Anchorage Assembly: Assembly Regular - August 4, 2026

Okay, next, Mr. Voland.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I, I think Member Silver's, for me, is actually just hitting on some salient points.

Um, I don't think that subpoena power is needed by the municipal attorney's office at this point. I think that is something that could be approved later.

I guess I'm not hearing clearly from the municipal attorney that there's, um, maybe fully an appreciation for, um, us trying to separate out a preliminary review and get that basis of facts, because the problem is I don't— I no longer believe the accusation document knowing what I know now. I think it is flawed. I think the accusation document puts forward campaign activity which is totally separate from removal code to begin with. I think we, we have heard tonight and we have had information provided us that now has been entered into the public record that gives an entirely different representation of why travel was approved. Versus an accusation that was delivered.

I think we've heard from a co-sponsor of the S.1. Version that they don't even know that they endorse the accusations that their version is tied to.

And so for me, I think I'm now at the point, now that we have gone round and round on the hamster chair— a hamster wheel, you know, we are at this point are torturing this with these amendments, and I don't think that we're necessarily going to get to a factual basis that we're all, we're all saying, hey, look, these, this accusation, this list of accusations has been vetted, it's in context, it actually pertains to the section of code that we're trying to use.

At this point, I'm a no vote, end of. I will not be voting to move forward in an investigation because I'm not hearing that it can be done in the manner that the assembly is attempting to request via these, these amendments.

And I just, I have several other concerns about the validity of the accusations that are even put forward. And I think Member Silver's point is, is well taken. Think about the politicized process that we are setting precedent for. I as a member can just make any accusation I want, and if I have a majority as my team and we're going after a minority member minority used in the sense of political minority.

Think about how we could weaponize that, that we're going to withhold certain elements of information from the public, but we're just going to spread like wildfire these accusations and move forward in this process at great expense and time to the municipality. So I, I appreciate that we've had this, I think, fulsome conversation. As part of leadership, I am dedicated alongside Chair Brawley to improving our processes our policy for travel, what the approval can look like. I look forward to exploring that special audit that was done. I think that there are tweaks that we can make.

I think there are, there are recommendations that we can put in, in place that will help ensure that, as Member Baldwin-Day described, the purpose of assembly travel, that that is being met. And that every member, so long as we're all on the same page about what that policy entails, can request of the chair to use that portion of their travel budget. So I think that's really the, the conversation that we should be having as a body going forward. All right, thank you, Madam Chair.

Okay, I'll note we are at the end of our extended debate, and I will remind folks that that is on the entire item, it's not per amendment.

Um, so I'll see if there's any other motion to extend. Move to extend debate 10 minutes. Motion to extend by Member Gerker to extend, uh, by 10 minutes. Is there a second? Second.

Second by Mr. Handeland. Um, any objection? Yeah, I'm going to object. I think we've beat this one to death. Then we're going to take that one to a vote.

So what we are voting on at the moment is, uh, whether to extend debate by another 10 minutes.

On a vote of 6 to 5, the amendment— or the extension of debate has failed. We are now essentially at the end of our debate. It is 9:11.

And we are in— so just to be clear, we are in the motion to amend. And so the next vote before members is the motion to amend that was moved by Ms. Baldwin-Day that's up on the screen.

On a vote of 6 to 5, that amendment fails. Next, uh, so then we are back on the main motion. Again, there is no further debate. I'm going to clear the queue really quick. Members may proceed to vote.

On a vote of 5 to 6, um, that, uh, AR 2026-182 S2 as amended has failed the body, or has failed to pass the body.

Okay, um, sorry, I know everybody was waiting. Um, I was just conferring with the clerk. The one thing that I realized I had failed to do, um, in the Movement toward debate was that I had failed to offer Mr. Martinez an additional opportunity to speak before that vote, but I see, um, I say he's indicated a gesture it's okay, and either way this vote has been taken. So I just want to note that that was a mistake that I made, but the vote has landed already. Yes, Mr. Persaud.

I'd like to move for immediate reconsideration.

Yeah, and just to note, that can be— or that must be done by someone who is in the prevailing side. Because it was a no and Mr. Perez-Fría was a no, then that would be in order. A second can be made by any member regardless of how they voted.

Second. Okay, there's a motion to immediately reconsider by Mr. Perez-Fría, second by Mr. Volland. Do you want to speak to that, Mr. Perez-Fría? Uh, nope, I encourage a no vote.

Okay, there's no one else in the queue. Members may proceed to vote on the motion to re— immediately reconsider this item. Um, if you do not want to reconsider it, the vote would be no. If you do want to reconsider it, the vote would be yes.

Okay, on a vote of 3 to 8, um, this item, uh, is not going to be reconsidered, so that motion has failed. So, um, we are going to take our dinner break, um, and then I will note, I know there are members— or there are members of the public here for various, um, public hearing items, so I will just briefly state, um, that we, we will open those hearings The intent of the sponsor on 13A, 14A— well, the intent of the sponsor on 13A is to postpone indefinitely. So I recommend if anybody is here to testify on that, you may save yourself some time. On 14A, B, and C, the intent is to open those hearings and with the will of the body continue those hearings. So for those who are planning to testify on those, I want to offer that, that there may be an additional opportunity pending action of the body.

And with that, we will adjourn for dinner— or sorry, not adjourn, break for dinner. Thank you.

Okay, everyone, uh, let's come back to order. So we have our public hearing items on our agenda tonight. I'll ask if anybody is still having conversations, please take those outside if you want to continue. So next we're on item 13A. So that's our continued public hearing for tonight.

AO-2026-13, an ordinance of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly amending Anchorage Municipal Code Sections 4.60.090, 27.30.080, and 27.30.085 to establish a review and comment procedure by an advisory commission for capital improvement projects within the Chugach State Park Access Area, or CASA. Public hearing item— or public hearing on this item is now open.

Anyone come forward to testify, if you would like?

Madam Chair, actually, I'm going to move to postpone indefinitely.

Okay, there's a motion to postpone. Definitely second by Ms. Park. Do you want to speak to that, Mr. Bullock? Yeah, thank you. I just want to do this for the awareness of the public who are going to be here on a prior item.

You've indicated prior, Madam Chair, that this item has been sort of a placeholder while we approach the question of sort of what to do with CASA and what does that public process look like. I know that you have stated that your intent is to postpone indefinitely, and you are a co-sponsor of the subsequent item we'll be taking up tonight. Okay, and as we— as this motion was made while the public hearing is open, then I'll just note, um, the sponsor does have an opportunity to respond, but I would just concur with, um, with Mr. Mullins said. Um, so is— I guess I'll ask, is there any objection to, uh, indefinite postponement of this item?

Seeing and hearing none, then this item is indefinitely postponed. So next we'll move on to our new public hearings. The first one is AO-2026-89, an ordinance of the Anchorage Assembly enacting Anchorage Municipal Code Chapter 12.110, Tax Incentives for First-Time Homebuyers. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify.

And then as usual, I remind the microphone is off, so please turn it on. State your name and what part of town you're in, and you will have 3 minutes. Thank you, Chair. Good evening. Jason Norris, South Anchorage.

I've already said plenty. Sorry, one second. We're making sure the timer's going.

That does conclude. You will indeed have an actual 3 minutes. Okay, go ahead. Thank you. Okay, I've already said plenty of my written testimony, so I won't belabor those points to— except to say I feel this would be ineffectual at best and detrimental at worst.

But I do have some things to add. Ignoring zoning is ignoring the solution. The administration's own frequently asked questions from a year ago state exactly that. And in many cases, our dimensional standards are the same that they were 50 years ago. Some of them, I looked, predate unification.

And I can't think of a single government regulation that governs our everyday lives that has not changed in 50 years or longer. If they're that important, it is worth our time and effort to take a look and to change them to benefit us. As our understanding of the world goes, so change our regulations, and for good reason. And we certainly learned a lot about urban planning in that time, and our needs as a community have certainly changed, and it's time that those change with it. To be bluntly, maybe even brutally honest, this all feels like distraction and misdirection., press releases, releases saying that housing permits have surged, when in reality they're about a month ahead of where they were last year, um, and we're at the end of permitting season.

And so this all, as we're going into winter, feels just a little bit disingenuous. MHOP was stalled on purpose a year ago pending community conversations. On the 25th of this month, the administration is finally having a single community conversation on what we want 10,000 Homes in 10 Years to be. We're over 2 years into a 3-year administration, and this feels like a reelection talking point, not an honest conversation. Because why would the administration not come into office with a vision for what this was supposed to be?

And if they didn't have that vision, 2 years ago would have been a great time to ask all of us, to give us time to, to deliver the input that is needed.

Now it just feels dilatory, transparently performative, and quite frankly sad. Item 10B3 tonight shows they understand the problem and that it's getting worse. They just don't seem to want to do what is necessary to solve it.

Bottom line is you cannot tax abate yourself out of this crisis, and even if you could, you would dig a deeper fiscal crisis. It's time to move beyond these types of actions and get to the item that will actually make a difference for our future and truly put us on the path to solving this housing crisis. And I'll just note, I don't enjoy being up here with this tone of voice. I don't like being up here negative, but I also cannot see this continue and not make note of it. So when MHOP comes before the body, mercifully after all this time, I encourage you to support it and to support moving housing forward.

Thank you.

Okay, next person please come forward. Again, turn the microphone on with the green button at the bottom. When the green light turns on, it's on. Uh, no, you don't have to hold it, just click it once. Make sure that there's a green light at the top like this though.

Um, and yeah, please push it. I just want to make sure it works. Yeah, there you go. Um, and then state your name, uh, you'll have 3, and what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes.

Go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Um, hi, I'm Lisa. I live in Fairview, but I just bought a house in East Anchorage off Boniface. So good evening.

I recently purchased my first home, a 1970s split-level in East Anchorage, and this has been a long time coming. My partner and I currently make about $200 grand a year, yet we are priced out unless we wish to be quote-unquote house poor. The average house value in Anchorage is about $500,000, yet currently the cheapest new construction home listed on Zillow is $465,000 for 1,000 square feet of space.

Uh, we attended the parade of homes earlier this year, and I would not pay the top dollar being asked for what amounts to a Home Depot house.

I wonder if any of you have frequented open houses recently or toured any of the homes being sold as is. This ordinance cites Strategy 4 of the Land Use Plan 2040, calling for the use of property tax abatements to incentivize developments that are difficult to finance. But individual buyers like myself are unable to access financing for deeply deteriorated homes. Only investors and firms have the means to access such financing. I know because I've been competing with them for the past 2 years.

However, there are plenty of homes from the '70s and '80s that require rehabilitation but are able to be financed through conventional mortgage means. Strategy 2 of the land use plan states targeted investment in older neighborhoods and commercial areas will enhance quality of life and improve a neighborhood's ability to attract and retain residents and businesses. These homes being sold as-is tend to be priced in the $300,000 range. So providing tax incentives to first-time homebuyers looking to rehab older homes works in the spirit of strategy too and works to improve the core neighborhoods of Anchorage that do not have room for massive new developments. The house I bought was owned by a couple living out of state and was hard lived in by tenants.

The bones are good, but we are currently renovating it to remove mold, broken fixtures, etc. Because the couple lived out of state, the 2026 property tax exemption for owner-occupied, um, houses is not eligible for this house. I will be an owner-occupant of this house for 5 months of 2026, and I cannot, um, this incentive is not available to me until 2027. So I urge you to please consider that the existing housing inventory is worthy of tax incentives. Many of us first-time homebuyers do not have the equity or the down payment for a $500,000 townhome or an $800,000 starter home and the new developments springing up.

Thanks. Thank you for your testimony. Um, next person please come forward, uh, state your name on the record and what part of town you're in. Microphone—. Yep, it's on.

Thank you. Go ahead, you have 3 minutes. Frances Cedar, District 4. I live in a house that was built in 1952. 4 Generations of my family have lived in the same area in Anchorage on the same street.

We're told we're the only ones. I'm here to suggest to you that I do not appreciate tax abatement for other people, and the reason is that rolls my way. My taxes are so incredibly high, we can barely make them. If you can justify to me why my old house is worth $500,000 right now, I would like to present all of the plumbing bills, all of the replacement of appliances. A house built in 1952 has floors that are failing.

I want to help Anchorage. I want to see people housed. I want to see first-time homeowners.

Homebuyers, but let's get real. The cost of construction is between $300 and $500 a square foot. How are normal people— is Baldwin Day going to afford that? It just isn't going to happen. And if you overburden people like me, I won't be able to pay for my house.

And I serve a very important purpose in this community. I am a certified brain injury specialist. I treat neuro diseases. As a medical speech-language pathologist. I'm one of the only people in the state.

That doesn't make any difference. I'm just like everyone else in my neighborhood. Our, our property taxes are too high, and every break you give builders and first-time homebuyers is a break that I pay for and my neighbors pay for. The existing property taxpayers are paying for these breaks for the builders and for the new buyers, and we just can't do it. We need to come up with some other solution.

You're going to destroy part of the infrastructure of Anchorage. A lot of people who contribute to this community are in my position, and we have older homes. I can't pay another $8,000. I showed up with a bag that had $8,000 in it last time, but I didn't get to speak. I had to go down to the property tax people and pay that for the next assembly meeting tonight.

That's a lot of money, and I'd like to see you really consider that. I mean, can't we go for grants, something better, so that you're not disenfranchising people like me, where generations of my family have positively contributed to this community? Thank you. Thanks. Um, excuse me.

Next person, please come forward. Microphone's already on. State your name, what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes. My name is Sarah Short.

And I am not a first-time home buyer anymore because I've lived in my home stably for almost 30 years. And I want to keep it. It's one of the things that my husband lived in. It was his family home. I'm a disabled veteran, and I spend my time serving this community.

I can't go back to work because I have a 5-year-old and I have 2 other children who now currently are 23 and 30, and they do live with me part-time because I cannot afford to buy a home because our taxes are so incredibly high. We start talking about taxes and how we spend them. I want Anchorage to have economic growth. I want us to have stability. And safety.

And once again, I want us to have accountability. And accountability means I want to know where that tax money is being spent. I want my roads fixed so that— and I know I got the eye roll. Thank you, Miss Scout. I love that.

I really love the fact that we are addressing first-time homebuyers because I want my kids to be able to do that. I got a grandbaby on the way, and they would love to have a home that's bigger than a 600-square-foot apartment, you know, meaning I put a wall between part of my house and they use the kitchen and they use the laundry room because they're in my house, which I love because the baby's going to be there. But come on, people, we really need to stop overtaxing the people that are actually here, and start doing some revitalization programs and bringing businesses back. And people who want to grow their families here, we need to do something to keep them. That means we need to get the crime off the street.

We need to get the drugs off the street, and we need to hold assembly members accountable for their spending. I'm going to say it every time I get up here. What Martinez did was wrong. I don't care if you don't want to hear it. I'm a taxpayer.

It does impact stuff like this because this is my tax money. And I also cannot afford a roof. I can't afford a floor. But I scrimped and saved every year. I can't do Airbnb anymore because you're doing taxes on that.

You're micromanaging me out of my business. I can't do it anymore. I had a couple of assembly members used to come to my homes. For events. They can't do that anymore because I had to put them to long-term rentals.

Short-term rentals are not taking your money. It's theft and crime and drugs and misspending by you all.

Would anyone else wish to testify at this time? Please come forward if so.

Okay, yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. At the request of the assembly, I'm going to move to continue the public hearing— excuse me, the administration, but also maybe the assembly. I'm going to move to continue the public hearing to the meeting on 9/15. And if I could also speak further to the motion, if I get a second. There's a motion to continue the public hearing to the meeting of September 15th.

Is there a second?

Second. Uh, second— or sorry, there was a motion by Mr. Bohlen, second by Ms. Baldwin-Day. Mr. Bohlen, do you want to speak to it further? Yeah, well, I, I think I'd like to ask the administration, you know, I personally haven't really seen any support for this item, um, at least addressed my way. So I want to ask the administration, what is the plan for this ordinance?

Is there going to be an S version? Should we foresee changes to this? So I want to be clear before they respond. The motion that we're in right now is the public hearing is open. The motion is to continue the public hearing.

One second. I just want to make sure that we don't get into debate if we're not—. I'm not going to debate the item, but I think it, you know, for me, I could essentially foresee a move to approve and kill this thing. Rather than doing a second round of public hearing. So I think that would inform my decision to vote on whether to continue the public hearing or not.

Yeah, and the— just one second, the clerk is researching, because again, we are not supposed to debate before a public hearing is closed. So I want to make sure that whatever we do right now is in order.

Okay, thank you. So the clerk has indicated that we can debate the propriety of the postponement, so I will urge members, anybody's asking questions, please try to stay out of the, the core content of the item and speak to the postponement. So I'll see if there's someone from the administration who would like to respond to Mr. Bowen's question. Mr. Dull.

Through the chair, Bob Dole, Director for Community and Economic Development. We envision an S version based upon feedback from various public members. There is about 3 or 4 areas we envision tweaking on this one and coming back to the assembly with it. Okay, appreciate that answer. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Next, again on postponement, Ms. Silvers.

I think that I would like to just vote on this tonight. I think we have all the information that we need, and I think, you know, if you want to bring back another version, uh, it would probably be substantially different. So I would just do that and let us dispatch with this tonight. Thank you.

Ms. Baldwin-Day.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. I, um, I do have an S version in the works, so if that factors into anyone else's consideration, want that to be clear.

Mr. Gerker. Yeah, I would actually appreciate us postponing this. It sounds like there's multiple versions that are going to be, you know, coming along, and procedurally it just seems a lot easier and cleaner to me to keep this thing alive and then do whatever we do with the substitute versions rather than, you know, vote up or down and potentially down and then have them come back with something else.

Okay, um, but before we proceed in the queue, I'll just note, so right now where we are is, um, the public hearing is open. So if members, uh, one option is to continue the public hearing, that is the motion before us. Another option is, um, if that fails, we in theory could close the public hearing, postpone, do some other item with it. But I will note that right now this motion, um, We need to dispatch with that either way. So, Ms.

Scout, go ahead.

Yeah, I'll briefly respond and maybe speak, then send it to the attorneys. I mean, anybody can introduce an item, uh, if it's an item that already exists, you can do a substitute version. If it's a new item, you can.

Take pretty much the exact same text, or more or less, introduce it as a new separate item. And so I think anybody who's contemplating changes to this could be made to this item, or it could be a separate new item, uh, but the public notice for it would require a, a public hearing in the future either way.

Yeah, um, yeah, and I don't know if the attorneys have anything to add there. I don't see anything. Okay, so yeah, I think the question is if there's appetite for change to this, the question is whether to keep this number or pursue a new number, essentially. And there's different paths to get there. Okay, there's no one else in the queue, so members may proceed to vote on the motion to continue the hearing to the meeting of September 15th.

And just to note, the public hearing on this is still open if that is the case.

Uh, whoever's on the phone, if I could ask you to mute. Uh, or that might have been Mr. Johnson.

So just to note, I did speak with Mr. Johnson before, um, the dinner break. He indicated that at 10 PM he would need to be on the phone, uh, so I'll check again before we lock in the vote. Uh, Mr. Johnson, are you there?

Yes, I'm here. My vote is yes. Okay, thank you. Yeah, yes vote from Mr. Johnson, and sorry for not checking earlier.

Okay, so on a vote of 10 to 2, this item, uh, the public hearing is continued on AO 2026-89 to the regular meeting of September 15th, 2026, um, and I imagine more to come on that one. So, um, next then we have item, uh, 14B, AO 2026-93, an ordinance of the Anchorage Assembly enacting Anchorage Municipal Code Chapter 12.100, Tax Incentives for Mixed-Use Multi-Unit Housing. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify.

Okay. And as you're approaching, I'll note the microphone is already on. Same instructions. Name, where you're from, and You have 3 minutes. Frances Cedar, District 4.

Um, same comment. What are we doing? We're going to be facing an energy crisis. I lived through 2 energy crises in Anchorage in the 1970s when I was a kid. It was one of the scariest things we have ever experienced.

You didn't know if you would have gasoline, heating, how were our schools going to operate. We're facing that again, and we're going to build more infrastructure that we can't even heat. That makes absolutely no sense to me. I think until we're sure where our energy is going to come from and whether or not we're going to be funding Canada further with NSTAR instead of Alaska, I don't think this makes any sense. I think we need to reexamine this.

I know we want to try to save Anchorage and make it productive, But if you build a lot of new buildings and you don't have a way to heat it, or electricity is too expensive, how's that going to play out? They'll stand empty. People will not be able to afford to live there. The rents will go high. I know you're trying to smooth out the market, but that's a very slow shift.

And for the rest of us, we're going to once again be paying to bankroll the Debenhams. With tax breaks. Rich builders do not deserve to have our tax money when we can barely afford to pay our property taxes. Thank you.

Okay, anyone, uh, further wish to testify on this item? Mr. Bullock also moved to continue to the meeting of 9/15. Okay, there's a motion to continue the public hearing on this item to the meeting of September 15th. Is there a second? Second from Ms.

Scout. Would you like to speak to it further, Mr. Boland?

Okay, um, don't see anyone else in the queue, so members may proceed to vote. The vote is— or the motion is to continue the public hearing of this item to September 15th. Member Johnson?

Yes.

Okay, on a vote of 12 to 0, um, this item AO-2026-93 is continued to— the public hearing is continued to the regular meeting of September 15th. The next item is AO-2026-98, an ordinance of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly amending Anchorage Municipal Code Chapter 4.60 and 27.30.005 to enact a new Section 4.60.3110 310, and establish the Chugach State Park Access Advisory Board. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you would like to testify.

And then I will also note, as folks are coming up, the intent is to continue the hearing on this item from the sponsors. Uh, so this, uh, just to let folks know as well, if you testify tonight and there's a new version, you would be able to speak to the changes in the new version. So So if, if that factors into the decision whether folks want to testify or not tonight, just let you know. So first person, microphone's already on. Please state your name, what part of town you're in, and you have 3 minutes.

OK, good evening. My name is Roger Marks. I'm representing the Board of Supervisors of the Glen Alps Road Service Area, or GARSA. We manage the roads that go to the 2 busiest trailheads at Chugach State Park, Glen Alps and the Rabbit Lake Sunnyside Flattop. We support the proposed ordinance and the creation of a CASA advisory board.

Most of us live near the park. We use the park, we value the park, and we see the park as an asset for the whole Anchorage community. And we see the creation of the board as a positive step for realizing the goals of CASA, which is providing capital improvements that support access to the park and ameliorating the neighborhood effects of access by park users, which we generally see as benefiting everyone. And we see creation of the board as a means for balancing the needs of the neighborhoods and the city as a whole. When there are conflicts between these goals, while it certainly calls for deliberation in the public interest, we do not believe a small number of people should be able to leverage a large number of people by withholding entering into cooperative agreements.

We emailed you some comments on July 23rd. There were 5 comments. I'll briefly summarize them here. First, you might want to consider adding a policy goal to the advisory board to strive to balance neighborhood and larger community needs. Second, you might want to consider having the advisory board hold at least one open hearing each year where the entire Anchorage community could weigh in on potential CASA projects they deem valuable.

And third, similarly, you might want to consider having the advisory board systematically consult each year with each user group in each road service area that provides access to the park for them to weigh in on potential CASA projects they deem valuable. Fourth, you might want to consider including as a voting member of the advisory board a board member of one of the road service areas that provide access to the park, given their familiarity with road conditions. And a fifth, final comment: in situations where a proposed project might increase maintenance costs for a road service area, You might want to have the Advisory Board work jointly with the road service area regarding quantifying those costs, where the additional funds might come from, and elevating the issue in its recommendations to the Assembly and administration. In closing, again, we see CASA as a win-win proposition for Anchorage. In situations where compromises are required, we are confident the Advisory Board could be a sound mechanism for crafting solutions., and we look forward to the creation of the board and working collaboratively with it.

Thank you. Okay, and there's one person in the queue for you, uh, Mr. Poland. Hey, Roger, thank you for being here tonight. Appreciate your testimony. Um, I, I just want to clarify one thing.

I think I know the answer, but for the benefit of my, um, colleagues as well. So one of your recommendations was, um, that there should be a spot on the board for at least one spot for one of the service areas that has— basically has access to the park, because there are limited road service areas that do not provide access to Chugach State Park. In the current proposal, our language, myself and my co-sponsor Chair Brawley, specifies two seats for, um, limited road service area representatives— or not even representatives, actually residents is the language that we use. And I think what you're suggesting, if I understand correctly, is maybe we could fine-tune that language, be a little bit more specific, that it would be at least one spot for a limited road service area that allows that access to the state park. Am I understanding that correctly?

Well, we suggest maybe go further and have an actual board member from a road service here, from one of those road service areas that provide access to the park, was our suggestion. So on the Board of Supervisors and proximal to the park? Right. OK. Thank you.

Appreciate that. OK. Next person, please come forward. Microphone's already on. State your name, what part of town you're in. Yes, thank you.

My name is Barbara Hood. I'm a resident of Stuck Again. We're the Bashir neighborhood. And we are represented by the Campbell Air Strip. Larssa, and I'm right— I submitted comments to the assembly.

I think my comments cover what I would like to say, unless you have questions, but I'm here to cover something that our council actually passed in advance.

Chance of this ordinance being introduced at our May meeting because we were very concerned about CASA and how it had been applied to our neighborhood. We are the more angrier version of what Roger just said. I think we want many of the same changes, but we had a different experience. His neighborhood has not gone through what we went through, and it to us was unfair and it's left a bad taste. We did ask for a postponement and we invited the co-sponsors of this ordinance to come to our next meeting And we're very grateful, Chair Brawley, that you're willing to come and talk to us, because I think there's a lot of mending that could be done that would take— bring us a long way before we come back to this.

Because as many of you know, there was a resolution brought right in the middle of a public process in which we were all participating as, you know, fair-minded, good citizens. And the assembly came through with what the existing CASA group had recommended and tried to strong-arm what we thought a decision that was underway in a way that made— that really made the whole process deeply tainted. So the existing CASA group, our experience with them, because they are all trails and parks advocates, is that it's a biased group, and we don't want to be working with a biased group. We'd like to be working with a balanced group. And I'd just like to read some— to read to you some of the provisions of the ordinance that we passed in May, seeing some of the same concerns that you see, that the co-sponsors see, and that the assembly should address.

I don't— I don't think we have any problem with the board. There should be a board. You have a governing body of any, uh, use of municipal resources. But anyway, uh, the, the whereases in our resolution— I think I've explained that the current group is fully, uh, parks access people, no neighborhood people. Um, the resolved part of our resolution was that the composition of the ad hoc CASA advisory group fails to conform to the November 18th, 2025 directive from this assembly because it includes no representative of ARDSA or LARSA.

So this assembly even recognized in November that it needed to be a more balanced board, and these are the people most familiar with the needs for road, parking, and trailhead improvements in the relevant service areas. Second, that any official group involved in evaluating or recommending projects for CASA, whether it be an advisory group or formal commission, must include a balance of representation between parks advocates and LARSA. Sorry, my writing And then to better ensure that both prongs of CASA's mission, improved access and ameliorated neighborhood impacts, are adequately addressed. And also that the roles and responsibilities of the new advisory group or formal commission and policies and procedures by which it will be governed and the ethical standards to which it will be held accountable should be much more clearly established to ensure fair public input and fair and transparent decision-making that fosters confidence in the CASA process. Um, sorry, our neighborhood supports CASA, but I think in order to succeed and continue, it needs to be balanced and fair.

Thank you for your testimony. Excuse me. Thank you. Next person, please come forward. Uh, microphone's already on.

State your name and what part of town you're in, and you'll have 3 minutes. I'm David Pease. I'm the longest-tenured, uh, member of the Upper O'Malley Road service area. We are extremely disturbed by this proposal to change the language in 3 of the original ordinance which was passed by the voters, which required consultation and approval of the road service areas. That was an integral part of legislation that was passed at that time.

It was signed by Assemblyman LaFrance at the time. We worked with the assembly to get that language put in there, and it was integral to the support of the road service areas to have that language in there. It's now being taken out. That's a bait and switch. And it does not sit well with the road service area.

We know these roads, we know what it takes to maintain them, and we know that we have to have involvement, and we're an integral part of making this thing work. This CASA thing was sold to the road service people as an ability to upgrade your roads to provide park access. And we have access to Prospect Heights and Sutterhof. And now that's being taken away from us, and it really chaps us. Uh, then I, um, we have a problem with the board itself.

You've got a 7-member board. Apparently it's going to have someone who is knowledgeable about trails. If you read the ordinance, it says nothing about trails. The ordinance is to ameliorate the neighborhood effects of access to, but by park users and the maintenance thereof. And it goes on and says, talking about minor arterials, collector neighborhood streets that lead— that leading from streets to higher classifications and are generally used by the public to access the Chugach Park.

And then I think they also want to have someone on the board from— oh, a board member who has demonstrated experience in outdoor recreation in Chugach Park. We're talking about park access, not what goes on in the park. The whole thing of this was to have park access.. And then it's— I think it's really rich that you say that if you live in an ARTSA, you're eligible to be on the board, or if you live in a LURSA. People that live there have no idea what's involved with taking care of the roads or how the road service areas work.

We're also a little troubled by the notion that this is to be an open and transparent process. We got an email— as far as I know, well, I've checked with 3 road service areas, the sponsors or the, uh, Municipal Assembly Attorney never consulted with the road services about this. It was just dropped on us. We got it through John Weddleton, uh, and I— the email said our goal is that this to be a collaborative and transparent process, and we greatly appreciate your feedback for a proposed ordinance. Well, when you drop something like this on us and tell us that this is the board, we're taking away your rights to, uh, be an integral part of, of the, of the decision-making that impacts your roads, that's not a collaborative and open process.

So we're, we would like to have the ordinance stay the way it is, and if there's going to be a board, it needs to be a legitimate board that has road service people on it. Thank you for your test. Know what's going on. Thank you for your testimony. Um, I'll ask, is anyone else in the room wishing to testify at this time?

Okay, um, and then I'll note we do have one person on the phone as well, so I think no one else is coming up, so we'll call, um, Miss Nancy Pease.

Hello? Hi, this is Miss Pease. It is this. Hi, this is Anna Brawley. Um, I am calling from the Anchorage Assembly.

Um, we are on AO 228698. You signed up for phone testimony and When you're ready, we can give you your 3 minutes.

All right, very good. I am ready. Okay, please proceed. Yes, I'm Nancy Pease, and I'm speaking on behalf of Rabbit Creek Community Council. Our council submitted written comments approved by our board.

They were submitted Friday, so they should be in your packet.

Um, we would like we support the CASA Advisory Board in general, but we think there need to be some revisions to make sure that it is balanced and transparent, and we hope that our District 6 representatives or the sponsors will make some amendments. Um, Rabbit Creek appreciates the Assembly's continued commitment to improving public access to Chugach State Park, but we think that there are several necessary revisions to the future advisory board so that it can provide informed, constructive input. We specifically want to ensure that a majority of board members have firsthand knowledge of park access issues and that road service areas and community councils that border the park have direct communication or representation to or on the advisory board. So a couple of specifics here.

Currently in Section 1, not— the current draft AO could allow appointment of a board with not one single member having experience in recreation access to Chugach State Park. That might be okay for one or two of the technical experts, but we feel the majority of CASA advisory members should have direct knowledge of Chugach State Park access conditions. And to It seems unlikely that people without direct experience could contribute as meaningfully as people who know the gradients, the winter driving issues, the overflow parking, the glaciation, and also erosion or overuse of certain trails. This in no way precludes members from any geographical part of Katla from serving, since we know that there are park users who live all across the bowl. So to achieve that, um, direct experience, we'd like to amend Section 1, Part 4 so that the 4 community at-large members will demonstrate experience in recreation in Chugach State Park within the Anchorage Bowl over the past 5 years, including use and firsthand knowledge of multiple access points.

We also feel that the members residing within the limited road service areas should be those areas bordering Chugach State Park, not down in the lower part of the hillside. Next, we think it's important to inform and involve community councils and road service areas in the vicinity of the proposed projects and not set up the advisory board as a way to bypass them. So to do that, we would like to have a clear line of communication. Let's— when it says the municipality shall communicate, let's put it on the municipal manager or other designated support staff to CASA to do the.

Communicating. And let's make sure that's 60 days before the proposed project's approval and include community council— councils and road service areas in the vicinity of the project. In addition, if there's not going to be a cooperative agreement, we need to have transparency about the financial impact. So we'd like the CASA support staff from project management and engineering to provide the road service areas with a documented estimate of annual and lifetime maintenance costs of the CASA project, especially for drainage structures and fill on steep slopes.

And also in Section 1— 4.1— 1 rather, we think that the board should have a role in conceiving and evaluating proposed access projects. Let's have some grassroots creativity So we'd like to add a Section 2 specifying that the Board shall evaluate access projects identified by Board members or community members and nominate those projects with merit for inclusion in CASA CIP updates. I think that's the main points we had. Again, our letter's in your packets. And we hope that— we look forward to the Advisory Board, but we ask that our representatives from District 6 and/or the sponsors make some substantive amendments.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Um, and I'll note also, uh, for benefit of the public, um, Ms. Pease identified herself as speaking on behalf of a community council, and so I didn't interrupt her in the moment to make the change on the timer, but we did to allow in 5 minutes, just to be clear for the record. Um, and Mr. Vohland has a question, if you're still there, Ms. Pease. I am. Hi, Nancy.

Thank you for your testimony. I wondered— this might be tricky because I know you're speaking on behalf of your community council, but on that first piece, I think it's really interesting.

The, the— if I understand correctly, the proposal is to be less about geographic representation, more about experience with recreation access conditions within the past 5 years. And I'm wondering if you can kind of unpack what that means, maybe what a little bit of briefly what the discussion was on the community council. Is that somebody who within the last 5 years, you know, regularly hiked or went backpacking and drove up to do that? Or I want to hone in a little bit on what is meant by experience with recreation access conditions. If you just unpack that a little bit.

Yeah, it could be somebody who goes to multiple locations in Chugach State Park, who drives there or bikes there.

And then uses the park. It could also be people who live in that area and routinely see conditions of parking on the shoulders, loose dogs running up into yards, those kinds of impacts. So it just means that you are up there on the hillside at and in the access areas to Chugach State Park. So you see the patterns of use, you see the weather conditions, the road conditions. You're not, you're not just somebody who has a theoretical interest, but you have actual physical experience seeing and observing the conditions of park access.

Okay, got it. Thank you. That's helpful. Well, as someone who hiked Tarmigan on Saturday, I think I might qualify, but I promise I won't put myself forward. Thank you, Ms. Pease.

All right. Okay, thank you very much. Yeah, thank you, Chair. Okay, uh, thank you. No further questions.

So, uh, thank you. Good evening, Miss Peace. Okay, um, anyone else wish to testify at this time? Anyone at all? Mr. Mullins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We are going to move to, uh, likewise, uh, continue the public hearing for this one to the meeting of 9/15. Second. Motion by Mr. Mullins to continue the public hearing on this ordinance to the meeting of September 15th. Second by Miss Park.

Do You want to speak to it? Yes, I will speak to this. Um, we would allow— we would like to allow the opportunity for more public input. Um, members may have seen, you know, certainly we've tried to solicit that. Um, I put out an op-ed sort of explaining, um, why we were bringing this ordinance forward and inviting the public to participate and weigh in with their thoughts.

Um, as we heard in public testimony tonight Chair Brawley has agreed to attend the next BASHER meeting and hear from those folks. And then I think there's lots of thoughtful input in our email inboxes from various stakeholder groups and members of the community. And so we would like the opportunity to process all of that and to make some changes. And I know other folks may want to bring some amendments too, so just want to allow more opportunity for that. We also will likely have a work session on this topic.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Next, Miss Silvers on postponement or continuing the hearing. I would like to move to amend the date on that to October 6th. Second. Okay, there's a motion to— one sec— motion to amend the amendment, or most— sorry, I'm in the motion to change the meeting date from September 15th to October 6th, and it was moved by Miss Silvers, second by Mr. Martinez.

One second. Okay, yeah, and I'll note, um, for members' awareness, um, if the— if that is amenable to the original mover, then, then we wouldn't have to make an amendment. Okay, um, yeah, sounds like we want to hear from the Silvers if you want to speak to it. Um, I would like to move this to October 6th because a lot of community councils meet for the first time in September after taking the summer are off, and I believe that many of them would like the opportunity to weigh in. I know that BASHR is one of them.

I believe they actually meet before the September 15th, but I do know that there are a lot of other councils that are emailing and wanting to weigh in, and I don't think that we need to hurry through this. I think it's good to— there's been a lot of important points brought up in testimony, and I think it's good to really consider all that, um, in a, you know, rather than rushing. Thanks.

Okay, Mr. Buland. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, you know, I hear Member Silver's point. I do want to back up a little bit though, and, um, I, I guess I, I would say I, I wouldn't want to go postpone it any longer than that One of the reasons is because, you know, the item that we previously postponed indefinitely, Chair Brawley's original ordinance, which would have made the procedure, essentially the CASA improvement project subject to the Anchorage— is it the Parks and Rec Commission? That has been— that was introduced for reading January 13th, 2026.

This has been lingering. We've known we need to do something about CASA. We need to do something to make this more fair. We've had multiple work sessions. We had a resolution which caused a little bit of a dustup.

You heard about that tonight. Um, I've been saying on a public record now, we've got to do something to balance the interest of ARDSA and the LURDSAs, to balance the interest of the neighborhoods who are proximal to access points and those that want to use those access points. Um, I was vocal in, in encouraging the administration to put together an advisory working group, which they did.

You know, this is, this has been a problem, I guess, that has needed to be addressed for some time. Okay, and then Member Brawley, or excuse me, Chair Brawley, held her ordinance in the anticipation that the administration would, would bring something forward, an alternate proposal. We were waiting on that. I said on the public record multiple times I would like to be in involved in that project. That opportunity was never extended to me.

Nothing was brought forward by the administration. So this has just been waiting and lingering.

Finally, I will say, at a leadership meeting, um, there was, I guess, a difference of interpretation on who, who was going to be involved in the drafting of this, of the administration's version of this that we've never seen. Um, the— our previous municipal manager, Becky Wood-Pearson, indicated to assembly leadership that she thought that the advisory working group was going to be able to be part of that process, that they would also be able to work on a similar proposal. Now, my understanding from what I've heard secondhand is that certain members of that advisory working group have taken it upon themselves, that effort to draft something. Again, I've never seen it, I don't know.

And in that same meeting, the mayor's chief of staff said no, that is not part of their mission. And so for me, it was a little bit disturbing that the advisory working group that we have for so, you know, for so long pushed that we need some voices at the table, we need somebody to advise us and weigh in on these projects and the capital improvement sequencing and how we're going to do all of this. Their input wasn't requested. For, again, whatever draft we haven't seen. So I don't want to continue to kick this can down the road.

We need to do something about this. We need to make it more fair. The co-sponsors are digesting the information that has, um, has come to us, and we deeply appreciate it. And so, yes, there's some time that can be taken with that to have a thoughtful approach and receive that public input. But I just don't want to push this off too far, too much further.

With that, I will, as the original mover, I will just accept that and fold that into my motion that we would continue the public hearing until October 6th, if the second agrees.

Miss Park, you were the second on the motion to continue the hearing. Are you accept— do you accept the change to October 6th? Okay, second says yes. And I have myself in the queue very briefly. Chair Parley.

Thank you. Yeah, I'll just say, I mean, this change was made to the motion. I am fine with either date, I'll say that. Also, I mean, we're moving into another budget cycle where we will where we are going to be the ultimate deciders, which is already true, but we will not have the full benefit of this body. But that's going to be true regardless.

So I would encourage members that we do take the time, that we work on this together, that we look at amendments, things like that. But also that the underlying conflict that this is going to surface will not go away until we resolve it. And so whether this thing exists or not, that is what we're going to have to deal with. So Thank you. Any other comments?

So, so now just to be clear, we have folded that in. So the motion on the floor is to continue the public hearing to the regular meeting of October 6th. I don't see anyone else in the queue. Oh, sorry, Miss Scout, go ahead.

I'm going to ask the administration to— because it's really their process. It's not a full advisory board. So if anybody could speak to that, the status of it.

Through the chair, Kent Colhase is online and we will try to get him on the big speaker. Yeah, Mr. Culhace, please just speak up when you are there. And then I will note also, I know Mr. Culhace has been the support staff for this ad hoc working group, so that is why we are asking him to speak to it.

Here at 10:35, we are having a little bit of trouble connecting with Mr. Culhace. We can try to take that question away. And get you an answer as soon as we can connect with him.

Okay, and I have Mr. Bowen in the queue. Yeah, um, so I, I guess I just want to say for the public record that the— I think it's more appropriate to call it an advisory working group. It is not a formal board or commission, and those work differently, and Part of one of the reasons that we need to bring something like this forward is because a working group works behind the scenes, behind closed doors. That's not a public process, whereas a board or commission, they work through a public process.

Um, additionally, I just want members to know that again, what was represented to us is that in the administration's crafting of this version that was supposedly going to come forward at some time and, and was stated by the Chief of Staff that it was not part of the advisory— the working group's charge or, or mission to, to weigh in on the merits of a formal advisory board. Member Brawley and I did have Legislative Services team circulate an email to that working group asking for their input because I think it's very important. I think that's very valuable input. If you have a working group that's, you know, helping inform the process, why wouldn't you want their input on a formal advisory board? So just want to state that for the record, and it's not a question.

Thank you.

Okay, and I think I see Ms. Fleet Green stepping up, I think, to answer Ms. Scout's question. Is that correct? Yeah, I thought I would come up and help clarify through the chair To Member Scout's question regarding the current board, just to refresh everyone's memory, the body created that and directed the administration to create that working group last year when we were going through the budget process to come up with the capital improvement project list for this coming year. So the charge was that, that was its mission.

And that group has now gone through the mission. They did a lot of fantastic work. They held many, many meetings. And we have that list, as we do capital improvement lists, and that will be coming forward to the body as part of the budget process. But that was the charge that the assembly gave that working group, and that is the charge that the administration followed.

OK, I didn't— don't see any other members in the queue, so again, the motion is to continue the public hearing on this item to the meeting of October 6th. Members may proceed to vote.

Member Johnson.

Yes. On a vote of 12 to 0, this item is now continued to the meeting of October 6th, and again, intent to schedule a work session, uh, between now and then. Uh, next item we have is item 14D, um, and I will note there's an error on our agenda, so I'll clearly read that it states AR 2026-99. The correct, uh, number for that one is actually AR 2026-193. It's a resolution approving an administrative agreement, TMS AA 2026-07, between the Municipality of Anchorage and the Teamsters Local 959.

Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify. Anyone at all?

Seeing and hearing no one come forward, public hearing on this item is now closed. What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Second.

Motion to approve by Ms. Scout, second by Mr. Voland— oh, Park, I'm sorry. Motion to approve by Ms. Park, second by Mr. Voland. Would you like to speak to it, Ms. Park? Yeah, just that, um, family leave is very important to working families, that the opportunity to have some time with their new child is something that can't be replaced later on.

So I urge all the members to vote to affirm.

Okay, I don't see anyone else in the queue, so members may proceed to vote. Again, this is AR 2026.

193. Member Johnson?

Yes. On a vote of 12 to 0, um, AR 2026-193 passes the body unanimously. Next we have AR 2026— uh, again, this is an error on our agenda, it says 2026-100, it is 2026-194— a resolution approving an administrative agreement, IAFF AA 2026-11, between the Municipality of Anchorage and and the International Association of Firefighters Local 1264. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward.

Microphone is already on. State your name, what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes to testify. Good evening. Justin Mack, president of the Anchorage Firefighters Union.

I just want to thank the administration for working on this. Our members ratified this administrative agreement nearly unanimously, and I just want to make myself available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Okay, thank you for your testimony. Um, anyone else, uh, please come forward if you wish to testify. Anyone at all?

Okay, seeing and hearing no one wishing to testify, public hearing on this item is now closed. What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Motion by Mr. Vohland to approve, second by Miss Scout. Um, any discussion on this item, Mr. Vohland?

Just urge support. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Okay, and, uh, before we proceed, I'll just check. Mr. Perez-Fordia, it looks like you're joining us on the phone, is that correct?

Yep, I'm here. Okay, um, so I don't see anyone else in the queue. Members may proceed to vote. The vote is on AR 2026-194, item 14E. Member Perez-Fordia?

Yes. Member Johnson?

Yes. On a vote of 12 to 0, AR 2026-194 passes the body unanimously. Next, we have AR 2026-189, a resolution of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly approving an administrative agreement, L302AA-2026-03, between the Municipality of Anchorage and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 302. Before I open the public hearing on this, I will also note a prior Disclosure of interest from Mr. Handlin prior ruling that, that he is not— his interest does not apply to this particular bargaining or part of the bargaining unit, um, so you do not have a conflict. Um, and I will see, uh, ask if anybody would wish to testify.

Public hearing on this item is open.

Anyone wish to testify? Okay, seeing and hearing no one, then public hearing on this item is now closed. What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Second.

Motion by Ms. Park to approve, second by Mr. Bullen. Would you like to speak to it, Ms. Park? Um, I, I am a long, uh, long time union member and union supporter, and, uh, we need these folks to get us through the winter. So, uh, I would urge my fellow members to vote in favor.

Okay, I don't see anyone else in the queue, and of course folks on the phone, uh, yeah, not any further comments. Members may proceed to vote on this item. The motion is to approve.

Member Perez Verdia? Yes. Member Johnson?

Yes. Member Silvers?

Yes. That was a yes for Miss Silvers. Okay, on a motion of 12 to 0, item AR 2026-189 passes the body unanimously. Um, then the last pieces of business on our agenda are our quasi-new and continued quasi-judicial public hearings, uh, to some degree. So I'll just note the next item on the agenda involves applications for a liquor or marijuana license and/or special land use permit for alcohol or marijuana.

The process to review these is slightly different, and I will note that we are in a quasi-judicial posture on I believe at least 3 of these. So, so we'll get to that when we come to it and then we'll go ahead and move through our business and open the first public hearing. One second. Okay. Public hearing on 15A AR 2026-214, a resolution of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly stating its conditional protest regarding renewal of beverage dispensary tourism license 402 for Ivory Manufacturing Corp of AK, DBA Flight Deck Bar and Arctic Inn.

Located at 832 West International Airport Road, Anchorage, uh, AK 99518. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify. Anyone at all? Seeing and hearing none, public hearing on this item is now closed.

What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Second. Motion by Mr. Vohland to approve, second by Miss, uh, Baldwin-Day. Any further discussion, Mr. Vohland?

No, Chair, thank you. Okay, I don't see anyone else in the queue, um, so members may proceed to vote on AR 2026-214. Member Presverdia? Yes. Member Johnson?

Yes. On a vote of 12 to 0, that item passes the body unanimously. Next we have 15B, AR 2026-218, a resolution of the Anchorage Assembly approving an alcohol special land use permit for sporting activity or event license with license number, uh, 60394 for Nana Management Services DBA Fine Arts Building. Uh, public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify.

Anyone at all? Seeing and hearing none, uh, public hearing on this item is now closed. What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Second.

Motion to approve by Mr. Vohland, second by Miss Baldwin-Day. Any further discussion?

Okay, don't see any members in the queue, so members may proceed to vote to approve, uh, AR 2026-218. Member Presverdia? Yes. Member Johnson?

Yes.

On a vote of 12 to 0, item AR 2026-218 passes the body unanimously. Next, we will move on to Item 15C, AR 2026-219, a resolution of the Anchorage Assembly approving an alcohol special land use permit for sporting activity or event license number 60395 for Nana Management Services, DBA Wendy Williamson Auditorium. Member, uh, public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you wish to testify. Anyone at all?

Seeing and hearing none, public hearing is now closed. What's the will of the body? Move to approve. Second. Motion by Ms. Baldwin-Day to approve, second by Mr. Vohlen.

Would you like to speak to it? Um, yeah, actually, I'm— both 15B and 15C treat with, um, a, a service that's been a long time coming, both, um, for dance performances and other, other things on the UAA campus, and also concerts and things that happen in the Wendy Williamson. There's not been the possibility of alcohol sales in either of those venues, and this represents a really important step forward for UAA and for, for for their revenue streams. So I appreciate support on this. Thank you.

Okay, I don't see any further members in the queue, so members may proceed to vote on AR 2026-219. Member Perez-Furdia? Yes. Member Johnson? Yes.

Okay, on a vote of 12 to 0, AR 2026-219 passes the body unanimously. Our last public hearing item, AR-2026-225, a resolution of the Anchorage Assembly approving a marijuana license and special land use permit for Baltazar Holdings LLC, DBA Sensimia, a marijuana retail sales establishment with license number M35490. Public hearing on this item is now open. Please come forward if you would like to testify.

And I'll note the microphone is open. So, uh, or sorry, microphone is on. State your name and what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes. Okay, my name is Fran Gregor, and I'm a member of the Northeast Community Council, here to testify that we have voted many, many times against having an additional marijuana retail sale establishment on Muldoon Road.

This applicant would be number 4 on the location of Muldoon Road from, uh, Boundary to 16th Avenue. So on March 17th, we received a flyer from Baltazar stating that his final wish or desire is to go in front of the muni and present his request for application by fulfilling his meeting, which was scheduled for April 13th. So on April 13th, we showed up at his location, 1431 Muldoon Road, in the tire shop and his— for the meeting, and his employees They said he just left. So we said, we're here for the meeting. There was no computers, no chairs, no tables, nothing.

So they— we asked him, we said we're supposed to have a meeting for him. So they went and they found him. So he came back. He promptly called his lawyer and his paralegal. And they wanted to have a Zoom meeting, but nothing worked.

There were no computers, no iPads. No laptops, so they did it by telephone. So they had their phones there and we were there. And the meetings that I picked up yesterday at, uh, from Elizabeth Appleby, I believe, at Elmore Road, Muni Planning, uh, stated all this stuff. Even George knows that we have voted down this additional marijuana facility on Muldoon Road.

It's too close. There's the playground for the kids, there's the junior high, there's a children's, um, preschool there. So anyway, I picked up this letter yesterday with the minutes, and it is nothing. They came in at 12:30. We were there at 11:50 for his meeting.

And we waited. And so I know that this was a haphazard type minutes that they drew up, because when the minutes were submitted to the MOA, they had the wrong address. The legal lawyer and her paralegal in this document admitted sub— submitted the wrong address for Balthazar's land permit. How do I know this? Because they put my address in there.

So I am on the special land use permit for Baltazar. And I have a copy right here.

I don't know if anyone is interested in seeing it.

Thank you for your testimony. If you want to provide— I think our staff have stepped away.

For the moment, but— Pardon me. Oh, thank you for your testimony. If you do want to provide that document, I think our staff have stepped away for the moment, but if you want to leave it, they can make copies and make sure that we all receive a copy. Okay, and then did you get a copy from the president of the Northeast Community Council? She said Pam Rager, she sent everybody a copy.

Yeah, I believe if it was emailed, we received that email. Okay. But yeah, if you do want to leave it, I apologize, our staff has stepped away for a minute, but— Yeah, and actually, ma'am, sorry, if you, if you want to leave it closer to the computers here toward us a little bit more, I don't want it to get mixed up with the other. Oh, um, the vice chair is going to step down and our staff is coming back, so yeah, if you want to just hand it to Travis when he walks by. Um, also I will note, um, so we are 8 minutes before we continue with our public hearing, we're 8 minutes out from 7 minutes out from 11 PM.

I'm going to need to ask for a motion to extend. I know it's been a long meeting, but we have one item left. So moved. Second. And if I could ask what time?

Let's extend to 11:15. Okay, there's a motion to extend to 11:15 by Miss Baldwin-Day, second by Miss Scout, I believe. Any objection? I object. Okay, there's been an objection.

Then we will take a vote.

Shall I speak?

Past my bedtime.

Okay, and the clerk is figuring out the vote. I'll just note, um, that if that happens, we will just continue with our public hearing, and then, um, if, if we don't finish with this item, it would continue to the meeting of, uh, August 18th.

Okay, we're gonna have to do a voice vote. Go ahead, Madam Clerk.

Oh, sorry, it's— yeah, go ahead and vote. I'm sorry. Member Presverdia?

Yes. Member Johnson?

Yes.

Okay, on a vote of 11 to 1, we are extended to 11:15, so we'll turn back to our public hearing. So next person, the microphone is already on. Please state your name, what part of town. You'll have 3 minutes. My name is Yolanda Mesa.

I live in South Anchorage, and I'm here in support of this. Balthazar has been a business owner, successful business owner, entrepreneur. He's been working on, on, on, you know, supporting You know, he pays his taxes. He's a, you know, he's a reputable guy. He is a family man.

He has, you know, he's raised 3, 2, 2, 2 wonderful men. And I think alcohol definitely is more, you know, damaging to people's lives than THC and CBD. It is a useful tool in, in helping with pain. You know, I— my partner has cancer and she does use THC and CBD, and it is a— he is a law-abiding citizen. He will follow the rules.

He's been working on this project for 11 years, so he's done his research. He, he is working all the time, so definitely, you you know, missing meetings is a— it can't happen. He is a hard-working man, and I think this is a good thing for the community. He will be law-abiding and follow the rules, and I, um, I think that's it. Anything else?

Thank you. Thanks for your testimony. Next person, please come forward. Microphone's already on. State your name, you'll have 3 minutes.

Again, my name is Sarah Short, and again, I'm going to talk about accountability. We just heard a woman who's lived in East Anchorage talk about the fact that her own address was used in conjunction with this pot shop. You know what, I don't have a problem with pot shops. I really don't. They did I have some medicinal qualities for my husband when he passed away from cancer, and I have several people in my neighborhood that need the stuff.

But I will say this: we have enough drugs in Anchorage and enough drugstores and enough dealers on the street. We don't need to encourage any more. We need accountability. We need you guys to be able to watch over these business licenses, hold them accountable, and make sure that they are actually filling out their paperwork the right way, that they are listing all the reasons that they want to be licensed, where they want to be licensed. You guys have taken on Airbnbs now, you've taken on pot shops, liquor stores, but you're failing on the basics with the roads.

You're failing on the basics with accountability with your own spending. So things like this, let's draw the line somewhere. Let's bring up some common sense and let's hold everybody, including yourselves, a little bit more accountable for approving these licenses. I made a mistake when I sat through the one about the Flight Deck Bar because I live close to there. Last week I offered a gentleman who who came out of there completely sloshed.

I offered him a ride and he didn't take the ride. There's nobody watching outside these pot shops, you know, to make sure they're not in the parking lot and then driving home. Again, I support the use of medicinal marijuana. I don't have a problem with it, but I think we have enough, and I think we need to start giving back to the sober community, the family community, the honest community, the people that are integrity intact and accountable for their spending, not like Martinez.

Next person, please come forward. The microphone's already on. State your name, what part of town you're in. You have 3 minutes. Hi, my name is Abraham Hernandez.

I live in Midtown. I'm here to—.

I don't know how to— I don't know where to begin though. On back on the, uh, was that April 25th, we went to a council meeting and people voted and they agree that, that this was going to move forward. And then all of a sudden everybody left and they say that they disagree. So I don't understand why they, they, they agreed to the, to a vote And then they changed their minds. And now I'm sitting here, I sat a while back on a meeting with the opposition, and they openly admitted that they're consumers of marijuana products, but then again, they're here pushing for this business not to move forward.

I think this is more of a personal indifference than a real matter. And I think— I don't see a reason why Mr. Balthazar can move forward with this business. Since the beginning, he's been doing this within, within the law. So I don't understand how come other businesses are opening up around the same area and his particular business can move forward. Because of a person that is a user of marijuana products is opposing to it.

That's basically all I have to say.

Okay, next person please come forward. Microphone's already on. Please state your name, what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes.

My name is Alan Boggs. I'm a resident of that location. I can see both of those facilities from my house. I'm an environmental engineer. I have my doctorate, public health.

And I've seen personally friends of mine— I went to Alaska Methodist University, UAA. And I also went down the States, of course, to get my advanced degrees. But I saw kids that I grew up with die because they got marijuana. This is when the Vietnam issue was going on, and lots of drugs were in Anchorage. They were spiked with marijuana having cocaine in it.

Then when I was going to AMU, I had a friend doing LSD every weekend. Now this is controlled substance we're trying to propagate and get into the system by people buying product. We know what the basis this. I saw in grad school people getting poisoned because people wanted to sell more, make more, and so they tried to get them addicted.

Doing a controlled substance sale is much, much better than the street avenue that we have now. I've lived in the house 45 years. I went to Anchorage High School.

So I do know about Anchorage, and I would like you to understand that this is a very important item.

I know Baltazar. I helped him out when he first started, and he's a very ethical person.

And also, a lot of you don't know me. I'm a lot older, but I used to work for the muni the state, the federal government. I was a consultant. I worked for the oil companies, and I've seen a lot of bad things going on. You go up the slope, oh, we don't have drugs up— they do.

What they do is people mix it with things and make it a lot worse. Fentanyl. Think about fentanyl, what they're adding to marijuana now. Fentanyl kills you the first time. It's not something even, you know, think about.

Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Um, next person please come forward.

Next person please come forward. State your name and what part of town you're in. You'll have 3 minutes. Yes, good evening. My name is Rod Rodriguez.

I'm An Anchorage businessman in real estate. I'm here tonight to support Bart Baltasar, that I consider a pillar in our community, as being an honest man and a hard-working business owner.

Baltasar is the owner of Baltasar's Tire Shop in East Anchorage, business that he built from the ground up through hard work, sacrifice, and determination. His story is a true example of what can be achieved in Anchorage when someone is willing to work hard and invest in their community. Walt Tsaar's contributions extend far beyond his tire shop. He has developed housing in Anchorage and provides employment, living wages, and house opportunities that support more than 20 families in Anchorage.

He has repeatedly invested in his own time, money, and resources into our city and community. He is now asking the city to give him the opportunity to have a land use permit under, uh, on his property, uh, and give him a fair opportunity through the appropriate channels. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next person, please come forward.

State your name. Microphone's already on. State your name and part of town. You'll have 3 minutes. Hi, this— I'm Bart and I live in Muldoon.

I've known Baltazar since 1999 when he first started out in the tire business, and I watched him expand his tire business into Muldoon, demolish the porn shop that was there, built a tire business there, expanded the tire business, and, you know, now he's expanded into housing. He's redeveloping houses and multiplexes in Mountain View. He's built a duplex on Tudor, so he's expanding, you know, opportunities out there. You know, character-wise, I mean, known him for a long time. He's always honest, willing to help.

He's a great asset to the community for redevelopment. I recommend you support this. Um, also the Northeast Community Council had originally approved supporting his marijuana operation. He went back to them a few months later when he lost his investors, investors in Fairbanks, and they turned around, denied his application. He has followed all the rules.

He's went through planning. They have determined that his business is going to be required distance away from the park. He's met every rule that the municipality has put into law for marijuana operation. He's doing what is legal. I recommend you guys support his business.

Thank you very much.

Okay, next person please come forward. Uh, microphone's already on. State your name and part of town. 3 Minutes. Thank you.

My name is Milan. I'm—. I've been living in, in Anchorage for about 17, 18 years. I support Mr. Balthazar with all his businesses. He helped my businesses many times.

He is really ethical, fair, and super supportive, so I do approve anything that he is going on. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Next person, please come forward. Microphone's on.

State your name and part of town, 3 minutes. My name is James Mull. Yeah, I've known Baldassarre for 30-plus years and I've found him to be of the highest moral character. He's a very hardworking guy and he's been changing— doing my tires for the last 20-odd years and he's always done a perfect job and I believe he'd do a perfect job with the marijuana business too. So that's it.

Thank you for your testimony. Um, anyone else wish to testify, please come forward. Anyone at all?

Okay, um, please state your name, what part of town you're in, you have 3 minutes. Uh, thank you. Jana Weltsine, attorney for Balthazar Holdings and Mr. Balsatar is going to come up. Um, I think first, I know you guys have had a long night, and so I'll try to be brief. Um, I wanted to address the Zoom meeting.

Um, there was a lot of community engagement with this application. Uh, September 21st, 2023, uh, he attended a community council meeting. October 19th, 2023, community council meeting. November 6th, 2023, community council meeting. November 16th, 2023, community council meeting.

January 16th, 2025, and another community council meeting, and then the MOU was revised and reintroduced February 2025 and then voted on March of 2025. Um, I wanted to go a little bit into that detail, and I know I'm going to run out of time, so I'm going to try to go really fast. Uh, October 19th, 2023, the community council conducted a straw poll, and it was for Balzatar's, um, application. Uh, it was 31 in support and 13 opposed. Um, In this structure, Good Cannabis was gonna be the manager of the company, a manager of the actual store.

Good Cannabis is a Fairbanks-based operator, prolific throughout the state, really great, great brand. They were gonna come in and basically teach Balthazar kind of how to run the marijuana retail store. Um, November 16th, 2023, a memo, uh, MOU stating, outlining that Good Cannabis was going to run Balthazar's store, um, and be kind of the face of the business was introduced and it was passed 45 in favor, 9 against. Um, then Good Cannabis decided to put its kind of resources elsewhere and went into other stores in the state and decided not to move forward this project. So instead of Mr. Balzatar kind of saying, oh well, we got the MOU signed, let's just move forward anyways, he went back to the community council and said, things have changed, I'm going to be running the store, it's going to be me.

Um, and so that brings about the March 2025 community council meeting. In the meeting, um, there was brand new procedures for voting on this particular issue. People had to come in, and there was no notice to us that this was going to happen, but that's what happened. People had to come in, had their IDs checked. If they didn't have a Northeast Community Council address on their ID, they were asked to prove ownership of their property or a lease for an apartment or a house, or prove that they own a business in the, in the district.

People weren't prepared for that proof, so we saw folks get turned away. A gentleman that owned the business in the community got turned away. A woman who was was renting for a house. She didn't have her lease on hand. She got turned away.

Those in the room voted. It was 34 to 34. And then the folks online, the Zoom online, they were polled too, except they weren't, to our knowledge, verified the same way. And so 4 folks on the Zoom voted for, and the remainder against. So the ultimate vote was 51-34, and the MOU failed.

Then we, you know, started Oh, I'm a little short. Thank you for testimony. I also recognize you are the— you're the petitioner, essentially, or representing the petitioner. So I think if, if we can finish our public hearing, I think you'll have another opportunity to provide information if assembly members are seeking that. Okay.

So you want me to stop talking? Yeah, for the time being. So because we will need to close the hearing in order to move forward. Okay. And there's just— there was a late on the item table from the Cook Inlet.

And I want to address that. I just got it tonight even though it was sent in March, so I just wanted to address that too. Okay, thanks. Yeah, I think we have ways to bring you back up. So, okay, yeah, then I'll just ask, does anyone wish to provide testimony at this point?

So just, uh, to continue that, uh, and sorry, one second. Um, so, um, microphone is already on, so I'll ask you to state your name, uh, what part of town you're in, and then you'll have 3 minutes to test. Okay, my name is Baltazar and.

I own Baltazar Tires for the last 25 years. I have been a staple of the community for the last 25 years, where I provide 14, 15 full-time employment through the years for my people. So we also running a construction company where we provide housing, shelter to a lot of people. Back a little bit before I lose my thought, in about the November— March March 21st meeting. So like she said, we just, we just voted.

Nobody was checking, just my people was checking what were refusing to vote. So we are a little square where they give people, so none of my people was in there to make sure they were a fairly trade. The people in the line, they know nobody checked ID, didn't know where they are, where they came from or whatnot. But anyway So the vote was submitted, the paper is signed there, they give a little tray, they give it to the people. So they count the vote.

Listen to this, they count the vote. So they say, you know, Baltazar, you won. Okay, so the number she say. 15 Minutes later, 15 minutes later, she say, you know what, never mind, your proposition fail. She won't let me lie.

She won't make me lie either. They failed. You know what? We didn't pass it. We make a mistake.

Are you sure you're making that kind of mistake in the important meeting? It's like you get up going in the delegation and say, you know what, let me take your chair out of it. You fail because the people who are running is the one who want you to fail. I never had a fair shot in the community. I have been treated unfairly.

In the discriminatory toward my person. It's what I feel. Yeah, a lot of people— Alan, he won't let me, uh, like, he heard over here in the back, in the, in the back room, correct? Yes, thank you.

Sorry, uh, just a point of order during testimony. Okay, well, anyway, so anyway, he was saying, you know, we're hearing, you know what, let's go do something, you know, exactly specific. I don't know, but I was said to fail that night no matter what. I can understand they don't like the proposition of marijuana or cannabis business, but like the people who running or they have cannabis bliss, catalyst, they meet the condition, you know, they meet the law. So are we, so I.

So why not be treated fairly based on the same condition? So I'm here, you know, to be truly fair, apples to apples. Cannabis regulation to them, cannabis regulation to my industry, the same way they have the rules having applied to them, apply to me.

The clerk has informed that the— it is 11:15, and so essentially our meeting is done, and so this item needs to be continued until the next one. Motion to extend.

Okay, 10 minutes.

10, 15, 15 Minutes. I think this is on the line of whether we're even able to extend, unfortunately. Yeah, I'm seeing sad looks from the attorneys, so I think, um, it's hard when we hit that clock. And so, um, so I— yeah, I apologize, there's a gentleman here to testify. So just to be clear, um, we, we cannot continue the meeting, so we'll need to adjourn.

So we will need to take this item back up on August 18th. Yeah, yeah, and I apologize, but that is That's what happened. So our meeting is adjourned. I will also say— I will give general advice to members of the public. You are welcome to send written testimony if you do not wish to come back to testify in person.

Point of information, Chair, because we're essentially pausing this meeting or adjourning in the middle of a public hearing, does it continue by default at our next meeting? Yeah, so yeah, and we are still in the public hearing, so just so public is aware, um, we are not in a meeting posture right now. Um, but yeah, this, this, uh, item is continued. The public hearing is open. Okay, thank you.

Um, can you just give us a couple minutes?

For members of the public who might be confused about what's happening right now, um, uh, so there are very specific rules that govern, uh, the way that our meetings can be conducted and how late they can go. And so I believe that the attorneys are conferring right now about what happens if we hit this 11:15 threshold and a public hearing is still open. So if you'll give us just a moment, they're sorting that out right now. But there are— again, there are laws in charter that govern what can happen in this meeting and at what time that can happen. So they're trying to sort that out.

Believe me, this is not how we would prefer for this meeting to end without resolution of this item. Um, so if you'll just bear with us for a moment. Thank you. And it's going to rock it again.

How you doing?

Doing all right, thank you. Yeah, yeah.

I'm still hoping that community gets their grant funds. The rest of this year I'm going to be working on all of those.

I already— I mean, we did the primaries to each today. Actually, we're open for early voting Yeah, yes, yes, yes. So I'm just making sure all the H5 reports go in right. Yeah, yeah. It's all good.

Why didn't I come make this way? But I, I, first, I think there was someone there. Did I misread something? But there was someone who was talking to me on the edge of the aisle. Or, uh, A lot of things.

Oh, that was tight in that.

Okay, I don't know how to— I don't know how to like— Okay, I saw it.

Okay, thank you everyone. I know this has been a challenging night. I will state very clearly, one, that we are not in a meeting right now. Two, that the meeting ended at 11:15. We have been conferring about if there are options or alternatives to that, but I think the code is pretty clear and we did not extend the meeting.

So again, I am sorry that we did not finish our business tonight, but to be clear, this item is continued to the meeting of August 18th. The public hearing is open. Anyone who has not testified will be welcome to do so, and then we will At that point, close the public hearing and take up this item. Thanks.

This is— I serve on a board of a Canadian folk song group. That's so great. So I met her here and like, she's like, "Hey, I found something." Like, "Try it out." And like, I'm very curious. Yeah. So, so cool to hear.

Yeah. So let's see, that will follow. It is every 2 weeks, right? Almost every 2 weeks. It's pretty fun.

And there's another one in between. Okay. Follow them.