she doubled down, shifting the entire lawsuit's focus to a single culvert violation while simultaneously withholding my land use permit for nearly 2 years.

To manufacture justification for the suit.

This drastic shift, which happened between the first and second municipal letters that were sent to me, makes it clear that this lawsuit is no longer about enforcement. It has become about covering up an initial error. To this day, her office refuses to produce the Whittier's official code standards for culverts. Even more concerning is the claim of attorney-client privilege used to withhold information from me. Under Rule 1.13 of the Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct, the attorney represents the municipality's highest authority, which is the city council and not the city manager.

Neither the manager nor the attorney can legally assert privilege against you. You are the client. You have full legal right to every piece of information regarding municipal lawsuits. Neither the manager nor the attorney has independent authority to set litigation strategies or spend vast public resources without your oversight. By withholding details, they have prevented you from doing your statutory job.

This relentless and untransparent strategy has wasted vast public resources and has damaged public trust.

I urge the council to assert its authority tonight, review the requests in my letter from last week, demand full access to all legal files on this case, and protect our city's resources. Thank you.

Thanks, Art.

Next on the list is Kelly Bender.

Good evening. Just here to tell you that I am no longer the president of the Whittier Chamber of Commerce. I have stepped down and we had elections today and the new board is— Tom Wagner is the president and Aubrey Jergeson is the vice president. Michaela Olson has stayed on as the secretary and Stephanie as the treasurer. So I just wanted to make sure that we all knew that and hopefully the Chamber of Commerce and the city can continue a partnership and hopefully a better partnership.

So thank you.

Thank you, Kelly. No others are signed in.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on any agenda item at this time?

Lori, I mean, there's a button at the bottom of the microphone. Just push it until the light comes red.

Oh, there.

Well, I call her Otter Lady. And I just want to thank her. I have watched her for the last 5 years come before you trying to run a business, trying to do the best for this community, and it's a shame what has been done.

Um, I think she's a very good person, a very hard worker. And that shouldn't have happened to her.

Thank you, Noreen.

Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak?

Hearing none, I guess we will move on to approval of agenda and consent agenda. Is there a motion and a second to approve tonight's agenda and consent agenda?

I'll move to approve the agenda and the consent agenda with one removal of item 14, the resolution of the Whittier City Council operator's manual.

Okay, Madam Clerk, give me some direction here. So I need, I need a second.

Any discussion on the, uh, amendment?

Any discussion on the removal? Um, if none, Any discussion?

Hearing none, we'll call for a vote. Voting on the motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda. Mr. Pinquoch. Yes. Mr. Denmark?

Yes. Mr. Mccolto? Yes. Mrs. Loan? Yes.

Mr. Shen? Yes. Mayor Wagner? Yes. The motion passes and the agenda and consent agenda are approved.

On tonight's consent agenda are the introduction of non-code ordinance 2026-007, approving the 2027 operating budget and related revenues, expenditures, expenses, and interfund transfers. Amending the pay scale and appropriating funds, and setting for public hearing. Introducing Non-Code Ordinance 2026-008, approving the 2028 operating budget and related revenues, expenditures, expenses, and interfund transfers, amending the pay scale and appropriating funds, and set for public hearing. Introduce Non-Code Ordinance 2026-009, approving the updated Whittier fee schedule to include a fee for certified mailings. And set for public hearing.

Introduced on Code Ordinance 2026-010, authorizing the sale of and setting a hidden reserve for surplus public works heavy equipment by competitive sealed bid in accordance with Whittier Municipal Code 3.36.410 and set for public hearing. Resolution 2026-051, a resolution authorizing the city manager to sell surplus city personal property valued at less than $25,000 to the highest bidder by sealed bid, approval of August 4th, 2026 special meeting minutes, approval of August 19th, 2026 rescheduled regular meeting minutes, approval of the September 22nd, 2026 rescheduled meeting minutes, the commissioner appointments of Jamie Loan to Port and Harbor Advisory Commission seat D, David Goldstein, to Port and Harbor Advisory Commission, seat G, and Jamie Loan to Planning and Zoning Commission, seat E.

Is there a motion and a second to approve tonight's agenda and consent agenda?

Sorry, understood. At this time, does anyone wish to declare a conflict of interest in matters appearing on the agenda?

I just wanted to state, just because we're doing the budget, that part of that budget does include salaries, and my spouse is one of those salaried people. So I just wanted that on record to make sure that was okay for voting on the budget as a whole.

So I guess in a sense you could say that you have a direct financial interest because it is your spouse, but council could also look at it in the grand scheme of the budget as a whole. But that's something council's going to have to discuss and vote on under your code.

Seems like with the salary, it's kind of a blanket C See, I— well, um, cost consumer price index across the board here. It's not a specific position.

Discussion?

Hearing no more discussion. Do we need to vote on whether this is a conflict of interest? Okay, I will call for a vote. Voting on the question: does Mrs. Loan have a conflict of interest in items 7 and 8, which are the two ordinances for each year? Mrs. Loan?

No. Mr. Pinquoch? No. Mr. Macaltao? Mr. Denmark?

Mr. Shen?

No. No. Council determines that Mrs. Loan does not have a conflict of interest in items 7 and 8.

Okay, moving on to presentations and reports.

Thank you, Chris. Do I need to, uh, okay. Oh, it's okay. I was just waiting for Shelby to bring up the presentation on her screen. Okay, thought you were waiting on me.

No, no, no. Okay, Mr. Mayor, members of council, and members of the public, um, I'm going to just do a brief overview of the 2027-2028 biennial budget. Uh, we, um, hold budget work sessions prior to this time of year to discuss the budget and get feedback on the budget. We held those work sessions the first week of October, so the budget that you see before you and that I'll be discussing tonight is the budget that was introduced for public hearing Tonight, it will be voted on by council at next month's meeting, so there's still opportunity to make changes. The only change that, that is in the budget from when I presented earlier is one of the council members requested an increase to the volunteer stipends for our fire and EMS responders, so we made those changes.

And then in addition, when we get to the capital improvement plan, I'll talk a little bit about changes that we've made subsequent to that that we'd like council to approve. So in this presentation tonight, You'll see a lot of photos, and with the exception of the one on this, on the first screen, these photos represent projects that have been finished by the city in the last biennial budget cycle. And just a reminder for the public who might not know, our last biennial budget was our first time we've ever done a 2-year budget, and this will be the second time. So this budget will be from January 1st, 2027 to December 31st, 2028. We'll talk about, we'll talk about the major themes of the budget this year.

The first one was strengthening financial resiliency. So the goal has been for the last 5 years or so to build strength in our finances so that over time Whittier will be self-sustaining and will be able to replace its infrastructure. So strengthening financial resiliency is a common theme, and I'll talk about specific actions that we've taken in the budget for the next 2 years. And beyond to strengthen our finances. The second item is building housing security.

The third item is the capital improvements we're working on. And then the fourth item is the operating budget and the assumptions that have gone into the budget that you'll see. And finally, the debt that the city owes in the form of both loans and bonds. So the first item is strengthening financial resiliency.

Um, what steps has the city taken to make sure that over time our community is going to be stronger financially? In 2025, Council authorized the creation of a new fund called the new permanent fund. It actually hasn't been codified, so we'll come before Council with an ordinance that will put this fund into code. We've funded it already, but the funds have not yet been segregated out of the general fund. The purpose of the permanent fund, and it may end up with a different name, my guess is it probably will have a different name so it has connotations specific to Whittier.

But the idea behind this fund is to really— we're putting 100% of the lease revenues from our cruise ship facilities. So that's the Holland America Princess facility as well as the Hoonah Totem facility, the lease revenues from those two facilities are going into this fund with the idea that it's really recognizing that the community of Whittier has set aside a significant portion of its waterfront for the cruise industry and the tourism industry. And people often say, what's in it for us? What about the locals? What's— what are you doing for the locals?

So the idea is that those monies are kind of symbolically put aside, and they will grow over time, and council will decide how to spend them on things that are specifically beneficial to the residents of Whittier, to improve the quality of life. And those, those decisions will be codified in the city code, and that will include things like what can the monies be spent on, how many votes do you need to spend money At what point, if at all, do the voters have to weigh in on how the monies get spent? Um, what are the investment policies around how we make sure that that money grows over time and is used to benefit the community? So those things you'll see in an upcoming ordinance that we'll be working on over the next year. Um, the second thing, then the second fund we created is called a Revenue Stabilization Fund.

That was also created about 2 years ago. So in our last budget, and I think a few budgets before, we were putting a little bit of money aside. It's not much, you know, in the $25,000 range per year, with the goal of building that fund so that it maintains 10% of our general fund revenues. A lot of communities were really hard hit by the pandemic and they weren't able to bounce back for a few years because those hits were significant and unexpected. So our goal is to create basically a resiliency fund that helps us in a year that we have a, a significant unanticipated hit to our general fund revenues.

The third thing that we're doing is, is looking at ways to create a long-term plan for replacement of our infrastructure. So we've done that in the boat harbour already. We set aside 100% of the waterborne transportation fees to go solely towards strengthening the harbor's capital assets and infrastructure so that over time when we need to replace things in the harbor, we don't have to raise rates. Those monies are all going 100% toward harbor capital replacement. And I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a community in Alaska that does that and has a plan to replace those assets.

But we're also looking, now that we have the harbor settled, on how to do the same thing for the general fund and the water sewer fund. And I think we've talked in this budget, and our plan is in the future to set aside specific property tax revenues from different elements of the cruise industry as well that could be used just to help us replace the infrastructure for water, sewer, and the general fund, which would be like streets and sidewalks. The ground fee that we've created also addresses visitor impacts. So things like replacing rest— public restrooms. Signage, wayfinding, you know, those kinds of things.

We paved the road towards, towards the cruise terminal and the campground this last summer. So, so that's another way that we are trying to make sure that we have sufficient resources to provide the amenities that are needed, but not drain the city's coffers or put an undue burden on the residents. We've really built— we're starting to build up a motor pool fund that will Basically, the goal is over time we will be putting money into that fund each year so that when we have police cars that needs to be replaced, when we have a loader or a grader or an ambulance, that the monies are basically being forward funded to replace equipment as it comes, as it reaches the end of its life. And in that way, we don't have to borrow money. We don't have to go out and pay interest to borrow money from somebody else to pay for those things.

And then finally, the permanent fund that we're talking about in this budget, we've talked about leaving those monies in the general fund for a period of 5 or 6 years. And the reason for that is we're trying to focus in this next 2-year budget on the purchase of our land from the Alaska Railroad. So we're trying to accomplish many things at the same time, many big goals for Whittier. And so we're keeping the monies in the general fund kind of for a fallback plan But after this period of, I think it's 2034, when we believe that our general fund reserves will be within our goals, our land will be paid off, and we will have $2.8 million set aside in the permanent fund that will then be set aside for the future, hopefully to fund services for residents of Whittier quality of life well into the future. The second area that we've really focused on in this two-year budget is building housing security.

So Whittier has two buildings, and so you would think of all the communities probably in the United States, we should have the easiest opportunity to make sure that where people live, those facilities are secure. So we've done a couple things. We've recognized also we don't want to just have two buildings people live in. People would like to be able to own property, so So one thing we've worked really hard on with the council and the city manager is the land transfer from the railroad. Thankfully, the legislature passed that bill unanimously, and we're working to finalize the agreement with the Alaska Railroad by the end of this year.

The opportunity from that is to allow for residential development, residential expansion, hopefully. So that's one thing we're doing With regard to focusing on housing, the other thing is Shotgun Cove Road. The further we get out to the end of the road, the more opportunities we have to expand. That project will open up 486 acres of land, um, and it basically adds at least 83 new parcels that can be sold for development. Um, that, that expansion also does other things like provide bathrooms and kayak launch areas and kayak launches and parking lots, lookout areas, beach access, and so on.

And then finally, another thing that we've done for the locals is in the last 2-year budget and in this 2-year budget, we've set aside 100% of the, of the property taxes that are paid by the people at the BTI and at the Manor, and we set those aside in a specific fund to address major needs of those two facilities. So we're basically saying to the, to the owners of those, of our residential facilities in Whittier, we, we hear that you have issues with infrastructure needs. We'd like to try to help address those, and so we're setting aside your tax monies to offer assistance in terms of major repairs to those two facilities. And that is— was done for the last two years. It will be done in this two-year budget.

By the end of 2028, we will have $414,000 set aside for the BTI and $68,000 set aside for the Manor, which represents 100% of the property taxes for those two entities over four years. And then finally, we're working on the BTI asbestos mitigation project. Um, the contractor is actually coming to Whittier this month to basically review the report that was done by the BTI in the past, make sure the scope of work is accurate, determine a cost estimate for the project, and then we'll come before council for deploying grant funds that we received from the USDA on mitigating asbestos at the BTI.

Next slide, please.

So a goal without a plan is just a wish, and so we have had lots of wishes in Whittier, lots of things we'd love to see improved, but we've been spending a lot of time developing plans, you know, how we're actually going to replace our infrastructure, what capital projects we're going to be focusing on. And so we've developed a a 10-year capital improvement plan, and I'll talk specifically in depth about some of the projects on that. And, and not only the projects that we just completed, but the projects we hope to complete in the next 2 years. Next slide, please.

So this is just a picture of our new sewer lift stations, Lift Station 5. It replaced the majority of the lift stations in Whittier, actually, and automated them in that building. There's a lot of electronic controls in there to automate the operations of our lift stations. Um, we had experienced a lot of flooding, so this was a huge improvement to our, uh, the integrity of our sewer system. Um, so I spoke earlier about how the waterborne passenger fee is going to replace 100% of the harbor capital assets.

The ground fee is helping to replace our city-owned streets, sidewalks, public restrooms, parking lots. And other visitor infrastructure. Our property taxes are— the goal is that they will eventually go to solely to replace general government and wastewater and water infrastructure. And then the permanent fund that I talked about, which allows for quality of life investments. Next slide, please.

So it's kind of hard to see, this is small print. On the left you see a photo of our new water well project. So that's the water well building in front of it. Off to the left, you see the new water wells have been located in that area. They will actually replace and we will decommission the existing water wells.

And this is a significant upsize to our system, increasing the flow and the capacity of our, our entire city water systems. This is a huge improvement for the community. So in the last 2 years, we completed $22 million of projects. I'll just list them quickly. The lift station that I showed you a picture of in the last slide.

This water— the water well system is not complete, but it's, you know, it's largely— it will be complete next spring. Harbor Phase 3, we replaced 1/3 of the floats in the boat harbor. We replaced boardwalk lighting in the harbor and the launch ramp LED lights. The water wells and automation system project You can see the improvements at the new city park. I have a few pictures of that and I'll show you in a moment.

A new road grader for Public Works. We expanded Shotgun Cove Road by an additional mile. We paved the head of the bay to the cruise terminal and campground. The police department got, um, ALMR compliant radios and laptops in the cruisers to improve their technology. Tsunami warning equipment was installed.

Also equipment related to the Berry Arms slide. That wasn't a city project necessarily, but we participated and partnered in that. We've done a lot of trail maintenance thanks to our Parks and Rec Department. Um, dumpsters and trash cans, kayak racks, bike racks, picnic tables, and other things that have helped to beautify the community. Next slide, please.

Funding for our next 2-year budget is for capital improvements. We've increased contributions to the motor pool so that we can start setting aside money to replace our Fire trucks, our ambulances, some public works equipment, and the harbor and water, water sewer for the first time are contributing to that fund. Uh, I talked about the BTI asbestos mitigation. That funding is in the budget. Um, we will be purchasing a new ambulance, fully equipped.

Thank you to Representative Holland for his work on getting us funding for that. We will be purchasing a new patrol vehicle for police in 2027 and the second one in 2028. We will be constructing a new Harbor Loop restroom, our first actual construction of a real public restroom in Whittier in many, many years. This is intended to be a year-round project, so it will also require some utility installation. Um, so we'll be doing road improvements and paving to take advantage of the fact that the state will be doing some paving in Whittier.

Um, also some investments in police, fire, and EMS equipment. We're going to be doing engineering on Luyang Park. People might have seen that the boardwalk was taken down because it was unsafe, the viewing platform. So we're going to be engineering some improvements to the park. We have funding for $4.5 million of a grant, federal MARAD grant, to do design and permitting of— I'm sorry, design and engineering of the DeLong Dock replacement project.

And then in the coming years, we've got funding for the Whittier Falls Park to include plumbing, construction of a bathroom, paving, and volleyball and soccer court— or, I'm sorry, soccer field at that park. Next slide, please.

Some of the other major initiatives you see in that picture, that's the new lighting improvements to the harbor. These are energy-efficient lights, and we had a grant from, from Alaska Energy Authority to do that project. We'll be purchasing the land from the Alaska Railroad. We'll be continuing our mitigation of the Buckner Building contamination. We have funding to, to be working on planning and design of the potential military museum with a multi-agency facility partnering with federal agencies like the U.S. Forest Service, potentially the Coast Guard, to cost share so that the operating costs are not borne by just one entity.

Lots of funding in here for beautification, junk removal. We've— we have talked about relocating ConEx trailers from the harbor area, or people that have lease sites that don't allow ConExes, but the city has set aside some, some property up at the tank farm that we can lease to our lessees to move their things off the lease site so they can be in compliance with their lease. So we've identified a problem but also offered— offering them a solution, and that will be coming to them very shortly. The, the area has been cleared and is ready. More trail improvements.

We're working on a water, water sewer line connection between Whittier Street here, right about the Phillips Building, that will connect up to the water and sewer in the harbor and give us a looped water system. We have grant funding for that, and also a big initiative is the need to deal with sludge removal and future wastewater disposal for water and for our sewer system. Next slide, please.

Some of the capital items we're working on, we don't necessarily have funding for these, but these are some of the things that are on our priority list is the Whittier core. So that would be the entire area here, and we're talking about street sidewalk and stormwater improvements. We're applying for grant funding for a fire tender truck potentially. We're looking at new residential expansion of water and sewer along Glacier Street, the last mile and a half of Shotgun Cove Road. We've applied for grant funds for about half of that.

We're—. We do have funding in the budget for a water sewer master plan. Including a wastewater disposal system, as well as water system at the head of the bay, um, sewer vacuum trailer that will help us, um, so we don't get into the situation we are today where we have a lot of sewer sludge that needs to be disposed of and it's expensive. We also will be talking about Harbor Triangle and Harborview new restroom construction. And finally, we've just finished the safety action plan And one of the results, using a federal grant, and one of the results of those plans is to identify initiatives that would help us to reduce the likelihood of conflicts between passengers and vehicles.

So we'll be proposing some of those initiatives in our capital improvement plan that council will see coming before them. Just a few more slides left. So the budget assumptions that are in the operating budget include Tariff increases, which by the tariff increases in our tariffs are based on 3-year average consumer price index changes. So in 2027, for the water sewer and the harbor, that'll be a 4% increase, and in 2028, 2.7%. We talked briefly about the cost of living increases, and those are going to be based in the budget on the last 2 years of actual CPI.

So For 2027, it includes a 2.2% cost of living increase, and for 2028, a 2.1% increase. The tax rates remain the same. Sales tax is 5%, 8 mills property tax. Talked about the purchase of the land from the railroad utilizing property taxes. Our goal is to do that over the next 5 years, or if we need to borrow the money to actually pay up front, you know, we're in the— we're considering options for that as well.

Um, the— for the ground transportation fee in 2026, our focus was on just implementing the fee, and in 2027 our focus will turn to compliance with, um, with that fee requirement. The general fund budget, um, you know, if you look at whether you would call it a balanced budget or not, we're using $274,000 of our reserves, but we're putting $326,000 into capital improvement. So we're basically taking money out of our savings account and we're investing it in capital improvements in, in the community. And the harbor has a balanced budget for both 2027 and 2028. Next slide, please.

The water and sewer fund, likewise, they're required actually to set aside money in their capital funds in order to demonstrate to the state small water utility system that we are not just covering operating costs, but we're also covering capital. So we are putting $130,000 into our major repair and replacement fund for water and sewer. And then the kind of an important initiative is the DeLong Dock. So we've been saving money in the DeLong Dock, building up the reserves there so that we could replace that dock. And so we'll be using the lion's share of the reserves for the purpose of doing the engineering and design of the replacement of the dock.

Then when we—. Once we have a shovel-ready project, then we will seek construction funds, which I think we're going to be successful with. And the Denali Commission has this awesome program for communities that have to meet DOT matching grants, and the Denali Commission's funding can be used for your local match. So it's just been really helpful to Whittier and other small communities that don't— just don't have that kind of money for some of these major projects. So we'll be seeking funding from the Denali Commission when that time comes.

We did increase funding for the fire and EMS volunteer stipends for both their callouts and their training. And then another initiative was we are taking, starting in 2028, 50% of the revenues that we generate in our ambulance calls, and we're putting that in the motor pool so that over time we're using revenues generated from the ambulance to replace ambulances so we don't have to, you know, raise any kind of fees to try to replace something that costs, you know, hundreds of thousands of dollars. The budget does continue to support initiatives like the fireworks, the Weather Service, the community barbecue, museum contributions, and it also funds in 2027 an update to our strategic plan. So I think that will be really great. We haven't done one since we had the expansion at the Head of the Bay.

And also we continue to set aside funding to build up for replacement in the police, fire, and EMS for body cameras, body armor, tasers, radios, a lot of the things that cost a lot of money. But, um, if we can set aside a little bit of money each year when it comes time to replace those things, we don't have to find out or try to figure out where we're going to come up with the money. Next slide, please. This is the debt that the city owes. So for the harbor, we have about $5 million in debt on our, on our last 2 phases of the harbor replacement.

Again, that is being paid for 100% with the waterborne passenger fee revenues, and it's no longer being funded from either the harbor or the CPV. The general fund will have about $3 million in debt at the end of December 31st, and that is solely going to be related to the Alaska Railroad land purchase if we, if we borrow the money for that or if we pay for that over time. The sewer system owes about $570,000, and that's for the sewer lift stations I showed you photos of earlier, and then the motor pool. We have one loan outstanding for our motor grader that we purchased in 2026 with a balance of $244,000. My goal would be that once this budget is fully implemented and these reserves that we've talked about and these investments in capital over time, we will get to the point where we no longer have to borrow money.

The city will be funding things itself through setting monies aside and we'll save a lot of interest, interest costs that taxpayers would otherwise be paying. Next slide, please. That's just something to all be proud of, the USS Ted Stevens being in Whittier. What a, what a great opportunity for the community. And then finally, where to find more information on the final slide.

You can find either the city 2027-2028 biennial budget on our website, as well as our 10-year capital improvement plan that will be from 2027 through 2036. It's on the city's website, www.whittieralaska.gov. Happy to answer any questions you might have.

Dave, the first thing I say is your budget and long-term projections are a masterpiece. Thank you. And, but On capital improvements, there's a lot of stuff being done, but, you know, 20 years ago we talked about the levy. Is the levy, you know, is it in there somewhere? We always still overlooking it.

That's my first. I got like 4 questions. That's for—. Yeah, great question. It is in our capital improvement plan.

Um, and, and actually, if, you know, we haven't actually done a concerted effort looking for funds for the levy, to be honest with you. Um, I think, you know, our attention has been diverted to some of these other, like, critical time-sensitive issues. But I think it's— there are funds out there for levies. And I'm trying to think of the— when I was in a different community, we, we built a significant levy and we put a road over the top of it. And I think those funds are definitely available, especially in a community like Whittier, where it's, it's putting at risk all the infrastructure of the community, public infrastructure, private infrastructure.

So Yeah, we can definitely bump that up on the priority list if that's the wish of the council. I just, you know, I don't, I don't know how serious it is, but I don't know how long I've been on council, but I know when I first got on, it was a huge priority and then it went away and it was all good. And if I remember correctly, didn't Spring Creek flood in, you know, at some point when it was first opened? And that was, I think that drew our attention more too. But anyway, yeah, I personally would like to At some point, I know you're busy, but at some point maybe look at funds for that because it is, it is crazy to build all this stuff and not protect it.

Second question, you said the Harbor, the Harbor shows a balanced budget for 2 years, and I know this budget, the year-to-date stuff is only to the 31st, but looking into a couple of the things, the preferential and transient mortgages still got a ways to go, and I don't know why those wouldn't be paid up Without the harbor master, probably can't answer that, but because those are normally paid the first year, and then the, the park daily parking is significantly under, and I don't know how much that's delayed, but I'm wondering if that's been addressed at all. Yeah, thank you, Councilmember Pinkish, through the mayor. We actually recently went through a software conversion and, um, pay stations is an example. And we've—. I'm actually scheduled to go down to the harbor, I think this week Friday, and work with the harbor finance officer to look at how things are getting recorded because we think there might be a recording issue.

So we have the money in the bank, but the revenue is getting recorded on time— we think there might be a disconnect there, which is what's driving the lower apparent lowering, uh, launch fee revenues. And I think it also applies similarly to potentially parking and campgrounds. So I asked to put that off until after the budget was passed, but then we could dig into it. So we'll be looking closer at that on Friday, and I'll try to report that in my next CMR, the city manager's report, the findings. Okay.

And then lastly, based on comments that you made last week, um, how much are we paying WindFluence? How much? I know you said— I think— I believe you said we're funded through June. And with the comment you made, we've paid them a lot of money, but your comment was that the land transfer was 100% Jackie's effort. If that's the case, why are we paying them influence?

I don't agree with you, but I'd still want to know. Sure, Councilmember Pincush. Good question. First of all, I believe we're paying them $5,000 a month. And so my comments were to address the fact that in the budget we had budgeted them just through June with the expectation that we would be completely finished with the land transfer by then.

Um, I don't— I mean, I don't have a crystal ball. I don't know. We talked previously that once we wrap up this first phase of the land transfer, that council may wish to look at additional, um, land issues with the railroad that we've previously talked about. So that either may or may not happen. That will be at the direction of the council.

So I wanted to just be clear that we only had put money in the budget through June. Um, as far as WindFluence, I do not want to take away from them and didn't intend to take away from them, um, the efforts that they made working with the railroad and Jackie. My comments were really more about the staff and the impact on the staff of that project that really Jackie kind of single-handedly carried that issue and the staff wasn't, um, wasn't as involved, and very likely because she had the support of WindFluence to help her with, with that project as well. So I agree, they've done fantastic work for us, but, um, through just June is what we've got in the budget. So if we decided we needed them for any additional initiatives, then we would come back to council for a discussion about that.

Okay, thank you for clarifying that because I feel What you said there, everybody did not know that WindFluences— I would agree that Jackie is carrying the ball on it for the city, for city staff, but I don't think we would ever got to first base without WindFluences' insight and assistance. Agreed.

Thank you, Chris.

So, Vice Mayor, previous Vice Mayor, do you have anything to report?

New Vice Mayor? Yes, Madam Clerk, do we have a, a report that wanted to be read out loud with Jackie, or is she on? Jackie is with us. Okay.

Hi, Mayor and new Vice Mayor. Congratulations. Sorry that I am not present. I am currently at training. I know that you guys have had a long night already and will have a long night in front of you.

If you have any questions regarding my MR or anything from any of the staff, we're welcome to answer any of it at this time.

Any questions?

Mr. Mayor.

Well, got some questions. Go ahead. I have some questions about, um, your— the progress on the Wellfield Park and the City Park. Um, we've been get— I've been getting a lot of questions from, um, citizens on like what's the plan and, uh, on what we're going to be putting there, and it's hard to find information I can direct them to, so I mostly just been passing on information I've been getting from you.

Um, wondering if you have any plans on like, um, any information that you could post online or create, creating a web page that citizens can look at to, uh, see, um, what our concept plans for those areas are.

Councilmember Shen, through the mayor, uh, are you asking about where the well field is, or are you asking about Whittier Falls Park, or all of the above? The above, because I've seen language about a World War II park. Um, I think it would, uh, well, I think that all is really cool. I think, um, people are wondering what we're doing, and I think some transparency would be helpful there. Yeah, I have met with the assistant city manager and we have discussed putting not only park information updates, but as well as the World War II Heritage City designation and having links on it.

So give us a little time and we will make sure that that is available. We do have a map from our RFP for the Whittier Falls Park project. As you can see in the slides that Chris had provided, we do have— the playground equipment has been installed. We are moving forward with the hydroseeding. While we were hoping to have the hydroseeding done before snow falls, because it is called a dormant seed, we're still working on that with our contractor.

And as far as the well-filled project, We are still cleaning up the biomass that has been created around it with hopes to be able to bring in topsoil and also hydroseed that in the next upcoming season. That's all time constraints that we have right now, but we'll be happy to provide at least monthly updates as well, if not something on the website, if that works for the mayor and the council.

Any further questions?

Mayor Wagner, I do need Shelby Carlson to read my wild recognition in for me.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jackie writes, this month I want to recognize our finance director, Kristin Erchinger. Chris does not count the hours. She looks at what she can get done for the city. That often means early mornings, late nights, and weekends.

Her work reaches into nearly every part of our operations, from budgets, audits, grants, investments, and taxes to the financial details behind our major projects. She looks ahead, catches things others may miss, asks the hard questions, and considers what today's decisions will mean for the city from now. Much of that work happens behind the scenes, but helps make the work of administration possible. Kris is, is an incredibly important part of the city and our team. I want her to know that her hours, her work, and her commitment are seen and appreciated.

Thank you, Kris, for always showing up, finding a way forward, and Someone we can count on. Congratulations.

Sorry, Mayor, I had to do it like that because Chris probably wouldn't show up to the meeting if I didn't— if I put it in the packet.

Go ahead, Victor. Thank you. Another question was any updates on, um, I know that we are still trying to hire for a full-time city clerk. Any progress on that?

Yes, Councilmember Shen, through the mayor, uh, we have, I believe, 6 interviews all next week, and our hope is that we will be hiring a clerk soon. For the city.

Well, thank you.

Thank you, Jackie. Anyone else have a question?

Okay, moving on to public hearings. Uh, non-code ordinance— sorry, non-code ordinance 2026-007, approving the 2027 budget— I'm sorry, operating budget and related revenue expenditures, expenses, and interfund transfers, amending the pay scale and appropriating funds. Uh, I am opening the public hearing for non-code ordinance 2026-007 at this time. Madam Clerk, has anyone signed in to speak? No one has signed in.

Is there anyone present in the audience that would like to speak at this time on non-code ordinance 2026-007?

If there are no further public comments, no comments at all, the public hearing for non-code ordinance 2026-007 is closed at this time.

Any discussion at this time?

Mr. Mayor, if I may, we like to, uh, provide ample opportunity for citizens to speak about the budget, but not ready for it to be passed at this time. That will be— that will come at the next regular meeting. This was just one additional opportunity for citizens to speak about the budget.

Apologies for the confusion.

Okay, moving on to Non-Code Ordinance 2026-008, approving the 2028 operating budget and related revenues, expenditures, expenses, and interfund transfers, amending— oops, sorry, is that the one?

Sorry, amending the pay scale and appropriating funds. I am opening the public hearing for Non-Code Ordinance 2026-008 at this time. Madam Clerk, is anyone signed in to speak? No one has signed in. Is there anyone present would like to speak at this time on Non-Code Ordinance 2026-008?

Seeing none. Discussion, Council?

There are no further public comments. Uh, the public hearing for Non-Code Ordinance 2026-008 is closed at this time.

Okay, next on the agenda is the Community Development Block Grant.

I believe our contractor Robin is here. Is she in? Okay.

I'm online. Would you like me to speak? Yes, that would be great. Thank you. Okay.

So, um, members of the public and council members that were around last week are going to hear my spiel one more time. I'm talking today about what your staff came to me with. They asked for my company's help, and my name's Robin Reich, by the way, and I'm with Solstice Alaska Consulting. Um, my company was approached by your staff to help you all with the Community Development Block Grant, or a CDBG.

The CDBG program is very prescriptive. To be able to be awarded a grant, you first have to go through a bunch of steps even before you apply. One of those steps is to have a public hearing as we are today to discuss the program, what it can fund, what it can't fund, and what members of the public would like to see funded through the program. So the CDBG program is funded via federal funds that go through the through the state, through the community, the Division of Community and Regional Affairs.

The program itself is designed to encourage community self-sufficiency, reduce the cost of essential community services, reduce and eliminate conditions that are detrimental to health and safety. Um, CDBGs can only be awarded to communities that have a majority of low and moderate income folks that live there, which Whittier has. The program awards grants, um, a max— to a maximum amount of $150,000. The grant can fund things like community facilities, such as health clinics, daycares, homeless shelters, water and sewer systems, flood and drainage facilities, docks and harbors, electric distribution lines, and other types of utilities. It can also fund transportation improvements such as roads, boardwalks, barges, It can fund access to public facilities and structures, so getting rid of things that might block the way or help folks that are handicapped or elderly get into public buildings or facilities.

They can buy— the program can buy real estate. It can It can also fund building removals or improvements to buildings, be those public facilities, and can demolish public facilities as well. They can also— the grant can also fund fire protection facilities and equipment, so you can buy new vehicles or rehab or construct facilities that are— that help with fire, with fighting fires. You can also fund planning studies or designs of different public facilities. You can fund through the program special economic development projects, as long as these projects create jobs for low- and moderate-income folks.

The ineligible projects are equipment like motor vehicles other than fire vehicles. It won't fund computers or furniture for public buildings. It won't fund government buildings like city halls or admin buildings. It won't fund government operations. Like paying your staff to do, to do their jobs.

It won't fund maintenance and operation of community facilities, and it won't fund political activities. Um, so really, it's the job of the council to select the project that you would like to apply for through the CDBG program. Um, but You're supposed to take your lead from the public and get their input and then vote on a resolution to apply for whatever the public thinks is the most need to them.

I have a question. So you had said when you first started giving your presentation, you said $150,000. I'm sorry, 850,000. Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. And also regarding the public, um, I'm sorry, regarding handicap access, um, you said to public spaces, um, so that would not include handicapped access to private spaces?

No. It will not fund that. However, I believe that question came up previously in relation to where folks live in Whittier. Most folks live in Whittier, and there is some, some language in the grant guidance that says if folks live there, they have to— that you might be able to get the grant to fund that.

It's kind of— I guess I wouldn't recommend going after funding to a public facility because there will be more hoops to jump through, more things to prove to the agency. It won't be as much of a slam dunk, I guess, as other projects might be.

You lost me there. You wouldn't recommend going after a public or private? I wouldn't recommend going after this funding, the CDBG program funding, for access, for an access project to a private building, just because it wouldn't be as much of a slam dunk. It would, it would require us doing a lot of proving that it meets the intent of the program. Meanwhile, other projects would be easier to prove.

I understand. Whittier is kind of a strange animal in that, you know, basically the whole population lives in two buildings, and I can't speak manner, but I do know that the Vegas Towers is a corporation.

It's, it's, it's, I don't know, it's different. Anyway, moving on, I guess we'll discuss the input that we did get back from the public and the council and try to come up with a plan forward.

Anybody have any questions regarding the presentation. I did go on the website today and it's pretty informative.

Jamie, go ahead.

This one, make sure I'm reading what we got in the laydown correctly. So the— from the link that was sent out, there's 5 responses and I'm assuming that number 1 is the first line down there. Account printed. Okay, thank you.

Victor? Yeah, it looks— Robin, you mentioned that these funds can be used to purchase real estate, right? As long as that real estate is for a public facility or public function.

Okay, so that would And that probably wouldn't apply for railroad land purchases.

Unless we were going to put some public infrastructure on there, correct?

Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, I can go back and figure that out.

Like our well fields.

Yeah, I mean, if you were putting something that's needed for the public on that land. Yeah, I know that they like to see, um, you know, you, you can add, you can add this funding to other funding as well. It's not, you can't use it as a match for any sort of federal funds, but it can be added to, you know, do the project, but they like to see projects completed with their funding. So, if you're just adding to the pot so that you can someday, you know, hold that land and, you know, you're not getting a product out of it, I guess is what I'm saying, until you keep paying and paying, right? It's not going to It's not going to wrap it up in a bow.

What was the, the end date for, for this? What was the timeframe?

The grants are due, the grant applications are due on December 4th. Okay, thank you. Any other questions?

Kelly? I'm sorry. I will open this for public hearing at this time.

No one has signed in.

In the audience, Kelly?

Thanks. I'm coming a little late to this, and generally I try to stay pretty well informed, but I see that there's only been 20 responses. So I really hope that you'll reopen this to the public and try to get our community to weigh in more on this. I did just look at it very briefly today and was a little bit surprised that these are the 5 priorities when I understand that this is supposed to be really community-based and maybe a little bit income community-based. So, um, I find that the fire truck being number 1, I think if we open this up, that that might change.

And I feel like there's probably a lot of other ways our community can pay for that. But I will tell you that sidewalks are a really big deal for our community. Um, we are, especially in the summer, we are a walking community. All of the people who work in the harbor, work at the fish plant, Most of them walk. Thank God we have that pedestrian tunnel, but I had an elderly woman who would try to come down to our shop at least once a week, and every single time talk to me about the dangers of the sidewalk.

And if you try to drive up these roads, we see that most of those people walking in the middle of the road, because the sidewalks are uneven, a little unsafe, and not really clear. So, I would say that sidewalks are really important to our community. So, um, I, you know, that's just my point that I'd like to bring that up towards the top. I would love to see the boardwalk and the harbor taken care of, which is very dangerous right now. But I also believe that that's really more of a tourism function, a visitor function that those people are— most of the people walking on the boardwalk are visitors, and maybe that's what visitor funds can go towards, ground transportation funds going back into those things.

Handicap Accessibility Clinic, and I really feel like— I hope you take the time to take this back to the community and really put a push on getting the community's input here, because I think that these numbers will change and maybe some new ideas will come up. But 20 respondents, we know our communities necessarily always participate. That's this very empty room tonight. But I think if you put something that's really important to them like that, that they can see tangible, that you'll get some, some more comments. So finding a new way to reach the community, I think, is really important.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Sorry, go ahead, Eric.

So I remember this grant from last week, and after having thought about it for some time. I'm the one that, or at least one of the ones that mentioned a boardwalk down at the harbor, and after seeing the boardwalk, I think it'd probably be a better idea to just get rid of the boardwalk altogether, given that it's wood and we live in Whittier, to get rid of the maintenance factor that's involved there and just put regular old asphalt, but make it, you know, nice and something that's a little nicer for the tourism aspect of things. But I think that would be more of a long-term plan that would be pretty viable down at the harbor. Thanks. Thanks, Eric.

Yeah, my two cents is I— what's that?

Okay, if there are no, um, further comments, I would like to close the public hearing on this ordinance. Thank you.

Discussion. So I have to agree with, um, Kelly's statement. Um, Whatever we do with this money, and I don't have the answer at this point in time, I want to see something that benefits the community directly, and I mean the community that actually lives here. Um, any type of project that already has a mechanism in place for funding, I would rather leave that mechanism in place and stay away from it.

Um, I would say, um, sidewalks are definitely in the top 5 list, at least for me. Sidewalks and handicapped access. I'm not really sure about the buildings that don't have handicapped access that are— yeah, they're open to the public, but they're privately owned. So I'm not sure where that line is there. And then the other thing with all the development that we've got going on up at the Waterfall, the new park, Um, maybe some consideration to a sidewalk up there, uh, maybe some consideration to paving it because it is an absolute disaster to try to drive up there right now.

Uh, maybe installing utilities as far as like maybe electricity either up to the waterfall, maybe up to the Salmon Run, maybe down to the campground.

Something that will benefit the community and that is not basically 100% tourist-based.

Anyway, yeah, that's my two cents. Anyone else?

Jamie? Thank you. Um, one quick question, Robin. How often can we apply for this grant?

I'm sorry, your question didn't come through very well. That's okay. How many—. How often can we apply for this grant? That's a great question.

You can— it comes out every year at about this time of year. Okay, once you have one grant though, you have to pretty much spend it out and be done with it before you can apply for another one. But it's once a year. So if you got a project done and, you know, 9 months, you could apply the next year. Okay, thank you.

That being said, like, looking at these projects, obviously all 5 of them are really important. I think everyone can agree on that. Just with some of the things that Robin stated this evening, though, about how they like projects that you can just kind of like one and done and wrap up really nicely. Um, with the amount, it's $850,000. I don't think that that amount would wrap up any of these projects except for the fire truck.

Um, and I do think that that serves Whittier residents directly because, um, as we are expanding down Shotgun Cove, Head of the Bay, even, even some of the structures that are on Shotgun Cove now, especially after seeing what happened at the head of the bay this summer, that, that's pretty concerning to me. But if it were to happen anywhere else, that we would be in the same situation of hauling water back and forth. But that's just my, my thoughts on it.

Thank you. Victor.

I agree with both your statements here. You know, we want— I mean, this grant is designed to meet the needs of a community that has a majority in low income and stuff.

And, you know, they—. What it's designed for, and I think where we stand to benefit, is going after projects that are shovel ready.

Yes, you know, do I want to see improvements and development in the core area on the side of the railroad tracks for citizens here? Yes, I do. And reinforcing Jamie, I just want to echo that just to kind of amplify it some more that, yeah, we— if we pursue like a sidewalk project now, we don't know when that's going to be done. If it takes 3 years to go to complete, then we've tied up our opportunity to apply for this grant. For 3 years.

However, if we go after a shovel-ready project, whether it's a fire truck or something else that we can close out within 6 months, you know, like purchasing a vehicle or constructing something that has engineered plans already, and we can close it out before the next grant opening, then we can apply for another grant in another year. And then we can get, in a way, you know, instead of getting one project in 3 years, Now we could potentially get 2 or 3 projects done in 3 years with this program, and it sounds like where previous means that applying to this grant does not preclude us, exclude us from applying to future grants. That's—. Is that—. You want to correct me on that, Robin?

Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. Okay, and so if we, you know, We're after a shovel-ready project right now. I think our next step is to— we should direct our administration, if they haven't already, is creating a rolling list of projects, potential projects for this grant, and then starting a public process so that we start filling the— how would you say— preloading the torpedo tube? I don't know a better term. So that way we can prepare for it ahead of time and we can plan for it and pursue some of these projects that might take longer, potentially longer, and not tie up a grant opportunity such as this because we don't have a project ready for it.

Thank you, Victor.

Yeah, I think, uh, the next step would be to again try to get some community input other than, um, what do we say, uh, 5 comments.

And we've discussed this before, I think the way to do that is to get some food. That'll bring them. So But I think it's important enough to do that.

So, Mr. Mayor, I think we're in crunch about this time for, um, you have to apply for this grant.

Um, and like what Robin said, um, when applying for this, we should also have a compelling story from what recently happened to the Head of the Bay. And extended shotgun, Scott Korbe, I think we have a 100% shot on this. And we don't want to miss it. Oh, I don't disagree, but I believe the deadline was— correct me if I'm wrong— December 7th?

If I might—. The 4th? Yeah, if I might, it's due December 4th. However, it does take us time to put these grant applications together.

I, candidly, I wouldn't wait much longer to make a decision because, you know, there's work that goes into these.

No, I understand.

Dave? Yeah, to respond somewhat to Kelly, and I agree with you 100%, Kelly, but this is a time crunch. If I remember correctly, this was a grant that we didn't know about until the fire. We were looking for a source and we found it, and unfortunately, Fortunately, it's a short time. And, you know, you mentioned the boardwalk, and, you know, in one of our resolutions is CRW.

One of the things we're going to have them look at is engineering design for more down there. So by design or accident, the only thing that really makes sense that fits what we can do in a short period of time is that— is a truck wing. It doesn't hurt to have it. Give us the process one time, and hopefully we can we can— it would seemingly be the easiest thing to pay off to where we're not stuck to not be able to operate it next year so we can have more time to develop this and have it shovel-ready easily in time for next year. So it doesn't— it just— there just isn't any opportunity for these other ones.

I do like the clinic and transportation services, the healthcare, but you know that it's going to take months for us to figure that out probably. But that's the one actually I like. That was a going back somewhere on council, but, you know, when we, when we put the clinic in this building, most people, a lot of people are opposed to it because they like the convenience of it being at the, at the BTI. But the clinic couldn't expand. They wanted a contiguous room, and they had to go— we're going to have to go to different places, and they didn't want to do that.

So, and my feeling was, honestly, my feeling is when you're so small that a bus Girdwood was a better option. That was me. But it was very— we felt it was that putting this clinic in and investing that money, it would solidify. It didn't, but we thought it would. So at this point, reverting all that back, I think for next year, I think some sort of service to health appointments and stuff like that would probably top my list.

But it's not something we can do before December 4th. That's kind of, kind of where I'm at. I kind of like that. And the boardwalks, they are— they're going to be looked at and engineered. CPV funds are very appropriate for the sidewalks down there because it is tourism-related.

So I think— I don't think we would want to spend this grant on that particularly. Maybe it should be more for community. So I hate to say this, but kind of this side of the track is kind of where I would look for this grant for the most part. And I don't think we have, you know, I don't think we want to lose this opportunity. So I think I would, I would, I would ready to move forward, forward with the, the fire truck option, fire tanker option.

Any further council comments?

Um, the administration would appreciate if you would like us to proceed so that you vote on how you would like us to proceed. So whether that's making a motion to apply for the Community Development Block Grant to obtain a fire truck. Or something else, tell us, make that motion. Or if you would like to make a motion for us to obtain more community input, that would be helpful.

I still think we have some time. Um, I really don't want to vote on this tonight. Um, I guess I would ask with that thought, was it you that said next week the asbestos— somebody's going to be looking at that asbestos thing. Is that a possibility to add more money to that grant? Because that would be hugely health, life safety for people too as well.

Is that months away, weeks away, or are they ready? Are they just looking at what they need to do or So, what, where are we at in that stage? I guess if you know, Councilmember Pinkus, through the mayor, I think that's a fantastic idea, but I don't think it would qualify for the funding because the building is a privately owned building. So specific to the criteria that Robin mentioned, if I could just respond to Mayor Wagner's comments about, so we have in the budget for 2027 paving to the new city park. Peter Denmark, as well as construction of a bathroom at the new city park.

So that involves extending water and sewer utilities to that area. We also have, and we talked to Council about bumping roads, streets, and sidewalks, roads and sidewalks and stormwater for the Whittier core to the top of our legislative priority list for federal funding. Well, I think that's also a great idea. I agree that $850,000 isn't going to go very far because when you're replacing sidewalks and streets, you talk about water, sewer, sidewalks, streets, stormwater all at one time because you're digging stuff up that has utilities under it that needs to be taken into account. So that is just such a large chunk of funding that I don't think we could accomplish, you know, anything meaningful with— I'm sorry to say that— small amount of money.

And then I would say, you know, the reason that we had Robin and her team help with this grant is exactly this reason, to get public input and try to broaden the reach of gathering information from the public. And I think that because this grant allows for so many different opportunities, and a lot of grants are very specific, we only fund this thing or this thing, we can continue to look for funding for those other very specific topics, including some of the great ideas that have been brought up today. So I would just say my only concern is if we don't give direction to Robin's team by this meeting, then I think we probably will not have a strong application, um, and we might lose the opportunity to get funding at all for the year. So I'm not trying to put the heat on you guys. I know you don't like to be pressured to make decisions, and we don't either.

We tried to bring something as quick as we could. We've had 2 public hearings, um, and addressed it at 2 council meetings, and we will address it again at the 3rd council meeting, which would be in November, when you actually have to approve submission of the application, I think. Although you could make a motion tonight, I think, to direct the administration to apply for that particular purpose. But I think Robin can correct me if I'm wrong, that we actually will need a resolution passed at the next meeting. But that said, I think passing it on the 20th and trying to get an application finalized by the deadline is not enough time to develop a strong application.

Now, if you were to give direction tonight, and then the resolution comes in November. I think that's enough time. So I don't want to put any more pressure on you, but I think that's— unfortunately, that's where we are. But I also think that knowing that there's a desire to get— to gather more public input since this grant is available every year, we definitely could start, uh, you know, a very broad, um, uh, public process where we invite people in for pizza or spaghetti and try to get more public input. Thank you.

Thank you, Chris. Um, at this point in time, I guess at this point in time, I'd be looking for a motion to, um, direct that money toward the purchase of a tank truck. Mr. Carter, I'll make a motion to direct administration to pursue grant— a grant to fund the purchase of a fire tender. I'll second.

Discussion?

Hearing none, we get a vote. Mr. Shen, I, I'm changing your wording just a little bit, so tell me if it's too off, but motion to— voting on the motion to direct administration to apply apply for the Community Development Block Grant to purchase a fire tender truck.

Mr. Shen? Yes. Mrs. Loan? Yes. Mr. Denmark?

Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes. Mr. Macaltao? Yes.

Mayor Wagner? Yes. The motion passes, and administration is so directed.

Okay, moving on to resolutions. Uh, Resolution 2026-042, resolution adopting the Whittier City Council Operations Manual.

I'll make a motion to adopt.

Motion been made. Is there a second? I'll second. Staff report.

Mr. Mayor, uh, the City Clerk's Office presents the City Council Operations Manual draft for your review. Um, I don't have anything further to add that we haven't already discussed in previous meetings.

Thank you. But we're open to your feedback.

Mr. Devlin. I'm going to go back to the issue that I brought up last time. This was on the agenda, and that has to do with First, the issue of packet deadlines. But agenda items according to this manual will be submitted to the city clerk by 5 PM on the Tuesday one week prior to the meeting.

We do not see our packets until usually Friday, um, and I don't— and very often things are If the packet isn't completed until that Friday, I don't see any reason why agenda items can't be added until that time.

David? Yep, I agree with that. So there are time limits that are put on the council for when we have to submit this or that for— because it has to go to legal, which makes sense. One question was, is administration under the same rules? Would they have to have submitted at a certain time, or—.

Indeed, Mr. Mayor. To Mr. Pinkush, indeed, the administration also has a deadline of Tuesday, the Tuesday prior to the council meeting. Okay, well, someone— when one— it's 30 days, there's 30 days. But beyond that, there's— which this has been discussed before— but the teleconference or virtual attendance. So it limits, it limits unless the council decides to approve more, it limits for virtual attendances.

So what is the answer to that? So if I can only attend virtually 4 times and I want to save that, what do I do? I don't attend. So it's completely counterintuitive to what you're trying to do. If you want participation, but because of the rules, I have to not show up at select meetings if I want to do it more often.

It's stupid. It's just plain stupid. I don't care how you get there. If you want counsel input, having a warm body in the chair doesn't get you 7 different opinions, which is what you want. So I think that part of that, I know that's in code, but it's just crazy to do it that way.

In the Whittier Fishing Game Advisory Committee, we used to have really struggled to get people to attend. We'd have to have, you know, we'd have the meetings at the Anchor Inn and some nights, days, we'd go home because we wouldn't have everybody. And since we've gone to Zoom, We have people signing up to be on the committee and we don't have room for them all. It's completely changed the attendance. So it's brought in probably 2 or 3 times as much different people to speak on different subjects that have different backgrounds.

And it's been invaluable to that committee. And I think how you attend is much less more important than attending. And I think, so anyway, I'm going to vote against it. I think it's I think we're tying our own hands and making things difficult. And some people, I know some people disagree and think, yeah, being here is most important, but I just don't agree with that.

Go ahead, Pete. And another point is rule number 7 that I have a problem with is the evaluation process. Um, in the wake of the circus that we have witnessed over the last few weeks, I don't think that a standard form evaluation form for the city manager will be appropriate. Um, there's obviously some issues that need to be addressed that may lean to the subjective. I've seen this evaluation form before.

It is, it's a quantitative evaluation form looking for objective answers. And I think we're going to have to delve into subjective subjects in this evaluation. And whatever we, whatever this council decides to have a city manager evaluation, I think that that should be considered. But because of that clause in this resolution, I will not be supporting passage of this manual. Which, which page is that you're referring to, Peter?

Page 55, Rule 7, number 1.

Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none, Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Mr. Mayor, if— could I make one comment, not as city clerk, if that's acceptable? Okay. Um, I understand your concerns with those particular rules. Would you be open rather than throwing out the whole manual, should this motion fail, would you be amenable to making an amendment to remove those rules out of there? And maybe there's something that we continue to work on in the future, but just we— you don't pass them at this time, those particular rules.

Yeah, we've been— we have been bandying about this manual literally for years. And it's— it has been condensed to relatively simple. And the issues that remain to me are significant. I would— I'd like to see us find a way to a finished project. If we leave those, if we were to remove those, that leaves some gray area.

And we've been surviving without this manual for 4 years.

I would like to see a completed product prior to passage. And I'm only one opinion.

I would say the same thing, but I would say I will, to the issues I have in it, I will offer an alternative sent to you for potential change in review and a later vote.

If it fails. So if that's the case, Dave, then we basically want to, from the standing rules, remove Rule 2 and Rule 7. Maybe even more. 3 And 7. 2, 3, And 7.

I will call for the roll.

54. Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-042, a resolution adopting the Whittier City Council Operations Manual. Mr. Shen? Yes. Mr. Macaltao?

No. Mr. Pinquoch? No. Mr. Denmark? No.

Mrs. Loan? Yes. Mr. Mayor? No. The motion fails.

Uh, sorry, children, we, we'll make it work.

We should, we should change what I said to hard numbers to shallow too. I'm going to turn ours.

Okay, back to resolutions. Resolution 2026-046, a resolution amending the contract with CRW Engineering including planning, engineering, surveying, plotting, subcontract management, and construction administration on multiple capital projects.

Excuse me. Is there a motion and second?

I'll make that motion. I will second.

Is there a staff report?

Chris, would you be willing to speak to this one?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. So as you know, we have a contract with CRW Engineering to do engineering services for the city. We have— I think that contract still has 2 more years on it, but we also wanted to go out for an RFP for engineering services just because it's good practice and I would say best practice to periodically go out and just make sure that you're getting the best bang for the buck. So we are in the process of getting an RFP out on the street to to engage the services of an engineering firm. We've talked to Council about this before, and of course CRW, they've been fantastic and we have no issues with their work product.

They've been a great partner of the city, but this is solely for the purpose of, you know, just making sure that we're getting the best response to a competitive solicited bid. And that's required by also by our granting agencies. However, what we've discussed with Council in the past is that CRW has been hired by the city to do a number of our projects. They've spent a lot of time, energy, money. We've spent a lot of money hiring them to gain all the knowledge on these projects, and so it doesn't really make sense to— for the projects that are already underway.

To have a new engineering firm, assuming that maybe CRW wouldn't win the competitive bid. It doesn't make sense to hire a different engineer and then pay them again to go back and do the same planning and engineering on projects that they've already been working on for us. So we'd like to amend their existing contract to allow them to work on these— continue working on these projects that they've already been engaged in so that we're not duplicating and paying two engineers for the same work. Work. So we have a specific list of projects that they have been working on for us that we just want to be explicit what they are working on for us so that when we go out to bid for another engineer, assuming a different firm were to be picked, we would be able to show them Council's approved these projects that were already in the works to be completed by the former engineering firm.

Then anything that's not on that list would be something that the new engineering firm would be doing on our behalf. So really it's just an amendment to the CRW existing contract to specify some of the additional projects that are within their scope of work that they are working on. And I'll give you just an example. They've been working on the BTI asbestos mitigation project for us. So if we go out to bid and we get a new engineer, we would kind of have to start all over with that again.

Under a new contract with a new engineering firm, except we've asked Council to explicitly say they've already started that work. We'd like them to finish the work. So essentially that's what we're asking Council to do, is just allow us to amend the contract with CRWW to be explicit about some of the projects that we would like to be within their scope of work, so that when we let the bid for engineering, which should be within the next month or so, there's no confusion about who's being asked to do what. And I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thanks, Chris. Questions?

Discussion?

If there is no further discussion, Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-046, a resolution amending the contract with CRW Engineering to include planning, engineering, surveying, platting, subcontractor management, and construction administration on multiple capital projects. Mr. Macaltao.

Mr. Pincush? Yes. Mr. Shen? Yes. Mayor Wagner?

Yes. The motion passes and Resolution 2026-046 is approved. Mr. Mayor, could we request a 10-minute break? 5-Minute break? You read my mind.

Yes. How long would you like to do? 10 Minutes. 10 Minutes. Thank you.

Okay, moving on.

Um, yes, excuse me, 2026-047, a resolution amending the 2026 budget to amend or deobligate 2026 funds not expected to be spent by year-end and appropriating said funds.

Is there a motion and a second?

I'll make a motion.

Second.

Is there a staff report? Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so this is— this isn't something we have to do. We don't have to amend the budget. However, there's a specific reason I like to do these amendments at the same time we do the preparation of the budget for the next 2 years.

The main reason is that if we are— well, a couple things. For example, if we have a budget that says we're going to spend in the harbor this year, uh, $448,000, $466,000 for restrooms. And we decide we're not going to spend that money from the harbor. We're going to use other grant monies to do that. But it's in the harbor budget, then it skews Council's view of the budget to actual spending because it looks like we underspent our budget by $466,000 because we have a budgeted expense that we're not going to spend.

So it makes the administration look like we've done a great job managing the budget when in fact, you know, that's really neither here nor there. And so in order to try to be really kind of more accurate about what we expect to spend, I like to take some of those big items out of the budget if we know we're not going to spend them. And that gives us a better sense of really whether we've hit the mark on our budget or not. The other thing is, in terms of this, these particular requests to amend the budget, some of them are, are quite important. The first one is, we had previously budgeted to literally transfer cash out of the general fund and set it up into a new fund called the permanent fund.

But I think I mentioned to council that instead of physically transferring the cash out, I'd like to keep it in the general fund. Under a specific portion of our reserves that we, we earmark for certain actions that council's approved. So we have our reserves, and in that is a subcategory called permanent fund contributions. And the reason we would keep those monies in the general fund— there's actually multiple reasons, but in this particular case, it helps us to build the case that if we have to go out and borrow money to purchase land from the railroad, that we can demonstrate a healthier level of reserves. If we, if we don't demonstrate a healthy level of reserves, then we aren't as good a candidate for borrowing money.

And because of how critical the, the purchase of the land is from the railroad, I think it's important for us to maintain those reserves in the general fund. The second thing is that we have budgeted the revenues from Glacier Creek for property tax, but council had agreed to defer those revenues. So in other words, we've earned the revenues from property tax. Ordinarily, you would record those as revenues. But under generally accepted accounting principles, because we agreed to postpone receipt of those to a future year, we really can't record them as revenues in the current year.

So my recommendation is that we, we basically will reduce what we show in our budget and we'll, we'll put those monies into a category we've actually never budgeted before, but it's called deferred inflows of resources according to accounting principles. See, we have to call it that. In other words, it's not things we expect to get within the first 60 days after year-end. It's really being deferred to a future year. So that is actually just an accounting standard that requires us to record something differently than what we originally budgeted because we agreed under our lease with Glacier Creek to defer those revenues.

The third thing is that when we set aside money for the BTI and the Whittier Manor from our property tax revenues, in the general fund, you typically have revenues coming in in one year and you spend them, you know, and your budget reflects that single-year activity. It's not like multiple years showing in the general fund. So because we've earmarked monies for those particular purposes, but we're not going to spend them by the end of this year. Again, I'm asking for the treatment of those expenses to be similar to the permanent fund where they remain in the general fund, but under our reserves in a line item called property tax revenues for BTI in the manner so they don't get lost in reserves. They're very— it's a line item in our general ledger.

When I print out reports, council will see this is the balance in that account, so it doesn't get buried anywhere. And then when we decide to spend those monies, we have them. Identified in, in a specific line item in the general ledger. So this is all intended to be, number one, more transparent about what is in our reserves, what council's intention for those monies are. And number two, if I got hit by a bus, somebody would be able to see those monies were set aside for that purpose, and they're not just on a list I've kept somewhere in the back room saying, oh, council approved these things.

So it's really trying to make sure there's continuity in in our history going forward. And then finally, that I talked about the $466,000 for the harbor restrooms, and we're not planning to spend harbor funds for that anymore. We have grants to pay for the construction of the first restroom in the harbor, so it's reducing that. So anyway, that's the, the request is basically to amend the budget to reflect those changes that I've highlighted, and this is something standard that I've asked Council to do at the end of the year, um, multiple times. So our recommendation would be approval, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

Yes, I'm recommending council pass this resolution, please. Thank you. I'm just curious, maybe what are some of the bigger ticket items that have been reappropriated or taken out of this budget? Could you list some of those, the larger ones? Um, the ones that I just listed, so there's 5 or 6 if you look at the different sections in the resolution.

We're, we're taking out the property tax revenues from Glacier Creek. We're reassigning the permanent fund into assigned fund balance. In other words, a section of our reserves that identifies it's for, for the permanent fund. Another section of our reserves that identifies these monies to be set aside for the BTI and for the Manor. The other one is to reduce the budget to eliminate the Harbor restroom expense.

And then finally, the CPV grant. Grant revenues came in lower than anticipated, and so we're just asking to reduce the expected grant revenues to what they actually came in at. This is the one of the challenges when you do a 2-year budget is you're really estimating 2 years ahead and you just don't have a crystal ball. So, and I like to, when our revenues come in so much lower as they did for CPB revenues, the reason I like to amend the budget is that our next 2-year budget I don't want to overinflate the revenue side of things, and that's what we would have been doing. We would have overestimated how much our reserve balance would have been at the end of 2 years, because we would have been basing it on prior year revenues that we never received.

So it's really just trying to be more realistic about it, and more conservative, frankly, about what our realistic picture is in that fund. So those are the specific requests in, in this.

Resolution. Any further discussion?

Can you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-047, a resolution amending the 2026 budget to amend or deobligate 2026 funds not expected to be spent by year-end and appropriating funds. Mr. Shen? Yes.

Mr. Denmark? Yes. Mr. Macaltao? Yes. Mrs. Loan?

Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes. Mayor Wagner? Yes.

The motion passes and Resolution 2026-047 is approved.

Thank you. Moving on to Resolution 2026-048, a resolution approving the 2027 through 2036 Capital Improvement Plan. Is there a staff report? I'll make a motion. I'll second.

Sorry, got ahead of myself there.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. So, um, this capital improvement plan has, um, 2 areas that have changed since we brought it forward to you under the preliminary plan. Number 1 is just the harbor section of the report had some of the projects out of order. It doesn't really matter, but when you're going through and saying this is project number 1 and 2 and 3, we had some of them were that were flipped out of order, so I made that correction. However, the, the material change has been to add a new section to the plan which begins on page 85 of the capital improvement plan if you're looking at the PDF, and it's really adding an entire section of safety action plan projects.

And these are things that came out of the Safety Action Plan grant that we received related to transportation safety improvements. And one of the neat things about that grant and the reason we applied for it is that once a community has developed a safety action plan and it, it's very specific as to Whittier-specific danger zones, basically for conflicts between passengers and vehicles, for example. Areas that we should put in speed bumps, you know, to slow down traffic, areas that maybe we want to put up better signage or consider other road safety improvements— crosswalks, better sidewalks, better streetlights. So anyway, there— all of those things were addressed in this— in this safety action plan. And then when the safety action plan prioritizes what those needs are, The city then can apply for specific funding from the same agency to actually implement those, those capital improvements.

So you'll see starting on page 85, for example, one of the highest priority projects was to add a right turn lane at Whittier Street because it's kind of one of our dangerous intersections that has a lot of traffic. Traffic calming measures. That's basically code for let's put in speed bumps to slow people down. Mobile speed feedback system. In other words, the things that tell you how fast you're going to slow the traffic down.

They proposed harbor-covered sand and gravel at the launch ramp. So when it's icy in the winter, there's just an easy way for someone who's trying to launch their boat to spread some sand and, you know, protect themselves when they get out on the ice. Wayfinding, you know, signage and ways for people to know where to go in town and how to get there.

Intersection signage and distance improvements means clearing the brush so people can see. So the head of the bay is a great example. When you turn out of the tunnel, there used to be so much foliage and trees there. If you weren't familiar, you might not know there was a stop sign when you're coming back out. Or so anyway, those kind of improvements.

A shuttle connection, potentially a railroad passenger platform crossing improvements and sidewalk ADA rehabilitation. And then finally, a multi-use pathway network was recommended, which is from the head of the bay into town. So there's lots of great information in this safety action plan. Shelby Carlson will be posting that and actually, I think, bringing it forward for council approval at the next meeting. It's actually really interesting.

It has great graphics and great priority of some of these projects, but we wanted to add them to our capital improvement plan so that when we look at what funding is available and what it will cover, it's been identified by the city as a priority. Because if it's not identified as a priority, it's much harder to get funding. So we can show this is part of our capital improvement plan. It's part of our safety action plan, and if any of these items rise to the level of council seeking to identify them as state or legislative priorities, then of course it's even an even higher priority. So anyway, those are the changes that are— have been made to the plan, is just incorporating the recommendations from the safety action plan.

I'm sorry to kind of put the cart before the horse, right? Because council hasn't approved the plan. You won't approve the plan until your next meeting, but because we're trying to approve this as part of the budget, at the last minute I realized, ah, if we don't get it in this plan, we're going to be waiting 2 years to get it into the official next plan. So I thank you for your indulgence in adding that here. And that's the only changes from the last version of the capital improvement plan that was presented to council during the budget workshops.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, Madam Clerk, you can call for roll. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-048, a resolution approving the 2027 through 2036 Capital Improvement Plan. Mr. Shen? Yes.

Mrs. Loan? Yes. Mr. McAlto? Yes. Mr. Pinquoch?

Yes. Mr. Denmark? Yes. Mayor Wagner? Yes.

The motion passes, and Resolution 2026-048 is approved.

Moving on to Resolution 2026-049, resolution authorizing the city manager to accept and administer the United States Environmental Protection Agency Congressionally mandated project fund for the Buckner Building remediation, abatement, and demolition of prioritized sections, appropriating the initial award, award of $600,000, authorizing project spending constraints— I'm sorry, consistent with the grant agreement, and authorizing Amendment Number 1 to the Qualified Environmental Protection and Project Management Services Agreement with Nortek Incorporated.

Is there a motion and a second to approve Resolution 2026-049?

I'll make that motion. Second. Staff report. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am elated to bring this resolution forward to you, um, on behalf of administration.

Senator Murkowski got us $5 million for the Buckner Building for the purposes of remediating. So we have the $800,000 from the EPA Brownfield Multipurpose Grant, which we're working through right now. This $5 million, we knew about it in 2024 that it was coming, but it wasn't until this year that we finally worked through all of the pieces to get it released to us. So it— they are releasing it in two phases. EPA is the agency that's distributing the funds to us, so they're releasing it in two phases.

Phase number 1 is this first $600,000 of the $5 million, and that is for us to get through the— they call them the federal cross-cutter requirements, which is just making sure that we dot all our i's and cross all our t's with endangered species, tribal, national historic preservation, which that one is a really big one for the Buckner Building, as you can imagine, and then the NEPA, which I forget what that stands for exactly, but It has to do with environmental impacts. So, um, this resolution accepts the $600,000 of the $5 million. The remaining $4.4 million will be to do the work to actually bring the building— to clean the building in sections and bring sections of the building down. Um, and this also allows us to amend the current contract that we have with, um, Nortek Inc., who's our qualified environmental professional company. Um, Basically, our science nerds, so I like to call them.

Um, so this allows us to add the scope of the CDS project to their current contract. Thank you. Questions?

Hearing no further discussion, uh, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll, please? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-049, a resolution authorizing the city manager to accept and administer United States Environmental Protection Agency congressionally mandated project funds for Buckner Building remediation, abatement, and demolition of prioritized sections, appropriating the initial award, award of $600,000, authorizing project spending consistent with the grant agreement, and authorizing Amendment Number 1 to the Qualified Environmental Professional and Project Management Services Agreement with Nortek Inc. Mr. Macalto? Yes. Mr. Shen?

Yes. Mr. Denmark? Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes.

Mrs. Sloan? Yes. Mayor Wagner? Yes. Motion passes, and Resolution 2026-049 is approved.

Okay, moving on to Resolution 2026-050, a resolution approving the use of multi-parcel appraisal method for certain harbor upland lease parcels pursuant to Whittier Municipal Code 3.38.450.

Is there a motion and a second?

I am remiss at the start of the meeting. I would like to declare a potential conflict here because once again I am a leaseholder. You have that cross to bear.

Understood.

Discussion regarding, uh, Mr. Denmark's statement. Yeah, I guess I'd like to ask legal. So Jamie Loan's husband works for the city, and because everybody's going to get the raise or whatever, it's all the same. So we didn't— we didn't— we found her not to have a conflict yet. In the past, Mr. Denmark has— how many leases are there?

There's 20, 30 leases. Same scenario as far as I'm concerned. More leases than our employees.

But in the past, that's been a conflict that has— can you tell us the difference between the 2? To me, there's no difference. The same kind of thing. It's affecting everybody in the same way.

Thank you. And through the mayor, there are a couple of practical differences, but first and foremost, you are the body that decides what is and what is not a conflict of interest pursuant to your code. Body did determine just Speaking about what you said, the body did determine that Ms. Loan did not have a substantial conflict of interest. The body has previously determined that Mr. Denmark does. Um, when we're talking about a practical difference, right, we're talking about a salary schedule that affects all city employees, not necessarily her husband's employment.

There were no—. Mr. Denmark would be voting on an appraisal method for a lease with which he is currently a holder. But again, it is up to this body to determine whether or not that rises to the level of a conflict of interest or substantial, you know, financial interest, as it's called. And this body has previously done so.

And if you choose to put this to a vote, please remember that I was precluded from even discussing any issues with the leases let alone vote on them.

Any further discussion? Jamie Loan. I guess it's a question for legal, since we're just voting on the appraisal method and not like his personal lease or the amount or anything like that. Would that make a difference?

I feel like, yeah, you're the body that has to make that determination. You're absolutely correct that he's not voting to renew his own lease, to fail to raise his rent. It is a method. Does it also affect his lease? Potentially, but that's a question that you all have to grapple with and an answer that you have to come to.

Thank you. Any further discussion?

Madam Clerk, call for the vote, please. Voting on the question, does Mr. Denmark have a conflict of interest in item 19, where yes is yes, you believe he has a conflict, conflict, and no is no, you do not believe he has a conflict. Mr. McAlto.

No, no. Mr. Pinquoch? No. Mrs. Loan? No.

Mr. Denmark? As before, I will abstain. Mr. Shen?

Yeah, got away with it before, I'm going to get away with it this time too. You have some consistency. It is up to the council to enforce its own rules. Mr. Shen?

No. Mayor Wagner? No. The council determines that Mr. Denmark does not have a conflict of interest in item 19.

Where we at? Are we, uh, okay? Uh, is there a motion and a second? To approve Resolution 2026-049— I'm sorry, 050. I'll make the motion.

I'll second.

Is there a staff report? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. According to our code, the council is the body that determines whether or not it's appropriate to be using a multi-parcel appraisal method. I am probably just as learned up on what that means as you are, um, but essentially it means that rather than looking at each individual parcel as its own individual thing and doing all of the legwork and all of the research on that singular parcel, and then moving to the next one right next to it and doing that same thing from scratch all over again. The multi-parcel appraisal method allows the appraiser to say these parcels are relatively similar, they're in the same location, and, you know, have similar qualities.

That's what they start with. They go back and they look at each parcel and still do adjustments based on that specific parcel, its size, its utilities, all of the appraiser things that I am not familiar with. So, um, it's not saying that they're all going to be the same. Oh, it's just $20 per square foot because they're in the harbor. They still go through and double-check that each parcel gets its own unique number and that it's appropriate for that parcel, but the legwork that they do for that area is done at the same time.

So, this resolution asks the council to approve the use of this method for all of the harbor uplands leases. So, that's Harbor Triangle, Harborview and Harbor Loop all together as one.

Discussion?

Go ahead, Dick. I can elaborate on this further. The why this is, is because it's in the master lease and it requires an appraisal every 5 years for every property. And it hasn't been done a lot, if at all. I mean, I don't know the history of it, but basically I was the one that asked this to be the multi-property option because let's just throw out a number.

If there's 60 leases and everybody had to do it every 5 years, everybody's going to have to pay $1,000. So you'd be paying $60,000 for 60 appraisals. This allows one appraisal to be— it's generally, it's more of an assessment with, with, you know, why we have to do an appraisal when you already have assessments, I don't know, but it's in the master lease. So if the railroad purchase goes through, this can go away, but for now, default to comply with the master lease, you have to do it. So my request was that we put it in code to where you could have one lease or one appraisal for all the properties and reduce the price to the leaseholders by a significant amount of money per leaseholder.

That's, that's why it's done this way.

Thank you. Any further discussion?

Peter? I met with the appraisers when they were here. I mean, and the designations being used as a function of parcel numbers and legal descriptions are not consistent with my leases if I can identify them off of this list. Um, I know this— this is about methodology and that's about it. Um, but the plat that I was given with the leases that I have in my possession is not consistent with what the appraisers had and should require some sort of— I don't even know yet, but I perceive a consistency problem that's hard to discern just from the legal descriptions given here.

Mr. Mayor, through the mayor, I would gladly follow up with you, Mr. Denmark, regarding your particular leases so that we can be on the same page regarding your legal descriptions. Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Um, clerk, can you call for the roll, please? Voting on the motion to approve Resolution 2026-050, a resolution approving the use of a multi-parcel appraisal method for certain harbor uplands leases, lease parcels pursuant to Whittier Municipal Code 3.38.450F. Mrs. Loan. Yes. Mr. Pinquoch?

Yes. Mr. Macaltao? Yes. Mr. Denmark? Yes.

Mr. Shen? Yes. Wagner? Yes. The motion passes and Resolution 2026-050 is approved.

Okay, next thing on the agenda is City Manager Evaluation. I am not clear why this is on here. Um, in my notes it said no action requested. I will defer to the clerk.

I also, um, I'm not sure if Jackie wanted to speak to this at all, but, um, for these two items, I apologize, they should have been in the informational items section as we are not asking for any action from council. The second item is the 2025 ballot destruction memorandum, which As the clerk, the code requires that I notify council that I'm going to destroy the ballots from the previous election.

Any questions? Mayor, if I could add for your evaluation portion.

Uh, yes. So, um, as stated in multiple meetings, uh, my evaluation, the city manager's evaluation, is due in November, or at least the ability to send out the forms so that council can do the evaluation. Uh, with past knowledge and items, and even what Councilmember Denmark had stated this evening, my recommendation is that you use your third-party HR to distribute any type of evaluation and allow you guys, and then also be able to conduct any of the type of questions that you want to see on that evaluation, and then have them be able to tally and put everything together for a future date of a meeting for my evaluation, if that makes any sense.

Understood. Any questions?

Hearing none, moving on to council comments.

Just one thing tonight, if I may. Um, I'm wondering Uh, how we want to deal with the promotional materials that were used at the circus meeting that we held last week, how long we want those to stay in City Council chambers. If we want to keep them here, maybe we should hang them on the walls.

Or have them removed. We will have them removed and at least put in the back room until we can figure out, uh, what to do with them. I don't want to make any comments on it right now.

Any other council comments? Oh, go ahead. Follow-up for the community block grant, that process that we're going through. And so, you know, I like to follow up with that, and I think something that would benefit us is to create, um, I think a rolling list of like shovel-ready projects that we could apply this grant for. And so as this deadline comes around, We can either work off this list, we can refer to the community what they would like us to take off this list, and we have these projects ready to, you know, rock and roll.

Um, I don't know if we want to create— if that's an internal document that the administration has, like with this other grants, or because this grant process requires input, maybe we created a You know, we have a priorities list, like council priorities list. Do we create a more public document that we work off with, or should it— is it okay creating, um, having you guys maintain an internal document?

Councilmember Shen, through the mayor, um, you know, because this grant is specific to the type of public input that's required in order to qualify for the grant, I think it does deserve to have a process that that's somewhat unique and probably, you know, fairly lengthy process so that we have lots of opportunity for people to provide their input. And then maybe at some point, you know, a public meeting where people can put their little stickers on the wall and prioritize projects. Although I really do appreciate Shelby at the last second scrambling to do an online poll so we could at least gather some input on really short notice. So I think it's a great idea. We might want to start, you know, with a public meeting that people can throw their ideas up and, you know, sticker them.

And then from that, council can have maybe a work session to talk about those projects and prioritize them so that we have plenty of time to work up an application for the next round. So, I mean, if council has any other suggestions, and I'll talk to Robin again also and see what she's done in other communities, but I think we've all noticed that in Whittier, food helps to bring people out and gets their input and involvement. So I think that's a great, a great idea. As to the timing and whatever, you know, I'll let Shelby Carlson and Jackie C. Wilde, you know, kind of decide what, how full the plate is and the priorities, and then try to develop something like that. But I think that's a great idea.

Follow up, that tender truck is already noted in our capital improvement plan resolution.

I'm sorry, go ahead. I would just continue with Victor Shen's discussion. I think something that would be helpful is a list of projects that have been approved by other, other places, because it's not real clear what is and isn't. And a long list of potential, or one that already been paid off by other cities, would be really good to know. It might give us ideas.

I think that's a great idea. And then something to keep in mind is, um, I think as Council Member McAlto said, you know, we have a compelling story about the fire tender because of what happened here recently. And sometimes when you're competing for $850,000 is a lot of money, but the state only has so much money. So depending on how— you don't have to ask for $850,000, you could ask for $350,000. So there's some strategy involved in the type of project, how compelling it is, your story is, and then the amount you're asking for.

And so I think we keep that in mind too as we look. But we definitely can ask Robin to produce a list of, you know, other communities that have been funded and see if that helps bring some ideas as well.

And Chris, correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that part of the scoring criteria was matching funds.

Mr. Mayor, I don't recall Robin saying that. It requires a match with most grant applications. If the city is proposing a match, you get scored higher on the priority list. So we do have funds available in the budget for equipment for the fire department. So if we did require a match, I think we could find it within their existing budget.

But again, we'll talk to her about that strategy at— in terms of strengthening our application before it gets submitted. Yeah, and I think you're exactly right. It's not required, but it's part of the scoring criteria, and I believe it's worth like 25 points or something. Yeah, so, um, so in that case, when we bring forward the resolution to council in November to actually approve, um, then at that point we would appropriate monies if we needed to appropriate any additional monies for match. Generally, the way we do that is if we have money that we've identified in the budget that's already been passed for a particular purpose, then we don't necessarily need an appropriation.

So we'll have to decide that based on our conversations with Robin, and then what the estimated cost is of the equipment, and then that would determine what the 20% match would be, for example. So she'll help us navigate that.

Thank you. So that would bring one question, is if we did that, would we be allowed to buy something for $1,850,000 from them and then Can it be a $1 million project and we put in the other $150,000?

Councilmember Pinquoch, through the mayor. Um, yes, I think we can definitely do that. I mean, I'm not the expert on this particular grant, so we'll clarify, but that's a really good question.

Any further discussion?

Right, question on, um, this regarding driver's licensure and operating, um, basically those motorized minibikes around town and what the laws, our local laws, surround this. And I've asked Andre about this, Chief O'Shea, this a few times, and it's still a little kind of unclear for me. And I guess what I'm arriving at, it seems like It depends on what the community wants us to enforce, correct? Under state law, juveniles cannot be driving motorized vehicles on the roadways and such that. Okay.

A lot of manufacturers, not law, but a lot of manufacturers for liability says anyone under the age of 16 should not be riding any of their vehicles like ATVs, UTVs without being accompanied by a parent. That's not law, that's their recommendation. But to be operating anything 50cc or lower or on roadways, you need a valid driver's license and that vehicle needs to be registered. We have given juveniles already citations for operating scooters or motorbikes on city roads, including driving motorized vehicles on city roads, because it's against law. And that's under what's called Title— Alaska Statute Title 28.

And regardless if you're a juvenile or not, any violation of Title 28, you are treated as an adult. Before we do that, we try to, especially with kids, because they don't understand roadway versus non-roadway, we try to do some education. Like one of the kids we educate, we advise multiple times, we're on a scooter, and the child still decided to ride it, so we cited him. So that child needs to go to court with his parents and stuff like that. But that's what the law is.

Communities can be stricter than the statute allows. Prime example is the Municipality of Anchorage. The Municipality of Anchorage decided that no motorcycles or off-road vehicles are allowed anywhere on their roads, period. That's why you see Anchorage has very little. Girdwood is under the Municipality of Anchorage, so they follow the same things.

You go out to the Mat-Su Valley, which is bigger, spread out because it's a borough and a city. Inside the city limits of Whittier, you can't do it. Outside the city of Atlanta, in the Valley, you see vehicles, ATVs riding on the side of the roadways. They're legally allowed to cross, but you can also legally register those vehicles under statute. So you'll see ATVs with actual motorcycle-style license plates on the back because they've legally registered them.

And I've seen more like the UTV side-by-side that are legally registered with the, like, motorcycle license plate, as long as they have operational headlights, brake lights, and they just have a quick inspection. And DMV, you have to have driver's license and you have to have insurance. I could get information if Whittier wants to pass by making the laws stricter. So municipalities can always make laws stricter, but cannot make it less restrictive than the current laws is already set. So right now we've had, I believe, for motorized vehicles, not cars or registered vehicles, like scooters and stuff, I think we've cited 2, maybe 3 juveniles that's been on scooters, ATVs, and stuff like that.

We also advise adults that we pull over that are driving inappropriately ATVs, UTVs, side-by-sides on the roadway, because if you're on the roadway you're required to have a driver's license. So we've also advised them with that. And I think I mentioned before, if you want to register the vehicle legally, you could do it through DMV. Yeah, yep. Just to follow up my concerns again, um, you know, I witness this quite often in the city.

We have juveniles riding these mini bikes around. And then something I'm witnessing in Anchorage now is they are getting, um, these electric motocross bikes, and they— some manufacturers call them bicycles, but they don't have pedals on them and they have watts. They have probably even more torque than those gas motors. There is a big discrepancy with electronic bikes right now in the state of Alaska. To put it mildly, Alaska statutes, Alaska's administrative codes are not up to date.

Everything you see about motorcycles and bikes, they're based on cc's, cubic inches or size motors. Bikes, electric vehicles, are not based on cc's. They're based on the— I forgot what the The term for the electrical output of the bike. It was wattage. Yeah, wattage.

Certain communities, like I've talked to Sitka, they've already started their own process about saying this amount of wattage is equivalent to this amount of CCs. So they're passing their own regulations. State of Alaska has yet to do that. Anchorage, I believe, under their municipality is starting to do that because you see parents getting kids electric bike equivalent to 100cc bike But it's like, it's electric, it's fine. But they're going to go 60, 70 miles per hour in that with no driver's license, no training.

And you see them zipping around on sidewalks as well. So that's something that if the state doesn't do that, I know a lot of communities are passing their own ordinances on that. Okay. So electric bike is a little bit different. Well, hopefully the state addresses that issue.

I don't know what, you know, my opinion is, yes, please continue, you know, I would prefer strict enforcement of these minibikes and then also maybe getting ahead of this with electric, these motorized UTVs with the electric and stuff. I'll get a copy of some draft ones. I know APD, or not APD, Municipal of Anchorage was one of the first ones that brought up the CC comparison to the wattage on electric bikes and they passed ordinance. And some other smaller communities, I'll get copies of their draft ordinances or their ordinances and Maybe sit down with Shelby and Jackie to see what we can do with that. And then up on the follow-up with that is vehicles, UTVs without mufflers, or even vehicles without— if we have a sound decibel ordinance or along that lines.

Usually for sound is more of a disturbance and nuisance after certain hours. Usually like for disorderly conduct is anything after 10 o'clock at night, 11 o'clock at night, where it keeps people up at morning. I know I live in VTI, I hear some exhaust 5, 6 o'clock in the morning revving up. For trying to get a DB thing to register decibels, that's gonna be hard and expensive. But I think it's more of a common courtesy.

If you know who the person is, just give us information, we'll chat with them in the daytime. You know, your neighbors are complaining, you do knock it off. You know, we could do something like that. But, um, and for like on the roadways, uh, I believe under, uh, administrative code, they're required to have muffler exhaust system. They can't have glass patches or things that make a lot of noise, or pipes, straight pipes that make a lot of noise.

We can look at that a little bit more, and, uh, if we have specific problem vehicles, we could go after that. If they're a registered vehicle, they have to follow, uh, the road or administrative code on driving on the road. And what if they're not registered? If they're not registered, then if it's like an off-road motorcycle, it's still going to be the same thing. If they're driving on the road, they have to have a driver's license, you know, we can still go under that aspect.

Yeah, now make sure I pass that on to our officers on that. Okay, thank you.

Sorry, go ahead, Dave. I got two things, one for Chris, one for Andre. I mentioned this a couple years ago, Chris. Forever tags. You remember that?

They're almost every village in Alaska is now signed up for it. Whittier is not. Whittier was before because we're an incorporated borough. What is the process to get that done? You know, is it?

Yeah, I don't, I don't actually know if that— maybe Andre actually would know that what the requirement is for us to put in place forever tags because that is done through DMV, but I think it would be based on our, our own rules. So.

Still being based on the boroughs basically, but I think I could call up, there's like a trouble desk I call it because Whittier is unique. We don't have borough. We're an unincorporated borough. Cordova Valley is an unincorporated borough, something like that. I can ask them about that, especially with our population base, which is small, like that of a small community.

Um, I'm going to put that in my notes with the other one and specifically ask them about that. That's what makes us eligible is running an unincorporated borough. But, and, and, and if you mean it, a couple years ago there was just like 10 cities in it. Now almost everybody's got it. So if people don't know what that is, it allows you to— your vehicle's, I think, more than 10, 10, 10 years old, you pay Property tax once, you're done.

Yeah, as long as you own the vehicle, so it saves you money. Now there's also ZTags, which if you're 65 is another, another one, but that's— you're eligible for that no matter what. And then secondly, you mentioned the word restrictive. So I've heard comments lately about our 10-mile-an-hour scenario. So I guess my question is, is do we have anything in code that suggests it should be 10 miles per hour?

I've been told by people that were on council years ago that the signs originally ordered were 20, and then somebody wanted it 10 during the summer, so they put up 10s.

And 10 is very restrictive. So I know somebody that drove around today at 15, and it was pretty doggone slow. But anyway, it's just that when, when they've got forklifts and stuff going, it's one thing, but in the wintertime, do we need it to be 10 along this stretch? That's going to be up to the city. That was 10 miles an hour when I got here, uh, just shy of 8 years ago.

The city can choose, because it's a city-maintained road, to increase or lower it. Uh, certain areas are not, um, the city can't if it's on government or state roadways and stuff like that, but it's up to the city if they want. I don't have an issue with it, um, because I know we've, uh, put restrictive on, uh, speed limits, uh, going to the head of the bay. There's some, I believe it's 20 mile per hour posted signs there. So I think the biggest I've seen this thing before, like when Whittier Seafoods was in operation, a lot of workers, heavy equipment, stuff like that going on.

Do you know if DOT has some sort of guidelines on that or—. DOT's guidelines is based on residential area, on certain things, the residential area, the zoning area for that, the traffic, if it's a high traffic area. And I know this because for like Alyeska Highway, years ago, Girdwood community has been asking multiple times for DOT to drop the speed limit from 45 down lower because inside, like the Old Town or proper Girdwood area, is 30 miles per hour. They wanted to extend it, and it took a long time just to get that 30-mile extension less than 100 yards because they were putting up those rumbles or traffic strips, measuring this, that. It was a long process through DOT.

Normally they go based on the the zoning of that area, residential, commercial, school zones, stuff like that. And that's— I think those are all pass-throughs from the federal government highway transportation stuff.

I will do some more research on it.

Any further comments?

Just informational for y'all, um, Whittier Parks and Rec Committee, we hosted a volunteer day this weekend and got some local volunteers and volunteers from Alaska Trail Stewards, and we cleared some brush for additional winter trail clearing, grooming, and sledding. They cleared approximately enough brush so that we could potentially make another 1,800 feet of winter trails and a second sledding corridor off of COVID Creek Road. Thank you.

Andre, I got a question for you.

So we lost our attorney. This isn't the first time. Um, what is, what is the policy, um, for opening the tunnel for an exception to get said attorney home?

The tunnel gives us law enforcement, public safety, the ability to access tunnel in and out. We've accessed a tunnel, we've escorted People that stay because of council meetings, uh, usually I'll escort them because I'm salary, instead of calling out an officer to do it. But we have the ability to do it for emergencies or non-emergencies or critical aspects, escorting them into the tunnel, out of the tunnel. We've done it before on medical emergencies that they don't want to take an ambulance, as well as we've allowed people that would call us up or dispatch up, we've escorted them into Whittier. We had one like Cito, they had an emergency, we escort them through the tunnel at 0:30 in the morning.

So it's basically, they give it to us. The main thing is, is after hours they have to be escorted by a public safety vehicle in through the tunnel, make sure they're out of their controlled area, and then back out. We make sure the doors and tunnels and everything are locked up when we clear. So like, we escort someone through, we have, when we go back through to Whittier side, we have to make sure everything's secured. We've been fortunate quite a few times that the tunnel operators are still there.

We still have to escort them through, but that doesn't— then we don't have to re-secure everything because they're still in operation there. Thanks. Yeah, no, I understand how the process works. I didn't just— I, I wasn't sure about was how much notification you needed and, um, basically who to call. If it's an emergency, doesn't matter, we'll have an officer do the escort.

Like, I know, like last council meeting when it lasted late, we've already had personnel available. We expected it, so we were prepared to escort people out, and we've done that before with a group of people that stayed in Whittier after the council meeting, after town closed. We escorted a group, I think the biggest group I did was like 5 or 6 cars out of Whittier. So we don't have an issue with that as long as, you know, we get some notice and there's not another emergency we have to respond to. Thank you.

And at this time, I would like to ask, uh, I guess, Council, um, do I need to make the motion?

No, I want to add Peter Denmark, if you would, when we get there. But you might want to allow public comment first. Okay, all right. Is there any further council comments?

Moving on to citizen discussion.

Time is limited to 5 minutes per speaker. Any subject over which council has control. Again, this is not time for dialogue, rather it's time to allow citizens to speak and the council to listen.

Panel clerk, is anyone signed in at this time? No one has signed in, but I do have a letter after The opportunity for people in the room to speak has been given. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak at this time?

Is that a yes, sir? I see you're moving around. No, you're not heading to the podium. Okay, want to read?

This is a, uh, public comment that was submitted to the city clerk's office for me to read. Dear Mrs. Carlson, please accept this document as my formal written statement of correction regarding inaccurate and untrue statements made during the Whittier City Council meeting held on October 13th, 2026. These statements directly involve a past action concerning me and have caused severe unjust damage to my personal and professional reputation, as well as my character standing within the community. Pursuant to the city's obligation to maintain an accurate legislative and public history, I hereby I request and demand that this statement of correction be permanently attached as an official exhibit to the City Council meeting minutes of October 13th, 2026, and that this document be included in the official correspondence packet distributed to the Whittier City Manager and City Council members for review prior to the October 20th, 2026 regular council meeting. Corrections to the record: untrue statement placed into the record.

Background: during the meeting, the City Manager explained that she spoke to the City Attorney about the possible creation of a memo and timeline, which would then give counsel a detailed explanation of the record pertaining to the lawsuit. However, she then had the City Clerk read a response created several weeks prior, which presented a brief timeline and statements of what the attorney felt comfortable sharing in her rigorous effort to force Eric into a full restoration of his property. These— I'm sorry, I— this is from Eric Fleming. I apologize, I did not say that at the beginning. The statements discussed in the meeting only presented the arguments describing the culvert situation in the lawsuit.

It is well known that the city has expended a tremendous amount of city resources with an enormous effort to have Eric forced into complying with the demands of his lawsuit. This full-force effort and the heart of the legal discussions brought to the courts was— were not based around a culvert violation. The statements made in the attorney's prepared memorandum included a historical account of a conversation Eric had on the phone with Scott, the out-of-state a public works director, a director of public works at that time. The statements made in this council meeting have not been on the record and have not been presented to the courts. Untrue statements.

At 1:55:40 of the meeting, the statements— the attorney's memorandum said that Scott informing Eric that a permit is needed and that his culvert does not conform to Whittier specification standards. It stated that Scott told Eric that his culvert has design flaws for potential freezing, creating blockages and potential flooding. It then went on to mention that Scott informed Eric of where he could obtain a permit application and where he could purchase approved culverts for Whittier projects. It then concluded the phone conversation stating that Scott had said, "You shall not install or perform any work within the drainage ditch without a signed permit," and that Eric responded he intended to install the culvert and continue with the work anyway, and that Scott finished the conversation stating proceeding with the work without a permit could result in legal consequences. At 2:0018 of the meeting, the attorney's memorandum made statements that the director of public works had observed the work done in August 2024.

This was also not true because Scott was not present in Alaska during this time. At 2:0046 of the meeting, the statement said Eric did not reach out for an inspection, which is also not accurate to the records documented in the courts. The actual facts. Background: it is quite evident that the city council doesn't have any knowledge to the rationale behind this lawsuit. It's clear by the discussion in the meeting that the city attorney has been withholding from sharing information over what she has no legal authority to withhold from council.

Eric had requested an open meeting to discuss the rationale and the specifics of the lawsuit in two prior city council meetings in July, but did not receive a response from the administration regarding these requests. It appears the city attorney may be responding with a memorandum, and it appears she may be uncomfortable sharing information by continuing citing attorney-client privilege policies. It is perplexing to witness that this city business information has not been fully disclosed with the council at this point. The city attorney and city manager have no legal authority over what information can be shared in this lawsuit. This lawsuit was initiated with allegations that Eric was in the process of building a structure, and it included an old build permit application which had been denied early that year.

The lawsuit was filed through the courts seeking immediate injunctive relief to halt the builds prior to having any communications with Eric and prior to notifying the city offices and prior to issuing any official notice. In the official complaint, it clearly states under the prayer for relief section that the city is seeking permanent injunction, injunction, and a full restoration of the property along with a number of fees and fines. It states that the court should grant these requests because no building permit and no land use permit had been approved for this type of work. A month later, the city mailed Eric an official letter requesting a variance permit application and a land use permit application, which were later discovered by the city manager to be improper paperwork for the work performed on his lot.

Rebuttal: The memorandum read in the meeting does not reflect the actual statements made between Eric and Scott, and the information it shared does not follow the arguments presented throughout this lawsuit in the courts. The memorandum doesn't address the circumstances that led to the decision-making process throughout the lawsuit, or the overarching substance behind the arguments in the lawsuit, or the rationale behind Ms. Ammons' effort to have Eric restore his property. When Scott finally responded to Eric's messages and contacted him, the culvert had already been installed and fill dirt was already paid for and well underway. Scott then informed Eric that he was supposed to have had a permit for that type of work work and discussed the different businesses in Anchorage Whittier had prior experience with when purchasing culverts. He then explained that the next time there were to be any planned work, that he needed to turn in a permit application first, even if it was something sketched up on a napkin.

There was never a discussion of unapproved culvert types that would freeze over and have high potential to get blocked and flooded. There was also no discussion of Whittier's specification standards. The conversation concluded with Scott informing Eric to go to the city offices to get the required paperwork for a permit approval for the, for the culvert installation. Eric proceeded to walk, walk to the city offices to find no person available and left a handwritten message with a substitute receptionist for whichever city official should return. In his note, Eric stated his need for the proper paperwork for his work, the discussion he had with Scott, and he had also left his contact information.

Eric never received a response from any city official regarding this note. Or from the numerous phone calls he had made. Like mentioned above, the director of public works was not present to observe the work performed on Eric's lot, and Eric did reach out to the city offices for inspection inquiry and received no response from the city until June of this year. These statements were— are all clearly established on record and in the courts. The official record must reflect the truth.

I expect this correction to be filed and preserved within the city's archives accordingly.

Sincerely, Eric Fleming.

Is there— I'm sorry, anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak at this Fine. Okay, moving on to, uh, council administration response to citizen comments.

Does anyone wish to respond at this time?

Okay, so I have a question. So the attorney is now gone.

Oh, okay. So thank you.

Is there a motion, a second to enter executive session, discuss negotiations with RC Collins per Whittier Municipal Code 2.08.040-1, matters that if immediately disclosed would tend to adversely affect the finances of the city?

Motion. Second.

I guess I'll make that motion. I'll second.

Um, as far as, uh, invites, I guess the— you said the attorney is online, and also—. Is there a discussion? You? Yes, please. Do we need to have a discussion about this?

Definitely. Capital—. Okay.

Discussion.

Was there a laydown or a different agenda that we have for this currently? Our current agenda doesn't have anything for executive session. Through the mayor, that is correct. Um, however, council can go into executive session to discuss whatever they would like to discuss that's appropriate for executive session at any time during a meeting, whether or not it's on the agenda. Um, this came up yesterday, so we did not add it to the agenda as it was already published.

Um, but we are seeking council direction on this item.

And I've discussed this twice now with Shelby. I don't know if this is the correct time to do it, but I will be making a motion to add Eric Fleming to an executive session. Um, this needs to be talked about, but we can do it when we come out. Doesn't matter.

Madam Clerk can call for roll. One thing I would want to bring up— apologies, Mr. Pinquoch— but Council has determined before that because Mr. Pinquoch had a power of attorney for RC Colin, that it wasn't appropriate to have him included in those conversations as a conflict. I just would pose that to the Council. And that was rescinded about 2 months ago. The power of attorney was rescinded.

Yep. Oh, okay.

On the motion to enter executive session to discuss negotiations with RC Collin as per Whittier Municipal Code 2.08.40, matters that if immediately disclosed would tend to adversely affect the the finances of the city. Mr. Macalto? Yes. Mr. Pinquoch? Yes.

Mrs. Loan? Yes. Mr. Denmark has left the meeting.

Mr. Shen? Yes. Mayor Wagner? Yes. The motion passes, and council enters into executive session at 10:28 PM.

Time to—.

Matt and Jackie, I'm gonna move us into a breakout session for this executive session.

Okay, Matt, did you just say something? No, I think Jackie did. Just make it sure. Thank you.

Just for those watching online, I apologize. This is the city clerk. Uh, all of my cameras have declined to participate in this meeting. At this point, uh, so you have a black screen. I apologize.

A motion was made by Mr. Shen and seconded by Miss Sloan to exit executive session. Voting on the motion: Mr. Shen, yes. Mrs. Sloan, yes. Mr. Macaltao, yes. Mr. Pinquoch, yes.

Mayor Wagner, yes. The motion passes and council exits executive session at 11:11 PM. Is there a motion and a second to direct administration to pursue damages including fees and costs for the Triangle lot lease previously leased by RC Cullen?

So moved. A second.

Discussion?

Hearing none, call for vote. Voting on the motion. Mr. Pinquoch? No. Mr. Shen?

Yes. Mrs. Loan? Yes. Mr. Macaltao? No.

No.

No, motion fails.

Mr. Mayor, if I may, in regards to your request about an executive session regarding Mr. Fleming, um, The attorneys did suggest that we either schedule a special meeting to have that discussion or hold it at our next regular meeting, but as an earlier agenda item, as the attorney that's working on this case, Brian, is actually located in Washington, D.C. So, um, that way we could have him on as well so that he can provide his input. Is that something— would you like it as a special meeting, or is November 17th acceptable. If we want earlier, how about a special meeting right before the regular meeting? We could do that too.

Is there any objection to that? Okay, we will schedule a special meeting prior to the November meeting with that executive session.

Any further business?

Okay, if there's no further business, um, this meeting is adjourned.