5/06/26 City Council Regular Meeting

You're on the record. Okay, okay. I'd like to call to order the May 6th, 2026 City Council meeting. Uh, if you're able, please, uh, rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you. Mayor Nackstedt. Here.

Councilmember Daniel. Here. Councilmember Grimme. Here. Vice Mayor Askin.

Here. Councilmember Petty.

Here. Council Member Kucena is absent. Council Member Sonnart? Here. And Student Representative Bowling?

Here. You have a quorum. Okay, thank you. Council, before we get to the agenda and consent agenda approval, I'd like to bring to your attention the laydown materials that you have before you.

Item H9, add item, new business consent agenda, purchase orders for over $35,000 which need council approval. Brought to us by administration. Item E2, public hearings, ordinance number 3514-2026 substitute, also brought to us by administration. Add item E5, public hearings, ordinance 3517-2026 amendment, brought to us by administration. Um, item E8, a public comment, uh, provided by the city clerk.

And add item G1, unfinished business, planning and zoning draft minutes brought to us by administration. Also, pleasure of council, I move—. I move that we approve the agenda and consent agenda with laydowns and ask for unanimous consent. I'll second. Are there any additional revisions to the agenda or consent agenda from council?

Seeing no one, uh, would the clerk please read the consent agenda items into the record? Thank you, Mayor. Regular meeting minutes of April 22nd, 2026. Action approval, bills to be ratified, brought to you by the administration. Action approval, consent to assignment of lease agreement of Lot 1, Block 5, General Aviation Apron Number 1, amended, brought to you by the administration.

Action approval, special use permit to Weaver Brothers Inc. for truck trailer storage, brought to you by administration. The introduction of Ordinance Number 3518-2026, amending Kenai Municipal Code Title 6, Elections, Chapters 6.05, 6.15, and 6.40, relating to election dates, candidate filing, compensation of election officials, and canvassing of elections, brought to you by the City Clerk, with a public hearing date of May 20th, 2026. The introduction of Ordinance Number 3519-2026, accepting and appropriating grant funds from the Alaska High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area for drug investigation overtime expenditures, brought to you by administration, with a public hearing date of May 20th, 2026. And the introduction of Ordinance Number 3520-2026, amending Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 14.10, Subdivision Regulations, and amending Kenai Municipal Code Section 18.10.030, Street Improvements, to remove road design standards from code and replace them with a street design standards manual brought to you by administration with a public hearing date of May 20th, 2026. And that is your consent agenda.

Okay, thank you for that. Are there any public comments on any of the consent agenda items just read by the clerk?

Seeing no one, unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Hearing no objection, the agenda and consent agenda are approved.

There are no scheduled administrative reports. Under C, there are no scheduled public comments. That brings us to unscheduled public comments. Are there any members from the public who would like to speak on any item not scheduled for public hearing on this agenda? Okay, anybody online?

There is nobody online. Okay, so that brings us down to public hearings. The first public hearing before us tonight is Ordinance 3513. 2026, Amending Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 7.15, Purchases and Sales, to remove requirements to publish advertisements in newspapers. Brought to us by Administration.

Pleasure of Council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we enact Ordinance Number 3513-2026. I'll second. Okay, moved and seconded.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3513-2026?

Seeing no one, that brings it back to council for discussion. Commander Eubank, did you want to give us a report on this? Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. I'm going to defer to our Public Works Director. He handles most of our procurements, so he can speak to this.

Thank you. Um, so this ordinance is for removing or modifying some sections of the purchasing code for KMC. We are trying to remove the requirements that we advertise in the local newspaper. Our current code requires that we publish twice in newspapers to get advertisements out there. As we mentioned in the memo here, we've recently switched over to BidExpress, and we're seeing a lot of engagement on that.

A lot of plan centers and things like that already subscribe and grab plans from that and can distribute it out as well, and it allows subcontractors to see what contractors are interested in projects and things like that. So it's getting a lot more engagement for us using that online bidding platform that's free. So we don't see a need to do this anymore, and we are spending money every time we're advertising for projects to advertise these in the paper, and the, the paper distribution is getting less and less and less. So we think this is a better solution moving forward.

Any questions from council? Council Member Cremie.

How would the average, like, person, Joe Schmo, who maybe, I don't know, wants to get into the contract business but hasn't broken the ice yet, or wants to be aware, how would they know? I mean, now they could read it in the paper, um, obviously the paper version, not the online version. I know that those notices aren't usually in the online version, but how, how would information then be accessible by the general public? Thank you. So right now you can go on our website, and if you go to the, the bids and RFP section, it says, you know, all of our bids and RFPs are now online through BidExpress.

So you click the link there and you just create a free account. Once you're into the program, you can subscribe to certain places, like if you wanted to receive every, you know, bid posting that was with the borough, with City of Soldotna, with City of Kenai, with City of Seward, and City of Homer. You know, if they're— I know the borough and Soldotna are both using BidExpress as well. I don't know about Seward and Homer. But in theory, you're getting notices every time that, you know, new projects are posted on there.

So you can subscribe to those notices and get those automatically. Other than that, it's just most people are keeping an eye on it or browsing it regularly if they're not subscribed to it.

Thank you. Any further questions? I do support this ordinance. The borough was mentioned. The borough started using this about a decade ago, and so it's nothing new.

And actually, at the time when it was news, there were a lot of dirt contractors didn't like it, but now it's the best thing that ever happened because they can get any updates, they can change a bid right at the last minute, they don't have to run down to the borough. And get it stamped in, they can do it online. It really works well, so it's, it's well within their thinking. So anyway, I think this is good, and I believe we're getting more bids too now that we're using it. So any further comments?

Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you, Mayor. Councilmember Daniel? Yes. Councilmember Grimme?

Yes. Vice Mayor Askin? Yes. Councilmember Petty? Yes.

Council Member Kassena is absent. Council Member Sonnart? Yes. Mayor Naxted? Yes.

And Student Representative Bowling? Yes. You have 6 yes votes. Ordinance number 3513-2026 is enacted.

Okay, uh, now we have before us Ordinance, uh, uh, 3514-2026, increasing estimated revenues and appropriations in the general fund and airport fund and awarding a contract to purchase a firefighting foam brought to this administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we enact Ordinance 3514-2026.

I'll second. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3514-2026? Seeing no one, that brings us back to council. Um, and I see we have a laydown, we have a substitute. So do we have a motion to amend by substitute?

I think there's a suggested amendment in the laydown.

Yes, um, I move that we amend, um, ordinance number 3514 with the PO increase of $96,295 and request unanimous consent. I'll second that. Is there any objections to unanimous consent? Seeing none, um, Ordinance 3514/2026 Substitute is before us. Um, at this point, I'd like to go ahead and go back to the public.

Is there any, any public comment, uh, on Ordinance 3514/2026 Substitute? Seeing no one, that'll bring it back to council. Council comments?

City Manager Eubank, did you want to, uh, fill us in on anything with this? If you would like me to, absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Um, appreciate, uh, the movement of the substitute. Um, so Ordinance 3514-2026 starts by, um, The city is in the process of replacing the firefighting foam that is used at Kenai Municipal Airport.

It's also used in some of our apparatus from our main station here. That firefighting foam, frankly, was the only foam that was approved by the federal government for decades. It has been determined that that foam, it's called AFFF, I don't, I wish I could remember the actual name, but the acronym is AFFF. That firefighting foam contained some forever chemicals, namely PFOS, which is no longer acceptable. And as a result, they— I think it's been about 2 years ago now, they— substitute product was developed and finally approved by U.S. military and the FAA for use on airports.

So what the city's in the process, the overall process of doing is, one, we have to decontaminate our existing equipment. So the machines, our equipment that currently has the foam in it, has all that has to be removed. Those things have to be cleaned and decontaminated. We have to then dispose of all AFFF that we have because we no longer can use it, and then we must purchase a replacement foam. So this, uh, this ordinance, because the total cost of that project exceeded what we estimated in the FY26 budget, one does two things.

It approves a supplemental appropriation to provide the additional funding that we need to affect the entire project. And then it authorizes the purchase of the foam, which we competitively bid. Now, the substitute was put before you tonight because there was a math error in the lowest responsive bidder. It allowed us to reduce the original ordinance by a little over $1,000, and that's why that was before you. But that is what is happening with Ordinance 3514-2026.

Council Member Petty. Um, City Manager Eubank, when is the estimated time that all of this process will be completed?

Lee, do you know the timeline on the foam? I believe will take approximately 12 weeks to ship. Um, we're hoping it'll come faster than that, but I believe that was what we put on the, the bid date. Um, so So we would need to take the trucks over one at a time. They're going to a local vendor to get cleaned out.

And so I'm assuming that's going to be a one-at-a-time process because we're going to need to keep trucks here active with foam ready to roll. And so it's kind of going to be a staggered process after that period.

So our equipment will still have foam until the new approved foam is available. Is that what I'm understanding, sir? City Manager Eubank. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Petty. Absolutely, yeah, it's absolute requirement on the airfield.

And, you know, foam is only deployed by the fire— I wish Chief was here to talk to this— but as far as our normal apparatus over here in some very unique situations. So, but yes, we will absolutely maintain current foam until we have replacement foam and get that in place and service. Thank you. Any further discussion? Clerk, please call the roll.

Thank you. Councilmember Grimme? Yes. Vice Mayor Askin? Yes.

Councilmember Petty? Yes. Councilmember Kucena is absent. Councilmember Sonnart? Yes.

Mayor Naxted? Yes. Councilmember Daniel? Yes. Student Representative Bowling?

Yes. You have 6 yes votes. Ordinance number 3514-2026 substitute is enacted. Thank you very much. Now we're on item E3, Ordinance 3515-2026, increasing estimated revenues and appropriations in the airport snow removal equipment capital project fund to transfer residual balance from a completed project back to the original funding source, brought to us by administration.

Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we enact Ordinance Number 3515-2026. I'll second.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3515-2026?

Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you. Vice Mayor Askin? Yes. Council Member Petty?

Yes.

Council Member Kucena is absent. Council Member Sonnart? Yes. Mayor Nackstedt? Yes.

Council Member Daniel? Yes. Council Member Grimme? Yes. Student Representative Bowling?

Yes. You have 6 yes votes. Ordinance number 3515-2026 is enacted. Thank you. That brings us to item E4, Ordinance Number 3516-2026, Increasing Estimated Revenues and Appropriations in the General Fund, Fire Department, and Overtime Costs in Excess of Budgeted Amounts, brought to us by Administration.

Pleasure of Council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we enact Ordinance Number 3516-2026. I second that. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3516-2026?

Seeing no one, uh, bring it back to council. Council discussion? Discussion?

Seeing no one, Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you. Council Member Petty? Yes. Council Member Kusuna is absent.

Council Member Sonnart? Yes. Mayor Naxted? Yes. Councilmember Daniel?

Yes. Councilmember Grimme? Yes. Vice Mayor Askin? Yes.

Student Representative Bowling? Yes. You have 6 yes votes. Ordinance number 3516-2026 is enacted. Thank you.

Now we have item E5, Ordinance 3517-2026, increasing estimated revenues and appropriations in the general fund and authorizing a Consulting agreement to evaluate natural gas storage opportunities on Kenai Municipal Airport lands, brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council, Vice Mayor Askin. I move we enact Ordinance Number 3517-2026. Second.

Okay, moved and seconded. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3517-2026?

Seeing no one. Bring it back to council. I see we have a recommended amendment and a laydown. Vice Mayor Askin. Yes, I move that we amend ordinance number 3517-2026 to execute a change order to the contract with Alaska Marine Power in the amount of $30,000 for a total contract amount of $60,000 for consulting services.

I'm requesting unanimous consent. I'll second. Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, we now— before us we have Ordinance 3517-2026 as amended.

Um, council discussion?

Uh, thank you, Mayor. Just perhaps an overview of why, why we need to make this change from the city manager. City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Um, so if, if council recalls, uh, we, uh, council adopted Ordinance 3507-2026, which appropriated $30,000 from the airport, um, to provide for consulting services related to, um, the city's analysis of, of competing gas storage applications.

Um, working with those consultants, um, I believe we're, uh, getting close to exhausting the original amount, um, under that contract. This ordinance will, um, provide an additional $30,000, um, for consulting services, bringing the total to $60,000. And it also is going to authorize, because the original contract Um, was less than the amount that required council approval. Uh, moving to a total contract of $60,000, uh, require— requires council approval. And, um, so this ordinance again does two things: appropriates an additional $30,000 for consulting services, and it authorizes, um, a change order after the amendment was just made, authorizes a change order of $30,000, bring total contract amount to $60,000 with Alaska Marine Power, um, LLC.

Any further discussion? Follow up, if you don't mind. Go ahead. Um, do we feel this is going to be sufficient for the, the work, or, uh, at the current burn rate, or what are our thoughts with that? City Manager.

City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, Council Member Daniel, um I hope that it is. I guess it just depends on how prolonged this process is. We are currently working to schedule times to meet with the individual applicants and start discussing more specifics of potential leases.

And so it's my hope that this is enough, but we'll have to see as that process evolves and moves forward.

City Manager Eubank, if you didn't mention it already, you know, this is, uh, this consultant has, uh, experience and a knowledge, uh, beyond what, what we have capable here at the city. That's why we're using this consultant. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. So, you know, I, I can tell you that when Kenan Municipal Code was, uh, written and adopted, it There are no provisions in it, frankly, that envision some of the leases that we're contemplating in the case of gas storage.

When we were looking for— to identify potential consultants that could assist the city, one item that was a hurdle that we had to try to work around was, you know, many of the oil and gas consultants in the state of Alaska either work for Enstar or Hilcorp and would have conflicts of interest. So that ruled out a lot of parties. I think we were very fortunate to find the gentlemen at Alaska Marine Power. One of those has decades of, you know, high-level executive experience with oil and gas projects in Alaska and of varying sizes and states. The other one has, you know, decades of experience as a landman for a major oil company and negotiating these types of leases.

So we have expertise based both on the project level and on negotiating leases and things like that for these types of assets. So I think we've identified a great team. They've been— You know, in my opinion, they've been a real asset to this point, and, um, and I think they've been well worth what we're spending.

Thank you. Council Member Daniel. Sorry, one last thing. I just want to say I really appreciate the administration working diligently to find, uh, expertise in this, uh, because I know it's a very specialized process, and, uh, I really appreciate that and bringing this forward, and I'm definitely in support of this so we can hopefully make, make informed decisions.

Any further discussion? I want to say that I also do support this, and hopefully we can, we can come to a resolution soon. Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you. Councilmember Sonnart?

Yes. Mayor Naxted? Yes.

Councilmember Daniel? Yes. Councilmember Grimme? Yes. Vice Mayor Askin?

Yes. Councilmember Petty? Yes. Councilmember Kucena is absent. And Student Representative Bowling?

Yes. You have 6 yes votes. Ordinance number 3517-2026 is enacted as amended. Okay, thank you. Now we are on item E6, resolution number 2026-29.

Authorizing the purchase of a new Ventrac tractor attachments utilizing innovative procurement adminis— brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin, I move we adopt Resolution 2026-29 and request unanimous consent. I second that.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-29?

Nobody, nobody online. Um, seeing no one, we'll bring it back to council. You know, the consent was requested. Are there any objections?

Any further council comments?

Seeing none, resolution 20— it's okay, that's okay. Council Member Gremmick, I just wanted to comment that I appreciate that this moves towards consistency. So if we have the same brand, same parts, makes it easier and I would assume more cost-effective across the board. And then you'll have two tractors instead of just one for Parks and Rec. Absolutely.

Any further discussion? Again, unanimous consent was requested. There are no objections to that. Seeing none, Resolution 2026-29 is adopted. That brings us to Item E7, Resolution 2026-30, authorizing a contract award for the 2026 fire systems testing, inspection, and monitoring, brought to us by Administration.

Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Raskin, I move we adopt Resolution 2026-30 and request unanimous consent. I'll second. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-30? Seeing no one, um, bring it back to council for discussion.

Council, unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, Resolution 2026-30 is adopted.

Now we are on Item E8, Resolution 2026-31, authorizing the city manager to enter into an airline operating agreement and terminal lease area lease with Fox Air LLC, brought to us by Administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move that we adopt, um, Resolution 2026-31 and request unanimous consent.

I'll second.

Okay, is there, uh, is there anybody, uh, from the general public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-31? Okay, seeing no one is, uh, bring it back to council. Council discussion.

Council member, uh, Daniel, sorry, I got you. Sonar was about to say something. I'm sorry, were you—. No, go ahead. Okay, just a quick curiosity, maybe for the city manager.

Um, do they meet all the requirements in terms of, uh, for this lease agreement, or we have not gotten to that stage yet? City Manager Eubank. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Daniel. Uh, I believe they do. So their initial operating plan is to operate 6 flights per day, 6 days a week, with no operations on Saturdays.

They will be operating the caravan It's a 9-passenger aircraft, same aircraft operated by Grant Aviation. I have no reason to believe they can't meet our requirements. They've been clearly communicated to them. I, and I can tell you that in anticipation of this being adopted, we did receive the initial deposit check from Fox Air today. It's a little over $25,000 deposit they're required by the AOA.

To provide, um, but we will make sure that, uh, their certificates of insurance and all the other requirements are met prior to, um, uh, initiating that AOA, the Airline Operating Agreement, with them. But, um, I have no reason to believe they won't. Any further discussion? Council Member Sonar.

How timely. Do we need this lease? I know that we're looking at summer right around the corner, or at least we hope so. There's some sunshine out there now. Um, I guess I have a concern about this letter of testimony here, and a couple of the allegations in here I think would be very easily checked out.

And I'm just wondering if we, if we push this for 2 weeks just to give admin a chance to make a few phone calls and check this out, would that delay us for being ready to operate at summertime? City Manager Eubank or Mr. Bloom?

Thank you, Councilmember Nexted. I guess what I would recommend is unless council has grave concerns, that council approve it with the contingency that administration will do some little additional due diligence. I'm not sure what we can do, but we, we can look into it more and wouldn't execute the lease and would bring it back to council if we found some concerns. That would allow us to move forward in a timely manner.

I share Councilmember Grimmie. I share Councilmember Sonar's concerns. I think that the things that are said in, in Blaine Dempshire's letter are significant enough to warrant concern, but certainly don't want to cut off our nose to spite our face either, because we, we do need and could all could benefit from another carrier. So I wouldn't want to eliminate that as an opportunity, but I'd much rather have nothing than something bad. So I, I mean, I trust that city staff will do their due diligence, and, and I think I could agree with Mr. Bloom's plan.

Any further discussion? Sorry, Council Member Petty. That helps. I certainly appreciate your recognition, Mayor Nackstedt. My apologies.

Thank you so very, very much. Yes, uh, this letter does, uh, create some pause for concern, and I would think some of the allegations that they're stating could be, uh, easily determined through FAA records to validate and see if, uh, if Fox Air could, um, give reason, or— I just want to make sure that we have, um, quality opportunity that comes to our city that doesn't tarnish our reputation. Thank you.

Any further discussion?

So would we be able to postpone this? I wasn't looking at you, Council Member Petty. Oh, sorry. Um, so I would like to, um, ask, uh, Mr. Bloom his recommendation on how we should move forward with this, if this would need to be postponed into our next meeting.

Mr. Bloom? Thank you, Councilmember Nexted. Uh, sorry, Mayor Nexted, Councilmember Petty. Uh, so I think council has two options. One would be to pass it at this meeting, or act, take a vote at this meeting, and administration would follow up and could report back to council and, uh, not execute the lease.

You're giving me the— you're giving the city manager the authority to do so. But he doesn't have to do that. I mean, if he found things that were of concern, and we could report back at the next meeting. The other option would be to postpone until the next council meeting. I'm—.

Without Fox Air being here, I'm not sure how that would affect their timeline if we postponed, but both options are available. Vice Mayor Oskam. I, um, I trust that moving forward with this and leaving it in your capable hands, and you can let us know in 2 weeks if there's a consideration that to not do the lease or to execute. City Manager Eubank, were you going to say something? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

The only thing I was going to fill in is, uh, the intent of Fox Air is, I believe, is to begin, um, service on June 1st. So, um, and I think that provides for either postponement or the other recommended action, whatever the pleasure of council is.

Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you, Mayor Nexton. Um, I would be fine with moving forward because we do have a summer timeline right in front of us, um, with the plan that admin look into this, and then if admin feels like there's— has any reservations, then you would be able to bring it back before us and say no, we're not going to do the lease. But I would suggest let's move forward with that caveat.

Councilmember Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxal. I would agree with Councilmember Sonner. I like that plan going forward. It gives us the most flexibility, um, and, and to execute or not.

I really appreciate that. That's a good, good compromise, I think.

And, and I, I too would agree with that. And, um, I was rather surprised at the at the email, you know, it came from somebody that even identified where they worked in a small town, and there were a lot of accusations, I should say, that didn't seem to be substantiated either. So I really wasn't sure what was going on there, and he was actually making literally a federal case out of it because he had to do with mail fraud or whatever, and I think all that can be, be handled here. So quite surprised by that email, and I'm not sure exactly what to think of it, but I would support moving forward. Is there any further discussion?

Seeing none, unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing no objections, Resolution 2026-31 is adopted.

Next, we have item E9, Resolution 2026-32, authorizing extension of a contract for purchase of water and wastewater chemicals, brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we adopt Resolution 2026-32 and request unanimous consent. I will second that.

Is there anyone from the general public that would like to, uh, speak to Resolution 2026-32? Seeing no one, bring it back to council for discussion.

Any discussion? Council Member Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxer. Just a quick question for, um, Mr. Lee. Is this the same price we got last year, or is it a different increase at all?

Just curious.

Um, yes, Brentag, our current vendor, agreed to extend the same price from last year. We reached out to them. Typically, we bid this contract out annually, but we, with concerns about fuel prices right now, we asked if they'd just be interested in extending one year, and they were willing to do that for us.

Any further discussion? Nanum's consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, Resolution 2026-32 is adopted. That brings us to Item E10, Resolution 2026-33, authorizing extension of a contract for refueling services for city facility fuel tanks, brought to us by Administration.

Measure of council, Vice Mayor Askin. I move we adopt Resolution 2026-33 and request unanimous consent. I'll second that. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-33? Seeing no one, bring it back to the council for discussion.

Council?

Um, I did have a question, uh, for the city manager, um, that this is, uh, that before the contract, we, uh, there was a reduction from the, uh, um, OPUS, uh, to over 2%. Now this would be an increase. Can you kind of explain how the, the number differences correlate, and it's in the best interest of the city in here, and I just want to know how that is in the best interest.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So originally the city bid this contract as a 3-year contract with the opportunity to extend for 2 1-year at the agreement of mutual consent between the vendor and the city. The vendor fully met their requirements under the 3-year initial term. So they've provided what they quoted. When we asked if they were interested in extending for 1 additional year, they said they could not do that under the current price structure that they bid.

And that they would— but they would be willing to at an increased rate. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Frye, I think we only had a single respondent when we bid this. So they were, when this was originally bid, the only bidder that did bid. And, you know, staff working with them, I feel like they feel like they underbid the original contract, that volumes weren't as big as they thought they were going to be and delivery costs were more than they were expecting. And, you know, staff again concerned in the current fuel environment that this might not be the best time to try to bid a longer-term contract is recommending that we accept their increased rate for 1 year, and then we'll reexamine the bid environment at that point in time and decide if we'll do a long-term bid or request to extend again.

It's being brought before council. Had there been no increase in rate, I simply could have— we simply could have agreed and not brought it before council. But because the rate changed over what it originally was and what council approved, that's why it's before you here this evening. Thank you for that clarification. Any further discussion?

Councilmember Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxted. The 31 increase. So is that for the whole year? So if prices go down, it's going to be elevated, or how does that, that work?

City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Daniel. I believe it's still pegged to OPUS, which is a floating rate that based upon the, the price of fuel from, um, uh, the refiners or the, the suppliers. So as that price drops the price we're paying for fuel will drop, but it will still be 31 cents in excess of whatever the OPUS rate is. So whichever direction OPUS goes, we will be paying more or less, and it will always be 31 cents more or less than OPUS.

Council Member Gremmie. Did I understand you correctly? Essentially, there is no other option. City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Member.

No, I certainly did not say that. I said I think what concerns staff right now is to issue an RFP with price— the prices of fuel fluctuating 50 cents each and every day depending on what's going on in the Persian Gulf. This might not be the environment that we are recommending that we go and test the market again. That's— we're recommending that, you know, we adopt this rate for a period of 1 year and then reevaluate when fuel prices become more stable and the environment is probably more conducive to issuing a long-term bid.

Any further discussion? Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections?

Seeing none, Resolution 2026-33 is adopted. So now we are on Item E.11, Resolution 2026-34, affirming city support of non-discrimination policies as outlined in Title VII of the 1968 Civil Rights Act, known as the federal Fair Housing Act to comply with certain grant requirements brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we adopt Resolution 2026-34 and request unanimous consent.

I'll second. Thank you. Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-34? Okay, seeing no one. Bring it back to council.

Council discussion? Councilmember Petty? Uh, yes, I would like to ask the city manager. Um, I thought that, um, the city always operated within, um, the underlying Title VIII of the civil rights. Why is it necessary to put this forth?

Manager Eubank? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Petty. I think that's a great question. Yes, I believe your, um, your understanding is correct that the city always operates under the provisions of that. However, um, the city partnered with Kenai Peninsula Housing Initiative on a Community Development Block Grant application, which we were successful in being awarded.

One condition of that grant is prior to issuance that we must reaffirm, take this action to reaffirm our position on this. So that is— this is not— this is something we've done in the past in similar situations when grant provisions require it, and this is one of those required provisions. Um, I think one of the last ones that we're trying to get through and, um, to get that grant in place and start to extend those utilities and construct roadway.

Thank you, um, I appreciate that. Um, I just find it most interesting that we have to affirm that yes, we do follow the law. We do follow the law, and we're reaffirming that we do follow the law. So that's what we're doing tonight, is reaffirming that, as we always do, we do follow the law. Thank you.

Government at its best. Any further discussion? Now, as consent was requested, are there any objections? Seeing none, Resolution 2026-34 is adopted. At this point, I'd like to take a 5-minute break to about 6:50.

We'll be back.

You're on the record.

We are back on the record. I'll wait for Council Member Petty to get back to the dais.

5 Minutes is not very long, so thank you. So that brings us to, uh, Item G, unfinished business. Um, we have Ordinance 3510-2026 amending the official zoning map by rezoning the property at 10060 Kenai Spur Highway from Conservation to Suburban Residential zoning district, brought to us by Administration. I have a clerk note here that a motion to enact Ordinance Number 3510-2026 is on the floor from the April 1st, 2026 council meeting. So therefore, we do not need to have a motion to enact.

It's already, already been made. So with that, I would like to ask if there's anybody from the general public that would like to speak to Ordinance 3510-2026 or Ordinance Number 3510-2026 Substitute.

Not according to this.

Mr. Mayor, I think we need to either speak on the ordinance number 3510-2026 first before we speak on the substitute. Say that again. I, I believe we need to speak on ordinance number 3510-2026 before we can speak on the substitute. Okay.

2026.

Seeing no one, that brings us back to council. So, uh, we have, uh, um, ordinance number, uh, 3510-2026 substitute. Does anybody care to make that, that motion?

Vice Mayor Askin. Um, in reading the original ordinance and the substitute, they seem to be saying the same thing. Can, um, moving from conservative conservation to suburban residential, um, wasn't the substitute to convert to rural residential instead of suburban? Is that correct, Mr. Bloom? Thank you.

Uh, so the original ordinance was to rezone the entire parcel. The substitute is to only rezone a portion of the parcel to suburban residential or rural. I got you. Uh, administration's recommendation is suburban.

Do I have a motion for the substitute? City Council member Daniel, uh, I move we replace—. Oh, we need to replace it or just move to it? Yeah, I move that we, um, enact Ordinance Number 3510-2026 Substitute.

One second. Is that sufficient? Okay, thank you. It's probably— it's close enough, so good job. Thank you.

Is there anybody from the general public that would like to speak to 3510/2026 substitute? Seeing no one, I'll bring it back to council. There was a— there was an amendment in the packet too for the substitute.

If anybody cares to make that motion.

Vice Mayor Askin, are you digging for it? He just made the— he just moved for the substitute, right? He moved the substitute, but there's an amendment that says what planning and zoning, what they recommended. I can see it. It's in our packet.

Sorry, the commission moved to amend it to rural residential. Do I need to make a motion to that? Page 66 of the packet. Okay, um, I am moved that we amend the 13th whereas by filling in the blank with that the City Council rezone the portion of the property at 160— 10060 Kenai Spur Highway from conservation to rural residential. The amended whereas would read: Whereas, at their regularly scheduled meeting held on April 29, 2026, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the City Council rezone the portion of the property at 10060 Kenai Spur Highway from conservation to rural residential.

Request unanimous consent.

Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you. Thank you, Vice— Mr. Daniel. Is there—.

So now we have before us— and unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections to unanimous consent?

Well, I have a question. I'm looking at the map on page 53, and we're talking about just a portion of this that is being rezoned, correct? That, that is correct. It would be just along the, uh, the road area.

So just so it's clear, what's on the floor is we're only amending the whereas in the resolution to indicate what P&Z did. You're not necessarily— we're not asking you to agree with what they did or not agree with what they did, just to amend the whereas to indicate what they did.

Can you say that again? Yep, I will try better. I'm sorry. So this was referred by council to the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation they made their recommendation. So all this is doing is filling in what their recommendation was in the, in the whereas, that at such and such a date they held a meeting and they made this recommendation.

But it doesn't change, uh, the outcome of the resolution, which is contained in, uh, the sections of the— after the whereas is in the section. So this is just stating the fact that they met and they made this recommendation, not changing it. I mean, to boil it down, not changing it from suburban residential to rural residential. Correct. Okay, thank you.

Okay, so, so backwards. So the amendment to the, uh, the, uh, um, substitute unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections to that, what Planning and Zoning did? Saying that exactly, would you please explain exactly what Planning and Zoning did do? They, um, Vice Mayor asking, you read the, uh, the amendment that pretty well covers it.

Yes, that again. Yes, they asked that the City Council rezone the portion of the property from conservation to rural residential instead of suburban. Okay, thank you.

And this consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, now before us we have Ordinance 3510/2026 Substitute as Amended.

Yeah, Mr. Bloom. Thank you, Councilmember Knackstedt, members of council. So I, I think this is, uh, better that we do this right rather than fast, and there's a couple issues that have arisen. The first was at the Planning and Zoning Commission, and we've been working with them on training, and we've really been encouraging them to when they act in a quasi-judicial capacity to take a break and go into adjudicative session. I think what wasn't clear to them is the difference between that when they act as a legislative body versus a quasi-judicial body.

When they act as a quasi-judicial body, they are making decisions about like individual property rights, acting like a judge. And in that case, there's an exception to the Open Meetings Act that allows them to go into what's called an adjudicative session outside of the public view and have discussions and make findings. When they're acting in a legislative capacity, which they were when they made this recommendation, they're not adjudicating anybody's private property rights. They're just making a recommendation, and that's legislative. They can't go into adjudicative session.

So when they went into adjudicative session, they technically violated the Open Meetings Act. So I would recommend that you guys can have whatever discussion you want to have tonight, but ultimately that you not take action and refer this back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to redo their hearing. Uh, that's the cure for an Open Meetings Act violation, is to redo everything in public. They can do that on, uh, their meeting on the 27th, and then this would come back before council on the 3rd. One other reason that I'm making that recommendation is because KMC 1420.270 requires that— I'll just read it.

The commission shall, upon public hearing, forward its written recommendation to the council along with all certified minutes and public records relating to the proposed amendment. We didn't have time to get the certified minutes, so you just have draft minutes. I don't think that they would change, but technically it doesn't meet our code requirement, which specifically requires certified minutes, not draft minutes. So I think that also is another reason to postpone this until we have the certified minutes and the Planning and Zoning Commission has cured their Open Meetings Act violation. Thank you, Mr. Bloom.

I think based on that explanation, we have really no choice but to, to send it back. But before we make that motion, if we— we can still have some discussion about this before we do that. If there's anyone that has any, any comments they would like to make on the, on the substitute ordinance as amended.

I did have a— oh, go ahead, Vice Mayor Askin. Um, I, I did have some question on why we want to do suburban residential and not rural residential. Um, because this is a conservation area, why would we want to put as many houses as possible when we could like open it up and not have as high a density as would be required or allowed with suburban residential versus rural?

Mr. Bloom. Thank you, uh, Mayor Naxted and Council Member Askin. I'd like to just answer the first part of that, and then I know the city manager has more to add, but I just want to let council know that when the city took over planning and zoning powers from the borough, conservation meant two things, and we never changed that. It was conservation for like open spaces and nature, but it also was conservation for airport. In that sense, it was conservation of use of the lands for airport purposes.

So this land was airport land, and like all other airport land, it was initially designated conservation for the airport use. So it doesn't necessarily mean And I know it's confusing because this does contain wetlands and areas that would probably fit under the other definition of conservation. But just have that background when you look at it, that this was originally set aside as conservation for airport use, not conservation for other wildlife or streams or that sort of thing. And I know Terry, our city manager, has more to add. And Mr. Bloom, just to add on to that, it is that we, we did rezone the airport proper to airport light industrial, and that was the runway, the taxiways, and everything was conservation, and that became a problem.

Do you have anything more you want to—. That's—. No, you're, you're correct. Most of the land that was airport land that, uh, was needed for other purposes has since been rezoned since the 1963 quitclaim deed from the federal government to the city, giving the city those lands, which requires that the city use those lands for airport uses. These particular lands have been released by the airport.

We went to the FAA and they said, yeah, these lands are no longer needed for the airport, but any funds or income from that property would go to the airport, not to the city. Thank you for that. And Mr. Eubank, did you have something you wanted to add to? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think it's a great question, Councilmember Askins.

Um, and I think what you have to understand is that one, we're talking about the entire parcel is an 81-acre parcel. Um, the administration absolutely recognizes that a significant portion approximately 71 acres of the parcel is likely not suitable for development and should be conserved because it does contain wetlands and, um, you know, sensitive habitat areas. So we're not asking to rezone the entire parcel, but we do believe there are approximately 10 acres that are adjacent, um, or, you know, adjacent to existing roads and existing city utilities that could be available for development. Um, we've also had interest from, you know, at least one developer on looking for an area in Kenai to provide, um, you know, a higher density housing apartments. Um, and when we look at a location, the administration evaluated this area because of its proximity to services like Walmart, like, you know, shopping like Walmart, Home Depot, Safeway, Three Bears.

So, and all of those services are within walking distance, including, you know, access to public transit. Now with the Takotenu Area Transit, there's a bus stop right there by Walmart. All of those services are located within walking distance. Or biking distance, and we thought it was a, a good location for higher density development.

And I also would like to remind council about the results of our community survey last fall that indicated that 74% of city residents that were surveyed said that the city of Kenai has a housing availability and affordability problem. And so, you know, the administration, um, and has brought to council a number of different processes that we are hoping to remove some of the barriers or limit some of the barriers to development here in the city. And we believe that rezoning this parcel is critical because if the city requires subdivision of the property prior to completing a rezone, you're asking either a developer or the city to go through the expense of re-subdividing this property without the guarantee that it can be used for the intended purpose at the end. Okay, what I think is really critical to understand is that this Ordinance does not— what, what it does, in my opinion, is it removes that first barrier. It allows somebody— we believe those 10 acres are likely the 10 acres that would be suitable for development.

Somebody is going to have to go out there and do due diligence. They're gonna have to dig test holes. They're gonna have to do all of the things that they should do in order to make that final determination. If we are correct, they can subdivide within that boundary, and they know the zoning that's going to be in place when they get done, and they know the limitations of it at that time. So we believe that's all we're doing is initially removing a single barrier.

What it's not doing is a couple of things. It's not guaranteeing development. There's no guarantee that anybody's going to develop this, that somebody's not going to go out there and dig a test hole and determine it's not suitable. Um, and, uh, it's also not guaranteeing that the city would issue a lease on this property or authorize the sale of this property. That is an action that would become back before the City Council, back before the Planning and Zoning Commission, prior to that being made.

Um, Yeah, those are the points I wanted to make. And, um, so why are we recommending suburban residential? Because, uh, again, the walking distance to services. Also, the primary difference between suburban residential and rural residential, which, which is the amendment recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission, a couple of primary differences. Um, suburban residential has a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet.

Rural residential requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. The extension of utilities—water, sewer, and road infrastructure—not to mention electric and gas, which just, you know, aren't costs of the city, are substantial right now. And to try to distribute those costs over a few lots, you know, of 20,000 square feet, as opposed to, you know, more lots at the minimum size of 7,200 square feet. I don't think the project becomes economical at rural residential because the cost of those utilities is just that high.

And then The other primary difference is in the number of dwelling units that is permitted. Uh, on a suburban residential lot, um, you are permitted to have up to 6 dwelling units, and you can conditionally approve more than 6. Under a rural residential, you are permitted up to 4 dwelling units And you can conditionally approve more than 4 dwelling units. So it has to do with minimum lot size and then the number of dwelling units that you can construct on each lot.

Um, so I think, I hope that answers your question, um, Councilmember asking them why the administration is recommending, um, suburban residential. But if you don't mind, just on the zoning and wetlands, both were mentioned. Rezoning, if there was a portion that was still wetland or determined to be, and by the way, it takes a determination that the Corps has to say that it is, that's not a permission to be able to fill wetlands or alter them, or if you want to discuss that, 'cause it seems like it's implied that that's so, The city can't do that, correct? That is correct, Mr. Mayor. Again, you know, all we're— all we've identified is what staff believes is likely an area that could be developed.

Again, the final determination and permitting, all permitting would have to be accomplished, which would include a determine if there is wetlands, a determination by the Corps. Um, and again, the developers, you know, would have to determine it's suitable for development as well. Um, this is just the area we think is likely. I think what was initially flawed and brought, brought forward by P&Z was the administration originally recommended rezoning the entire parcel. And then once a subdivision was complete, come back and rezone again to the remaining portion that's, that's not being developed to conservation.

Um, this creates a split zone, which are not— is not ideal. But it does limit that rezone to the area we believe could be developed and leaves the remaining 71 acres of land that should be conservation because it's wetlands, clearly wetlands, and a drainage flows through there in the conservation zone.

Thank you. Vice Mayor Raskin. Um, I have two questions. At what point does the, um, CORE decide? Is this if there is the, the potential that there's a subdivision?

When would they do that, the CORE samples and everything? Um, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Raskin. I want to make sure I understand your question because I think there's two different things here. I, I think part typical, uh, typically a developer goes through a due diligence process where they go out And they do, you know, a site survey. They're looking for contamination before, you know, they're gonna purchase something and inherit a contamination problem.

They're digging test holes to see what the soils are in the area to determine if those soils are suitable for the construction that they wanna do or how much excavation they're going to have to do, how much fill they're going to have to bring in. They go through a— they should, If, you know, and the good ones, I believe, go through a very extensive due diligence process. So there's that process that I think people would have to go through. Then they will absolutely have to apply for all the appropriate permits to do whatever construction that is. And if portion of the property is, you know, is or could be considered wetlands, they likely would have to get a determination from the Corps.

On if they actually do meet the requirements of wetlands, which would significantly reduce their ability to develop at that point. Thank you. That answers my question.

He went ahead and answered the second. Sorry. You're fine. City Manager Eubank, two other things on development. There was As mentioned, city utilities, we're talking about both water and sewer available, so there's not going to be wastewater disposed on the property.

Is that on the smaller lots?

That sewer is available. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Yes, so city water and sewer utilities are present at the corner of Help me, Lee. Princess and Magic. Princess and Magic, which is on the southern corner of the proposed rezone.

They would have to be extended up into the rezone area, but they are present there at the corner. And as far as on-site systems, you know, in order to have both water and sewer on-site, you have— would have to meet DEC separation requirements. Which I believe is a minimum 100-foot between well and septic. So you'd have to determine what lot size would be able to accommodate that. You can get into other combinations.

You could have— it could be served by city water and have on-site septics or sewage disposal. But, you know, all of that would have to be determined by the proposed developer. On how they'd like to move forward. Moving on with utilities, if I could one more time, the other thing I think I saw in the minutes or discussion was the road going out there. What is its condition?

Is it satisfactory for the loading, the traffic? And, you know, and I think there'd be a road extension too.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm gonna defer to our Public Works Director who's just, you know, we're in the process of implementing our new road standards, and he can tell you how those would apply here.

Thank you. So the street assessment that we did is determined that that road is in good condition. It's currently classified— or once we— if we approve the standards the way we have it, we'd be classifying it as a residential road. So typically for our residential road requirements that we're putting in, it would be a 24-foot road, you know, if there was significant development, we could look at doing something like expanding the road or providing an increased surface or, you know, enhanced surface. We could look at paving it and doing things like that in the future if we determine that traffic was necessary.

But for its current needs, it's meeting what it, what it should be.

And we're only maintaining Princess to Magic right now. Thank you for that clarification.

Councilmember Grimm. Mr. Eubank, thank you for explaining clearly the difference between suburban and rural residential. Are you aware of and could help us understand why Planning and Zoning is asking to amend the city's request from suburban residential to rural residential, especially given what we know about our resident survey in regards to housing. City Manager Eubank, that also might be a Mr. Bloom question if he's got any insight. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Girmay.

I, I don't want to try to put words in the mouth of the Planning and Zoning Commission, but I would draw council's attention— I'm sorry, I don't have this here Um, they're the draft minutes from the meeting where Planning and Zoning did make findings that support— that they believe, you know, that were in support of their proposed amendment. Um, I'm looking in the laydown here. I'm sorry, uh, it's on page 4 or 5 of the, um lay down, and I'll just read this. It says, come, uh, Commissioner Ursuli, um, read findings into the record. These findings were that rural residential allows for 4 dwelling units by right, that the commission disagrees with staff findings on traffic impacts, that the commission finds that any development will impact the economic and non-economic value of neighboring properties, and that the development allowed in rural residential will be more congruent with the existing neighborhood.

Thank you. Can you tell me if that is similar or different than other parts of the city where, um, larger units like sixplex, like you had mentioned before, have been built? I guess I'm thinking off top of my head, like, uh, Readout. For example. Um, is that— is the same concern, is the same conversation been had?

City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Council Member Girmay, through the mayor. Um, again, I'm not— um, I might defer a little bit to Kevin here. I'm not necessarily— um, I don't recall the exact conversation with P&Z regarding some of the rezones and things that have taken place, um, over in the readout area where some of the larger developments are, are taking place. Um, so, um, Kevin, do you have any—.

Council Member Groomey, through the city manager, we have had these discussions both on rezones It did not come up on the Redoubt rezone that we passed last year, but it did come up on a number of conditional use permit applications along and near the Redoubt corridor. So it is something they do take, take stock of each and every time they make a decision, depending on how it's going to impact the neighborhood, whether that's, like I said, rezone or conditional use permits or other processes they have.

Thank you. I guess my question boils down to consistency. Um, I guess what I would— what I am interested in knowing is what has been historically the response to similar requests in the past in other parts of the city, and if you, in your experience, would say that this being zoned as rural instead of suburban residential would be staying consistent with past requests or would be deviating from past requests?

Uh, I will apologize, Councilmember Groomey, that I have not been here with the city long enough to have a long-standing knowledge, and we have not had something similar to this one. I will say that they are generally pro-development in the city for housing. But, um, on this particular one, I don't want to again put words in their mouth. And, uh, the findings that they do have went through an incorrect process, so I don't want to infer anything that they— I don't want to assume anything that they were thinking. And I'd rather have them put that on the public record at their next meeting.

City Manager Eubank, just kind of following up on that, the, the findings that they used was that it was going to diminish the value of their property in the neighborhood. And that's a valid statement. However, it's not a finding without data.

Did they have any way of making that so other than just saying it? Was there an analysis done of like, Councilmember Grammy, other places in, in, in the city or anywhere else? Do they have any, or was it just a statement with no, no, no backing? Was it just emotional perhaps?

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I, I don't believe— I, I did not see any evidence that was provided to support that. Um, as far as all the other conclusions there, I'll, I'll, I'll let you, um, let each person make their own. Um, but I don't— there certainly was no data provided that, um, I think— Kevin, were you aware of anything? There were no—.

There was no data provided during the time given at the findings.

Councilmember Gremy. Well, and in the interest of making sure that our record is full and complete, the findings noted two things: traffic impacts and the impact on property values. So I would assume that the answer to the question— to Mayor Naxted's question about data related to, um, value of neighboring properties— the answer would be the same for regards to traffic impacts. There was no study conducted, there was no data provided that would indicate that anything different than what was provided to them by the city in their recommendations for this change. Is that correct?

Thank you, Councilmember Girmay. Um, yes, that is correct. And, and what I would say in regard to traffic is that undoubtedly any development will increase traffic on that road, but the proper way to deal with that, if development is going to take place, is to do a traffic study to determine what that impact likely is And as a requirement of the development, the city could require the developer, or the city could itself improve the roadway to accommodate whatever traffic it might be. I would, I would argue that likely that road would be sufficient enough to handle, um, you know, a fair amount more development than what is already there. You know, it is different, very different than like Readout Avenue.

Readout Avenue is a suburban collector or a residential collector, sub-collector. But you're collecting off of Readout, you know, Woodland subdivision, you know, in the Woods subdivision. You mean hundreds of homes are all converging on to Readout to distribute out to the main thoroughfares. So You know, I, again, I think regarding the traffic, that is absolutely something that can be addressed as development, you know, becomes clear. Again, this, all this, in my opinion, all this ordinance is doing is removing the first hurdle that would, you know, give somebody the confidence at least to do a subdivision, knowing at the end what they would be able to build.

I just want to have one more follow-up question to what you said. Uh, traffic study done by a developer, a third party, or the city— is that something that is normally done in the course of development of, um, land like this, or is that something that's been done in other parts of the city? Again, I know I keep going back to Readout, but that seems to be my most current point of reference, and for similar-sized units. Is that something that is generally required as part of the process, or if that were to be included as a requirement in this parcel, would that be something additional that's not par for the course normally? City Manager Eubank.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think that is— I think the analysis of, you know, of traffic is certainly A part of every staff report that P&Z does regarding rezones and would be part of any analysis the city does on, you know, proposed development in the city. When we're looking at any developer comes in here and wants to propose development on whether it's city property or private property, we're looking at all the impacts on city infrastructure, water, sewer, roads to make sure that we're not creating problems. And, um, and we would make appropriate recommendations to alleviate any problems we believe would be present.

So I think it's typical of our process. I'm, I'm sorry, I guess I didn't, I, I didn't ask my question clearly. I meant in addition, because it seems like the city has already done that and put forth what they believed was an informed opinion about what the potential impacts would be. And based on the uncertified minutes PNZ disagreed with the city's recommendation and findings in regards to traffic impacts. So I guess my question really is, having an additional one beyond what the city provides and has provided, would that be something that is normal or abnormal?

Mr. Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Girmay. I think it would be abnormal to put an additional stipulation on a particular parcel when the analysis is automatically going to be done by the city in review of any development like we do on all parcels. So I don't, I don't know why we would single out a single one to say we're definitely going to do what we would have already done.

Thank you. City Manager, Eubank. Just following up on the traffic, I mean, putting Lee here on the spot perhaps, but looking at this subdivision and its outlets, the number of lots, and we decide how big a road it's gonna be based on what we think the traffic is, but would a traffic study, it really wouldn't be that much of a study, I believe. That's something that we could do in-house within, good reason, I would think, but I'd like to hear that from our Public Works. Absolutely.

Thank you. Um, so with the design guides we're putting out, what we're recommending in there is for essentially a single-family house lot is for 10 vehicles per day or 10 trips per day. So when we're moving through street counts, I believe when it goes to a sub-collector, we're looking at 400 to 1,000 trips per day. So a lot of this is going to vary depending on how development would occur. So if we're just looking at, you know, 10 lots being built, that's going to be 100 trips.

It's going to stay a residential road. Now, somebody's building a giant apartment complex or something, then we're going to do a different analysis to figure out how many trips we're recommending per vehicle down that road. So it's going to vary, you know, I would say throughout the years as development would potentially occur on that road. It's going to be sufficient for right now. It just would depend on what kind of development occurs or proposed in the future.

Okay, any further, any further discussion? Vice Mayor Askin. Um, I move that we refer Ordinance Number 3510-2026 Substitute back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to hold a public hearing on Ordinance 3510-2026 Substitute at their May 27th 2026 regularly scheduled meeting and make a recommendation, recommendation to the city council and for council to take back up ordinance number 3510-2026 substitute at its June 3rd, 2026 meeting and hold an additional public hearing. Request unanimous consent. I will second that.

Council Member Petty.

Mayor Nexted, I'd like to ask the, um, city attorney if this would rectify doing this, uh, the Open Meetings Act, and that the process would be followed and explained to our Planning and Zoning, uh, Commission. Mr. Bloom. Thank you, uh, Mayor Nexted, Council Member Petty. Yes, so that's the point of referring it back and having them, uh, hold another public hearing, and doing it all in open session is to cure the potential Open Meetings Violation Act that previously occurred. Thank you, sir.

Anonymous consent was requested. Are there any objections?

We are referring this back to— we're referring Ordinance Substitute as amended 35-10-2026 to Planning and Zoning on the 27th.

So that brings us down to item H7, action approval, Council on Aging Commission 2026 work plan from Council on Aging. Pleasure of council, Vice Mayor Askins. I move that we approve the 2026 Council on Aging Commission's work plan and request unanimous consent.

I'll second. Is there any members of the public that would like to, uh, to speak to this work session? Seeing none, um, council discussion. Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections?

Seeing none, the, uh, Council on Aging Commission 2026 Burke Plan is approved. That brings us down to item H10, discussion Parks and Recreation Master Plan memo.

City Manager Eubank, do you want to start with this? We have our Parks and Rec director here as well.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. What the administration is requesting is a work session prior to the meeting on the 20th. Um, that would allow the, um, consultant that the city worked with to develop the Parks and Recreation Master Plan to present that plan to council. Um, it would also facilitate, you know, questions, comments, and, and discussion on the plan. And then, uh, The intent would be, uh, at the, um, once that plan's presented to council, you have your opportunity to answer questions, that we would, um, be, uh, introducing legislation, um, for June 3rd that would, uh, for action on June 3rd that would adopt the, um, presumably adopt the Parks and Recs Master Plan by city council.

So it's just to give the consultant an opportunity to come present the plan and answer your questions on the development of the plan. And that's requested the 20th of May at 5 o'clock? Yes, yes, sir. Okay, kind of looking for a nod of heads. Not nod heads.

We don't need a motion for this, do we? No, I think it's just general discussion.

We got one okay, two okay.

5 O'clock.

Councilmember Daniel, you're still looking, so— Oh, you're good. All good. Yes. So we're all in agreement. Okay, so we will bring this back 5 o'clock on May 20th for the Parks Master Plan, and I'm looking forward to it.

So that brings us to commission reports. Council on Aging, Council Member Askin— Vice Mayor Askin. We don't have them. Our next meeting is May 14th. Okay.

Airport Commission, Council Member Soenart.

The next airport meeting is also Thursday, May 14th.

Parks and Recreation Commission, Grimy. Um, our next meeting is tomorrow, and Council Member, um, Casena will be covering that for me. Next we have Planning and Zoning Commission, Council Member Daniel again. Thank you, uh, Mayor Naxted. A couple highlights.

I will not— the lion's share of the meeting was about that, uh, um, conservation parcel we just discussed. I won't go back into that since they're going to get another stab at it. But that was a big part of their meeting. A couple other things that were passed, um, there was another— ironically, were a discussion about, uh, rezoning, um, the split zone at 6575 Canispur Highway to a general commercial, and that passed. And then also Resolution, um, let's see here, PZ 2026 Nope, not that one.

06, That's the one. Yep. This is a retail marijuana store that also passed at 6384 Kenexburg Highway for a CUP for that. And then there is a license transfer, another marijuana outfit, and that passed. So that was P and Z.

And the next means on the 13th, which if someone's available to cover, I would greatly appreciate that. Looking for volunteers. Thank you for your report.

There you go, got a taker. Next we have Beautification Commission. Petty. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, there is no report at this time, and our next meeting is Tuesday, May the 12th.

Thank you. Thank you for your reports. Uh, now we have report of the mayor. Just have two things. First off, we, we had a budget meeting this last Saturday that was 9, 9.5 hours long.

I think every minute of it was very valuable, and, and I want to thank Mr. Swarner for all of his work and the city manager and, and putting that together, and all the directors as well that came and spoke to us. We certainly had a lot of questions, and that's one of the reasons that it took a little longer than maybe some, but I think some meetings, but I think that, that that's part of the value of it. It's, it's more than just the, uh, the dollars and cents. It's, it's basically, you know, what our directors, what departments are doing, and, uh, it gives us all a very good feel for, for what goes on in the city and how it works. And, uh, so thank you for all the good work, and I look forward to, uh, our final budget meeting that's coming up first, uh, first meeting in next month.

And then lastly, our, our clerk has been taking a break, so I wanted to thank Mr. Parks here, our assistant clerk, for all of his good work, kind of holding down the fort and carrying through today. And, and I think it's, it's moved very smoothly, and I much appreciate it, and thank you. So that is my report. Now we're down to administrative reports.

City Manager Eubank. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. A few things to report, uh, on the staffing and recruitment front. Uh, I want to, uh, welcome Melissa Scher as a part-time janitor.

Um, Melissa will be primarily working here at City Hall. Uh, I wanted to inform council that we, uh, will be, um performing another recruitment for an airport manager. We were unable to reach agreement with a couple of the candidates from our last round, and I'm also very thankful and happy to report that Ms. Bondurant has agreed to continue working here with the city in the interim role until we're able— and she snuck out of here— until we're able to fill that role permanently. So really appreciate Mary's help We also are actively recruiting for an equipment operator, a firefighter, a dispatcher, and some seasonal positions. So if you're looking for a job, you might want to check out the City of Kenai's website.

Last week, I think it was last week, might have been the week before, I attended the 2026 Industry Overview Forum in Seward put on by Kenai Peninsula Economic Development District. Vice Mayor Askin joined me.

You know, communities across— from across the peninsula gathered for a full day for updates from industry experts on topics including housing assessments, infrastructure investment, natural resource development, and shifting economic trends. I think it was very well put on, and I appreciate KPED's effort in that. The following day I attended a hearing of the Alaska Regulatory Commission. They were hearing an NSTAR application for advanced determination of managerial prudence for the, for the gas storage facility that they're proposing to build here in the city. And I wanted to stay up on what was being presented there.

I found it very interesting and I think it will assist us as we move forward. On Sunday of last week, our finance director came in, Mr. Swarner, and submitted our most recent small community air service development program grant application. I appreciate you coming in, Mr. Swarner, to do that. It was due by Monday, but we wanted to make sure we didn't have any technical difficulties difficulties. So we were able to get that submitted.

And it— I will tell you it had nearly 20 letters of support, including congressional and legislative support, support from all the cities here on the peninsula, local chambers, both the Canaitsie and Salamantoff tribes provided, and Cape had provided letters of support. So I want to thank all of them. Uh, the runway rehabilitation project, um, is on schedule. Uh, the main runway will be closing on May 15th, um, expected to reopen, uh, around October 1st. Um, I will tell council that the special instrument flight procedures that council authorized us to, uh, and provide funding for us to develop are in place and available to 2 pilots, um, so, um, they can, um, get those and continue, um, instrument approaches into the airport.

Um, unfortunately, I have to report that the airport cafe, Debbie's Bistro, uh, has, um, uh, told us that they will be, um, discontinuing service on May 23rd. Um, and we will be issuing a request for proposal trying to get a new operator in there. In that space. Aleutian Airways has suspended service for the months of April and May, citing fuel allocation issues with what's going on right now with Jet A, and their summer schedule has not yet been confirmed. I wanted to tell council that pursuant to KMC 1320.030, it's my intent to close the portion of Mission Avenue in Old Town from Eric Hanson Scout Park to the Kenai Bible Church to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic due to the significant sloughage creating unsafe conditions for vehicles and pedestrians.

There will be exceptions granted to the property owners that use that Mission Avenue there as their access to their residences.

I will also be closing the maintenance pathway on the newly constructed abutment of the Bluff Erosion Project to pedestrian access, again, because of significant sloughage, and we just don't want anybody to get hurt down there. And we have ordered signs, and once those signs are here and put in place, those closures will go into effect. And I am required to report at the next meeting that I have officially closed those. So I will— that's under also KMC 1320030. So that notice will be provided at a future meeting.

I'm happy to report that we learned today Senator Murkowski has included a um, drinking water improvement project that the city submitted, uh, to her for one of her congressionally directed spending requests. So she's supporting that and moving that forward in her request. Um, it's for $1,248,000 to help us with, um, some drinking water improvements. So want to, uh, recognize her for that and thank her for her consideration. Um, On the 18th, at the Kenai Visitor Center, the mayor and I have been invited to a host— excuse me, a lunch being hosted by Glenfarn.

It'll be Glenfarn and with key partners and off-takers of the proposed pipeline. I know that Glenfarn is chartering 4 aircraft to bring a number of folks in for this meeting. You know, I don't know that it's a funny story, but they originally called and said they wanted to bring a 737 in, and I had to inform them that our runway closed on the 15th and their meeting was on the 18th. So they pivoted and they have identified some charters that can help them get the folks that they need here. So looking forward to attending that myself and with the mayor and We can certainly report back what happens there.

Um, some upcoming events here in town, um, summer reading over at the library has kicked off, um, this month. So if you're interested in participating in the summer reading program, you might want to go over there and check it out at the library. And Parks and Rec will be hosting Planting Day on Saturday, May 30th, um, and they're looking for volunteers to help plant the city's flower beds. For, for this summer season. So if you're interested in volunteering, you can, um, I think look on the Parks and Rec page of the city or get in touch with Parks and Rec.

But, uh, that planning day will be on May 30th, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Are there any questions of the city manager? Council Member Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Nexted. Uh, in regards to the closures, um, do we need to have— are there any concerns with utilities Do we need to shut any of those off over there?

Are they still well protected? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Daniel. I think that's a great question. We do have some concerns over, um, uh, predominantly some water utility that's in that area. Um, I don't think right now any of it is, um, necessarily threatened from actual sloughage.

Um, I think there's Concern about next winter because, you know, while we bury them, you know, usually at least 10 feet deep to keep things from freezing, these are no longer 10 feet from the face of the bluff. So they don't have that same insulating factor from the face. So likely are going to have to be relocated this summer. And, you know, I think that's all a project that Public Works is evaluating. We're just waiting for kind of groundwater and breakup to stabilize so we can know exactly what's there and then form a plan of action to start trying to address some of those issues.

Thank you. Any further questions of the city manager? Seeing no one, Mr. Bloom. Thank you, Councilmember Knaxted. I do actually have something to report.

Report tonight. On April 29th, last week, the Kenai Peninsula Borough District Student Council meeting was held, and I gave a series of presentations at that meeting. It was attended by our student rep on teamwork and conflict resolution and dealing with difficult personalities, and it was really great for me to just see all our student leaders in the borough and how much they care about their schools and how serious they are about their work that they do on student councils.

Any questions of the city attorney? Seeing none, city clerk. Oh, more of a statement. Thank you for doing that. I like a good time.

Wish I could have been there.

City Clerk. Thank you, Mayor Nexted. I have no report, but I'm happy to answer any questions. Any questions of the clerk? Thank you for your good work.

So, uh, that brings us to Item L, additional public comments. Are there any members of the public who would like to address the council at this time on anything? Okay, you're good. Okay. Thank you.

Seeing no one, that brings us to council comments. Student Rep. Bolling, you're up. Good evening, Mayor Naxted and council members. Um, first, I'd like to begin by congratulating some of KCHS's student leaders in their recent election to KPBSD district-level committees.

First, Alex Khan for his selection of the KPBSD Mathematics Curriculum Committee, where he will voice student opinions for the K-12 math curriculum. Second, Shawna Cook for her selection of the KPBSD Wellness Advisory Committee. Shawna will be representing all KPBSD students in a twice-yearly report on student nutrition and physical activity policies. Third, Sawyer Graham for his selection of the Calendar Committee. Sawyer will meet to review and recommend specific KPBSD school-wide calendar dates.

He will canvass students throughout the district to make his recommendation in October to his committee. Finally, Caroline Karpik for her selection of the Instructional Material Review Committee. Caroline will be representing the student voice and acting as an advisory reviewer any material under complaint. These accomplishments highlight Kenai Central High School students' commitment to representing themselves and their peers. Some of our spring sports currently in progress include baseball, softball, soccer, track, and field.

Last month, KCHS hosted a successful prom. I'd like to thank the Kenai Rec Center staff for their help with after-prom and the Kenai Senior Center for hosting a wonderful sunrise breakfast. At the next meeting, the class of 2026 will have graduated. I'd like to offer each and every one of them my congratulations. I'm sure they'll go far and do great things.

And last, thank you to City Attorney Bloom for attending the annual KPBSD Student Council regional meeting. Mr. Bloom attended as a guest speaker and spoke to many of our students across the peninsula. Thank you.

Excellent. Now, Council Member Sonar.

Thank you, Mayor Nexted. I would like to, um, Thank our finance director, Mr. Swarner, and our city manager, Mr. Eubank, for all the work that you did on preparing the budget and your departments. I realize it wasn't a two-person operation. Uh, you have departments and fine employees working with you on that project. And yes, Saturday was a marathon for all of us, and but, uh, very necessary.

And I appreciate your patience with our questions, because I know that our questions and our conversations did lengthen the day. But, um, I learned a lot. Every year I go through this process, I learn even more about different departments. And but what I walked away with was just knowing, having the confidence, and knowing that City of Kenai is on good solid financial foundation footing, not only for meeting our current needs and our needs next year. But we have wonderful people in place that have projected out 25 years, 30 years, and have the vision for what our city is going to need several decades down the road, and are actively today planning and preparing for it.

So when that time comes, the funds will be in place. And I just— I think was wonderful, um, good work to everybody involved in preparing that budget and just thank you for a wonderful day.

Oh, and I do want to thank again Mr. Parks for holding down the fort.

Councilmember Daniel.

Thank you, Mayor. Well, I unfortunately missed the budget meeting, but it sounds like you guys had a great time without me. I'm a little jealous, but I do appreciate Mr. Swarner's time the other day before before the meeting to discuss my concerns and questions. I was very appreciated. Thank you for making the time.

I was out doing my hunter safety with my son. I was the oldest kid in the class, a bunch of 7th graders. It was a good time, but we both passed, so that was good. Other than that, I do, you know, keep it short and sweet and let's move on. Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Councilmember Gremmie. Thank you. I too attended the budget meeting on Saturday and learned a lot. A couple of things were reaffirmed for me in that, in that process about, I think, my appreciation for City of Kenai and all things that staff continue to do, not the least of which was be stuck in that meeting all day Saturday, but the, the things that they continue to provide for, for all of us as residents by Parks and Recreation, the library, Senior Center, Visitor Center, Public Safety, all of them. Um, every single staff member that came and talked to us offered something, um, forward-thinking and thinking about not just what would be good for the city now, but tomorrow and moving forward, and, and creatively.

Um, I've I heard 8 things that were my favorite words on Saturday. I heard grants, state funding, matching funds, federal money, donations, cost and resource sharing, replacement funds, and investments. And I think for all of those reasons, I would echo what Councilmember Stonhart said, that I walked away feeling very confident and happy and proud of the work that staff are doing for securing Kenai's resources. Okay, now we have Council Member Petty. Thank you, Mayor Nexted.

Um, it was an honor to, uh, work with everyone this evening. I too, uh, had the privilege to participate in the budget process and, uh, look forward to our budget for the upcoming year. I echo the things that Ms. Groomey and Ms. Sarge said. I amen all of those, and that ends my comments. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Askin. Thank you, Mayor Nexted. I too attended the budget meeting and echo everything everybody said. I've repeatedly said we have a pretty— we have a Class A staff, and I'm really— I'm proud to be a part of it with you. I snuck out of the meeting about 20 minutes early to attend the Caring for the Kenai Award Ceremony.

Some pretty phenomenal projects. The winners were two boys from Seward who did the research and found out that when spruce bark beetles get ready to leave a dead tree, they release a pheromone. That tells the rest of them, "Don't stop here, it's not any good anymore." And they were devising ways of distributing that pheromone to maybe start doing away with our spruce bark beetles. Then, in the second place was another young girl from Seward who as those of us who have dogs, they were collecting dog hair and felting it and using it for oil spill response, for cleanup, because it would absorb oil. So that was pretty cool.

And I too, as City Manager Eubanks said, I attended the Industry Overview Forum and I learned a lot. KPIT did a really good job. And that ends my comments. Thank you. Okay, thank you.

We have no executive session and we have no pending items. That brings us to adjournment with no more business before the body.