Kenai: 10/07/2026 City Council Meeting

Okay.

Ah.

Okay.

Okay.

I would like to call the October 7th, 2026 City Council meeting to order, if you're able.

Please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Clerk, please call the roll. Councilmember Daniel. Present. Councilmember Grimme. Yes.

Vice Mayor Askin? Here. Council Member Petty? Here.

Council Member Kucena? Here. Council Member Sonner is absent. And Council—. I'm sorry, Mayor Naxted?

Here. And Student Representative Bowling? Here. You have a quorum. Thank you, Council.

Before we get to the agenda and consent agenda approval, I would like to bring your attention to the laydown materials. We have add item G1, Resolution 2026-63, uh, Resolution Number 2026-63 Substitution, brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move that we approve the agenda as presented with the laydown materials and request unanimous consent.

I'll second. Are there any additional revisions to the agenda or the consent agenda, Council? Seeing none, would the clerk please read the consent agenda items into the record? Thank you, Mayor Nackstead. Approval of the regular meeting minutes of September 16th, 2026, and approval of the special meeting minutes of September 30th, 2026, both brought to you by the city clerk.

New business, action, approval, bills to be ratified, brought to you by the administration.

Action approval, non-objection to the acceptance and appropriation of a U.S. Department of Transportation pass-through the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Alaska Highway Safety Office grant in the amount of $2,065.17 in the— in accordance with KMC 7.25.030, brought to you by the administration. Action approval, consent for Alaska Rent-A-Car, Inc. to assume copper River Rentals LLC concession agreement with the City of Kenai, brought to you by the administration. Action approval confirming the appointment of the election precinct boards for the November 3rd, 2026 regular city election, brought to you by the city clerk. Introduction of ordinance number 3546-2026 amending public noticing requirements within Kenai Municipal Code Chapter 14.05, Planning and Zoning Commission 14.10, subdivision regulations. 14.20, Kenai Zoning Code.

21.10, Leasing and acquisitions of airport reserve lands. And 2205, disposition of city lands to modernize public notification procedures. Brought to you by the administration. Public hearing on October 21st, 2026. And introduction of ordinance number 3547-2026, accepting and appropriating the award of a U.S. Department Health and Human Service Center from Medicare and Medicaid Services Rural Health Transformation Program grant passed through the State of Alaska Department of Health in the amount of $435,770 for the purchase of emergency medical equipment.

Brought to you by the administration. Public hearing on 10/21-26. And that is your consent agenda. Thank you. Um, are there any public comments on any of the consent agenda items that were just read by the clerk?

Seeing nobody, unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Hearing no objections, the agenda and consent agenda are approved. We have no scheduled administrative reports. We have no scheduled public comments.

Now we have unscheduled public comments. Are there any members from the public who would like to speak on any item not appearing on the agenda?

Nobody saying no one. That brings us to public hearings. The first public hearing before us tonight is Resolution 2026-64, authorizing the city manager to submit an application to the U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service via the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources for the Land and Water Conservation Fund grant program for facility improvements at Old Town Park and committing upon grant award and acceptance to provide a cash match equal to the grant award up to a maximum of $250,000 to meet grant matching requirements brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin.

I move we adopt Resolution 2026-64 and request unanimous consent. I second that. Thank you. Is there anybody from the Public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-64?

Seeing no one, bring it back to Council. City Manager Eubank, you want to frame this for us? Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of Council. Uh, so part of the application process to file for a Land Water Conservation Fund grant is, um, a, a resolution like this showing support from, um, the body. It also requires acknowledgement of the grant matching requirements.

These are 50/50 grants, so, uh, whatever amount of the grant that we would— were to receive would require appropriation of the same amount as match. Uh, the maximum amount of award that, um, is $250,000. Um, I will tell you, in the city's 2027 through 2031 capital plan that we adopted last year, Old Town Park is— was projected to have an $800,000 city contribution in FY28. Um, of course, that's all subject to review again this year with the new capital plan, but, um, these are funds I think the city's been preparing for and planning for. And, um, but this is a requirement to apply for the grant.

And, um, I guess I'm happy to answer any other questions. Any further discussion, questions from the city manager? Councilmember Gray. I just wanted to point out that the Parks and Rec Commission is supportive of this application. It was discussed at their last meeting, and the Old Town Park, as, um, as Terry pointed out, is something that has been a point of discussion for many years, and, uh, the there will be focus on making sure that this park is redesigned in a way that's cost-effective but also accessible.

There's been a movement in recent years for having increased accessibility in our parks for youth who have different strengths and weaknesses, and this park would answer those needs for Kenai.

Council member, thank, thank you, Mayor. Sorry, quick—. That's okay. So, uh, quick question. I am support— in support of this.

This is really exciting to be able to find some grant funding. Is there like a timeline though we have to use the funds if we are awarded? City Manager Eubank. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Daniel. Kevin, do you know if there's a grant performance period.

Uh, through the city manager, uh, Councilman Daniel, I believe it's 3 years post-award, but that'd be outlined in a grant agreement if awarded. I think another critical— just to add to that, I think another critical piece of information for council is that if we were awarded a Land and Water Conservation Fund grant, it would encumber that land into perpetuity once we utilize the grant on, on it. So we have a number of properties in the city that we've done this. The, the soccer fields on the way out of town, those were constructed using a Land Water Conservation Fund grant. It does encumber that land, makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to use that land for an alternate purpose from that point forward.

So there are some permanent decisions to get made when you accept these grants. That's not a decision council's being asked to make here tonight, to be clear. That is something you if we are successful in a grant award upon acceptance, that's something you definitely want to be aware of. So if that helps us also. Thank you for that.

That was my follow-on. What were the other strings attached? But you've answered that. Thank you.

Steven, did you have some other—. No. Okay.

Any further discussion?

I definitely am in support of this resolution. Old Town Park, it's actually more of a playground park, and it's been there since I was a little boy. It's like the oldest park that I'm aware of. There may be some other ones, but it's also very well located. There's a lot of multifamily housing around there where children are, and I think it's important to the city.

And this has been something we've been wanting to upgrade for a very long time, so hopefully we'll be be successful in this. So if there aren't any further comments or discussion, unanimous consent was requested. Councilmember McGremy? I, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that this park is also the one that has been up for discussion as a cooperative endeavor with the city, Kenaitze, and, um, Sal Mantoff as well. That was a discussion in our meetings earlier this year with them, and they had been involved in some of the, I think, design processes in the very early phases of this project and have offered their help as well.

Thank you. Any further comments? Again, unanimous consent was requested. Are there any, any objections? Seeing none, Resolution 2026-64 is adopted.

Now we are on Item E2, Resolution 2026-65, granting street improvement exceptions to Kenai Municipal subdivision pursuant to Kenai Municipal Code 1410.09, Section— pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move that we adopt Resolution 2026-65 and request unanimous consent. I'll second. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-65.

Please come forward, state your name. Hi, my name is Zach Reiniger. I live in Kenai. My wife and I are the ones developing the property in question. We started the process over a year ago in the fall before the Pioneer Road requirements were instituted.

We even submitted for a re-plat prior to those requirements being installed, and we've laid out our entire lot not under the understanding that that would be a requirement. We find it is a real major hindrance into what we've done and what we were trying to do. The, the area in question is along the north side of our lot and the east side of our lot. It ends up being about 600 lineal feet of area that's all heavily treed, and we were wanting it to be a tree buffer as long as it could be. The improvements that the city's asking for, you know, would be— it essentially would be adding in half of a road that's kind of isolated.

There's a driveway on the one side that's not up to the standard on both sides of this thing. So you wouldn't really have a full road, um, coming in there. Um, and, and the lots that are beyond that, there's no current plan or, uh, to develop any of them. Um, also looking at the map, I don't think this actually really would improve the access to any of them. Um, further, um, um, We got a quote to do these improvements, and it was like $63,000, which we really hadn't budgeted for in any of the design or the development of our property at all.

I just really feel like this would be an injustice, or, sorry, is that what it is? It's a, not an injustice, that's not what I meant.

Sorry, I lost the word— hardship, additional hardship for us that we, you know, we weren't planning on. Had we known this all along, you know, we could have properly planned for it. But we've already spent a lot of money and then to develop the way we were and then all of a sudden, you know, this was changed in the code right in the middle of our process and feel it would really impact us negatively and the surrounding area.

Um, but that's kind of all I got. All right, thank you. Thank you, Zach. If you want to hold on a second, perhaps council might have some, some questions of you. Sure.

Councilmember Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxted. You mentioned something when you first started this process, that there is a change in the code. So before, that wasn't an indoor requirement, is that what you're saying, that you didn't have to put this road in Correct. What we're trying to do actually is, is we're asking for a right-of-way vacation for Glacier Street, which is on the west side of our property.

Excuse me. We own the properties to either side of that and we're trying to make it into one large lot. We submitted for a replot before this rule went into effect. And then, and actually, the city approved it at that point. And then it was kicked to the borough who had to then approve it as well.

They had a minor comment, and then another landowner to the south of us wanted to also vacate his portion of Glacier Street. And so we went through a bunch of extra work to get it replatted and resurveyed and then resubmitted. And when that happened, this Pioneer Road addition was added on there. And we and our surveyor had no idea that this was even a thing or a possibility, and it just showed up on requirements once the replat was approved. I don't know, it was kind of out of nowhere for us.

Does that help answer your question? Thanks, Dan. Yes, it does. Thank you.

Any further questions? I guess I have a couple. Just for clarity, I'm looking at the satellite imagery. Misty Haven, if that was upgraded Would it— it's not even— it wouldn't serve— wouldn't be serving your properties correctly, correct? Correct.

Yeah, the way we put it, we put our driveway in off of Rainbow, and so we are not linked to Misty Haven at all currently, the way we have our house set up. Okay, so now looking at Rainbow, I was wondering what kind of condition that road is for. It's kind of being used as a driveway, but is it—. Is it—. Does it Is it solid in the springtime?

What's the—. It's pretty poor conditions. I would say, yeah, I think the driveway that's there is exactly the reason this is being added into the code, is so that people don't put in driveways to that standard, and that there's something usable when people want to keep adding on. And that definitely doesn't meet the standards. You go to a really low-quality driveway into a very high-quality one.

Which is what we'd end up being. And then so yeah, you're driving down a pretty crappy part of road that'll be muddy in the spring and yeah, no ditches, no nothing for drainage. It's not up to any standard. And it appears that the Rainbow Drive is going to already, partially developed at least with— it looks like a couple of structures on there. Um, yeah, uh, so Rainbow Drive, um, we own the first, uh, lot, the 11605 Rainbow Drive.

We currently own that one. And then the Glacier Street is just to the east of that between Misty Haven and Glacier. Um, so yeah, both of those are, are our properties that we're trying to combine. Really, if we were to develop Rainbow all the way across there, it would dead end into the backside of somebody's lot that's on the Bighorn subdivision. So it really wouldn't access anybody currently back there, help them in any way.

I'm guessing they'd rather not have better access back there to their backside of their lots, but just for traffic, just to ease traffic or when I'm back there. But thank you for the information. Yeah.

Any further questions for the applicant? Thank you very much for your input. Thank you.

Um, back to council. Any further questions? City Manager Eubank, we have our planner here too. Is there anything that you have that you might want to add to this discussion? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council.

I'm, I'll take a stab at some of this, and I'll ask Kevin to give a bit of a staff report as well.

Um, I'm not gonna— let's see, how do I say this? I, I believe Ms. Reniger's perception of this is accurate. I will tell you that nothing has changed in code, um, that the, the provision in code that requires development of the right-of-ways when the right-of-ways are dedicated has not changed. What we did implement when we implemented the new design standards for roads was the concept of a pioneer road. I will also tell you, I think for many years the city has, um, not enforced or overlooked the provision of requiring construction of the right-of-way when the dedication took place.

So from your perspective, I think it feels brand new, but it really has been in code all along. I think council can also look around town and can see how those decisions have, in my opinion, significantly hampered the development of some parcels. And, you know, when you look— if you look on page— let's see, I'm sorry, I'll find it here in the packet. If you look on page Yeah, I want the plat itself. I'm not sure if that's gonna— yeah, page 22 of the packet here.

Here is the plat that, that's been filed. Um, the vacation of right-of-way is taking place. That's the hash mark that runs down through here. The, the little boundary on the northern edge of Lot 50 155A and on the eastern edge of it, those are— that is what is being newly dedicated. That right-of-way has always existed.

It was part of the patents when that land was patented. They've just never been dedicated as right-of-way. They actually still existed. So this plat is just dedicating that information at this point.

I think the city's problem is, is there are properties to the north of this large tracts of land that are undeveloped, have no road access at this point. And I don't believe likely to have road access into the future unless we find an incremental way to start developing and, and having roads built. Um, the Pioneer Road was, was thought to be that incremental step where property owners don't have to bear the full cost of constructing a road to standard to access their property. They can provide, you know, limited construction effectively of half a road, and then as somebody develops either on the east side of this or to the north, they would be required to construct the secondary half of the road, and then we have a complete road. Providing access.

So I think this is a very tough place. I do sympathize with property owner here. I've just— we're trying to comply with what is in Kenai Code. We're also trying to utilize the new standard of road or the Pioneer Road concept to start getting incremental development here in town. A lot of what you're seeing is you're seeing large tracts of land like this in town purchased, I think, below market value because they don't have access.

If they had legal access and constructed roads, the cost of that property would be significantly more than what it's being purchased for. So, um, I, I agree this is a difficult situation. Um, Kevin, do you want to just give a brief staff report too for, for council?

Through the city manager. There we go. Um, just brief history at the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 23rd, the commission did consider the request from the applicant as long as well as the larger preliminary plat. Um, the Planning and Zoning Commission did find that the cost of developing Pioneer Road as defined would constitute a real difficulty and substantial hardship. Um, and their findings were based on testimony from the property owner.

Um, as he stated, it was going to be $60,000 or more. Uh, for that construction. Um, we wanted to, um, and through this process, we had also— the staff had also talked to the property owner and informed him that there are mechanisms in code that he could request the exception, which is why we're here tonight with this resolution.

Um, the—. That the plat note that would be required would state it would be subject to assessment for an improvement that's required per KMC 1410.080 G1, when installed at a future time. Um, but that does not— per the way it's worded, um, does not set a cap. So if it's $60,000 this year, we don't know what it will be in 20 years, potentially, if that's when this assessment hits. So, um, in a way, it's a roll of the dice.

But, um, the reason we did not recommend approval of the exception, um, Um, from the administration's standpoint, um, is exactly like City Manager Eubank stated, that these lots to the north are all 2.5-acre government— unsubdivided government lots. They all have the federal patent restrictions that as those get subdivided, that right-of-way will incrementally get, um, pushed further to the north. Um, I don't think there's much to the east from where this is at. Um, right now the only other way to access some of these parcels would be to come going south along Misty Haven from, uh, Aliak, but a lot of the stuff in the middle, nothing has been dedicated in any way, shape, or form. So for us to unlock a lot of land, and we're talking several, about 20, 25 acres in there of pretty prime real estate, um, we can't get there if we don't get the incremental right-of-way added to it so that If let's say in this case, if Rainbow gets developed, that lot to the north, now they would have to— when they subdivide, they put the other half Rainbow and another chunk of Misty Haven going to the north.

So it would eventually get us where we want to go. Um, I will, I will state that, um, looking back through the records, that a lot of, a lot of times that the subdivision regulation, um, had not been— had either been overlooked or had not been enforced. Um, and I will even say that a couple times on my watch, it has also not, you know, not been enforced. So, um, this is, this is our way of, you know, making sure, like, we're dotting our i's, crossing our t's, but in the best interest of the city, we, we think that getting access to these lots will help us develop as a city going forward.

Thank you. Um, exactly the comment that this was unjust and then corrected himself. Um, and I'm just looking at the, the parcel viewer, the borough parcel viewer where you can actually see the, um, a relatively recent image of that space. And so I do think to a certain degree, It seems at least unfair to burden this one single property owner with upholding our code, um, in the tune of $60,000, um, when the, the roads— let's generously call these driveways roads— that will lead to this new road will be significantly I guess, less well-built and may not even connect. I mean, I'm just looking at Misty Haven Lane.

The driveway there may not even connect to the new road that Zach would have to build, I guess, is how I would put that.

Um, I say that while understanding, uh, as a rule guy myself, I'm a big fan of rules and having some consistency in how we apply things. And so When I look at solutions that both meet the city's needs and provide a fair and reasonable cost of development on this undeveloped property, I look at the approximate length of the neighboring, um, I think it's Highbush as it comes south off of Aliak Drive. It's about 1,300 feet according to the computer, which, you know, it's not a real survey, but Um, if someone were to try to develop those same lots north of this property, you would have to put in a 1,300-foot road either way, either off of Lawton or Alyak, one of which would help access the lots that are closer to the school. Uh, so I guess east of Misty Haven, which the work that this will do will, will not do anything really in that, in that goal. And so I think, well, I really support the plan and the work that we've done in having consistent development rules and plans.

I don't know that I feel like this is the one to, um, the hill to die on for it. And I think the Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation we typically take their recommendation as they are the more seasoned experts on this thing. And so I think given those reasons, I would, you know, short of new information, I would tend to think an exception would be reasonable here.

Just before we go on, I just wanted to make sure if there was anybody else from the general public that wanted to speak. I kind of moved right into discussion. So is there anyone else? Okay, okay. Councilmember Gremmie, go ahead.

I, I like rules too, and I like when things are laid out clearly, but I think we may have done ourselves a disservice, um, in not adhering to or enforcing our own rules, um, and expectations up until this this point, and I think maybe we created a precedence that now we are burdened with meeting. I know that there has to be a line in the sand someplace there, and, um, but I think that line needs to be defined ahead of time. I don't think it should be a surprise. I don't think that homeowners and property owners should not know what to expect or be told one thing believe one thing's occurring and then be told something else. Um, and as our planner indicated, you know, some— this has happened for a number of years to include recently, even since, you know, his tenure with the city.

I think that a precedence has been created, and I think that before we can move a different direction in how we're going to enforce that We need to provide notice of our newly defined expectation, and I don't think we did that adequately in, in this instance. Um, and I, I, I also struggle with moving the goalposts because I think that that will prohibit and disincentivize people from wanting to build homes or multifamily units or businesses, develop property within the city if they don't know what to expect. If they believe it's one thing and then they start investing and putting their money on the line, and then they're faced with some— a different reality.

Um, and I do think that we need to give credence to our commissions. That's why we have them. Um, and what they have suggested, I think, matters. I will say that I trust the judgment of our staff as well, though. So That makes this a bit of a difficult position, but in this instance, the precedence that has been previously set with no newly defined expectation is what is problematic for me in this instance.

City Manager Eubank, if you could— what I understand you to say is that there isn't any new standard as far as, as far as a subdivision goes. It's simply that you can build a half road now, which is our new road standard, rather than the whole, the whole width, correct? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. That's correct. Code did not change.

The provision that required development by the subdividers of the dedicated right-of-way has been in code. That is not new. I, you know, I— we are telling you here today that it has not always been enforced by the city. Matter of fact, I I, I can't— I think you're absolutely right, and, um, it hasn't been enforced in many, many cases. What was added in the new design standard was the concept of a Pioneer Road, and that was our intent of trying to provide any, like I said, some incremental steps, um, that we can start to get roads developed and built in the city that will start unlocking land.

Is this the right one? I think that's a valid conversation for council to have. I, I actually am, you know, I'm very sympathetic with, you know, the applicant here, but we're trying to, you know, pick that point in time, like you said, or a new line in the sand where we have to start operating in a manner to start getting some things developed here in town. So I think, yeah, nothing in code— that provision of code has not changed. It has been there.

It wasn't amended. But the road construction requirements has been reduced to a pioneer road or a half width from what was—. Correct. What was previously in code was, um, I don't think very clear. Um, Lee, you want to help me here?

Yeah, essentially our street design standards are extremely minimal for what was in code before, and we removed that section. It was requiring like a 30-foot wide road be developed anytime we're developing a road. So we, we, by producing the street design standards, we developed options for that depending on the level of traffic, um, for most roads. But we also introduced this Pioneer Road option as a way for somebody to build a road through existing right-of-way, also to connect to some lot that's currently— you can't really get to. So essentially it would act like a long driveway that we wouldn't maintain for a period of time until it's developed into a full road, but that was part of the intent where that was developed as well.

Oh yeah, ladies first. I'm, I'm clear on the code part. I don't think that was an issue, but I, I would like clarification. Am I correct in understanding that Mr. and Mrs. Reininger's application process had begun before this Pioneer Road was, was clarified or developed in policy? Because it sounded like, if I understood correctly, you submitted your application, this— it went through the city, then it went to the borough, the borough had a small modification, then it came back, then you added another party, and then it went back.

Is—. Do I have the timeline correct? And then somewhere in between the back and forth, the Pioneer Road piece came into play. Is that accurate? To do manager Eubank.

Yeah, I believe that probably is accurate. Absolutely. Then I would question— I would question why he needs an exception at all if he began this process prior to this expectation being in place. Councilmember Grammy, I think if, if we didn't have the code change, he'd need to have to build a 30-foot-wide road. Is that correct, City Manager Eubank?

And that's my understanding. That is what code required before the adoption of the new design standard. But we didn't require it the first time that the city reviewed his plan. Is that correct?

If this started over a year ago, I'm confident that that was not discussed at the time of their initial application.

Okay, then, then, then I think I'm going to go back to what I said at the beginning of my last statement, then I, I think the line in the sand was drawn for us already when this wasn't enforced the first time it was reviewed. And the line in the sand when we choose to enforce this maybe needs to be the next time, because our ability, in my opinion, to enforce this— that ship sailed when it didn't get enforced the first time it was reviewed.

A bit of a shift of gears here.

Lee had mentioned something that made me remember a comment that maybe Director Buechner could clarify. If this Pioneer Road is put in, regardless of whether it fully connects, we'll build a Pioneer Road to— it would be built to a Pioneer Road spec. But will remain unmaintained by the city afterward. Is that correct?

Through the mayor, Councilmember Kucena, yes, Pioneer Roads are not maintained by the city. It's only when it becomes full width and built to either a specification for like a gravel road or a paved road and we accept it, at that point we would maintain it. Okay.

I feel even worse about it then. Yeah, if we're going to make them spend $60,000 for a road we won't maintain until we do a real one. But yeah, thank you.

Any further comments? Council Member Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxted. Yeah, I tend to agree with Council Member Cassina and Council Member Grimme. Um, this isn't the hill to die on tonight.

I do think we need to start getting ahead of these standards and making making sure that we, you know, as applications come forth, we inform people, hey, this needs to happen. And I don't think we did a good job doing that for this applicant. And that we just take it as a takeaway for a process improvement. I don't want to—. I don't feel like this body should penalize them because of this quote-unquote surprise.

So I would be in favor of the exemption tonight for this specific scenario.

Anything else? I have one follow-up. Sorry, I just remembered, um, and there's a piece in here that I want to clarify, uh, that we, as a part of this, um, there'd be a plat note that could assess the any lots there for a future road. Is that my understanding? So there's still a mechanism in the future?

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Daniels. So, a requirement of approving the exception— approval of the exception is the addition of a plat note that indicates that if that portion of right-of-way is developed in the future by the city, that the applicant would be assessed the cost at that time for those improvements. That Platno will be— I believe it, you know, depending on— I think this is the applicant's situation to deal with, but it could impact property value in the future, ability to transact, because I mean, that is an open-ended— I think what the planner said, that's an open-ended liability of the property should it ever get built. So, but yes, that plat note would be required if the exception is granted. That's another code section that's requiring that.

Would you mind explaining that a bit more about what that— what— how that could impact the property owner?

And I could be speculating a little bit. I think I'm not an expert in this, but if I'm looking to purchase a piece of property, I do my proper due diligence and my title agency or I look at the plat, and I see a plat note there for an undeveloped right-of-way, and it says that this property will be assessed— not, not maybe assessed, it says it will be assessed if improved by the city. That means that it's not a choice. It's not like I have to vote or have to sign a petition for an improvement district. It means the property is going to be assessed the cost of that.

Um, at that time, it could be filed as a lien if unpaid, which then could encumber the property. And, you know, I can't tell you what that cost is going to be 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 5 years from now. I can tell you right now, the applicant's telling us it's $63,000, but that is— I think that was put in code to protect the city that it and reinforce the fact that it is the— these property owners' responsibility, or, you know, the value of the improvements should be the, um, encumbered by the— or, you know, borne by the property. I appreciate that. That does make it way more clear.

Um, would that then apply to the adjacent properties along this, this area? There's— I mean, I just am looking at just the Misty Haven there's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 right along that property. Would they also have a lien applied to their properties for, for not developing this road? When—.

No, it's only going to apply to what is being dedicated in this at this time. I mean, I think that's all we can apply to. It's going to be applied to this plat and the right-of-way that's being dedicated at this point in time.

So, is the short version they pay $60,000 now, or they might pay $60,000 later? But either way, the expectation is these property owners are going to be on the hook for $60,000. I mean, or it might be $160,000 when those get developed. I believe that's the intent of code.

Councilmember Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxal. More questions, sorry. I guess I'm a little confused here because we— if this is granted, the road isn't being built at this time, but only this property owner. And if, say, if the road's way down, somebody bought a piece of property way further down, how does that work?

I mean, I don't understand how they can only assess that one owner and not the other ones along the same stretch. I guess that's confusing to me. To imagine you bank—. Sure, Mr. Bloom.

So the only reason this is being put on this plat is because the applicant is asking for a subdivision. So if any future property down there was just purchased, there wouldn't be a subdivision, so the city wouldn't have any ability to put a plat note or lien the property. However, if a future um, property down there did subdivide, they would be subject to the same if they didn't— weren't required to build the road. Otherwise, if the city was to build the road, like do a street improvement district, all the properties would have to pay their share. But in this, the other properties that weren't part of a subdivision would be able to elect whether or not they wanted to vote in favor of it.

Whereas this property is essentially losing its vote, um, by doing the subdivision now and getting the variance.

Councilmember Grammy, I would like to ask a follow-up question to Mr. Reininger. Were you aware of this at the time we submitted the replat for replat? No. Or when you asked for the ex—.

The exception, were you aware of That part got put in by the Planning and Zoning Committee. We were just asking you to get rid of all of it. I would, yeah, point out to you all those ones along Misty Haven, they already— they're already developed and they would never be required to have the same commitment. So it is kind of a double standard along at least the Misty Haven portion of it, in my opinion. So knowing that this additional language that was added by Planning and Zoning Commission and you're here today asking for the exception exception, knowing that was added, is it a fair assumption on our part that you are aware of that, that's a risk that you are comfortable with accepting in exchange for the exception potentially being granted?

I'd rather not, but yes. And then I also have questions as far as like the assessment. I mean, right now the standard is a pioneer road. If they're going to put a full street in there, am I required to pay the assessed price based on the city, uh, what the city wants for the road that they want to put in? This isn't a point where you get to ask.

Okay, sorry, I just, I just think that there's, there's a lot of ambiguity in that. You're asked a couple of questions from, from a council member, but it's just the way— Sorry, sir, but yeah, so it doesn't turn into a back and forth. And, and, and you know, the plan—. Understood.

Thank you.

Well, I guess I'd like an answer to his question then. Well, you have a question for somebody up here? Whomever is in a position to answer his question about whether it would be a Pioneer Road or a— I mean, potentially four-lane highway or whatever is determined by the city at that point in time. What would financially the property owner be responsible for? Mr. Bloom, uh, our intent is that he would be responsible for Pioneer Road.

There would be other properties elsewhere that would also be participating. It wouldn't be just his property that was building the road, it would be other properties as well, and he would be responsible for the Pioneer Road portion of it, which is essentially half of a right-of-way. Okay, thank you. Mr. Bloom, if I could ask how you become responsible for that, it would be the same as a, uh, LID or something where it would be attached to the taxes to the property itself. It could be a future owner for that, but that would be over a period of time, correct?

And assessed annually, correct? There's options, but generally they're a 10-year repayment plan, but it depends on the formation of the district and the rules in place at the time. But generally, I think it's a 10-year process. It's the way we've done them in the past. Effectively, it's not like a lien, but it's a— it's something attached like that.

It becomes a lien on the property by virtue of state statute once the district is formed if the payments aren't made.

Markus, any? Two more just dumb questions for the group, because I don't know really anything about this.

One, if he were to not subdivide this property, which is, I think, counterintuitive, because he is undividing it by smushing them together. If he were to not subdivide, would this requirement be made? Mr. Blue? No, if he were not to subdivide it and was simply to vacate the right-of-way, this would not be a requirement.

So next question is, if he is in the process of subdividing, could he stop that process to where he's not required? Yes, he can withdraw his application at any time prior to final plat.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The only point of clarification I want to make is Planning and Zoning did not apply this concept of a plat note. What is dictating the need for a plat note is KMC 1410-080, um, G-1, and the language and code is very specific. When installed at a future time by the city, um, for the installation of Rainbow Drive and Misty Lane. So, um, let's see, at a plat note, Lot 155A will be subject to assessment for any improvements required by Kenai Municipal Code 1410.080 when installed at a future time by the city, um, for the installation of Rainbow Drive and Misty Lane.

So, um, I, I agree with the city attorney. Our intent is that he would be responsible for those Pioneer roads. I don't know how that's going to be interpreted if that standard changes in the future, but you know, it, it definitely was not something that it was imposed by P&Z. It's required by code if the exception is granted. Mr. Blue?

Sorry, Mayor Nexet. I just want to let council know too that in order If council was— council doesn't have the authority to waive code except for by ordinance, so we would— you can't waive that provision of code at this meeting.

Any further discussion?

I want to say, if there's no further discussion on it, uh I am conflicted a little bit. I am a rule follower, and the rules would have you build half a right-of-way.

It doesn't seem reasonable to be building all half of Misty Haven all the way down. But what the applicant is doing is it's a subdivision, and it's a subdivision even when you're unsubdividing. And he's creating fewer lots. If he was creating more lots, I don't know that we'd be having this discussion because you're creating more lots, you're creating more traffic and all of that, and the road is necessary. Now, going from north, which I'm looking at, it's upside down, there's two big lots and they're gonna be one big lot.

And there's already, something built there that's providing access. The other 3 coming off Lawton become one lot and it has access off of Lawton. But since the lots are being subdivided, in this case really kind of unsubdivided and combined, I think it's a little bit different animal and gives me reason to consider the exception, you know, for the exception. And so I would tend to agree with accepting the exception in this particular case. And furthermore, you know, what happened a year ago, 2 years ago, 10 years ago, anybody discussion— any discussion on subdividing or whatever, something wasn't mentioned or understood, you know, code is code.

We really need to adhere to it, and just because it wasn't understood or something like that doesn't, doesn't cut it. But I think in this case, providing an exception seems reasonable. Mr. Bloom. Sorry, thank you, Mayor Naxtadim, members of council. And I, I do think that, that What Mayor Naxstad just said is an important point, and when we waive provisions of code like we're being asked to do here, I think it's incumbent on council to find special reasons to do so.

Otherwise, when do we ever stop waiving them? And I think that's right that in this particular instance, I think our code was written when you take a 10-acre parcel and you subdivide it and make 10-acre— 10 1-acre lots, and you have to build roads to access those lots. In this case, it is unique in that it's a subdivision, but it is combining two lots into one rather than creating more lots and more traffic, uh, more, more burden on the city. So I think that the fact that this is a subdivision that's taking two lots and making it one lot is a good reason to approve this exception. Whereas it might not apply going forward when somebody's going to do a subdivision that takes one larger tract of land and makes it into smaller lots.

Thank you, Mr. Bloom. Any further discussion? Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, Resolution 2026-65 Is adopted.

Next we have item E3, Resolution 2026-66, authorizing a contract award, the citywide paving design project, brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Askin. I move we adopt Resolution 2026-66 and request unanimous consent. I'll second this one.

Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-66?

Seeing no one, um, bring it back to council. Council discussion.

City Manager, you bank. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Uh, so Public Works did a, uh, request for proposal for design of some upcoming road improvement projects. First project will be a repave of the remaining portion of Willow Street.

The remainder of Willow Street was repaved with a project a couple years ago. This will do that— the portion from just about the, the four-way stop here to the Spur Highway a little bit further down that way. Second project is Airport Way from Spur Highway there to Willow Street. Those projects currently are planned for construction hopefully next season.

Another couple of projects, Loughton Drive, Tinker Lane, and Swire Road are— I'm sorry, yeah, Loughton Drive, Tinker Lane, and Swire Road are going to be designed. I believe those are slated for construction in likely 2028. But this, this contract, we had 4 respondents, very close actually, less than 1 point between the top 2.

This will award a contract of $105,653 for design of those roads to Nelson Engineering. And if you need more specific information, I'll defer to Mr. Fry in the back.

Any further discussion? Let's—. Member Daniel. Thank you, Mayor Naxta. This might be for Mr. Fry.

Um, in front of the middle school, um, maybe Mr. Putnam too, actually. Didn't we apply for a Safe Streets for All grant and hopefully improving the sidewalks and that whole light up, lighting that area up a little bit better, making it a little safer for students? Is that part of this project, or am I misunderstanding this? Through the mayor, Councilmember Daniel, yes, we did apply for the Lawton and Tinker section of that larger project. Does not include Squires, um, has not been awarded yet.

We anticipate, if last year was any indication, it should be awarded in sometime between mid-October to early December is when we're anticipating hearing about that award. That would be an add-on to this project, not— it wouldn't be a detriment if we didn't get it. And I'll just add on that, uh, a couple of the roadways we did look— we did, um, we are having the consultant design potentially redoing the sidewalk on those sections of road. One of those is Willow Street, if we want to redo that with asphalt or with concrete. So we're going to have that evaluated, and that'll be something that's potentially brought to council to determine if we want to spend the additional funding on that or not.

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

Seeing none, Resolution 2026-66 is adopted. So that brings us to unfinished business, postponed item under Item G. Resolution number 2026-63, authorizing a contract award for the Kenai Bluff Erosion Stabilization Mission Street Erosion Project Control Project, brought to us by administration. It's a clerk's note here: at the September 30th, 2026 special meeting, this item was postponed to October 7th, 2026. The motion to adopt Resolution 2026-63 is on the floor. From that meeting.

Is there any— anybody that will go first? Back to the public here. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak to Resolution 2026-63 or Resolution 2026-63 Substitute? Seeing no one, bring back to council looking for an amendment. To substitute.

Vice Mayor Askin. I move that we substitute, amend Resolution 2026-63 to include the substitute that we got in our laydown, request unanimous consent. I'll second that. Okay, any further discussion? And this consent was requested.

Are there any objections? Seeing none, we have Resolution 2026-63 as, as amended. Um, is there any further discussion? Councilmember Daniel, I think you had your light on.

Yes, I mean, I did earlier for something else, but I do want to ask a question anyways on this, um, for city staff. This, uh, resolution here, this is for all the, uh, drainage issue. I guess maybe a quick review, and this is for like the drainage and the, um part of the bluff erosion project. I guess my confusion here is this all happened early in the spring, but this is just now coming to us. Was there work done in between, or did I miss something?

I guess I'm confused on our timing. Why, why this is coming now? City Manager Eubank, you want to go ahead and give us a report? Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. So Councilmember Daniel, you are correct.

This spring, uh, what we experienced during spring runoff was a significant erosion event on what was used to be Mission Avenue. That erosion was caused by a significant amount of runoff from streets that congregated in the area of Mission Avenue, started to overflow the bluff there, and that additional water created a significant erosion event. Where we are now is when that process started, we actually brought to council, I believe it was done by change order, but we change ordered contract of HDR Engineering, which was the design team for the bluff erosion project. And they developed a proposed, I don't think it's a permanent fix. I think it's a mitigation measure That mitigation measure includes relocation of a water service that was exposed when that erosion event happened.

I don't know if it's fully exposed, but it's certainly on the front side, on the bluff side now. It is not covered by more than a foot or two of soil. It will absolutely freeze this winter during cold weather. Weather. If that were to freeze this winter and rupture, we would have another significant erosion event.

I mean, water is not our friend there. So part of that design is to relocate that. Second part of the design is to create some mitigation measures to keep runoff from migrating to that path. It's going to be putting some sandbags at the end of Main Street, there's right there in front of the, of the church where our right-of-way goes right up to the bluff. We're going to be putting some additional sandbags in there to stop water from congregating down Mission Avenue.

It will also be to install some vegetative mat, I believe, and do some erosion control in where the erosion took place last spring. So what have we been doing? We've been waiting on that design from the engineers telling us what the best path forward is. We received that design, we put it immediately out to bid, we received no bids. We had a special meeting last week to hopefully to award.

We had no— we had no respondents. With no respondents, we again postponed it here to tonight, Mr. Frye, which is allowed in code because we had no Respondents to the bid reached out to a local contractor, met on site, went through the project. They submitted a quote of the $98,000. And because of the time sensitivity to this, needing to get that relocated before winter flies here and get some of these other mitigation measures in place, we're recommending approval to contract with Peninsula Construction to do this work. Did I miss anything, Lee?

Um, no, I think that's about it. Um, we're not doing exactly the project that was bid out. Um, we were doing what the contractor felt comfortable and what they're able to do. Um, so we might do a little bit different erosion mitigation. Um, he's kind of agreeing to try to do some of the mitigation while he's there on site.

The primary work that he's planning on doing is the movement of the water service, and he said he'd take a crack at trying to do some of the erosion work while he's there and has the equipment on site. So we're gonna try and do what we can to stabilize that and see if we can get some vegetation growing on it while he's here. The contract's going to be time and expense, so we're gonna try and just work through and see what we can do before winter gets too bad.

Any further discussion? I want to say that I believe that this is a priority for the city. It happened under our watch. Erosion is going to happen there, but this was a different sort of event. And so the city is doing the right thing in taking care of the issue.

I wanted to thank Mr. Frye too, because I understand that he went back to the Corps and Cedar Bluff, wherever, to make sure that the funds could be used that we have available for the bluff erosion project, and we have a balance in there, could be used for this. So essentially, this isn't costing— it's not coming out of our budget per se. So that's a plus, because I would have been supportive of this if we had to, because I think it was the right thing to do. But I think it's appropriate for the project to be paying for it as well. But anyway, that happened, and all that took some time.

So here we are. So one quick question, when do we expect the work to be completed this fall?

We're going to get a contract going with him as soon as we can. So we'll issue a notice of award to him tomorrow. And as soon as we can get all the paperwork going, I think he was talking, trying to move equipment on there next week.

Perfect. Any further discussion? Anonymous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, um, Resolution 2026-63 is adopted.

So that brings us down to a new business item, H7, action approval authorizing a file motion— file a motion to intervene a FERC project number P15423-000, Deep Green Cook Inlet SPV LLC, brought to us by administration. Pleasure of council. Vice Mayor Raskin, I move that we authorize to file a motion to intervene on the FERC project PE15423-000 and request unanimous consent. I would second that. Thank you.

Um, is there anybody, any members of the public that would like to speak to this action approval? Seeing no one, council discussion?

Just appreciate, uh staff putting this letter together and making sure that we at least try to have as much information as we can about this project. So thanks for doing that.

Absolutely. Thank you for the discussion. I, I think that a lot of work went into that letter, and I read it carefully, and it was very thorough and complete and well done. It didn't put a position that the city has in it either, but it just puts us in a position so we can comment. So that's much appreciated.

So there aren't any, any further discussion. Unanimous consent was requested. Are there any objections? Seeing none, the action approval item regarding the FERC is, is approved. So that brings us down to item I, Commissioner Reports.

Council on Aging, Council Member Askin. Thank you, Mayor Nagstad. Um, no meeting. The next meeting is tomorrow at 3 o'clock.

Thank you. Airport Commission, Council Member Sonnart is not here. Do you have that for her? Their next meeting is tomorrow at 6 o'clock. Thank you.

Council Member, uh, Gremmie, Parks and Rec. Parks and Rec met on October 1st, and we discussed authorizing participation in soliciting the land and water conservation grant that council discussed earlier this evening, recommended fiscal year 2028 capital improvement plan priorities, and discussed a couple of upcoming events. October 10th Pumpkin Festival that the rec center has switched winter hours. That staff helped with Industry Appreciation Day and it was— they were— they love doing that event every year. Also talked about the cleanup from the beach after dipnet fishery using a magnet rake, which I think bears noting that that was developed by a KCHS student through their Caring for the Kenai project in like I think it was 2021, and then was adopted by the city.

That was Riley Graves that did that. And we— I shared the letter of appreciation from Eddie Castillo, who is the KCHS baseball coach, who had a lot of great things to say about Mr. Best and the Parks and Rec team. And the next meeting is November 5th. Thank you. Planning and Zoning Commission, Council Member Daniel.

Thank you, Mayor Naxted. A couple things: P&Z met on the 23rd, I believe it was, had a work session on conditional use permits for the meeting, which took the whole hour, and a lot of good discussion there with more to come. And so thank you for working on that with staff. That's great. And then the meeting was right afterwards, and in that meeting there's a couple things.

Let me get my notes here. So, um, the big item of the night was what we discussed tonight, the, uh, Mica subdivision exemption replat deal, which we had a thorough rundown. They also had a PZ-202631, combined two lots on Highbush. That one passed, no big deal. And then there's a variance permit for a— somebody wanted to put a shop in that was just a little too tall, just with how it was shaped on the lot.

It was just two stories, and that had to get a variance permit because they had to build on a 10-foot setback. And because the shop height was too tall, they had to get the permit, and that passed as well. And then PZ 2026-29 was—. Looks—. This was denied, I believe, of a non-commercial RV park and campground on at 1518 Tundra Rose Lane.

The short version is it just— they went and looked at it and it looked— they recommended not to pass it and it was not passed. Just looked like it was— might be a potential for commercial in the future was the consensus. And so that was, that was that. Uh, on the other thing on there that was of note was a home occupation permit. I didn't know he had these for home-based food business specializing in baked goods.

So we'll see where that goes. Uh, and they will be meeting next Wednesday. And that's—. Thank you. Beautification Commission, Councilmember Petty.

He's still with us.

Councilmember Petty, I think you're muted. Star 6 to unmute.

Thank you. This is, uh, Councilmember Petty. I have no report, and I don't have the calendar in front of me to let y'all know when the next meeting is. Thank you.

Thank you very much. We'll figure that one out. Okay, now we have a report of the mayor. I have a couple of items. The first one, the city of Kenai was proud to host the State of Alaska Firefighters Conference.

It's an annual event. Council— not council— Chief Tig was the chief organizer of it. This whole thing came together. It's not like organizing a party, you know, a month before. It's been going on for virtually a year.

I attended it and gave some opening comments, but the room was full of fire chiefs and other fire personnel from all around the state. And they were staying here in our city.

Getting training on the latest equipment and procedures and whatnot. There were vendors here for a day down at the ops center where they could go through and look at that equipment and probably had some other hands-on stuff. So I think it lasted 3 days, correct, Chief? The primary thing. Mr. Mayor, it was 5 days, Monday through Friday.

I only got involved on Wednesday, but anyway, it was quite the doo-doo. And thank you very much for putting that together. It was a huge lift.

Same day, that was last Wednesday, went to, I was invited to, it wasn't really a hangar party at the airport, but it was a get-together of local pilots and users of the airport and the person of Honner was our new airport manager. And so a lot of the users and leaseholders had an opportunity to meet him and to discuss issues with them. And, and he spoke very well and all that, and I thought that went very well. So happy to do that. Uh, next item that I like to just thank, uh, City Manager Eubank and staff for really the completion of Wildwood Drive.

It's been a project that's been on our list. It was, I think, about a million-dollar project, and it's really a state road that we maintain. It goes to a state facility, and we held our ground on that, and City Manager Eubank was able to talk the state into funding that and paying for it through another project. So I did drive it. It hadn't been painted yet.

Perhaps it is now, but Mr. Eubank, you'll probably have more of that in your report. But very, very happy to see that, that completed. And, uh, and the other thing, and I know Mr. Eubank will go on with more detail on this, is the runway is now open. That $20 million project that we've been waiting for was opened and is in full use, and users are very Very happy with that. So that is all I, all I have.

So that brings us to item K, administrative reports. City Manager Eubank. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. A few things to report on the staffing and recruitment front. City's pleased to welcome Caitlin Bishop.

She's a new administrative assistant too in the planning department. Melanie Lee is a new Parks and Recreation attendant, and Aiden Day was hired as a janitor. The city also hired 9 temporary equipment operators for the airport's winter season operations. We're currently recruiting for a police officer and recreation center attendants.

Um, I also want to report that the The state recreation— Alaska Recreation and Parks Association conference was held here in Kenai. It was hosted by our own Parks and Rec Department. At that conference, the Kenai Recreation Center received the Facility of Excellence Award. That award recognizes newly built or significantly renovated facilities Recent roof HVAC improvements allowed the city to renovate the gymnasium floor, including repainting, adding pickleball court lines. The award also reflects dedication of city staff.

In particular, I'd like to point out Assistant Director Jenna Brown over there and her staff who maintain and operate that facility. And I think that reward is— or that award was well deserved. The mayor did indicate on the airport, the main runway reopened on October 2nd. I think the last— they're doing— they're finishing up some markings, I think, out there now. I thought— I think it's more on the taxiway.

The last remaining portion of that here is they have to do a test flight or a check flight, which will bring some of the other instrument-type approaches back online. We do have instrument approaches right now, but I don't know the difference, so I can't, I can't speak airport for you. But that is the last thing. I think that flight is expected about mid-month here, so it'll be nice to get that fully operational.

Uh, I am, uh, regrettably have to inform council that our application for a small community air service development grant was not successful. We have been meeting with our new airport manager who does have experience in, in this realm, and also our consultant trying to identify paths forward and some recommendations. So more to come on that in the future. Um, uh, let's see, on some road and park improvements, the mayor indicated Wildwood Drive was repaved on September 29th. Um, I know they hydroseeded the the, the ditches there.

I don't know that it's been striped yet. I know they are waiting for that asphalt to cure a little bit before they striped it, so it may, may be done. I know they're planning to do some spur work Friday, I believe, striping out there, same contractor. So I assume it's going to happen here, hopefully in this weather window that we have. But, uh, I do have to, to thank the Department of Transportation at the state level.

I don't think I don't think people do that very often, but Commissioner Anderson was truly instrumental in helping us get this project over the finish line. And our own Public Works Department and Lee, his persistence also helped push this over. So a great project. Probably— well, absolutely was the worst road, paved road in the city of Kenai. More than 50 years since it's been paved.

It is repaved and at a significantly reduced cost taxpayers here. So, um, on Aliak Drive, that failing storm drain system has been removed. Uh, the contractor, I believe, has completed, um, the, uh, stormwater galleries that they were going to install, and now they're prepping the road for repaving here. Um, so, and I assume that's going to happen in the not-too-distant future, just because I think most batch plants generally shut down about mid-month here. So, um, if you're out and about, uh, we've got new park pavilions, one in Municipal Park, one out at Beaver Creek.

Those were both completed this fall here. They look great. So if you get a chance, swing by and take a look at those. Um, the mayor also preempted me on this one, but, uh, September 28th to October 2nd, um, Tina and I hosted the, um, the State Fire Chief Conference for this year. During that, there were over 200 fire service folks that attended with education and professionals from statewide training conferences.

Instruct— instructors from across the country provided training in hazardous material response, technical rescue, firefighting tactics, and other subjects. Definitely have to recognize Chief Teague and his team for the effort to put that on. I think it reflected very well on the city and brought a lot of people to town, and really appreciate those efforts. So thank you, Chief. I'll remind everybody, October is Fire Prevention Month, so the department and Fire Marshal Hamilton are out providing fire safety training in Kenai schools this month.

So don't forget it's Fire Safety Month. Regarding Challenger Center, I did want to let council know the Challenger Center, since the city received that when the Challenger Center closed, we've— I think we've used it for two purposes since then. One, we had a special use permit this summer with the Peninsula Boilers, where they were able to provide housing for out-of-town baseball teams to help them get back on their feet. And then this week, Chief Teague used that for the conference. I do plan to start using it more for community events requests.

I do plan at our next council meeting to have an amendment to the fee schedule to establish some fees. I will tell you, a first event is going to be scheduled on the 17th of this month.

So, but I think that's something that we know on a limited basis and a little amount. We do have a public asset that's sitting there. It's—. The chamber is not available for this event because of their haunted chamber. So I really like to keep some of these events here in town.

So We are going to start using it on a limited basis, and I will have a fee schedule amendment for you at the next meeting.

Along with the Challenger Center, we are working, continuing to work with Capehead, um, Connecticut Economic Development District, on grant applications for workforce development utilizing that facility.

And likely to have some legislation before council at the next meeting just to discuss that. Things have evolved a bit. Looks like the city is likely to become either a co-applicant with CapeHead for the grant, the EDA grant. But we'll have more for you here at the upcoming meeting. So trying to work again on the workforce development.

I will tell Council our Public Surplus auction is open and out there. Tell all your friends. It's open from October 1st, closing on the 15th. There's available items, office furniture, electronics, and equipment. Details are available at publicsurplus.com.

I know there also is likely to be some surplus computers that are available for purchase over— computers and monitors for purchase at pretty reasonable rates over at the library. That's how we surplus our excess computers. So if somebody's looking for a computer or monitor, they'd want to check that out. Upcoming events: the 11th Annual Pumpkin Festival is this Saturday, October 10th. Starts at 11:00 AM at the softball green strip over there.

Some of the highlights includes hayrides, pumpkins for kids, games, and much anticipated pumpkin drop where the mayor will be way up in the air to drop and see if you can hit a target. Uh, there's going to be some food vendors there. Um, we really like to see the community come out and enjoy that. It's always a great event. Hope we, uh, hopefully get a little bit of weather for it.

Uh, Kenai Community Library haunted house runs October 26th through the 31st. Uh, it's offering a not too scary and creative activities for families, so families want to check that out. Uh, Kenai Senior Connection will host, um, trick-or-treating at the senior center on Friday, October 30th from 4 to 7 for families that are looking for, you know, a nice safe environment, take their kids, and, uh, the seniors really enjoy it too. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Any questions of the city manager?

Covered a lot of ground there. Thank you. City Attorney Bloom. Thank you, Mayor Nexted, members of council. I don't have anything to report, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions of Mr. Bloom? Seeing none, Clerk Sinner. Thank you, Mayor Nexted. Little bit here —of information. Absentee voting starts on October 19th.

For state elections, you have to go over to the Kenai Mall to vote absentee. For your city and borough elections, you have to come to City Hall or the Borough Building. City Hall offices are closed on the 19th, so anybody that wants to vote on the 19th will have to go to the Borough Building, but it will open on the 20th here at City Hall. I'm available for questions.

Thank you. In your report too, in the packet here, you were looking for, uh, for applicants. Oh yeah, sorry about that. Yeah, the arbitration panel for employees, it's time that nominations can come from employees or council members. The HR director sent the memo out to employees earlier this week, and this is your notification that we have 3 vacancies and 1 person whose term is up.

So we need about 4 nominations, please.

Thank you. Any questions of the clerk? Seeing none, that brings us to additional public comments. Are there any members of the public who would like to address the council at this time? Anyone?

Mr. Cook, state your name and city you live in.

Alex Cook, 4575 Kenitesi Court. This is back to the roads improvement on the Willow and other roads where there's— how Lee was talking about bike or pedestrian walkways and whatnot. We really should consider making them ADA compliant with the right approach, however that is, and the foot braille, because as we know The city isn't very— we got a lot of bike walkways around town, like the part of Willow that was redone. They didn't do those. People in wheelchairs can't use those.

So just keep that in consideration. That's all. Thank you, Mr. Cook. Anybody else? Seeing nobody, that brings us to Item M, Executive Session, an executive session, uh, that is competing applications for gas storage space pursuant to AS4462.310, a matter of which the immediate knowledge may have an adverse effect upon the city finance and the city, per AS4462.310, a matter of which by law, municipal charter, or ordinance are required to be confidential, brought to us by administration.

Vice Mayor Askin, did you have something you wanted to— before we—. Um, I have a conflict of interest, so I won't be in the executive session. Yeah, and, and I recognize what your conflict is, and that is accepted. So, pleasure of council, uh, Councilmember Gremme, you want to make the motion? I move to enter into executive session to discuss competing applications for gas storage space pursuant to AS 4462.310, a matter which immediate knowledge would clearly have an adverse effect upon the finances of the city, and AS 4462.310, a matter which by law, municipal charter, or ordinance is required to be confidential.

The executive session will include Mayor Naxted, City Council members, Manager Eubank, and Attorney Bloom.

Second. Moved and seconded. Unanimous consent. Unanimous consent. Unanimous consent was requested.

Are there any objections? Seeing none, we'll be moving into, into executive session, and Council Member, uh, Petti, is she going to be able to call in? Pardon? Right. Does she know that?

Okay, thank you. Council Member Petti, they're going to call you on your line from in there.

Thank you. And they have my, my personal phone number, ma'am? Yes, yes, we do. We'll call you. Thank you.

Council Member Gremme. I move to enter back into regular session. Okay, we're back in regular session. Um, I second that. Any unanimous consent?

Any objections to unanimous consent? Seeing none, we are back from executive session. We have no pending items, so with no further business, we are adjourned.