Assembly Regular Meeting - May 19th, 2026

I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting to order at 6 PM. This is a regular assembly meeting for Tuesday, May 19th, 2022. 2026. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Michael Bowles. Here. Stephanie Nowers. Here. Dee McKee.

Yep. Maxwell Sumner. Present. Bill Gamble. Here.

Dimitri Fanov. Here. Ron Vernier. Present. Madam Mayor, you do have a quorum.

Thank you. Are there any changes to the agenda? Yes, Assemblyperson Bowles, go ahead. This is for the consent agenda first or the agenda in general? Uh, you want to do consent first?

I'll do consent first. Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. So I would like to pull, uh, RS 26-051 from the consent agenda. Okay. And that's it for the consent agenda.

Not pull it off the agenda, just pull it. Right, just be able to discuss them separately, right? Okay, anybody else have anything they want to pull from the consent agenda? Yes, it's on. Okay, anybody else want to make any other changes?

Okay, Assemblyperson Bowles, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I would like to pull Ordinance 26-065 from introductions, and I move to postpone indefinitely. Okay, one motion at a time. Okay, you can— you either pull it off the agenda altogether or you move to postpone it indefinitely.

Okay, I move to pull Ordinance 26-065 off the agenda. Okay, is there objection? Okay, we have an objection. Um, I would just— I'm not sure why we would pull it off. This is the proposal for, uh, Another way to reduce property taxes in the, in the borough.

And I just, I know you want to discuss your proposal and you put it out there a long time ago to get it out there for the community to discuss. And I'm trying to do the same to get it out there and be able for the community to discuss it in this body to, to look at it. So I think we should move forward with the introduction and discussion about it. Any other discussion about pulling it? Yes, sir, go ahead.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I disagree. Um, what this ordinance aims to do is actually introduce a sales tax on top of already existing taxes, and there is no appetite for that in my opinion, and I don't think we should be spending time on this. Thank you. Okay, so Assemblyperson McKee, go ahead.

I think one of the most common words we've heard this year is taxes, and I think we need to wait. And the leaves are like floating all— and the legislature, I kind of think maybe we we should wait until the legislature decides what it's going to do before we start piling on. So I, I think it would be a good idea to postpone it. Okay, Senator Person-Howers, go ahead. Ms. McKee, we're already going to be discussing taxes on, um, on the 16th.

So we have various proposals to discuss tax, um, and there's one already scheduled for that. There's one for a 6.5% sales tax. So I don't think this Does anything except allow that discussion for the community to talk about how they want to fund things. So this is an idea. If they, they don't want to do this, we can stick with the system that we have.

It's just to have the discussion about it, and either way it would go forward to the voters. So I would appreciate the ability to let the community have a discussion on it. Assemblyperson Sumner, and then Deputy Mayor, one of the— whichever one. Thanks. Uh, yeah, I mean, uh, I don't disagree that, uh, discourse is necessary.

We're already going to be talking about, uh, a sales tax proposal. I will say that this— Mr. Bowles is right— this does actually not repeal property taxes. It does give a discount, but it, it adds a sales tax on top of property tax. And, uh, I mean, the last time a sales tax in addition to the property tax was on the ballot, it failed 3 to 1. I don't see that changing, uh, so I mean, why waste everyone's time?

Deputy Mayor, um, Miss Nowers came up with this and I think she ought to be heard. Further discussion? Assemblyperson Gamble? Yeah, I agree. I think that if we're been talking about process and following it for the last several meetings, and that she has an idea that she'd like discussed and let the public weigh in on.

I think that she should have that opportunity. Further discussion? Okay, members, please proceed to vote then, see if we have an objection. If everybody would go ahead and vote.

The motion is by Assemblymember Bowles to remove Ordinance 26065 from introduction.

The motion passed with Assemblymember Bernier, Gamble, and Nowers opposed. Okay, are there any other changes to the agenda? Assemblyperson Gamble. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, also from introductions, I'd like to pull Ordinance 26-021.

Okay, is there objections? My personal summer. Does that pull it or postpone it? Well, that's what I didn't want to—. What was the ordinance number?

It's, uh, introductions for public hearing on June 2nd. Oh, 6-1. It's 02126-021. And all I want to do is just ask that the public hearing be moved to June 16th. So that the community councils can meet and have an opportunity to weigh in on this ordinance.

If we do, do it in just 2 weeks, a lot of community councils are not going to have an opportunity to meet and be able to weigh in on this ordinance. Okay, I would recommend waiting until you're at introductions and then move to divide the question. Okay.

Okay. Okay. So we'll deal with that then later. Okay. All right.

Thank you. Any other change?

Right. So we're going to wait till we get to that. Yeah. Okay. Are there any other changes to the agenda?

Okay, hearing none, then the agenda has been changed. We all stand, please. And let's see, is Carter in here? I was going to have him— is Carter in here? Was going to have him lead us in the pledge.

Is he outside with the robotic? Yeah. Oh, there he is. Would you lead us in the pledge, please?

One nation under God, indivisible, with the liberty and justice for all.

And so tonight we do have some special, um, orders of the day. I'm going to come down.

Stuff in the bathroom. You don't have stuff in the bathroom.

Hello. And let me turn the mic on. Whereas the Northern Lights Robotic Team is the only FIRST Robotics Competition team in the state of Alaska competing on the national level, representing the Matsu Valley, Anchorage, and the state of Alaska with innovation, determination, and excellence. And whereas FIRST Robotics is the world's leading youth robotics community, inspiring students through hands-on STEM learning opportunities that foster creativity, teamwork, leadership, and problem-solving essentials for the future. And whereas the Northern Lights team consists of the businessman Carter and some— well, this says 9, but we, as you can see, there's only 2 here tonight because of different circumstances, representing, uh, 6 high schools who worked tirelessly during their rookie season to design, build, and prepare a competition robot entirely from scratch to prepare for the regional and the international competition.

And whereas during the regional competing campus in Minnesota, the Northern Lights competed among 47 other teams across the United States, around the world, including teams from Czech Republic, Japan, China. And whereas being— besides being a robotic team and entering the competition as underdogs The Northern Lights demonstrated remarkable adaptability, teamwork, and strategic thinking, earning selection to the number one alliance and ultimately helping secure victory in the regional championship. And whereas the historic accomplishment marks the first time in Alaska first robotics history that a robotic team from Alaska has achieved this level of success and qualified for the FIRST Robotics World Championship in Houston, Texas. And now I therefore, Edna DeBries, Mayor of the Mat-Su Borough, do proudly recognize and honor them.

Brenda's gonna go ahead and start that. So on the screens, you're gonna see some slides and they're going to talk and discuss about that. You can either use the portable mic or this or that one. You can put your back to the audience or you can face them, whatever you feel comfortable. I think I'm gonna grab the handheld mic right here.

Madam Mayor, the wireless presenter to advance the slides is on the podium. Oh, so you want them to click the slide? Okay, I can do that. So over here. Oh, okay.

Do you see it? Yeah. Okay, there we go. Awesome. Cool.

I think this is on. It should be. It is on. Okay. Oh, slide the thing up.

Push it up there. Near on. It should be on. Awesome. Cool.

Well, I'd just like to first start off by thanking you all for allowing us to be here today. Um, going into this season and starting the team, uh, we knew that we were, um, as underdogs, as Madam Mayor said, but we were determined to represent the state with the limited resources that we had. I mean, as I go through the slideshow, you'll see some photos of us. First of all, we built the robot in our team captain's basement. Um, we outsourced all of our parts for our robot from various other teams, teams as the, uh, UAA used to have a team, but they diminished, so we borrowed some of their parts, used them to build our robot.

We recycled things from Colony High School, just kind of really pulling in all of our resources to come together and build this robot from scratch. Up on the screen, you'll see some key points, such as we represent over 4 high schools across the Matsu Valley, and we engage more than 90 students through our initiatives there in Anchorage and through the Matsu. We are the only team in Alaska, as, as Madam Mayor said, that has achieved this level of success. In reaching world championship status as a rookie team, especially for Alaska. Um, here on the screen is, um, all the students involved in our team.

Starting on the top left, we have Finn, Justin, who's standing to my right, Cooper Habemeister, Isaac, our team captain, who's in the back, uh, Wesley, myself, JT, Ronan, Kana, and Tanya, and then Jeremiah standing next to me on my left. Um, so here are some photos from our regional competition. This is our robot. As we play defense in one of our matches, the objective for this year's game was to pick up what's loaded in our robot right now, which was fuel. Justin, I'll grab one of those and pick it up and show it to you guys and kind of feed it through our shooter that we have designed, which is that kind of— you want to point to Justin on the front.

And what that does is it will intake the balls we have loaded into our robot, shoot them into those turrets. You can see onto the right. That black box that says "Rebuilt" with that blue tag to score points. Justin, do you want to talk a little bit about our autonomous strategy that we had coded? Autonomous strategy?

Yeah. And kind of what that entails in the game. Well, for autonomous strategy, we wanted to do something pretty simple. We didn't have the resources to do anything overly complex. In fact, we only had really two programmers that were able to do very much, more like one.

So our autonomous strategy was pretty simplistic. It was basically just to shoot the preload. At the beginning of a match in the competition, you started out with a certain number of scoring elements. And in order to score points, you have to shoot them into that center scoring element tag in the middle. And that's all our autonomous would do.

It would shoot our preload into the scoring zone and score about 8 points. Pretty simplistic, but it worked well sometimes when it decided it wanted to work. And during the competition— I should have made this clear, but I'll say it now. Um, there's two different periods. There is a 30-second autonomous period, as Justin just explained, where our robot runs solely off of code and not driver input.

And then for the rest of the match, for about a minute 30 seconds, um, our driver will control the robot via an Xbox controller. As you could see Justin driving the robot up, and what that does is it allows our code to run, score points in autonomous, and then with our alliance, we would then go and score, um, with our driver controlling the robot. This photo is Wesley. He's our human player for our team, and what he does is he stands off to the side of the field and he will shoot balls into the turret to score points. He's— and throw them into the, into the turret to score points.

And he's holding up our front plate, which is not currently on the robot. We had all the teams sign it that were at the competition. He's holding up the flag in the background. This is our team working on the robot in our pits, fixing some things in between matches, making sure it works properly and making sure that we have nothing that's broken. This is our team after we won regionals.

Jeremiah is holding our plaque that says Rookie All-Star. Kana and Tanya in the front are holding our Rookie All-Star Award. What the Rookie All-Star Award is, is it's an award awarded to a rookie team that they see best fits the criteria that they look through the competition. Innovation, things like using resources to your advantage, like we have done. Other things impacting our communities, as Justin said, like things like our initiatives in Anchorage, reaching out to community teams, building those community teams so kids can have more access to STEM and robotics as well.

Um, this is after returning from Minnesota. The, um, one of the head people over at, uh, FIRST in Alaska met us at the airport, congratulated us for our success, and we're holding up our banner there. All of our team members are present. So here are some photos from the World Championships. So at regionals, we qualify for worlds in, in ranking points through our team with our winning alliance.

We were chosen on the winning alliance, which means we competed with some of the best teams at the regional competition, and we were able to win in the semifinals and finals and qualify for the World Championships. This is Isaac, our team captain, directing our drivers as they drive throughout the field as they're scoring points and using strategy of defense to defend other robots on the opposing alliance to make sure that our team and our alliance teams can score as many points as possible. This is our robot as it navigates through the field, defending other robots, making sure that we can keep our points, they can keep their points, so we can ultimately win a match. This is Ronan, JT, and a member from Nightcrawler, who is one of the teams that we competed with at regionals along with State Line. Their stickers are on the side of our robot, that red sticker and that purple sticker.

And we made sure at Worlds to build connections with them, hang out with them. And really make it prominent that we were thankful for these, uh, the success and what they saw in our team. Yeah. They helped us out quite a lot. They were very friendly, um, and we made good friends with these teams.

Um, and we had many issues with our robots. These guys would always come down and help us, uh, make it work so we can actually, uh, compete in the next match. Yeah, it's, it's really cool to see how the different teams just come and, uh, almost like fight over to help us. We, uh, we asked if we needed a part and they were like, oh, we want to help you and we'll send over for us right away. I don't know if you want to add to that.

Yeah, Jeremiah. I will say that throughout the whole regional competition, lots of things wouldn't be able to have done without them. As a person who has stayed in the pits a lot of the time as the safety manager, many things that they would come back to would be given from the other teams and be very helpful and necessary for repairing our robot. Let's just see this next photo here. This is Justin.

He is the head coder for our team, and he also is our secondary driver. It's him setting up his driver station. If you want to elaborate on how that kind of works at the competition, setting it up, getting ready to go for the competition. Yeah, there's a transition period between matches. The match itself is about 2.5 minutes long.

It goes by pretty quick when you're in the heat of the moment, of course, but there's areas on each side of the field where you put your driver station. In this case, it's our computer. For most teams, it is just a computer with some controllers on it. Um, you just set it there, plug it in, um, and you're off to go. This photo here is our team in the stands cheering for us.

Uh, you can see some of our— the parents, Miss Dusenberry, who's present here today, wearing our team sweaters, travel hoodies, just kind of cheering us on in the stands. Uh, there's members from Nightcrawler and State Line in the back cheering us on as well as we compete. Um, here is a picture of all the first teams from Alaska that participated in the championships. We have all FIRST Robotics levels present this year, which is something that is rare and I don't— I believe has never happened before. We have members from teams from FLL, which is the lowest level robotics, which they build LEGO robotics.

FTC is the step up, which you get more manufactured metal screws, that kind of stuff. Different coding languages, more advanced problem solving. And then you have FRC, which we compete in, which is the highest level of robotics. And all the teams are there present with Dave Patterson, kind of like the main guy for FIRST Robotics in Alaska there in the front. We'd like to thank our sponsors who have helped us tremendously: ConocoPhillips, MTA, MEA, Sarah W. Engineering, Alaska Bush Tracks, the Gene Haas Foundation, and many others for their support.

And we'd like to also thank the community as well. You guys have been a tremendous help just supporting us and getting us to where we are. We wouldn't be here without you, so thank you. And then we'd also like to present the borough and Madam Mayor with a game element signed by our team with our regional championships, Northern Knights FRC 10-9-5-0 in the year. Thank you.

So, yes, that's for you to keep. Thank you so much.

We in the audience have a couple of prob— proud mothers. Would you ladies like to stand? And so, uh, in my presence, I don't want anybody to say anything bad about the younger generation. They are coming along fine.

Although we don't have a proclamation, I do want to recognize that this is EMS Week, and we are very thankful for all of our employees, volunteers, on-call people that are involved in our EMS So, um, the next item on our agenda is processing the minutes. We have a regular meeting from the 7th of April, uh, the budget presentation minutes from the 9th of April, a regular meeting from the 21st of April, budget public meeting from the 23rd of April, budget public hearing minutes on the 28th of April and budget public hearing minutes from the 30th of April. Are there any changes from the agenda from the assembly? Okay, hearing none, then they are approved as presented. Agency reports, and tonight we have somebody from the City of Palmer So, Mayor, if you'd come forth and talk to us, please.

Madam Mayor, assembly members, Mr. Manager, Madam Clerk, thank you for allowing me to be here. Start off on a negative note. Um, just this last meeting, our Council approved the resolution in opposing your 6.5% sales tax, uh, Resolution 26013, um, and, uh, I'm sorry, 032, and we'll be forwarding that on to the other cities as well. It's obviously onerous for the City of Palmer.

We already have a 4% sales tax for a year. It'll go down to 3%, um, October of next year. Uh, I'm not sure that I want to live like in the state of Washington where you have a 10.5% sales tax. Um, that's really going to take a, a big hit on all 3 cities. It'll be 9.5%, 9% at Wasilla, and 8.5% at Lake Talkeena.

So I will be forwarding a copy of this off to you to the Clerk as well. Some better news, uh, we had a ribbon cutting at the food bank this last Friday, which was an amazing event. The food bank, as you know, has moved. It's now 5,300 square feet where it was a little over maybe 1,000 square feet before. They're serving now approximately 1,000 families per month.

They have walk-in freezers They now have sinks that they can clean vegetables. They have a waiting room. Probably more importantly, they have a big parking lot and bathrooms. And so it was well attended. The mayor was there as well.

Right after that, we had Police Memorial Day, which was May 15th. For those who don't know, May 15th, 1999, Officer James Roland was killed. Police officer from Palmer Police was killed, uh, in just above Fred Meyer parking lot right now. Um, it was a terrible night. I was on council at that point.

I got a call middle of the night. It was, you know, um, some— I guess if you want to call it some positive things came out of that. We went from having a one-person patrol to two people now on patrol all the time. But, you know, it was a good fellowship. It was held at the police station in the back, and it was actually kind of a picnic.

You know, they had hot dogs and hamburgers, and just, it was kind of remembrance. Had a flag that was flown over the Capitol that was presented to us as well.

Torch Run was Saturday for Special Olympics. That was held up at the LDS Church, and that's put on by the police officers as well. And there was a pretty big crowd there. Madam Mayor and I decided not to participate because it was a little bit longer than we could do. So, um, some construction projects that are going to be affecting people in and around Palmer, which start May 26th: Evergreen Avenue The main, main road coming across from the center town is going to be closed.

We are, we are doing construction on that to do the same thing that we did with Fireweed. We're removing the tracks, lowering the grade, so, and putting sidewalks on both sides of the road. That should be done, uh, final date is September 15th. We hope that it's going to be done before then. At the same time, Cedar Avenue which is where the old car wash was, is going to be pushed through the railroad tracks as well.

And that road is designed to allow the police officers from the police station easier, quicker access, uh, onto the main roads. So that road enters right to where the police officer's driveway is. And we're also doing up at Valley Trails, which is across from the high school, some pretty massive repaving. Up there. Some, some of the paving up there is 3/4 of an inch thick.

We need to tear it all up and put up, you know, 3-inch, 3 inches of gravel. And, and Friday flang started this last Friday. There will be some traffic revisions because of the library. Obviously construction is going on. Evergreen will be closing, obviously, that road.

You'll be able to enter into the museum/visitor center from Denali coming down Elmwood. Half of that lane will be blocked off for the, for the construction, and the other half is going to be open for when the buses and stuff arrive. So, Madam Mayor, that's what I have tonight. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't see anybody here from the school district, and Todd's not here from the state of Alaska. Um, there has not been a board, uh, assembly and school board meeting, but I understand there is some public relations, right?

Open, Madam Mayor. I'm going to—. Assemblymember Ponov, I'm going to restart this. It plays automatically. Yes.

Yeah. Is that okay? So, so this is just a slideshow. There's no sound. There's nothing to it.

We had a privilege. Was it last week? No, the week before, I think. We, um, there were several, um, actually I've seen one more assemblyman, uh, Sumner, that was there. Then we had, um, Deputy Director Jason Ortiz was there, and me and Mr. Brown went to a, what they call it, a fair.

I don't know, Mr. Brown will probably correct me on what exactly it was, but we served in the capacity of judges of what they have done over there at the Academy Charter. There was a lot of exhibits, there's a lot of interesting stuff that we really enjoyed. And these are 6th, 7th, 8th graders, is they presented different case, some history lessons, some honoring of the— honoring their soldiers. And there was many more amazing exhibits that we get to witness. And there was also a— this is a year where the school is transitioning from the original principal who was there for many years to a new principal, and we were able to also congratulate them and give them a coin from Matsuburo to say thank you for their service.

And, and I think it was just a— the weather turned out to be really good. We've learned quite a bit, and this is a one of those things, and it was just impressive to see kids doing these kind of projects. The 8th graders went to travel to Washington, D.C., where they learned a lot of stuff from there. Then they were able to replicate here some they learned, and there was few other things that Mr. Brown, I think, found it to be very interesting, and I will have him fill in maybe a little bit what— how his experience went. Yeah, thank you, Madam Mayor.

Yeah, so I, uh, Miss Gerard invites different folks into their World Fair that they do every year. It's pretty impressive. So if you get that opportunity, it's worth going in there and just seeing what the kids are up to. And, uh, it was funny because the first booth we walked up to was a 6th grade booth, and they were, um, you know, so they all had different themes, and, and they had some Taxation Without Representation protesters out front. And they weren't kidding.

They were pretty adamant about it. So it was just fun to see the kids and their pa— young people really, and their passion and the preparation. The Tomb of the Unknown. That's one of the photos you saw in there. And again, I don't take anything away.

They had some amazing artwork, some amazing food. They really put it all in. And but just some of the preparation to do some of the things they were doing for that Tomb of the Unknown exhibit was impressive. Having been somebody that's been to DC and been to that, you know, just seeing that, I was like, man, these guys are, they're all in, they're taking it seriously, and they really, really were putting some great effort behind it. So just really impressive through and through just to watch that.

And then they had some younger exhibits, but we were judging, so we didn't get to see some of those other booths. They kept us pretty busy while we were there. Assemblyperson Nowers. I just want to say, as a former parent of a couple of academy charter folks, that is an amazing lift for the, the teachers, administrators, the students. And I know we had some parents here, some moms.

There are a lot of moms and dads that put a lot of effort into making that a reality as well. So it's pretty neat. And if you can get there when it's a not windy day, that's always a plus.

And that's—. And although there's no pictures, there was another— our fire and EMS, along with many other partners, had, had a fair for kids not this Saturday, but the previous week, where people and families were able to, um, take the kids to the fire station, learn a lot about safety. They had some exhibits for them to try, some gifts to take home. Took all my kids there, and it was impressive to see and to learn all of everything that goes in place. I think they have the new trailer that is a portable that has like the oven and the bedrooms and many other things like inside of it.

That was a very good way to teach kids how to close valves, how to turn off breakers, and how to react to emergency situations, which was very impressive. And we found that to be a very good educational thing. So thank you, Ken, for setting that up. And there was one more proclamation— it's not a proclamation— that, Madam Mayor, you missed. There is a, um, I learned that there was a National Public Works Week, um, is also currently.

So we do want to say thank you for all the hard work you do, because if it wasn't for the— thank you.

So keep them roads safe. There's a lot of potholes that need to be fixed, and, um, so let's get them all done so our residents are not breaking any wheels, tires, or suspensions. With that said, thank you for a good winter. I think most people have been very pleased with during some of the harsh windstorms and the snowfalls we had. I think overall the teams did real well, and I want to say our deepest gratitude because that's what helps the EMS work, people go to work, and for our students to get to school, and we appreciate that.

Right, I think was it last year we had all of the public works people here and did big things. So yeah, are there any other public relations? Okay, Mr. Brown, do you have a report? Okay, Mr. Attorney, do you have a report? Madam Clerk?

Just that the clerk's report is in your red folder with the upcoming meeting schedule for the next 3 months. Thank you. Uh, the other items, then the next item is citizens and other correspondence. Are there any comments from the assembly on the citizens and other correspondence? Okay, Madam Clerk, would you read the IMs into the record, please?

Thank you, Madam Mayor. IM 26098, reporting the conclusion of contract for bid number 24-144B. With Nodak Electric and Construction Inc. for a final contract amount of $344,200 for the supply and install of generators for emergency services. IM26104, reporting the conclusion of contract for bid number 24-157B with Orion Construction Inc. for a final contract amount of $1,072,000— or $72,202.93 for the Animal Care and Regulation 2023 upgrade to the animal care facility. Okay.

Are there any comments on the IMs from the assembly? Okay. Seeing and hearing none. Uh, now we have audience participation. I believe we have a signup sheet.

Thank you.

And, um, I don't know if anybody has signed up, uh, that wanted to testify on the sales tax. The hearing originally was set for tonight. And then at the last assembly meeting it was postponed until the 16th of June. But if you came tonight and you wanted to testify on that, we certainly welcome you to testify. And so I have a sign-up sheet, and what is normally our procedure is that we will go through those that have signed up, and then we will open it up to anybody else that's here presently, and then we open it up for anybody that's online.

And, um, so Patty Fisher, or Patricia, you're, you're first here. There was somebody else, but they crossed their name off, so I wondered because I thought I was second. Okay, my name is Patricia Fisher. I'm resident of Meadow Lakes. I'm speaking to you tonight about Ordinance 2026-021, an ordinance which removes the consideration of community comprehensive plans from from the issuance of a conditional use permit.

The ordinance is being introduced tonight and will be heard on— I believe now it's June 16th, was changed earlier. I am—. I was part of a group of residents who fought a pit on Sylvan Road just off the Parks Highway in Meadow Lakes in 2021. The CUP was failed by the Planning Commission and later failed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Our opposition at that time to the CUP was centered on the Meadow Lakes Comprehensive Plan.

That was the argument that Alex Strawn told me to use in countering this CUP. A comprehensive plan is the strongest tool that a community has—. That a community that's not a city has— to oppose actions contrary to the wishes of the community. Our comprehensive plan was written over a period of 4 years by a group of 40 residents and then approved by the borough. It is very complete and detailed.

To be very clear, it is not a— it is not prescriptive. In other words, it is not regulatory. It simply lays out the wishes of the community. There are 15 comprehensive plans on the borough website. I have talked to many of the members of those communities.

They work just as hard as Meadow Lakes did to complete their plans, and they value, um, and they value that plan as a protection for the community. I will continue to contact council members over the next, now, 2 or 3 weeks so that they will know what the attempt is to remove this comprehensive plan as an issue during a CUP. I strongly suggest that if you have a problem with gravel, you find a solution that is not a shotgun approach, which is what Ordinance 26-21 is— a shotgun approach. You should not be removing comprehensive plans from the consideration. They are critical to communities.

They have been worked on for many years and developed by with the res— by the residents of the communities. You should not be gutting comprehensive plans without the permission of the communities. This is an egregious misuse of assembly power to remove this authority, this provision from a comprehensive plan from the community. Fix it if you have a problem. Fix the problem via some other means.

Not gutting a comprehensive plan. Thank you. Esther.

Good evening, my name is Esther Huddleston, Meadow Lakes RSA 27 board member.

Is this proper road maintenance? How much sealant are you going to put on this road?

Meadow Lakes Drive has drainage issues. A lot of the roads, connecting roads, don't even have culverts. It will cost my RSA $10 million to redo that entire road if the Matsu Borough doesn't address these issues. And who's gonna take the blame if that road fails because we're not properly maintaining that road. And Meadow Lakes Loop, $5 million.

My RSA does not have that funding to fix these roads. How are we going to pay for it? Yeah, it's on the road improvement project list, but we have no money for it. And The problem is, is the borough is not properly maintaining these roads. They need to do layovers of pavement.

I mean, when do you draw the line on the sealant? And then we have borough employees not addressing this light post to our, uh, RSA board. They're just going, oh, one person wants a light post for $18,000, and they're going to take that money from the dress— from the drainage issues to put a light post because one person says so, because it's unsafe for their kid to get on the school bus. Well, if that's true on Pittman, that students are unsafe waiting for the school bus, then we need to do a study and see how many bus stops there are on Pittman and see how many kids get on the bus at Pittman. And there's Meadow Lakes Midnight Sun Charter School, there's 200 cars dropping off their kids, and there's a bus stop there.

There's no, uh, post light there. And see how much it costs and bring it to the voters to see if they want to increase their property taxes for student safety to put light posts, not just taking $18,000 from this ditch work that needs to be done because the borough failed to maintain these roads over the years. Just because one person says, I want $18,000 for a light post, we need to research and not just hand over $18 grand. And we need gravel pits to fix these roads without gravel pits? Where are we going to get the money?

It's already expensive right now to fix these roads. But anyways, I hope borough staff addresses the issue before spending $18 grand to this board. And no, I've been reminded we're just advisory, but then what's the point of having a board if you're not even going to bring the dollar amount to the board? Thank you. Jackie.

And if people from the audience want to be excused, they can be at this time, or you're welcome to stay also.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the assembly. My name is Jackie Goforth. I've told you about the American Library Association and how they were formed in the '40s. In order to be an altruistic entity that was benefiting everyone, and how they've turned into activists that are pushing a Marxist agenda. They push grooming, LGBTQ, DEI, and they push it on children without parents' knowledge, and they don't make a secret about it.

If you listen to how they teach their librarians now, they tell you how they're doing it. So I'm telling you that they're using, they're using their sycophants, which are the Friends of the Library nonprofit. In order to push this agenda. How can you tell? Because the speakers who come out defending this and the speakers who attack online and here are the members of the Friends of the Library, if not the leadership.

That's how. Now, this book is obscene. It's in our library, no matter how much they defend you and tell you, and it meets all 5 criteria of the Miller test. And I'm giving you another example. Look at the first one.

This one's full grooming, full grooming. "Come on, let's go to my house. I'm pretty sure it'll be empty all day so that we can have a sex hookup." They're skipping school for this. It's on page 135. That sounds like enticement of a minor to me.

Now, I'm sorry I'm giving you 79 and 80 again, which are these mutated humans. But you'll notice for artistic, they can certainly show what an Adam's apple looks like on a male, but they don't show on the other male who's transgender his Adam's apple. And they show you he has broader hips, which is not true. And he doesn't even have a thinner waist. The next thing, uh, remember they're pushing the political agenda that every white male in here is gay or transgender or weak?

They, they even gave him a cane. They even gave him a cane. But the worst one for science, take a look at the, the, uh, female figure on the testosterone. If you'll notice on her chest, those little marks, those little marks are a mastectomy. Okay, those little teeny lines there, that's a mastectomy.

And the bottom ones, those aren't pecs. And this is a person who has been on gender puberty blockers. You don't get this kind of, uh, body shape as a teen if you haven't been on puberty blockers. And finally, this is not what mastectomies look like. Your last, your last page will show you what a mastectomy actually looks like.

This is a mastectomy, an actual female who went through gender surgery. That's what it looks like. She does not look happy. The only one looks happy, who looks happy, is the surgeon who just mutilated her for his yacht payment or something. That's what they're showing children without anyone's knowledge.

The parents don't know what's in this book. I'm telling you, it's a groomer book. I have studied it. I could write a thesis on it. This book is a grooming document.

And no matter how many people tell me I'm crazy online, and no matter how many people tell anyone I'm crazy, no matter what they talk about, no matter what they tell you, there's no obscenity, it's not true. But the only ones who speak about that are the friends of the library leadership. Please notice I invited them all at the library board meeting, but instead of— instead of pushing at the library boards to have people show up and make the library meeting chaotic, to call down here and defend this book. Why are you just defending it at the library board? Come down and defend it here.

I think we need to know who they are. Thank you. Thank you for listening. Uh, so John Shepherd. John.

Hello, ma'am. Ma'am, I'm just here tonight just to see if you already discussed the paving of Republican. Okay, can you state your name for the record, please? My name is Joshua Shepherd. Thank you.

Okay, let's go ahead with your testimony. Now, just curious, uh, it's been a lot of talk and stuff with, uh, paving Republican Way there in the Butte. Just curious what the plans are on doing it. I think it is under a section of public hearing, sir. Uh, you're welcome to testify about it here, but when we're done with audience participation, there will be a public hearing on it.

And so there will be a report and it'll be open and you can testify at that time. Oh, yes, ma'am. Thank you. Okay. Welcome.

And, uh, Linda?

Hello, my name is Linda Spohn. I was going to address the obscene, perverted, vulgar materials in our libraries, but changed my topic at the last minute. I'm appalled that our borough attorney doesn't know the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy. It's embarrassing. He said they were the same, like substituting the word rain for precipitation.

I don't come here to be critical, but this is important, especially since we are celebrating America's 250 years of independence. I quote John C. Ellery: By definition, a republic is a form of government that is ruled according to a charter or constitution, and a democracy is a government that is ruled according to the majority. Although these forms of government are often confused, they are quite different. The main difference between a republic and a democracy is the charter or constitution that limits power in a republic, often to protect the individual's rights against the desires of the majority, unquote. In my opinion, a republic follows the law, the Constitution, rather than mob rule.

In Juneau, we have mob rule. Our legislators don't follow the law or Constitution. Is this why our obscenity laws are not enforced? If confused about what we have here in America, it is a republic. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands.

May God bless and protect America through Christ Jesus our Savior. Thank you. Karen. Karen.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Assembly. My name is Karen Lewis. Um, I'm handing these out. I'm sure you've seen them before. It's, um, this is federal law pertaining to obscenity and Alaska state law pertaining to obscenity.

Now, over the last 3 something years you all have been exposed to the obscenity that is in the library books. And thank goodness they were moved at least to the adult, but it is a Class C felony to have these books in the library. It gives—. Giving access to children. The children could still get access even if they're in the adult area.

So the only thing that is reasonable is to remove the obscene books from the libraries, all of them.

And I don't know why we don't do that. And who needs to make the group that will do it? Can the library— can the library group do that? Someone has to do it. Those books, it's against the law to have those books in the library, and it really is that simple.

And I wish—. I mean, you, you were intelligent people. I wish you would come up with something that would do that, because if you will read these things, it's very obvious that these books are obscene under state and federal law both.

So do something, please. We shouldn't have these disgusting, filthy, horrible, mind-bending, innocence-taking books in our libraries.

Why are they still there? You guys care, or you should.

You're the adults.

You're the ones that are supposed to be helping our community. The worst thing you can do is subject these children to this obscenity, which is against the law. By the way, are you gonna do something about it?

You should.

Get those books out of our libraries.

Grow a spine, to put it politely.

Come on, please. Tired of this. Over 200 meetings, it's ridiculous. Get those books out of the library, please. Thank you.

Okay, George Ferguson, is it? No, but—.

George Theodron, I reside at 14996 East Republican Way. I think you've answered my first question because while it's under the lid in the newspaper, it's not on the agenda that you're going to talk about Republican Way paving as well. So thank you. Okay, ready? So now we'll open it up to anybody that didn't sign up but would like to testify or or give input to the assembly on any subject.

Thank you everybody for demonstrating. Okay, nobody.

Oh yeah.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the assembly. I guess it's appropriate I'm wearing a Seattle sweatshirt. I was just there and taxes are coming up and that's always a huge issue. But Colleen, would you state your name, please? Colleen Vague, V like Victor, H-U-E.

Okay, sorry. Okay, go ahead. But I've been in and out of the country and the state for a while and did not realize that the ordinance regarding comprehensive plans was coming forward. And so I'm glad I'm here tonight. I wasn't planning to speak like usual, but I think it's unfortunate that that's even under consideration.

I have been personally involved in writing and developing of two comprehensive plans, one in order to provide a SPUD to protect the Dog District out on Kenai Goose Bay Road. I'm currently in the process with North Lakes Community Council of developing another community comprehensive plan. And I will tell you that I spent 6 years on the Planning Commission, 5 years as the chairperson. Everybody's a NIMBY. I was incredibly surprised at the people that came up concerned with what activities and what things were coming into their neighborhood.

They're fine with it coming into someone else's, and when it's doing that, those people are NIMBYs. When they come before us, it's the serious issue and it must be taken care of. So I find that the desire to remove public comment and input from what happens in their communities, and especially to their property, somewhat appalling. I know it's inconvenient to listen to the public and what they have to say. You've expressed that over the time—.

Oh, sorry—. From people of this, this board and others. But the fact is, if you want to be in some kind of politics, it's messy. And people have differing opinions, and your time where you are as a public official is finite. You will be one of the people whose only personal decision-making and practical opportunity to make a decision in your neighborhood is as a person, and that comes down to the comprehensive plans.

So I hope you will really consider that when you take action and decide to take the people out of the traditional use permitting process. Thank you. Anyone else have— do we have anybody online, sir? No, nobody online. Okay, one last chance then.

Okay, we'll go ahead and close audience participation, and we're now to public hearings. Madam Clerk. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance— excuse me— Ordinance Serial Number 26041, an ordinance creating Republican Way Natural Gas Local Improvement District Number 672, approving the improvement plan for the district, authorizing the manager to proceed with the improvement, and assessing equally among the properties within the district the cost of the improvement. Okay, I think I will ask for a staff report on this.

Oh, can we have a staff report on this? Because it seems like there are some questions. Jensen, and then we'll open the public hearing.

Through the mayor to the assembly, Shyan Heidel, finance director. Before you is the approval of the creation of Republican Way Natural Gas LID. It is not a paving LID. Um, I know one of the questions was if the work was going to be done this summer, and that is the intent. It will be done during this construction season.

Okay, so up here we've gone over and over about the percentages. Do we—. You want the percentage? Yes. Yeah, can we have a more full explanation please?

Because we have talked more about percentages up here than we have anything else in the world. I think there were 9 ballots 6 mailed out, 8 were returned, 6 were marked yes, 2 were marked no, for a percentage of 75% yes. Okay, Assemblyperson Bowles, did you have a question or comment? Thank you, Madam Mayor. I believe there was questions from the members of the audience as far as whether or not Republican Way is going to be paved this year after or at the same time as the LID.

This is a gas only. Um, that would probably be a question for Public Works. I'm according to, uh, okay, so through the mayor to Mr. Bowles, according to Public Works, there's no paving project for the summer for Republican Way. Okay. Okay.

All right. Okay, so I'm going to open up the public hearing, and so anybody that would like to testify, The testimony at this time is strictly on this ordinance, so just come on up and state your name and then talk to us.

I'm sorry, wait until you get to— okay, state your name and then talk to me. My name is Cheryl Fusieron. We live in Republican Way. We've been there about 11 years. And the road pavement is very, very questionable because it's been in considerable disarray for that long at least.

And so the paving question was on the agenda, we thought. But we also are—. Want to add our name because we're snowbirds, so we just got up here. We want to add our name to the gas— adding our name to have the gas added for our particular home. So it's just really both, both of them are kind of together.

So, and when is the agenda for the pavement?

Well, what I heard from, for the Republican way, when do we come back?

Well, you just answered it. You said it's not going to be done. Yeah. So I'm sorry, it isn't a time for dialogue between us and the audience. Oh, okay, okay.

Is there a time for that? No. Okay, just broke a rule. Okay, but, but there are people in the— there is a Superintendent of Public— we're going to rat him out. Okay, he's raising his hand back there.

Well, I'm sorry you didn't I don't know if you can see it, but you can— he is available, but I'm sorry we can't get back and forth. Anyone else that would like to? Yes, come forth.

Yes, I'm Tom Chipman and representing the LID 672. For the natural gas on the East Republican Way. And I'd just like to take this opportunity to thank the borough and assembly for letting us get this opportunity to try to have natural gas. It improved our property, plus it'll help on heating bills in the winter. And I'd like to thank everybody for it.

Thank you. Okay. And George, you did sign up. Do you want to do some more testimony here? Thank you.

George Fijeron, thank you for the council and the opportunity to speak. Who determines who's on the LID, uh, and how do I find that out? Same gentleman? The lady in red? Yeah.

Thank you.

Anyone else that would like to testify on this ordinance?

We do not have anybody online. Okay. Okay, so last chance. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. And then Assemblyperson Bowles.

Madam Mayor, I move to adopt Ordinance Serial Number 26-041. Okay, would you like to speak to it one way or the other? No? Okay. Discussion by the assembly on, uh, Ordinance 26-041.

I think you had your hand up a little bit. Oh, okay, I thought you had your hand up earlier, so I'm getting back. Okay, I missed the point. Uh, is this the LID that is already completed that we just need to fund, or is this So, one day, just in preliminary action of just starting it. Could we get some clarification?

Is coming through the mayor to assembly member, finance director. This is an LID that is being created and the work will be done this summer. Okay.

I guess, too, since it's a— LED is so popular, I wanted to know if there's people— can we give an opportunity now to— is there a path to modify before it's constructed? If additional people who are in the area could also join, is there a fairly easy path for it or no? I'm going to throw that at Nick. Mr. Attorney? Yes, you could.

You'd have to basically fail this LID and direct staff to work with, uh, I guess the, the proponent, the person who came and applied for it, to redraw it and re-ballot it. The main, the main part is, is that anyone who's going to get included in the LID has to have the opportunity to vote yes or no before you can levy an LID on them. So, there's a path to get there. Functionally, what you would do is have to vote this down and tell them to start over. Okay, I'd hate to stop the process, but it sounds like there's a lot of opinions there.

So, I'll just hold the rest of my testimony for now, or questions for now. Okay, I don't know. Max, some assembly person, something. Yeah, I was just going to point out to Mr. Farnoff that this is a contiguous LID. Correct.

Yeah, and, uh, I've extended a lot of gas lines. It's not any more expensive to extend the gas line further later, so there's no benefit to voting this down to add on more, more users. If they're one lot outside of this LID, they could just pay for that extension to that lot, or if they want to start another LID for 3 or 4 or 5, however many lots further they want to go, then that would be the path forward for them. Deputy Mayor? I was going to say they could hook on to it, couldn't they?

If we passed it, they could just hook on to it.

Assembly person hours? No. Okay. Assembly person votes? No.

Okay. So further discussion by the assembly?

Okay, is there objection to the passing of the ordinance? I, I'm gonna just— not an objection, a question. So remember when we had discussion about LIDs? So this technically would be the time if somebody wanted their name to be removed and we could actually remove them from LID. Was that the discussion that we had the meeting will pass because I— this is actually a good exemplary how it works.

We approve, there's no people opposing us right now, uh, that say remove my name off of it. And if we did, then, you know, they could be out of it. So if I'm understanding correctly, this is— I think Mr. Gimble, I think you brought up the point like why, if they were here, um, they could, you know, ask to be removed of it. And I'm seeing this is actually I think with the way we're handling is the correct way. And, you know, I don't see anybody— I think Nick wants maybe to add something, but, uh, but I'm just saying, if this would be in time, I don't see any opposition.

So that's why I'm voting in favor for it. Mr. Attorney, do you have a comment? Yes, same thing as adding. You could remove somebody, you'd have to re-ballot it because what happens is when you have an LID, you know, in this situation, if there's 10 lots, you're going to take the total cost, you're going to divide by 10. And everyone has to have the opportunity to vote.

If you divide only by 8, let's say, or 7, the amount that each individual lot changes. So under the state statute, they have to re-ballot it to find out. And again, to take somebody out, you might not necessarily have to fail it. You could just direct staff to change it and re-ballot it and come back. But this would be the time to do it.

Absolutely. Further discussion. I'm sorry, further discussion by the assembly. Yes, some assembly. Yeah, Mr. Farmer, uh, the mayor, that— yeah, that— I think I was the one that was bringing that up the last meeting, was that there is an opportunity if you really don't want the LID to go through, that you can plead your case to the assembly.

And this is that meeting where we, you know, I pointed out that in the past, my observation has been that people don't object to the gas line getting built, which is this motion. They object to paying the piper. Which is the next time they object to the bill. Yeah. Okay, further these— is there any objection to the passing of Ordinance 26-041?

Say no objection, then it has passed. Okay, Madam Clerk. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance serial number 26050, an ordinance approving a less than fair market value sale of 9 borough-owned properties to the Alaska State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities for a public purpose. Okay, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

We do have a sign-up sheet. We do not set a sign-up sheet. Okay.

Okay, James.

Yeah. Hi, just move it up to you. Yeah, thank you. Madam Mayor, members of the assembly, good evening. My name is James Sarawine, and I am an employee with the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Central Region Right-of-Way Group.

I represent the department tonight. I have a short prepared statement for you.

The Matanuska Susitna Borough owns 9 parcels of land between Maud Road and the Oakland Highway Bridge at Palmer that are between the river and the highway. DOT proposes to incorporate these lands within the highway right-of-way. Assembly approval of this transfer will enable DOT to more quickly construct erosion protection features that are currently planned for this area. Your approval will also enable DOT to more flexibly and efficiently respond to future erosion by enabling the department to armor other portions of the bank before the river reaches the highway. Department staff are grateful for your consideration of Ordinance 2650.

And, uh, although it's not in my prepared statements, I wanted to acknowledge the exemplary staff that you have as they are. Um, to go a little bit off script, every time I work with them, I walk away and think the Matsu borough is such a wonderful group of folks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else that would like to give testimony on ordinance 26-050? And I think he gave a very good explanation exactly where the land is, so Okay, we do not have anybody online. Okay, I'll go ahead and close public hearing. Assemblyperson Bowles. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I move to adopt ordinance serial number 26-050. Okay, would you want to speak to it, sir? Thank you, Madam Mayor. The only thing I— I mean, I guess I can't say anything better than this gentleman just did. Um, this is going to be extremely helpful and beneficial to the residents along the Old Glen there.

I think this is an excellent initiative by our borough manager who started this. I don't know if you started it before last year when we had the meeting with Representative— now Senator Rauscher— Representative Johnson to discuss the flooding, the years and years of flooding. So, um, thank you, Mr. Manager. Thank you, Madam Mayor, for pursuing this, and it's great to see this come to fruition.

Position. Any other discussion by the assembly? Uh-huh. Assemblyperson Panoff, go ahead. I guess question to Manager Brown.

So once we give these, uh, or sell them for less than fair market value, they, um, we don't have any ownership of it and we can't do anything about it. Is that correct, Manager Brown?

So through the mayor to Mr. Panoff, so this would put it within state right away. So the idea is it's challenging now for DOT to tee up a project for erosion control when we own the property. It's not part of the Old Glen Highway right-of-way. This would allow them to take it into the right-of-way and then include it in future projects to protect the bank. I mean, when you see some of the stuff that's happened along the Mat River, it's challenging to watch the erosion happen until it gets within the right-of-way where DOT can do something about it.

These properties were acquired through buyouts years ago. So I imagine it was predominantly federal funds that procured the property under previous buyouts, and we've looked at that and said it makes a lot more sense if we give it to DOT and have it all within the right-of-way. Then they can build a project more holistically to address the issue. To follow up, there's like 3 parcels between— sandwiched between these parcels, the C-14, C-3, and C-4. Are they already in their possession, or they're still in our possession, or they're privately owned, that, you know, it's on page, I guess, 4 out of 12.

I'm just—. I know why there's some of us— 3 of them that are skipped, and 2, I guess, um, both. If we get an answer for that. But I do want to say thank you for the positive comment that we got from the DOT. I hope the relationship is, uh, same when it's in the return.

Because there are some times that we need to do something, and I think the DOT, we're not— don't have as maybe quick and positive results when we are the ones are trying to get something our way, I guess. Is that Tom Adams coming this way, or no? Okay, that's all I have.

Ready? I don't know, do the clerk want to pull up the map that so everybody can see? Or yeah, it's in our packet, it's page 4 of the IM, so Deputy Mayor, do you have some input? What is the total acreage?

We're doing, uh, less than fair market value. It was like minimum $500.

Through the mayor, the, the goal here is not to make money on these properties, it's to get it into state right away to protect the highway. Um, these properties were acquired through a buyout program because they were homes were, were being— or riverbank was being eroded and homes were at risk of falling into the river. So the, the less than fair market value sale is just a term we use to say that we're transferring them for no value, which is the intent. Um, the goal was never to charge the state to take the property because they're serving a public benefit. I understand that.

Maybe, uh, What do you got to trade would have been my, my comment, I guess.

Assemblyperson Sumner. Yeah, I looked up those parcels on OnX and they show private ownership, C14, C3, and C4.

Through the mayor— I didn't know we were doing this tonight— through the mayor, uh, 3 of those properties, or I'll say the 3, I don't have the diagram in front of me, there are some properties that are in private ownership that were considered as part of the buyout in years past, and the owners elected not to sell the land. Okay, further— okay, Assemblyperson Bolt. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you, Deputy Mayor. Um, so I would just say that the trade is resident safety.

Um, that's a big trade-off. Um, you know, there's already been a house. I mean, I've lived out Kinnick River Road since 2010, and we've watched at least— my wife and I watched at least one house that's been taken by the river. People have lost homes, people have lost property. It's getting closer and closer to the bike path every year, and then of course it's getting closer and closer to the road.

And so I think really the, the main thing that we should be focusing on here is public safety.

And I understand that there are some discussions on some parcels in agreements moving forward that aren't part of this, but this really is a public safety effort here.

Go ahead, sir. So through the mayor, uh, if, if the question is what's in it for us, we don't have a flood or erosion control special service area in this space. So what happened when it encroaching flooding. It breached the bank, flooded, and was traveling down the right-of-way. I think MEA had to go out and secure two poles that are transmission lines that serve the entire Butte and Kinnick River communities, and those poles were at risk of going bye-bye.

And so MEA had to stage teams out there and pay money to secure those poles until the water subsided, or we could come up with an issue. We met DOT staff on site Um, and frankly, we just don't have any response. We don't have any response authorities, quite frankly. Uh, and the attorney's over there going, yep, I told you that. Um, and so we're in this predicament where we're standing there looking at this problem with no legal authority to do anything about it.

Um, and so if you're looking at what's the benefit for the borough, not having to stand there and look at people and going, why aren't you doing something? Because we don't have any legal standing to do something. DOT, however, is in a different position if this is incorporated into the right-of-way. So if you want to look at it from a what's-in-it-for-us perspective, that would probably be it, because Tom Adams and I and Ken and a few others were the ones standing along the highway trying to figure out how we could do something instead of just stand there and admire the problem.

Senator? No? That's who I have down here. I was just going to say that, yeah, this seems like a no-brainer to me. I mean, if you, you know, an analogy comes to mind, you know, last night the State House had the opportunity to do something for the benefit of the state of Alaska.

A lot of individual legislators decided that they wanted to do what's the best interest of themselves or the best interest of their, you know, their local area. And, you know, screwed the pooch. So let's not be like that. I'm like, who's in hours? I really appreciate Mr. Bernier because there are things I would like to get DOT and especially DNR to do, but I do agree this is something where this is a public safety issue.

And if you've driven that recently, you can see the river is again heading towards that bank. And I know in Sutton they were really frustrated to watch the road disappear, disappear, land disappear until it was into the road. So having the ability for the state to, to do something with state dollars to get ahead of that, it's much appreciated, um, and it's probably a cheaper way to go at things than waiting for it to, to go further. So it does seem like a no-brainer. We got to work together on this because at the end of the day, it's people on that side of the road that will be affected by it if we don't get this taken care of.

And if you can do something to pull that gravel out of there, And maybe, you know, channel that a little more because you can take a look at it and see it's got a big bumper pushing it towards that bank. Deputy Mayor, I totally agree on the safety issue. Okay, I just seen less than fair market value and thinking, I bet there's some property that DOT's got that we could really use.

We don't want to be responsible for this, Deputy Mayor. Any further? Yes, Assemblyperson Bonoff, go ahead. Um, just, I guess, just like what you were saying, how reasonable we're to work with, and I think you'll get unanimous support in this, and there is a lot of acres here. When I looked up, some parts are quite large in size, so I just hope that you do relate to your uppers that maybe there's issues that our manager or somebody else that is trying to resolve so that it's also that relationship's mutual from the DOT.

And I do have to mark my calendar that on May 19th, uh, Ms. Nowers actually was promoting the extraction of the gravel, which is— I'm pretty impressed by that.

Assemblyperson Gamble. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I, I know that you think that these lots are large, but they used to be a lot larger. Speaking as one person that's been out there standing there watching the bank just slough off into the river at an incredible pace, this should have been done a long time ago, and it is absolutely a no-brainer. Thank you.

Further discussion by the assembly? Is there any objection to Ordinance 26-050 passing?

Okay, say no objection, then it passes. Madam Clerk. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance serial number 26051, an ordinance accepting and appropriating $338,000 from the United States Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, and accompanying Resolution 26038, a resolution improving the scope of work and budget, and authorizing the manager to enter into an agreement for the Susana Drive Drainage Improvement Phase 1. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing on Ordinance 26-051 and Resolution 26-038.

We do not have a sign-up sheet. Anybody that would like to testify on this ordinance or this Well, yeah, I'm just saying, yeah, they can come up.

The Council on Disability Council and Federal side from Human Services is required to have persons with disabilities can be on emergency management. Um, we work with state and federal is we did, we did find a way to accept emergency management Homeland Security to work with people with veterans and disability in case they have earthquake for funding. This happened nationwide, so we're working with Arizona and state of Nebraska and Colorado. To help with non-traditional counselors. If you look at Department of Human Services and federal side, Trump did downsize with Department of Human Services with non-traditional counselors, with programs of disability, senior, and veterans.

And so if you look at that, if you have a disability in a group home, long-term care, and they have— going to teach them how to use earthquake, what you're supposed to do if we have an outage in South Dakota and after the blow. And we are doing that probably this summer and trying to get trained on land security, and we working with state and federal, Homa Lekun, all that.

The person in the back. Yeah, you're done, sir.

I'm Vicky Banner. I'm actually a mitigation specialist. I worked for FEMA for last 8 years, finally got home. I've I've been through the entire country. And speaking of mitigation, I've seen there's a lot of changes with FEMA.

And what I see is, especially with the mitigation, we're not going to have the money like we had in the past. And so having worked in the field, I highly recommend to have your mitigation operating plan to be up to date and prepared because many times a lot of these Smaller states, they had the money— they didn't have the money, however, they had the concern and the needs for flooding. And I was back in Vermont. We had 4 floods in 1 year. So bottom line is, I haven't been home for a while, but I do know mitigation money is not there.

The HMGP grants are going to be issued, but Alaska has to def— definitely be a little bit more aggressive. I was in Region 10 for the last year and we were— we're a little bit— and I think you guys have looked at some of the plans that we were doing for HMGP and we need some consultants. I don't want to do it, but you're definitely going to have to have somebody to review your plans a lot more. So when they look at those plans, they initiated without a number of revisions and updates and ask them a lot of questions.

Okay, anyone else that would like to testify? I have anybody online, sir?

No. Okay, so go ahead and close the public hearing. And Deputy Mayor, I move to adopt ordinance serial number 26-051 1 and Resolution Serial Number 26-038. Okay, discussion from the assembly?

Any objection from the assembly? Okay, so the legislation passes. Madam Clerk. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance Serial Number 26-052, an ordinance approving land classification of 3 borough-owned properties in the Big Lake area as reserved use lands, resource management lands, and general purpose lands.

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Um, we don't have a sign-up sheet, so anyone that would like to give input on Ordinance 26-052, you're welcome at this time.

Hey, don't see anybody. We do not have anybody online. Okay, so I'll bring it back to us. Assemblyperson Campbell. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I move to adopt Ordinance Serial Number 26-052 and like to speak to it. Yes, go ahead, sir. So this is one of the fast-growing areas in Big Lake. It's way out on the west side, and, um, this is probably about the third time I've seen a reclassification, uh, for DES to build a future fire station, which is greatly needed out in that area. And West Desitna Parkway is the road that will tie into the West Desitna Access Road if that is built.

And when that happens, this area is going to become even more important, um, and the growth is going to explode even more than it already has. So, um, I think this is a great use of borough land. I'm not sure what Parcel B and Parcel C are going to be used for, um, but at least, uh, Parcel A, that's going to be used for future emergency services, um, requirements, I think is very important. Thank you. Mhm.

Further discussion on this ordinance? Is there any objection to passing this ordinance?

Okay, legislation passes. Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance serial number 26053, an ordinance extending the date of completion of the Brett Ice Arena digital sign display project through June 30th, 2027. Resolution— and accompanying Resolution 26040, resolution amending the scope of work and retitling the Brett Ice Arena digital sign display project. Okay, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. We do not have a sign-up sheet.

Anyone in the audience that would like to give input to the assembly on this ordinance and this resolution?

We have anybody online? We do not. Okay, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. And Assemblyperson Sumner, I move to adopt Ordinance Serial Number 26-053 and Resolution Ordinance Serial Number 26-040. Okay, discussion by the assembly?

Any objection by the assembly? Okay, legislation passes. Madam Clerk. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance Serial Number 26-056, an ordinance establishing the Board for Advisory Review of Kennel Standards, also known as Barks as an advisory board to review and make recommendations regarding kennel licensing and enforcement.

And this was sponsored by Assemblymembers Sumner, Fonov, and Bernier. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Anyone that would like to give testimony to the assembly on this ordinance, 26-056?

Do we have anybody online? We do not. Okay, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. And Assemblyperson Sumner, I move to adopt Ordinance Serial Number 26-056. I can speak to it.

Yes, go ahead, sir. For the sake of brevity, we all know what this is about and what's in regards to, so if anyone has anything else to talk about, I leave it open to you.

Assemblyperson Bowles, go ahead. I just want to thank the 3 of you for bringing this forward. Uh, thank you, Madam Mayor. Pardon me. Um, I just want to thank the 3 of you for bringing forward.

I think this is extremely important. I think this is going to be a very useful board, um, to the borough for many years. Um, you know, on our side down Kinnick River Road, not a whole lot of of, um, dog teams, but members of my extended family have had dog teams, um, out in Swetna, um, and I think that, um, there was some very important information brought forward during this terrible incident. And, uh, I really look forward to seeing what the, uh, what the board produces as far as recommendations, information moving forward. So thank you.

Assemblyperson McKee, can a borough assembly member be part of this board? Because if they can, I sure would like to be. No, you— I think the current legislation doesn't allow for that. Can we correct—. Can we amend it to make that happen?

So the current legislation does not allow for it. The mayor would have to appoint you The problem would be that if you sit on the board, the legislation doesn't allow for it. If anything comes to the assembly, you then have to recuse yourself.

I'm okay with that. It presupposes the mayor would appoint you. The legislation itself says, as feasible, the mayor is encouraged to give preference to mushers and kennel owners for appointment to the board. But the problem with mushers and kennel owners, that's why we have some of the problems we've got going on right now, is because I don't think should be so heavily weighted in that. I think you gotta have another voice in there.

I cannot tell you what— I'm sure you all have had lots of tearful conversations from the public on this. And if this is the way we can start to do it, I'll take whatever I can get out of it. If I'd really— I would be a very active board member. So that's just— I don't know, do we need an amendment, or how do we need to do that?

Somebody?

I'm not making any commitment. I'll wait to see what the board— what the applications look like. You know, Deputy Mayor, I can guarantee you there's going to be nobody harder than fellow kennel owners and mushers that are You know, when all this happened, there was a lot of kennels and stuff that wanted to take action and were kind of stopped because of the investigation process. And if they're— they're a hard group to— you won't get away with stuff is what I'm trying to say. Okay, so if you got other kennels and stuff, they're gonna— you mess up, they're, they're going to come gunning for you.

So I, I would keep it mushers and kennel owners and, uh, the like, because they, they've got a reputation to protect and to protect the dogs. Okay, Assemblyperson, um, Gamble, I think you were next. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Just a question for the attorney. Nick, so we could have an assembly seat on there and make it a non-voting seat, right?

And then that would alleviate—.

Yeah, you could. Yeah, I mean, that's what, that's what I do on the commission. So I kind of like the idea of having an assembly member on there. We can make it a non-voting position and kind of be our eyes and ears on the board. Thank you.

Okay, and let's see, Assemblyperson Bowles. Oh, Miss Sumner, I'm sorry. Yeah, I would not be opposed to a non-voting Assemblymember seat addition if, uh, Miss McKee wanted to make that motion. But, uh, you know, when we drafted this, the intent was to, uh, the voting members, uh, would be primarily comprised of mushers and kennel owners because You know, the specific instance that instigated the need for this, you know, if marshals and kennel owners have been left to their own devices, we would have had some, some Western justice and, you know, this situation wouldn't have happened. Uh, you know, it was a failure of the government.

And what I don't want to see is the government failing these folks, this community, and then the government enacting a bunch of extra onerous restrictions ordinances and layers of government to fix an issue that they created. I mean, that is absolutely not what we do not want. So I want the input, you know, I mean, I want it and I hope you guys do too. I want the input primarily of mushers and kennel owners on how we can avoid this ever happening again.

And Assemblyperson Schnauers, you had comments? A question for the attorney, just to clarify. So the mayor is she's going to appoint, but she doesn't have to appoint kennel, and it doesn't have to be all kennel owners, doesn't have to be all mushing owners. She would have the latitude to, to have some flexibility there. And I mean, I could see that being good from the standpoint of like, there definitely should be kennel and musher on there, but I could also see it being good for public confidence that there's some other folks, other voices on there, so they feel like you know, whatever, so people don't question the result that came out of it, um, or not as much.

Um, and I have no problem with, uh, Miss McKee being on there. So I guess I would offer a friendly amendment to add a non-voting assembly member position to the board. Okay, there's an amendment on the floor. The only thing I will caution all of you about we put an assembly person on that board and we don't have the reports yet from the investigation back, they— the public's going to say you are protecting yourself. You can bet on that.

That's exactly what they would say, that you're protect— you're putting— you're, you're putting people on the board to protect assembly and the borough. I might be misunderstanding what you're saying. If it's non-voting, all it does is give the public a window into—. It doesn't make any difference by the public perception. I agree that it's not— that's the public perception going to be out there.

Okay, let's see. Um, Mike, I think Let's see who is next. I can't read those. DM or MB? Okay, I think D had her hand up earlier.

Okay, Assemblyperson. Now just on the amendment, okay? It's just on the amendment, okay?

Okay, well, let's see, we got 3 or 4 people before you. Assemblyperson, do you still have your light on? Oh, sorry, no. So, so what we're, we're going to actually vote on whether or not to have an assemblyperson non-voting on this board, which, by the way, Bill, right, that's the amendment.

We can only discuss the amendment at this time, and whether it passes or not, then we will discuss the whole ordinance. Okay, Assemblyperson Sumner, I call a question.

Is there any objection to— yes, there's objection to calling the question. Okay, Madam Clerk, if everybody in the room would go ahead and vote for the amendment. This is on calling the question. Calling the question stops debate, so if you want to stop debate, you vote yes.

Yeah, okay, Madam Mayor, it failed with Assemblymember McKean, Bowles in support. Okay, so you're still in the primary amendment. Okay, so, uh, Simna and Stephanie, do you have comment? I, I think you have a very good point, and, um, but I don't know all the reasons that Ms. McKee might want to be on there. So I just, I wanted to hear your, um, your input after hearing that.

Does that change your mind about wanting to sit on the board, that it might cause an appearance of conflict? No, because I think it would do the exact opposite. It's saying somebody that is representing the public is, is actually going to be part of— at least, well, you're like a reporter almost in a case like that. You're hearing what people are saying. And so there's the— if anybody thought, well, they're going to cover something up, not with me there.

I mean, or anybody else on this assembly. I just think that it's an awfully good chance to get the public involved in something like this where they've elected us to do something. I want to do it.

And I— and if you I'm sure all of you have received just some tremendous— I can't even really talk about this. It's just a very— it's a very personal subject with me because I was a dog musher as a kid. And the idea that people could get away with this, I'll tell you what, if we have a watchdog from this assembly, whether it's me or somebody else, I just think that that's going to give the public a little boost. They'll like, yeah, okay, somebody else is looking at it too. Further discussion?

Gamble, did you? Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. Yeah, I just want to say that I sit on the Port Commission, which is non-voting, and I sit on the Fish and Wildlife Commission, which is voting. So did Assemblymember Bowles, and both those commissions are extremely grateful that there's an assembly member on those commissions, or more than one, that are very active. And Mike and I both were very active.

And so I think it's appropriate, and I think it's okay to have an assembly member on there.

Yeah, I think there might be a little misunderstanding. We are— there's going to be a time people will apply. There's going to be things. I want to ask Manager Brown, what are our predictions on the completion of the date of the report? Because I think this board will meet way past after the investigation report is completed.

And I don't have a problem with Ms. McKee willing to give up her voting power on this body if we take any actions on that. I wouldn't even be having a problem with her being a voting member on it. But I do think if the investigation is completed and closed with, and there is a room on that board to help to put that together, I think it It'd be a great thing. So, uh, Mr. Brown, do you have approximate data? Do— is this going to be in the next couple weeks when we can see— expect the completion of the report, investigation report, internal and external?

And Madam Mayor, what do you think that the time frame that it will take to collect all the applicants and for you to review them and approve? Because I see that's a couple months away, probably before the board will start meeting.

Well, if it passes tonight, you know, then we will start— Jamie will start getting applications in, and then probably by the 16th of June, because like for this Friday we have to have the people nominated for the any vacancy for the meeting for the for the 2nd of June. So I'm sorry, it's Thursday.

Oh, and then we have Memorial Day. But yeah, so normally, so I would be looking at, uh, depending on how many applicants come in and, you know, how many people I want to interview and stuff. So we may be looking at even the one meeting that we have in July. I, I don't— I can't commit because I don't know. Maybe nobody will apply, maybe 75 people will apply.

Yeah, I, I do think it's not like they're gonna be, uh, Ms. McKee's, uh, position on that, uh, board will be before the, uh, the report will come out. And I don't know if, Ninja Brown, do you, do you have answer to that as far as what's the timeline approximate? Because if it is past that, and I fully support you being on there. So I don't know, I guess—. What do you want me to say?

I don't have a golden—. I guess the only thing I'm asking is— Manager Brown can answer what is the approximate completion of the report, internal and external. I think he's willing to answer, if that's okay. Can he answer that question as far as the current investigation? I'm sorry, answer what question, sir?

The investigation that, uh, is currently going, and I think he has an answer for me. I'm not in charge of the investigation.

So through the mayor to Mr. Farnoff, I believe the report will be done well in advance of getting this committee established and actually to their first meeting. I would expect the report in the next 2-3 weeks. That answers the question. Yeah, so I guess my only, uh, to explain that I think this board will not be meeting while an investigation is going on. So I don't, I don't think it sets the image that we're trying to change the perspective.

So, but if she feels passionate about it, I think it's okay.

We don't know what's in the investigations either.

I think regardless of what is in there, and I think I know the somebody who's willing to say, you know, there's these changes need to be made and I'm be the champion of sponsoring some of these changes. I, I think that's a great thing. So, okay, Deputy Mayor. I agree with you, Mayor. I know Facebook gets a hold of this, that, oh, they, they've got an assembly member on the board, they're going to try covering something up.

That's—. Facebook gets on to that. I don't have Facebook, my wife does, and It's, it's nuts. It really— and it's just going to look like we're going to try covering something up, and that's just, you know, I, I appreciate your concern and your desire to be on there, but I, I don't think that's our role. Is this is advisory just from the outside?

I got that, but it is non-voting. So it doesn't matter to a Facebook person. People elect us to, to do just exactly that, to be watchdogs. And I'm—. We—.

I don't work for anybody here, so I'm— I represent the people in the community. That— I'm their voice, and I will be very, very strong. And I don't— I, I think if, especially having had this discussion tonight, if we don't do that, then people say, well, you know what, uh, we're not ever going to find anything out from me or from anybody else on this assembly. I'm loud and proud. I, I don't mind taking the hits either, but I really feel that this is a way to give the public the idea that we're— we have a channel in there.

It just won't be you taking the hits. It'll be the borough is covering something up. They got an assembly person on there, and most of these people, you know, keyboard warriors there. They don't read other than the first sentence, first couple of sentences, and they got their minds made up. Well, if they don't know that we're elected to represent them, uh, what else are we here for?

I just think that is the only way to, to have a voice of the people rather than just mushers and whoever said kennel owners or however that was made up. If you don't have a voice that is elected by the people That's what I'm here for. So I can't see how that could possibly be. If you did a staff member, you could say, well, you know what, they're covering them up, but not when you're elected by the people. I'm very passionate about this.

I hope we pass it because I think it, it will transcend the, the current incident under discussion, but it has something that has to be done. And I, I just want the public to know you can trust us because I work for you, the public. Assemblyperson McKee, who is going to represent your area, then when the report comes back and you have to excuse yourself—.

Sorry, maybe I didn't understand. Would you say that again? Okay, so if you're appointed to— I'm going to let the attorney talk. I think, Madam Mayor, if, if the ordinance itself is amended that says an assembly member's on it, then the rule about advising yourself goes away because the assembly can certainly certainly do that. I will remind everybody though, the mayor makes the appointment of the assembly member.

Everybody's discussing this like Assemblywoman McKee is going to automatically be appointed to this board. Maybe that happens, and maybe you all agree to that, and the mayor agrees to that, and everybody's— I just want to point out, the mayor makes appointments. The assembly does not make appointments, only the mayor does. But the rule about not voting on your own advice goes away if the assembly actually amends this. And says you can be on the board, because if an assembly member is appointed by the board by the ordinance itself, then that, that common law rule about not voting on your own advice goes away.

Okay, Assemblyperson Wolf. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I, uh, I think all of this discussion is valid and there's great points. I'm wondering if, um, there's a compromise there. And so I'd like to make a secondary amendment just to see— a friendly amendment— see if there's some— an appetite to, um, after the initial report.

I, so I move to amend the primary amendment to add an assembly member after the initial report is provided to the borough on December 15th, 2026. And I would also like to add into there to move the sunset date out and— or, or even remove the sunset date, because I think this is something that can be very useful to the borough for many years to come, many decades to come, as the sport changes, as new people come into the sport, and— or lifestyle. It's not a sport for everybody, so it's just a lifestyle. So I think that this could be a standing board that or a stamp— yeah, standing board— that can be very, um, useful to the, to the assembly and to the borough. So, um, yeah, I know it's a long amendment, so if I need to clean that up a little bit, I will.

Okay, Assemblymember Bowles, I'd like to clarify your, your, your, your— to simplify the motion, yep, your secondary amendment was to not confirm an assembly member until after the report is received, should Madam Mayor decide she wants to confirm an assembly member, as well as remove the sunset date and make this just a continual board and strike the sunset date. Okay.

Yes, point of order is that's two, two secondary amendments. So, so you want to move to divide the question? One amendment. Thank He could do it in one motion. I can't add a comma on my—.

Can, can Assemblyperson move to divide the question? Madam Mayor, the primary amendment can have more than one issue in it. Okay. So if you want to do it simple though, you can just withdraw the sunset. I would recommend just withdrawing the sunset and then moving that next.

Okay. Absolutely. That's agreeable to the maker of the motion. Okay. All right.

All right. Let's see if I have— who do I have down here? I have someone there. Assemblyperson Sumner. So, I mean, I'm going to speak to the intent of both your motions because we're going to be moving both of them.

But the sunset's not on the floor right now. I'm, I'm still gonna— I hope you guys will indulge me a little bit because they are kind of related, his intent. Um, if I'm collecting you correctly, you are planning on adding government, and the only thing that this board can do is add regulation. So I think you should take a pause and think about that for a minute. Do we really want to do that?

There's a specific issue that this board has stood up for to solve, and I did not want this to add more government or add more regulation, and I would definitely be opposed to that amendment. Okay, I'm ready. So, Assemblyperson Gamble, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Yeah, and we can always extend the board at a future date, so I don't really think we need to get rid of the sunset clause.

Okay, further discussion on Assemblyperson—. I do think technically they could advise us in any direction, so they could suggest we change or even delete regulation if they think it's— though I don't think it's necessarily the— I don't think the maker was looking to add regulation, but I don't know that I can support the secondary amendment at this point. I think it just either do it or don't. Assemblyperson McKee, go ahead. Yes, I said before, I— this is not a—.

Is—. I don't think that the commission that you're talking about, or whatever you call it, the board should be directed at a specific incident, because it's not as if this thing hasn't happened before. In fact, there's something going on in Fairbanks which was apparently a result of what we're going through here. So it's not like, well, we're going to take care of it just by taking care of this one incident. That's not going to work.

It should be something that's ongoing and, as I say, transcendental. I just don't—. I wouldn't— we have to keep it to the, the Second Amendment, and the ongoing or terminated is not on—. Oh, I'm sorry, because he was talking about, so I thought I would just jump been there. Thanks, Max.

Assemblyperson Sumner. Yeah, I just like to add that there actually currently is an animal control board so that, you know, some of these things could be handled by that board. You know, this, this was created for a specific purpose. Yeah. Okay, further discussion?

Further discussion? Not just so you clarify, Miss Brenda, what we're going to be voting on so that we're clear. The secondary amendment is to confirm an assembly member only after the report and the investigation is complete, and then should the mayor choose to appoint an assembly member. Okay, Assemblyperson Bowles, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, I didn't think about that. You're absolutely correct, we do have an animal control board. Is there a sitting member of the assembly that's on that board? I can answer that on the staff support. No, there would not be an assembly member that would be appointed to that board.

However, It's a quasi-judicial board, and that would be the reason.

Madam Mayor, everybody— yes, Assemblyperson Sumner, can I call the question? Sure. Okay, the question has been called. Is there an objection to calling the question? I don't see any objection, so the question is called.

You will now go ahead and vote on the secondary amendment.

Assemblymember Gamble.

Madam Mayor, Madam Mayor, excuse me. Um, we're on the secondary. I thought we're on the call of the question. It passed with Assemblymembers Sumner, Bernier, and Nowers opposed. Okay.

So now we're back to the primary amendment. Okay, so the primary—. Real quick, sure. Yeah, yeah, thank you. Yeah, we will wait.

Okay, okay. And then would you read the primary amendment to us, please? The primary amendment is to add a non-voting assembly member seat to the BARCC Committee. Okay, so that's Assemblyperson Bowles. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And so I just want to say that I appreciate you, um, some members, some are pointing out the Animal Control Board. I had forgotten about that, and that's absolutely correct. So, um, this has a specific goal, especially a specific mission. So, um, so yeah, I think actually I'm I don't know if I'm— I don't know if I'm going to be in— so I don't think I can be in support of adding an assembly member at this time because it is a, a, an advisory board that's for a short period of time. We already have an animal control board in place and established, so I think that both are achieved, or this, this will not need to bleed into that area, um, and so Um, I don't think, I don't think we need an assembly member on this.

Okay, do you further discuss? We have Assemblyperson Sumner. Go ahead. If I could add a secondary amendment to change it. It was going too good with all of the public hearings.

I knew we were going to wrap ourselves around something tonight, but I didn't think it was going to be Mark. I was betting the leaf blowers, not this. But, um, I would like to, uh, add the language. I mean, maybe attorney would have to help me on this, that the, the board may request an assembly member be added to the board. Okay, the motion secondary amendment is for the board, after it's appointed, they could requests that an assembly member be a non-voting member of the assembly.

Non-voting member. Okay, okay. So discussion on that, Assemblyman Key? Uh, apparently we're learning tonight— I didn't know there was this other board. Um, I would only— and I don't know who they are, bless their hearts.

Anybody that serves for nothing on a board, that's great. But why did this happen? There was no— it doesn't look to me like there was a real watchdog. And, um, it's West. Well, I— that's right.

But I, I just think that we wouldn't be having this conversation if that board were as active as it should be. Something happened, and then I know what the public opinion is, and I'm afraid everybody's— anybody who had anything to do with this can take a real big hit. And if I were on a board that was like Bill is on the Fish and Game thing, he's apparently very vocal. And I don't know so much about Mike, but I'm kind of like that as well. I, I don't, I don't care that there's another advisory board.

I don't want them to just request, because if they say no, then we're right back where we started from. So, well, whatever report they come up with will come back to this body, of course. Yeah, so you'll be able to have the input at that time. Deputy Mayor, did you have your hand up? Yeah, I'd like to start another group.

We've got a secondary on the floor already, Madam Mayor. Okay, so can't—. Tertiary amendments are not allowed. Okay, let's see. So the secondary amendment is for the—.

I'm sorry, I didn't— Assemblyperson Gamble, your name is down here. Is this old or new? I'm not sure, but I'll speak. I'll give you the floor and you're being shy. I just want to say again that, you know, sitting on the Port Commission and sitting on the Fish and Wildlife Commission, how extremely grateful they are to have an assembly person on there that is active and is advocating and promoting, you know, what they're doing.

And I think that once this assembly position, whoever it is, is there and they're active, that the board will be very appreciative to have somebody there that has direct ties to the assembly. That can advocate for them. Thank you. Okay, and Deputy Mayor? I just say that, you know, Fish Board didn't commit a bunch of murders to a bunch of fish and stuff, and it isn't very controversial.

I disagree. I'd bet you a lot of those murdered a lot of fish. You guys didn't restrict the fishing for the summer, right? So we don't have 2,000 people coming out after us, right? Question to Miss Mickey, um, do you, after this kind of conversation, do you still feel that your heart would be in it and you'd want to be in that kind of board, assuming that, you know, it's, it's approved?

We have to stay on the secondary amendment. Okay, thank you. Sorry. Okay, secondary amendment. Does anybody need it read after this?

Okay, and I just want to clarify because everybody's talking and make sure everybody understands. Sure. Your secondary amendment was to remove the language in the primary and replace it with that the board can request it, or you at—. Right? Okay.

Okay. All righty, so is there objection to the second? There is objection to the secondary amendment. Okay, so to me that's very weak language. It just says, well, we'll go hat in hand and see if somebody wants to get that person, the assembly person, on the board.

I don't think the public's going to be happy with, with that because it's— it sounds manipulative to me. It—. And whether it's me or somebody else, I mean, I don't think anybody on here would do anything different than I would, except maybe I'm louder. But I just— that, that guts for me the public's access through its representatives to say anything to the board, to be involved in any way, to be a conduit. So I think the fact that an assembly member, as I've said, and I won't go on about it, but I just think that when the public elects people to do something and somebody who's elected to do that goes out and does it, they better—.

They—. There's only way— that's the only way the public has of accessing what we do or what any of these boards do. So I sure do wish you just let it be. Okay, we're ready. Assemblyperson Fama, ready vote.

I am not going to support this amendment for some of the reasons that we are elected and people have chosen us to represent certain things. And there's a will from this body to have member, and especially hearing from the other boards that they're appreciative. I think they will appreciate it, you know. So I saying they don't get to decide right now. We get to decide.

And we should decide, and I want to support fellow assembly who's willing to dedicate time to it. She's not going to work— he or she, in this case she— was not going to get paid extra or anything like that, but wants to be able to have input in there. I'm all for it. Okay, we're ready to vote, I guess, then, huh? Because there is objection.

And just explain it one more time, what yes means, what no means. Okay, first of all, Let me make sure that Assemblymember Brunier has already entered his vote, and that wasn't an accident. Okay. As well as Assemblymember Sumner, and that was not an accident. Okay.

Thank you. So, Assemblymember Summer's secondary amendment is that the Barks may request an assembly member non-voting seat be added to the committee.

Okay.

Madam Mayor, it failed with Assemblymember Sumner in support. Okay, okay, so we're back to the primary member, Assemblyperson Bowles. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So looking at the Animal Care and Regulation Board directory, I don't see a position for a, a kennel owner. Um, I don't know if there's appetite on the dais right now to add an amendment to add that.

That wouldn't be germane to adding to the Animal Care Board because that's not before you. Okay. All right.

Yeah, and the Animal Control Board is, in my opinion, is completely different than the board we're talking about tonight. I mean, they handle things completely different situation. So, so Deputy Mayor, I think he wanted to do—. Yeah, you know, if we just—. Do you want to do a primary since we're back to allowing primary?

I mean, I was going to say if we vote, vote this down, then we can start another group. We'll call it PAWS. It'll be Personal Assembly Working Study. And we can all be on it.

Yeah, we could. We could just make it a board of the assembly, right?

So the primary motion is on the floor to add the non-voting assembly member seat. Okay, I thought we already voted on that. No. No, secondary. This is the main amendment.

We just, we just voted on the secondary that the Barks may request that it be added. There was another secondary, there was a call for the question, and before that we have not voted on the primary amendment yet to add a non-voting assembly member seat. Assemblyperson Sumner, uh, just point of clarification, but the first secondary amendment did pass, so this seat would only be added after after their results were given to us. So it would be a very vote— right now I just want to point out that anyone that votes yes for this primary amendment, it's a pointless amendment since, you know, the seat will only be added after they're done with their job, right? That's not true.

That's how the second— yes, that is true. That's how the secondary amendment is written, was it's after they give the report back, right? I think it's after the, um, the internal report is done. Oh, I misunderstood them. The secondary that passed was, yes, confirm the assembly after the report is received should the mayor choose to appoint an assembly member to BARCC.

That does not negate the requirement to vote on the primary amendment. Yeah, which report? Because my understanding was it was the report from BARCC to the assembly. No, I guess it's the, it's the internal report to BARCC. Okay, okay, all righty.

So now we'll be voting on the primary as amended by the secondary. I have no clue. Are you for—. Is what? After the— after this report, the investigation, I suppose.

That's better than Madam Mayor, it passed with Assemblymember Bonnier opposed. Okay, ready? So now we're to the main motion for Ordinance 26-056 as amended, correct? Okay, is there any discussion on that, or are we ready to vote? Is there any objection?

Okay, I don't see any objection, so the legislation passes. And are we ready for a break, or do you want to go to something else? Okay, we want a break. Okay, so why don't we come back at, uh, 8:15.

Can I have the assembly come back to order, please?

Okay, I think we passed Parks, right? So we're now at the second audience participation. Doesn't look like we have a sign-in sheet. Yeah, come up.

You'll have to turn the mic on there, sir. There you go. Okay. Madam Mayor, Assembly, this is Dana Raffanello. I'd like to talk about the property tax/sales tax.

Stephanie Nower presented one today and no one gave her a chance to talk it through. When the first one came out, they said they wanted to start the discussion. I've seen no discussion yet. On the sales tax, property tax. Stephanie Nowers had a good way to do that.

I think that we did some disservice here tonight by not forwarding her proposal, her ordinance on through. I think maybe you guys should reconsider that and look at her proposal, Vice 26032, or maybe combine them into one because you're fixing to throw away your tax authority if we go by 26032. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?

Do we have anybody online, sir? We do not. Okay, I'll go ahead and close audience participation. And we are now to the consent agenda. I think we did have some, or one item pulled, but is anybody else from the assembly interested?

Yes. Madam Mayor, I'd like to pull RS 26-050 just because I'd like to get some more information on what's going on there with the driveway and the water. Okay, so did you get that, Madam? Yes, ma'am. Any other things that anybody wants to pull from the consent agenda?

All righty, so Madam Clerk, go ahead.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Resolution 26034, a resolution to waive the $500 application fee for the nonprofit Wasilla Kinick Historical Society and to inform the assembly of the borough's intent to enter into a new management agreement for a 5-year term to use and manage borough-owned land and buildings, including the Kinick Museum and Bjorn Cabin. Located within Section 24, Township 16 North, Range 3 West. Resolution 26041, a resolution waiving all application and land use permit fees for the Alaska State Department of Fish and Games use of borough land for resource monitoring and management activities.

AM 26050, approval of an extension of the final completion date to June 30th, 2027, for contract number 22090PA. With CRW Engineering Group LLC for the Tech Cell Drive Extension Upgrade and Pathway Project. AM26055, approval of change order number 3 for contract number 22055P with Stantec Consulting Services Incorporated for the Seldon Extension Phase 2 Right-of-Way Acquisition Map completion to extend the contract to June 30th, 2027. AM26056, approving the fiscal year 2027 payment to the City of Palmer in the amount of $1,395,000 $1,571.64 for the fire services agreement. AM26057, acceptance of late filed and retroactive senior citizen and disabled veteran tax exemption applications for the period of March and April 2026.

AM26058, approval of contract amendment number 2 for contract number 26017C with Wolf Architecture Inc. for American Charter Academy construction administration services. To add $25,541 for additional design services related to the on-site traffic improvements. AM26059, awarded bid number 26-127B to Granite Construction Company in the amount of $1,527,531.50 to construct the compost and tire area improvements at the Central Landfill. AM26060, the approval of contract extension for contract number AM 26060P with Respect Inc., adding $9,920 for continued construction administration services to design Central Landfill Entrance Improvements Phase 1 and extending the contract completion date to June 30th, 2026. AM 26061, approval of change order number 3 for the E-91 and Dispatch Services Agreement number 16-100P, increasing the annual cost by $560,000.

$69,600 In fiscal year 2027 for 2 additional dispatchers and 2 additional call takers. AM 26062, authorizing a purchase from Ferno in the amount of $868,372.76 of Power X2 ambulance stretcher platforms with Pro F1 mounting systems. AM 26063, award of bid number 26167C to Braun Northwest Inc. and the anticipated cost not to exceed $506,000 to remount and refurbish 2 ambulances. Okay, Deputy Mayor, I move to approve the consent agenda as read into the record by the clerk. Okay, any objection from the assembly?

Okay, hearing none, the consent agenda has been approved. Um, there is no unfinished business. We had Oh, you're right. Absolutely right. Thank you.

So the first one is pulled by Assemblymember Nowers. It's Resolution 26050, a resolution amending the budget for Birch Tree Charter School and approving the budget for American Charter Academy to address unforeseen conditions, infrastructure needs, and resulting cost impacts during construction. Okay, Assemblyperson Nowers, would you like to speak? Could you move, please? Yes, I suppose I move RS 26-050, and if I could just ask for staff report to hear more about what's going on with the water issues and the driveway and what we might— I know we're transferring $900,000, but how much uncertainty we might have and if we might end up having even higher costs, or if you think that'll cover it.

Now, through the mayor, uh, Tom Adams, Public Works Director, Ms. Nauer. So Um, I think a lot of it's explained in the IM, but, you know, specifically there are two larger issues that have come up during construction of American Charter School. Um, and specifically it's the water issue. Once the water was drilled and tested, the sample came up very high on manganese. Um, in fact, it was like 400+ parts per million, and the threshold to stay under is 50.

So you can you know, very big difference. Um, in order to put a water treatment facility on site, first of all, it's cost prohibitive at this moment, and then also it would come with, uh, some testing and oversight requirements that require certification that school district maintenance does not currently have. So that, that is an ongoing discussion we have. Um, the plan right now is to put a cistern on site and import water for, uh, for potable supply. And then with respect to the site, the access to the site is through a driveway at Church Road, which is a state facility.

So of course we have to submit for a driveway permit. And then once we submit for a driveway permit, they require a traffic study, and our traffic study is on the threshold of requiring channelization for entering traffic. So we just recently resubmitted our response, our full TIA, and our response to their questions to DOT. We're hoping to get a response here in the next few weeks. You know, there are some mitigation measures that we're proposing to take that don't necessarily require us going and widening Church Road and putting a turn lane in, things like flashing radar or speed limit signs.

And/or perhaps considering putting 4-way stop at Seldon Church. So those, those methods would be much less cost-intensive and could perhaps achieve, you know, basically make us below the warrant for channelization because we're controlling speeds. Um, so the water— so as a cistern a— can that be a long-term solution? If water treatment is cost prohibitive, can a cistern be a long-term solution for a school to handle everything that needs to be handled there, water-wise? Well, I think it can be a long-term.

It's a matter of how long do you want to endure those costs, right? So, you know, our initial cost estimate for just, you know, putting in the cistern is about $300,000, just under $300,000. And they estimate for an annual cost to import water is about $20,000. So, you know, that continuous cost, you know, how many years do we want to continue paying $20,000 to bring potable water on site? Okay.

And then just so, how much is a water treatment plant if we want to do that? That's a great question, and that I tried to get that answer prior to this meeting, and I don't have that answer for you right now. So I could follow up with the manager and get that information out, but I don't, I don't have a number for you. Okay. Is it even on the table as far as you're concerned to try to look at a water treatment plant, or is it just you figure it's going to be so costly you're better off just sticking—.

Well, I think we're still in conversation with the school district. Like I said, it's not only the cost component, it's about the continuous operation of it as well, and having certified staff to, um, to operate the water treatment facility. Okay. Yeah, but having the kids drink high manganese is not an option. Like, I wouldn't want my kids drinking high manganese water.

I mean, it— there's a reason there's thresholds that DEC sets, and that threshold's 50, and our tested water was over 400. Yeah, so we need to get below 50 for us to consider that. So we've got a potable supply. One or the other, we've got to either import water or we've got to do a treatment. Correct.

The two options. Correct. Okay. Deputy Mayor and then Assemblyperson Sumner. How big is that site?

Mayor, Assemblymember Bernier. So the borough site itself is a much larger parcel. What was subdivided specific to the use for American Charter was about 20 acres. And that well, is that down closer to the stream?

The well itself, you mean, in its proximity? When they drilled it? No, I— well, I mean, the stream's pretty close to the site. So, you know, there's a large wetland bog that, you know, extends northward, northeastward, and comes across Church, and then it's, you know, right on the north side of that site. So the well's, I think, on the north east northwest corner of the site.

I can't tell you right now how many feet away from that. I mean, there's separation distances we would have to meet from surface water. So, well, what I'm wondering is if you took and drilled a different well or looked into different, different well up the hill further and maybe getting away from that. Um, I mean, it is a possibility, but, you know, Having now understood that we have found, you know, a water sample with high manganese, it's our understanding that maybe that's not an uncommon problem in the Pittman area, Pittman Church Road area. So, but it could be something we go find or try to drill another well.

You know, wells aren't cheap to drill either, so there's a cost component that have to be considered. But if it pays dividends, it pays dividends.

Yes, 20 acres is a pretty good size area. You're hunting water. Assemblyperson Sumner. Oh, I was just gonna say what Mr. Brunier was saying, but you know, I do know some water witchers if you guys are interested. Assemblyperson Gamble.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Hey, Tom, what was the depth of the well?

What, you know, 160 comes to mind right away, but that's a number I'm gonna have to confirm for you. Okay, thank you. That really boosts his amount in hours. I just wonder if there's other people in that area who have high manganese who would like to be off it, if there might be some ability to look at like a community well treatment kind of system where you could amortize the costs if If other people are— if that is prevalent in that surrounding area.

Yeah, anyway, brings on a whole different set of conversations with respect to operating a community water system.

Okay.

I think that's— I think that's it. Thank you, sir. Further discussion on Resolution 26-050? Yes. Assemblyperson Pham.

Whatever Mr. Bernier said and Mr. Sumner kind of brought up, I think there's a lot of merit there.

Is this resolution, as it's written, does it direct a certain direction right now? Is there, I guess, or— I hate to see a super expensive, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent when Maybe another well can be drilled. 20 Acres is a lot of land to find, and I don't know if there's neighboring lots that not far from there that we could voluntarily ask them to submit the sample of their water and things like that. I mean, it's, it's a problem, but I think before really looking into calling in or installing system that, like you said, it'll take qualified people to run it and maintain it. Um, I'm just really hesitant to, um, commit to Nuna before we explore every option there on site that is potentially a good time.

There's different aquifers on the same lot that you could have, you know, certain ones reach water at 40, 50, and the water is not as good. They go to 140, the water is different, you know. So, um, I don't know if it's $50-some per foot right now to drill. It's still— what is it, $60, $65, $70, $65 or so? Yeah, a commercial, a commercial well is more expensive.

Yeah, but like the sanitary plug— yeah, I understand that portion of it, but I'm saying even if the residential well is drilled to a certain— because it's cheaper to see if there is the water that doesn't have that problem, then, you know, commercial well could be expected. I'm just I'm just not thrilled on spending additional money. I guess that's all I'm saying. If I might, through the mayor, Mr. Von Hoff.

So this resolution does not dictate that we're spending money specifically to go resolve that problem. What we have identified is we've got a budget— I would say budget problem may be looming. You know, when this project was originally envisioned and then the bond sold, it was for $15 $1.2 million, um, after the fact. It was when, you know, a previous version of this body, you know, chose to expand the site of the school. And so we had to go spend monies to expand that school, uh, that had, you know, gave us less contingency, if you will.

And right now we have about $300,000 in contingency left in that budget, um, to complete the school. And as you're well aware, things happening during construction of these types of facilities that we need to be prepared for. Whether or not we absolutely use this money right now to go build a treatment facility or go drill a well, those are all things that are still in active conversation. Uh, purely what we're taking advantage of the fact that, you know, the decision not to build Birch Tree left that design contract with a surplus amount of money that need to be moved around anyhow. And since we see that there could be a potential we need more money for this project, that's what this legislation does is just take that money from Birch Tree that's not going to be spent and puts it in this project so that it's available to us when we make those kinds of decisions.

Okay, thank you for explaining it like that. Deputy Mayor, I was going to say, you know, as far as the well, even if it was $200 a foot and you went down 160 feet, that's $32,000 versus— how much was the cistern? Uh, through the mayor, uh, Mr. Bernier, so I think last estimate I saw was around $275,000 for for the cistern, and then about a $20,000 per year cost to operate, maintain. Yeah, I'd get Penn Jersey or E&D out there, and they know the area pretty good.

I know Penn Jersey used to have a map, and he knew every depth on water— or water and stuff in different neighborhoods and They were good, but—.

Assemblyperson Gamble. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Tom, did we have a hydrology report before we drilled here? Oh, we did not. No.

Is that something that we typically do or don't do? Well, it's an interesting conversation. So, you know, let me just say that the process this particular school came about is that The school district designed it, and then the borough took it over and put it out for construction. Now, that's not looking to point fingers at anybody. They followed the process that's set up for them in code as far as due diligence.

You know, when things like this happen, when you look in the rearview mirror, you wish you would have done different things to consider a site before you got married to construction on that site, right? You know, and this might be one of those occasions. So, you know, the manager and I have had conversations about, you know, in the future when we have public facilities, although it might cause us to spend money ahead of time, sometimes that money is well spent when it keeps you from de-risking, you know, development on a site that you might choose to go elsewhere. So, long way of answering the fact that no, we did not have a hydrology study, um, no, one was not required, it's not in our process. But yes, perhaps in the future, you know, we might consider, you know, for instance, Birch Street, right on the heels of this particular project, even though the design— we were in the design process, not the site selection, because that site had already been selected.

We chose early in the process to go drill wells to make sure we had yield and we had water quality, right, to be sure that, you know, we didn't— you know, it wasn't too late to turn around if we found out that those were issues we could not overcome without significant cost. Okay. And taking off on what Assemblymember Bernier said, I just got a text from somebody who's knowledgeable about the area and said that Penn Jersey does have data in that area. And there is artesian water, like 280 feet down. They've hit an artesian well down there.

So maybe if we, we go deeper, that may be a possibility instead of completely relocating or going to a system— system—. System. Just laying that out there. Thank you. Thank you.

There's a discussion. Questions for staff? Okay, thank you. Is there objection to Resolution 26? 26-050.

No objection, then it passes.

Do we have another one? Yes, ma'am, Madam Mayor. We have Resolution 26-051, a resolution encouraging property maintenance, community cleanliness, and the preservation of individual freedom of choice regarding the use of outdoor yard power tools including leaf blowers It's sponsored by Assemblymember Sumner, and it was pulled by Assemblymember Bowles. Okay, Assemblyperson Bowles, uh, you pulled. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I move RS 26-051, and I'm curious if the bill sponsor could speak to it. I'd love to, Mr. Bowles. This came about, uh, because it's kind of ironic that it's a Public Works Appreciation Week because it came about because Anchorage Public Works made a post about how the Anchorage Assembly actually passed a code, an ordinance or a code that made it using leaf blowers to sweep parking lots illegal. And as you can imagine, there were a lot of upset people about that. Speaking to the attorney, well, first of all, I'm really glad that we've never outlawed leaf blowers in the Matsu borough.

You know, I had to check that. We haven't. And apparently we can't make things extra legal. They can just be legal or not legal. But if I could do the exact opposite of Anchorage Assembly on this one, I would.

This is the closest thing we can do to the exact opposite of what the Anchorage Assembly did. So, uh, yeah, this is just reminding people that we did not outlaw leaf blowers, and you are free to use leaf leaf blowers to clean your yard if you so see fit. Okay, Assemblyperson Gamble. I'd like to thank you for bringing this resolution forward, and I'd like to say that there are more than just outdoor uses for leaf blowers. I have a prop front house with high ceilings and lights long and a ceiling fan, and I use my leaf blower to dust.

So I just wanted to share that.

I don't want to spend much time on this, um, but did they actually outlaw leaf blowers? Or I thought they said if you blow a bunch of dust, we might fine you for an air violation. Not that I want to get into the—. My understanding is that the use of a gasoline-powered leaf blower to sweep is illegal in Anchorage, but I could be wrong. There was actually a newspaper article yesterday about it, or 2 days ago, so you can read it.

That's what I read that made it sound like it was actually just outline if you spewed a bunch of dust and had an air violation. But whatever, I am for the use of leaf blowers. Use them safely, Miss Brenda. And, uh, that's enough. Yeah, assembly person bowls.

I'll just add to what Assemblymember Gamble said, but they also are very useful in the wintertime to remove snow.

Is there any objection to passing RS 26-051? Okay, hearing no objection, then it has passed.

So we have some unfinished business. Is that when we want to do it? No, ma'am, it's after your veto announcement, if Assemblymember McKee still wants to move that motion. Okay, so there's no unfinished business and I'm not doing any vetoes on the budget. And so at this time then, I recognize Assemblyperson McKee.

Yes, I move to reconsider, uh, is removing OR 26065 from introduction, and I need— I want to change my vote on that. You want—. You want the reason that I do? I said it to Stephanie, and I've said it to other folks, and anybody out in the public who listens to Stephanie understands that she is very— I think one of her major concerns and her major value to people is that she wants the people to be heard. And I think that that does that.

I think it gives them something concrete. They can say, well, if we do this, then this will happen. I think people need to weigh in on something. I, I, again, like I first said, taxes are raining like raindrops, but this actually gives the public a chance to address a specific issue. So I would like to change my, my vote.

The proper language is reconsider, Madam. I'm sorry, Assemblymember McKee, reconsider. Okay, yes, reconsider. Okay, already, so I should ask if there's no Assemblyperson Bowles. I object.

You what? I object. You object. Okay.

So discussion then by assembly. Yes, and remember, we're just talking about reconsidering the vote. Uh, is it my understanding that people can reconsider only if they are on the prevailing side? He was on the prevailing side. Hold on, we passed the budget.

That's for the budget, correct, or no? No, 065 is for— that's Stephanie Nowers, Assemblymember Nowers. It was up the second introduction for the 16th of June, Ordinance 26065. Oh, okay, okay, okay. Assemblyperson, thank you.

I just want to say I really appreciate that, um, that Miss McKee is willing to take another look at this. I think it's it's really important to have public input, and this is just another idea on the table. I've heard loud and clear that people want lower property taxes, and this is one way to get there, that it just gives people ideas. And I think it could generate ideas from the public that would be good for us. So, um, I just appreciate the courtesy of having it out there and being able to discuss it on the 16th.

Perhaps we don't move it forward, but it's just part of the public process, as, as Miss McKee said. So I'd like to keep this on the agenda and give, give a chance for the public to weigh in, because they've told us loud and clear they want lower property taxes. How can we come up with something that works for them to do that?

Further discussions? Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I think this ordinance is being misrepresented. This would absolutely not lower property taxes.

What this does is add a sales tax on your—. Yeah, we're just supposed to be talking about the reconsideration. This is for reconsideration of introduction of the ordinance. It should be debated if it's up for public hearing. So I disagree with reconsidering this.

We, we spoke about this, um, we agreed that, um, this will add another tax on top of all the taxes that we have already. Um, so I, I I think that we should not reconsider this. I think that we should move on and we should work on lowering taxes in the borough.

Further discussion? Okay, I, um, so there's a motion and I understand there is an objection to the motion. So, Adam, is everybody clear? Yes, reconsiders. Yes, this reconsiders it.

Madam Mayor, it passed with Assemblymembers Fonov, Sumner, and Bowles opposed. Oh no, you're correct. Excuse me, I apologize. It's been a really long day and a very busy meeting. The meeting failed.

It required 5 votes, but it had Assemblymember McKee, Bernier, and Gamble. McKee, Bernier, Gamble, and Nowrzan support.

Okay, so, well, so it fails. Yeah, so reconsideration did not pass, right? Okay.

Ready for introduction. Introductions now. Yeah, we're ready for new business. Uh-huh, Madam Clerk, would you—. Thank you, Madam Mayor, for introduction.

On June 2nd, OR 26021, or our— oh, excuse me, Ordinance 26054 with the company resolution 26044. Ordinance 26055 with the company resolution 26045. Ordinance 26057 with the company resolution 26046. Ordinance 26060 with the accompanying Resolution 26047. Ordinance 2601.

Ordinance 2602. Ordinance 2603 and the accompanying Resolution 26048. And Ordinance 2604. That was it. The last one was the one that was removed.

I'm right in the next one. So, Deputy Mayor, hang on a second. Oh, I'm sorry. We got a motion over here. Okay, we have to move the motion first and then you can divide it.

Okay, Deputy Mayor, I move to introduce the legislation as read into the record by the clerk and set the public hearing for June 2nd, 2026 and June 16th, 2026 respectively. Uh, and just to clarify, I'm sorry, Assemblymember Bernier, we— you guys pulled that one off the agenda that was up for the 16th. I should have changed your motion for you. So all the second? Just all the second.

Just a second.

There's no— there's no public hearing on the 16th. Move to set the public hearings for June 2nd, 2026. Okay, great. Thank you. Discussion?

Assemblyperson Gamble. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I move to divide the question and take Ordinance 26-021 separately.

Okay, we'll vote on dividing the question first, Madam Mayor. Okay, did everybody hear the motion? Yep, you're dividing the question.

Madam Mayor, passed with Assemblymembers Vonov, Sumner, and Bernier opposed.

And please let me just capture this. Thank you for your patience.

Okay, and now we're on to the first segment. Oh, I guess no, that failed. Never mind, we're on with— so you're on holding on your introductions. I'm sorry, you're what? If there's no objection to introducing the legislation for June 2nd, that's your vote now, right?

Oh no, it passed. I'm sorry, I am sorry. Okay, so your question has been divided and so has my brain, right? And so now we take up—. You take up the first segment, which is the June 2nd, and then the second segment will be the June 16th, or, uh, no, no, no, no.

No, it will be. Yeah, which, which ordinance you divide? I'm sorry, he is correct. He has not announced a date yet, and I apologize. Okay, so what, what did you divide, sir?

I, um, asked that Ordinance 26-021 be taken up separately from the rest of the introductions. Okay, and We haven't voted on that. So then we'll vote on all the— divide the question is the first thing you do. He divided the question, so the first segment will be voting on introducing the June 2nd, all the rest of them, and then the second segment will be voting for the introduction of 26021, right? Whatever he says about it, right?

Yeah. Okay, so the first motion that's before you is to set everything else to the 2nd of June for public hearing. Okay, everybody okay? Is there any objection to that?

Okay, so everything else except for 21 then has been set for the 2nd of June. Assemblyperson Gamble, now do you Do you want to move this and then we can discuss it separately? Thank you, Madam Mayor. I move Ordinance 26-021. Okay.

Do you want to speak to it, sir? I do. Thank you. Um, all I want to do is change the date for the public hearing from June 2nd to June 16th. Okay.

Um, because this affects, um, all of the comprehensive plans out there. And we heard Ms. Fisher speak earlier about it, and I've had several community councils, um, asked to have time to be able to, to talk in a general meeting, discuss it. I mean, they haven't said whether they're for it or against it, but they would like the opportunity since it affects— since it affects their community councils, um, that they have a chance to weigh in on it. So I just wanted to extend the date to June 16th.

Okay, discussion. Oh, okay, Deputy Mayor. The only reason I opposed this was that the other tax stuff was all coming out on the 16th, and there was going to be a large amount of discussion and stuff just on taxes, and it'd be a bit longer meeting. So I figured if I had this in on the 2nd, then the 16th meeting wouldn't drag on so long. Do you have a primary amendment you want to make, or you just want to speak in opposition?

Opposition only. Okay. Assemblyperson Sumner. Yeah, I'm gonna also speak in opposition. Um, we did, you know, the community councils have had a lot of time to dwell on this.

I mean, this was introduced, I think, 3 months ago. They went to the Planning Commission, actually twice. The Planning Commission only had had a couple of members missing, and then they brought it back and discussed it again, and then it came to us, and now we're introducing it for, you know, as the normal route of ordinances for the next meeting. Uh, so I would agree with Mr. Bernier that we should probably not stack. You know, this pertains to gravel.

A lot of people like to speak about gravel. A lot of people like to speak about taxes. If we stack this on top of the June 16th meeting, uh, I think we're going to be here all night long. Okay. All right, any assembly person?

Go ahead. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I appreciate Assemblyman Gamble, um, oh, you know, moving this to discuss this. Just looking at my calendar and representing District 1, um, I've got 2 community council meetings between now and then, and I, and I know one of them is very supportive of gravel. The other one, I have time before then to attend that meeting and get a feel.

So I'm supportive of this, the 2nd of June for District 1. Okay, further discussion? Okay, I think there is objection. So, Madam Clerk, so is this objection to the amendment or objection introduction? Period.

To the— what I understand the motion is to approve 26021, but with a public hearing date of the 16th. So if we, if we vote no, would it just kill the introduction, or would we have an opportunity to—. I could clarify, Madam Mayor, if I may. The second segment is to introduce ordinance serial number 26021 to set for public hearing for the 16th of June. If you vote that down, it will stay on public hearing for the 2nd of June.

Okay, thank you. That was, that was what I was wondering.

Okay, Assemblyperson Gamble. Yes, Madam Mayor, I'd like to offer a secondary amendment to change the public hearing date to July 21st. Okay, that'll, that'll keep it out of the tax mix and won't lengthen that, that meeting. Yes. Okay, so there's a primary amendment now to change the public hearing date till July 21st, 2026, right?

You know, you know, Assemblyperson Bowles. So I, I appreciate that, but we, we are entering construction season, and, um, and I think that we really need to think about this from the perspective of economic development. In infrastructure. Um, July is halfway through. We've got 3 months, and in my mind, 4 months maybe.

Um, I understand wanting to get it out to, um, community councils and getting as much feedback as possible, but, um, I, I kind of feel like we're growing and we need to get as much gravel moving as possible. So that's, that's where I stand on that. Assemblyperson Gamble, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I mean, the, um, I'm so tired I can't remember what it is right now.

With the, uh, these comprehensive plans— that's what I was thinking of— that these communities have, I mean, that's what they use to shape what they want their communities to look like. Point of order. We shouldn't be discussing the ordinance. We should be discussing the introduction of the ordinance. Okay, just a date.

All right, so, um, there's no real hurry to get this thing done. Why not give the public— and I hear Ms. McKee talk about this all the time, and Stephanie does too— about process and getting public input. And I don't see the hurry in getting this thing shoved through.

I think we've got plenty of time to just let it sit there until July 21st, where the community councils can meet and get some input into this ordinance. Thank you. Okay, Deputy Mayor. Well, you know, the nice thing about this, it'll all be decided in November when the whole people, not just community councils, but everyone gets to vote on it in November on the ballot. This isn't on the ballot.

Yeah, it has to go to a ballot. This is—. This isn't a gravel tax. No, the marijuana tax and alcohol. This—.

We're not talking about marijuana and alcohol tax right now. This is on the gravel. Oh, I have—. Okay, never mind.

Okay, so there is objection to changing it then, I think, from to July 21st. So, I'm sorry, Assemblyperson Fallop, did you—. I, at first, I was also under impression that we're discussing 061 because I think 061 was said possibly on the record. So I thought we're voting, we're talking about 061, and then later we figured it out that it was, um, 021 that we're discussing. So I'm saying whether I misheard or whether it was misspoken, which one we're talking about.

So That's why I am now just making a confirmation. We are talking about the 0 to 1. Okay, so we have an objection. So, just to clarify, everybody that's already entered their votes, you're sticking with what you've entered. All right, then we just need Assemblymember Bolles to vote, please.

So, just to clarify, no, Does not change the date to July. No, right now the secondary amendment is to strike June 16th, which was in the primary. Yep. Or in this—. Or, excuse me, to strike June 16th and insert 7/21.

Okay. This would only change the date.

Okay, so Madam Mayor, it failed with Assembly Members McKee, Gamble, and Nowers in support. Okay, so now we're back to voting on 616. Back to 616. Madam Mayor, could I offer an amendment to change the introduction date to 6/2?

You could just vote down to 6 6/16, it'll be at 6/2. Yeah, why wouldn't it? 6/16 Wasn't passed because it's being introduced as a referral date to 6/16. If it fails, it just isn't introduced at all. Okay, let me clarify.

The vote we just took was to strike 6/16 and insert 7/21. So the motion before that was to introduce Ordinance 26021 and set the public hearing for June 16th. Correct. So if it fails, then it's just not introduced. If we wanted to introduce for 6-2, we would need to make this amendment.

So it would wipe out the whole thing, you're saying? No, just introduce it as it was originally written on the agenda, but it has never been moved that way. It has only been moved to be introduced for 6-16. Even though it was originally on the agenda to be under introductions for 6-2, it was never introduced as being—. Hold on, you could vote both of them down and make it easier.

You could vote down the June—. The—. Okay, July 21st was voted down. Now it's going to be before you is June 16th. You could vote that down and then it stays on June 2nd.

I don't believe—. I don't believe that, but I don't think that's correct. But oh no, you're right, I apologize because it was a divided question. You're correct. Correct.

I'm just— I'm making an amendment to change this to the introduction date to June 2nd. Okay, so we have a secondary amendment now to change it to June 2nd.

Okay, is there objection to that?

So if we pass it to June 2nd, can you move to reconsider an introduction, Madam Clerk? I don't see any reason why not. Okay, thank you.

Okay, then we—. Oh, I, I guess my only thought about the 16th is, you know, we changed our election so more people could participate. On the 16th, we'll probably have a lot of people in this room and we'll get the most input on those things. So I think the 16th would be a good time. Okay, is there objection to the secondary amendment to change it back to the public hearing on the 2nd of June?

Yes, we do have an objection. Okay, so Madam Clerk, then we're Ready to vote. Just waiting for everybody to put in their votes.

Just to clarify, a yes vote changes it back to the second. Yeah, okay, this would— a yes vote would put it back to the— I don't know, at this point, and then back to the second of June. Sorry, and then not dividing the question? Question's already been divided. This is just to set the introduction of ordinance Serial number 26021.

So they'll just be in the same night, but they'll be for June 2nd. Yeah, okay, which where it was originally, but then it was divided, so then we moved it to the 16th. So now we're going back to the—. I see all the votes are entered. Are we ready to go ahead and display them?

Everybody, everybody ready? Okay. It passed with Assemblymember Nauras opposed. Okay, okay. So now, uh, Ordinance 26-021 comes back to you with a change to reset the public hearing for the 2nd of June like it would Yeah, yeah, like it was originally 15 minutes ago.

Is there objection? Assemblyperson— okay, yes, there is objection. Go ahead, Assemblyperson. Go ahead. No, I guess not necessarily objection, but discussion.

If the intent is to, then I guess, um, reconsider when we are already kind of planning for people to come and speak on certain date, which is in this case June 2nd. Um, I only thing I'd want to say is like, let's be considerate to people. If that's the date we're planning to do this, kind of stick to that date. I think we voted on potentially changing the date, so I would hope that we have that, uh, on a date so that we give plenty of time for that. And then the following meeting, where we're going to have a lot of tax discussion, we'll, we'll need as much time as possible to leave for that meeting for that.

So that's all I'm going to say.

Madam Mayor, yeah, and this is a question for Lonnie, but I believe if someone were to file a reconsideration of the introduction, then it would not remove it from the agenda. It would still be on the agenda. It would have the same effect because it would come back up at the next meeting. It would have the same effect as pulling it off of the agenda at that meeting.

Yeah, that's my understanding. My, my brain is fried, so I'm trying to make sure I understood what you said because I felt like I kind of went in a circle with you. So we're voting on the second segment as amended. So you're saying reconsidering the vote after—. If someone were to file a reconsideration, it was mentioned that you 'Can we file a reconsideration on this?' And I— yes, you obviously could file a reconsideration on introduction, but it would not remove it from the agenda.

No, it would still stay on the agenda. So then it would have the same effect as if you were to pull it off the agenda at the meeting that comes up. So it's, it's, you know, in effect there's no difference. Correct. Okay.

Alrighty, we still have an objection, is that right, from passing Ordinance 26- 021 with a public hearing date on the 2nd of June. That's what's before you now. Do we have— we do not have an objection to that.

Okay, so then it becomes, uh, passed and set for the 2nd of June. Okay, and that's the only divided question we had, right? Was just the one. Okay. Yes, ma'am.

All righty, so now we, uh, are to the vacancy report. Deputy Mayor, I move to confirm the removal of Pierre Charget from Lazy Mountain Road Service Area Board as requested by the mayor. Okay, is there discussion on the vacancy Report.

Is there any objection?

Okay, hearing none, then the vacancy report has been approved. There is no other new business, there are no referrals, and there we already took care of the one reconsideration, um, and so now we're ready for parting comments. Mr. Attorney.

Okay, Assemblyperson McKee, parting comments. Only that I think that all of us up here try our very, very best to represent the people that elected us, and I— we're contentious sometimes, but that's everybody's desire, and I absolutely know that. Assemblyperson Sumner, parting comments. Yeah, I mean, I just wasn't going to say anything, but I think I will reiterate that, that we don't always get it right, but we're all all trying our hardest to get it right in our own, in our own way. And I'm really glad that everyone can use leaf blowers this summer.

Deputy Mayor, parting comment. Thank you for everyone coming out. Thank you, Lord. Please bless our Valley. Thank you for your grace, your mercy.

Please bless our veterans, our first responders, Take care of us all, Lord. Help us to love one another. In Jesus' name, amen. Parting comments, Assemblyperson Nowak. Yeah, a few.

The people who came and spoke about Republican Way and were confused where it was on the agenda made me— reminded me of something that I've kind of poked at over time, which is the language that we use in our agenda and making things clear and just Making it easy for people to figure out if it's a topic they're interested in. And I'll give two examples. The ordinance 26-052, which reclassified the land in Big Lake, all we had to add to that was to say something along the lines, to reserve land for a future emergency services facility. That would, I mean, you had to click into the ordinance and figure out all this stuff. But, you know, somebody might have been interested in that.

They'd just be interested, the public, I think, in knowing that we're looking at that. And if you read that title, you wouldn't know what was going on. And then 26-053, you know, it does have the digital sign display project, but what we're doing there is delaying the purchase of a new digital sign because of cost increases and transferring funds to purchase ice Zamboni instead. Seems like a good, good use, but we could have put a little more language in there, and then it makes it easier for the public to to figure out what we're talking about. And same thing with the sale of lands on the rivers.

That one particularly, we could have said, you know, that we're selling these lands for a public purpose that includes dealing with erosion along the Matanuska River in the Butte area. People are really interested in that topic and how we— anyways, so just— I know I've mentioned that before, but the folks who We're like, where on the agenda is Republican Way? It was actually in the agenda there, but it just trying to make it easier for people. Um, on the proposal I am bringing, I want to be clear, this does give a property tax cut. It is a $75,000 property tax exemption.

It proposed for single, for primary residences. So people who live here would get a $75,000 exemption. Exemption. That's like $700 for people in this core area. For the outlying districts like the Butte, it could be $1,200.

And in your district, because your mill rates are much higher, it could be a higher rate. Um, in exchange to make up the difference, you have a 1.5% sales tax outside the city. So you're not stacking on the cities and you are capturing some of those out outside dollars from people who come visit here and use our infrastructure. So you're reducing the overall tax burden. Um, Mr. Bowles, I came up with this idea because you put your idea forward and really pushed for we need to do something about property taxes, and you wanted input.

This is my input to the community in response to yours. Is there another way? And so I feel it's very disrespectful to say that you are open to discussion ideas and then to say you would do not even want to have this for discussion. So I think I will be bringing this again. I think we should have it for discussion.

The community wants us to do something different with taxes. Here's another idea. Um, it should be the best idea percolates to the surface, and we allow the public to give us input on those. So I'll be bringing it again. I hope I can, um, convince you to allow the discussion that you helped push to start and get that community feedback on it, and then we'll, you know, vote depending on the input we get on it.

But it's a really important issue, and, um, it deserves a lot of consideration of how we move this borough forward and we've been dealing with for a long time. So, um, and then I was really happy to be at the Palmer Food Bank ribbon cutting along with the mayor and the Palmer mayor. That is really just amazing. If you had ever been in the food bank facility, was this hole in the wall. I don't know how they— it's really Valley spirit to make that operate, and it's really great to see them have a big facility people can walk into and have space for, for the food that they need and for the services they're providing.

Parting comments, Madam Clerk? Parting comments? Just thank you to the assembly for your patience. You did fine, baby. Assemblyperson Bowles, parting comments?

Thank you, Madam Mayor. So yep, I appreciate your comments, assembly. Woman hours, but I 100% disagree. Um, your ordinance absolutely brings another tax on top of the taxes that we have. It is, um, an obvious attempt to circumvent or kill my tax ordinance, and when I see it again on the agenda, I will also move to remove it again.

So what, what your ordinance does is it masks tax, the raising of our taxes with a $75,000 tax exemption, and knowing that a future assembly can come in here and raise the levy to 10, knowing that a future assembly can always remove that 10 mill rate cap and raise it to God knows what in the future. So, um, to say that this is an attempt to come up with a solution based off off of my request for comments from the public on how to lower taxes, I think is disingenuous. I think it's inaccurate, and I think that it's an attempt to try to get my ballot covered up— or excuse me, my ballot measure covered up on the November election ballot. There is high amount of appetite to remove the area-wide property taxes and bring in a sales tax. If I had it my way, we wouldn't bring in a sales tax, but that's just not— that's, that's just not realistic.

So what my ordinance aims to do is remove a tax, which is the area-wide tax, area-wide property tax, and replace it with a sales tax. And at the same time, it puts guardrails and barriers in place that a future assembly cannot bring back an area-wide property tax. And if they try, it immediately gets rid of the sales tax. So there are mechanisms in place to protect the members of the public from double taxation, triple taxation, quadruple taxation. So, um, I just want to make sure that's clear and on the record that your tax ordinance raises taxes and it doubles and it adds another tax.

So, um, that being said, District 1, um, I know there are multiple, um, businesses in District 1 in Sutton, um, on Kinnick River Road that make a living moving gravel. And, you know, one thing I ran on is making sure the government doesn't get in the way of you, you know, you're earning a living, telling you what you can and can't do on your property. And there are a lot of people that want to move gravel from their property to home build sites and other places. And I understand that there may be some communities that don't want that, and that's okay. But a lot of gravel is being moved and it needs to be moved, and we have it.

And, um, and I don't think there's anything wrong with us opening up the opportunity for people to make money and for homes to be built. So I think this is a very good thing that's coming before us. Um, so District 1, thank you for putting me in this seat. I am extremely grateful. And, uh, um, yeah, if you got any issues with any tax questions, please feel free to reach out.

And see you next time. Harding comments, Assemblyperson Gamble. Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. Well, first of all, people can take gravel off their property right now. There's nothing stopping them.

The only thing that this thing changes is the ability for a community to weigh in on during the CUP conditional use permit process. That's, that's all it does. And all they do is advise. They, they get— have a say in it. It's not regulatory.

It doesn't force the planning department to do anything. Um, and at least the communities get to say, you know, we don't want our community covered in gravel pits, whether the planning department agrees with them or not. At least they've had a word in the process, and that's And that's all they're asking for. I mean, they spent years working on these conditional— or on the, um, on their plans. Uh, so I just think it's really bad public policy to take people out of the process so that people can make a buck.

And the other thing is, you know, I think it's really bad precedence to deny an assembly member the ability to have their legislation at least heard and discussed, whether you agree with it or not. I'd like to hear all of the details and the arguments on any piece of legislation. And I just think it's terrible that you just take somebody's work and flush it down the toilet because you don't like it. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Morning comments, Assemblyman Fono.

I will say to respond to the last point that you said, Um, for a few years that I've been here, that wasn't the tactics that was used here on this assembly. And, um, somebody started this tactic of removing things off of agenda before, um, we even have a discussion. And in my case specifically, it was after a whole year of process of boards going and meeting and making certain recommendations, and we chose to— or this body chose to not even hear that and not to discuss it. So I guess pendulum swings both ways, and it's not pleasant when you're on the side that just got hit, you know, especially if you worked on something, if it's something that's common sense. So I'd like to welcome the more respectful way of doing business on this body.

But it, it takes all of us to not play that game, whether it's reconsidering, killing agenda because we have a public and this will sit good for the temporary moment. Uh, we're gonna pull this off and kill it. So I'm willing to do it. I've always been good of if I said something, I'll deliver on it. But it would take all of us to be on that same page.

Second part, Ms. McKee, if this goes through and you're still gonna apply for that position, I hope you'll be on that, on that board and champion whatever's personal to you. I know I've talked to you several times. This was the very one that hit you personal. I've seen you cry about it when it comes to what has happened, and if there's improvements that can be made, recommendation on how these panels and things operating and you put your input there, I'll be the first one to support that. I do think it's a good thing to have a person there who can champion and help.

I think, example that Mr. Gamble and Bowles provided, that they're on the, on the different boards, they welcome that. So it's going to be a good thing. That said, thank you so much.

We will have no executive sessions, and unless there is objection I will adjourn the meeting at 9:26.