Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM...CO TERCOPY. Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM....

CO TERCOPY

Assembly Packet

September 18, 2001

7:00 PM

Homer City Hall

City Council Chambers

491 E. Pioneer Avenue

Homer, Alaska

- - -

-- -

September 2001 - August 2002

SCl'lOlllhcr () I S M I' W T I' S

I ~ 'J

'1,,,, II II

.. l " II

7 II

~

I ~

II, 17 . I~ , 1" :::!ll 21 1::: l1 ~ I .~ c; :!/, ~7 ~x :!(J .1(1

()I,;loher 0 I

M T W T I,' S I \~r 1 I I,

1 :c ,Ii I III II I l 11 II I II, 11 II< I'! 2tl

~I " i I 21 l~ ":h ::7 lX ::!:l) '" 11

Nt) emllOr 0 I

S M T W T I' S I I

I ., th, 7 K I) 10

II I:: I I I I 1\ I" 11 IX '(J.~IIJ;1 t:!~.,~1._.1

:!l\ t ~(l 1:!.7 .~:i "'If) .,0

I:>CClllll(J<Jr () I

S tv! T W T I' S 1, ,

~ 1 I, 7 ~,

'J II ' I ~ 11 II \10 I? IX 1'\ ,10 21 " 21 ~ 1 ';:'i '2h 21 Jl< ~C)

111 11

'" -"..

J~l\Ill1ry 02 S M - T W T I.'

I ~ 1 I ~

I, I ~( 'J III II I}

IJ \-1 Ii It; II IX I" :!() 27

~I ., "-:!O"

~.l ,,, ~-I

11

, !li

Yearly Planner

September 3 L,<thor Day

7(J() I'M ASS[·:MI3l. Y I~E(j4 MI:nIN(;

7 ()O I'M AS~FMr~LY REO Nll·:I':TINC'·IN I [OMI-:R

October [(l)l~ Rl:gulur j':!cl:Lioll 2 700 I'M ASS! \MI3I. Y REG 9

M f,] '. lll'.)(i

7 l)O I'M ASSEMBl.Y R!:U23 Mlm'L'IN(i

November 6 7 (JO I'M ASSI :MI ~I. Y IU(G

MI:/'TIN(,

7'()O I'M ASSI':MIH.Y I~I~U20 MI·:LTIN(;

Thanksgiving [[oliully 22 ThllnJ sgiving r[oliuuy23

AML Annual onfcrcncc26 (Nov 2(;-30) Anchoragc

December 700 I'M ASSEMI!I.Y REG

NIH/·:TINCi

Chnstm;\s [Jay 2~ .:J

1....,hlllUry 02 S M r W T I' s

I 1 I .. I, 7 ~ 'I

III II I ~ 11 II I', rf, i? ill I') ~(j ~I !2 '1 ~ I "; 2/\ 21 2a

MardI 07. S M T W T I· S

I I I -, I< ] X 'J

I<J II I' 11 II l'i II< 11 IX 1'1 .11 21 ,~ 21 ~I 2~ ~t, ~? .Ii ~) 111 11

I\prilO2 S - M T W I' I.' S

I 1 I I, 1 ~ 'I III II 12 \1 II I~ I. 11 IX 1'1 !u ~I .!.l 21 2 I !'i 2(, 21 ~H ~r} 10

M~y02

S M T W r I' S I \ I

i. / X 'I III II I~ 11 II I' II, 17 III 1'1 ~11 21 " .1 2 I 2'i Yo ~7 21{ ~t) III II

.fllllC 02 S M T W T F S

')

16 ~.l 1(1

1 In 11 ::!,I

I II III ''i

I ~

1'1 ~ti

"11 :!on ~1

1 II '1 !X

t X

" ~:!

"J

July 02 M, I

2 W 1

I' -I

F 'i

S

" 7 I III II l' 11

Printed by Calendar Creator for Windows on 8/27/01 i·' 21

1,'\

" II, 21

! •

2-1 IX 2~

II :!tl

:0 2"

Jl< .!0 1n II

October 2001 Assembly Monthly Planner

1 2 3 4 5 6 730 PM School

Board ELECTION

DA 600 P 1 UlhPm

Ilosp.tal SA

700 I'M KachclII k I'MS

7:00 PM Trails Commission

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5:30 PM Pial

Commiltecl 7.00 PM Anch

PomlAPC r 7:0 P

I·.A iki kl 7'00 PM Kachcmak

13a APC

7:30 PM PlllllDing Commission

7:00 I'M AS 'EMOLY M~ETlNG

7:00 'M K.l'll Ro d . I

7:30/' I Uc ro k 1 S.\

7;lU P. Il oopcr / ng.\PC

DOE

,7 00 I'M Kuehcmuk

l.M'

15 16 17 18 19 2014 5 0 M CP<lII. A 7,llO P 1 CI'S FSA

7 o PM Anvhur 7 00 PM K eh lIla-FSA ~MS

7"30 PM Sohool Board

..,..,21 23 24 25 26 27-~

5'30 PM Plat 7:00 PM ASSEt· 7:00 PM I<lJchcmuk Comnultee 8LY MEI<.:TING nuy APe

700 PM I<lJc cmak l"M'

7'30 PM Planning Commission

28 29 30 31

September S i T WT F s S F ;~

I 2' 2 \ ·1 ~ 6 1 8 1 3 6 1 Q 10 9 )0 II 12 11 11 IS II 12 13 14 16 !'lb 17 18 /9 20 21 22

n 14 23 26 2 28 29 I IQ 20 21 2.1 :!.. 30 2(, 21 28 302'

APC = Advisory Planning Commission, FSA = Fire Service Area; SA = S,;!rvice Area

--- ---

September 2001 - August 2002

Seplcmher () I S M l" W T F S

t

'J I., 21 10

'1 III 11 ~ I

'I II I~ , I" !~

I'

:!.h

"11 'II '1

7 II 21 2l<

It I ~

:!~ -'j

( )etohcr 0 I

S M T W l" F S

I I I(

~ I 1,';, III

I II 12

" 11

II " I" 17 IK I') lO 21 " '1 , ~·I .1';; 2fl 21

2l< ~(J \II 11

Novemher 01 S M T W T I: S

1 .1

1 i It'r 7 rJ 1It

11 12 I I I I I' \1, I: IX If' ,"Ij 12\ ,~~ l2.1} ~l

l5 ' l(1 I 21 2X _<I .'0

I)c<o '/ul><:1' 0 I

S M T W T I: I ,

~ I I .. 7 .< .) III II ' 12 11 II 1, ,,, 17 IK \'/ .:!f1 21 "

21 ~ t • ~ !t, 27 'II ~,lJ

111 1\

J:lIl111lI'Y 02 S M T W T F

I ~ 1 I 1 a III 1\ I ~" -

IJ" II " I" 1/ la \') 10 ~I .!~ 21 ~,I 's ~(i

21 2K ~I) .111 \1

Yearly Planner

September Lahor Day 3

700 ['M I\SSI':MI{1 ,Y RHJ4 tvllm ['[NO

7 ()O I'M 1\ 'SFMlll. Y REG18 MI:I:I'IN(; IN [[OMER

October KI'Il Rcgulllr 1:lcdlOl12 7 DO PM I\SSEMI31. Y REO9 MFI.llN{;

7 lJO I'M I\SSEtvll3LY REb23 MI:E'IINO

ovember 7 ()() I'M ASSEMllI.Y I~H i6 MEE'IIN(i

20 7.0() I'M I\SSI ~MIlL Y I~H;

MI ~I :'IINe;

Th,mksglving [[o[iJilY 22 Thanksgiving [InliJay 23

AML Anllllol COllference26 ( ov 26-30) Anchoroge

December 7'()() I'M I\SSEMBLY RI:CjII

MI'I':IINCi

ChI isllllas J)ny 2~

Printed by Calendar Creator for Windows on 8127/01

Fdullary 02 S M l" W \' I' S

\ 2 1 I I. 7 ~ 'j

III II 12 11 II I', \" 1'/ III I') ~u ~I " c1 ~ I 2~ ~h 21 'x

Murch 112 S M T W 'I F S

I ,1 I .. 7 II ')

1<1 II I' 1\ II 10; If' 11 IX 1'/ '11 '1 !J" 2\ 2S 'ti 'K :':'1 1<1" 11

April ()2 S M I' w l" F S

I I " 1 )( III II II" III I' I" I III I" :!II 21 l..! 21 ~ I !S ~l. 21 :!.« ~9 111

May 02 S M l" W l" F S

I \ I 5 K 'I III II" 12 11 I 11 III

I') ~u 21 '2 1.1 21 2\ !ti 21 2lJ "I III 11

"\ I"

.lillie 02 S M T W T F S

I 2 \ .\ " ,I ')

I,. III 11

I III

II')

II :'!tI

II ~I

I' " 2.1 21 2~ ~6 ~1 211 _.J

111

.I111~ O:! S M r W r F S

I ~ I \ to

1 ,l ) III II 12 11 1·\ ," hi /1 IK I'j _II

21 21 'I l' .!hl' _1 2.~ -I) 111 11

I_Kenai Peninsula Borough

Assembly Meeting Schedule

2:00PM

followed by

followed by

followed by

7:00PM

TUESDA~ September 18,2001

Legislative Committee City Council Chambers Homer City Hall Homer, Alaska

Lands Committee City Council Chambers Homer City Hall Homer, Alaska

Finance Committee City Council Chambers Homer City Hall Homer, Alaska

Committee of the Whole City Council Chambers Homer City Hall Homer, Alaska

Regular Assembly Meeting City Council Chambers Homer City Hall Homer, Alaska

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Meeting Schedule

C1 TY OF SOLDOTNA 1D:907-262-1245 SEP 07'01 10:20 No.002 P.02

I

.J , II I

§ ... i

...-.. .... .. .... - --~~ .. -_ .....

. -+++-1-1-+-1 II .,'

CITY OF SOLDOTNA 10:907-262-1245 SEP 07'01 10:21 No.002 P.03

•. - f .• 1--1-- - _. . .., .•.. .. .. . . . .. .. .. - ..

I.. 1'-'- - - -~ - . ·-f - - " . -·1-" _.~ - . ~ -,-" --' .. - I -e-e-

S i

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH

SOLDOTNA

Name Description Estimate INeed 10IPriorityIS~re IProgramI I I Kobuk Street Outfall Sedimentation Basin Construction

Soldotna College Bridge

East Poppy Lane

East Redoubt AvenuelKeystone Drive Reconstruction

K-beach Road Frontage Roads

Binkley St. and Park St. Intersection Signalization

Kenai River Walkway

Soldotna School Trail

Poppy Lane Separated Pathway

Construct an above ground sedlmaentatJon basin/oil grease separator for the Kobuk $325.000 9612 2 83.5 CTP stonn water outfall. This project would use specified vegllatlon to help clean the stonn waters collected off of highways and streets prior to discharge Into the Kenai River.. Construct a new bridge across the Kenai River In Soldotna. Bridge and approach 2640 3 20 CTP roads will connect East Poppy Lane and Redoubt Avenue. Rehabilitate. Including reSUrfacing from Kallfornsky Beach Road to Kenai Peninsula 2641 3 45 CTP Community College. Add paved shoulders/rehabilitate East Redoubt Avenue and rehab Keystone Drive $6,050,000 2642 1 93.5 CTP from East Redoubt Avenue to the end of road at MP 5. Work Includes adding to road base to support hard sUrfacing, drainage Improvements Including culvert Installations, clean out ditches, and hard surfacing.. Construct frontage roads along K-beach Road. $900,000 9610 3' CTP

Upgrade trafflc signal lighting system from the existing automated pedestrian wakl $125.000 9611 2 81.5 CTP to a fully signalized Intersection. . Construct a riverside pathway system along the Kenai River approx. 2900 feet $1,080,000 2649 1 89 TRAAK downstream from Soldotna Creek Park. Pathway wl~1 be an on shore and floating boardwalk system. The Intent Is to build a pathway from Soldotna Creek park to the Kenai River Bridge. There Is 900' of private, boardwalk Just upstream of.the Kenai River Bridge. Purchase should be conslderttd. Construct a lighted pedestrlanlblke trail. 10 feet paved with 3 feet shoulders on each $250,000 6488 1 101.7 TRAAK side. Construct fitness stations at Intervals along the path. The shoulders are to be used exclusively for running. The path Is to be located between Marydale Ave. and Redoubt Ave. connecting Soldotna High School. Soldotna Middle School, and Redoubt Elementary. )

Construct a separated pathway from the elementary school to College avenue. 14179 TRAAK

Kenai Peninsula Borough Asserrlbly

Lands Committee September 18,2001 Immediately following Legislative Homer City Council Chambers, Homer

Chris Moss, Chair Ron Long, Vice Chair

AGENDA L. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ORDINANCES

1. Ordinance 2001-19-08: Authorizing the Acquisition of Lots 2 & 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, Homer Recording District, for an Addition to the South Peninsula Hospital and Appropriating $121,000 to Acquire the Property (Mayor at the request of the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area Board) 10

5. Ordinance 2001-31: Authorizing the Sale of27 Parcels ofBorough Land by Outcry Public Auction and Subsequently by Over-the-Counter Sales (Mayor) (First ofTwo Hearings) 56

M. UNFINISHE][) BUSINESS

1. Postponed Items

a. Resolution 2001-093: Classifying Certain Borough Land Located in the Nikiski Area Near Suneva Lake Lying within Section 22, T8N, Rll W, S.M., Alaska as Residential (Mayor) (Second of Three Hearings) 81

N. NEW BUSINESS

2. Resolutions

*a. Resolution 2001-100: Authorizing the Mayor to Offer for Competitive Bid, Fuel Reduction Sales in Unit 1 and Unit 2 as Approved by KPB Ordinance 2000-50 (Mayor) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 93

3. Ordinances for Introduction

*a. Ordinance 2001-32: Amending KPB 21.05.010 to Allow Variances from Other Than Area Requirement Provisions (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/23/01)

155

*b. Ordinance 2001-33: Revising the Procedures for Road Maintenance Decertification (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/23/01) " 157

4. Other

*a. Confirming Appointments to the Road Service Area Board 166

Appointment Seat Term Expires Susan C. Tauriainen North Region September 30,2004 S. A. Sam McLane At-Large September 30, 2004

Staff requested:

Planning Director or Representative

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Page 1 of 1 LANDS COMMITTEE

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Finance Committee

September 18,2001 Immediately following Lands

Grace Merkes, Chair Pete Sprague, Vice Chair

Homer City Council Chambers, Homer

AGENDA

L. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ORDINANCES

2. Ordinance 2001-19-09: Authorizing the Receipt of a Municipal Capital Matching Grant from the State of Alaska for Road Projects and Appropriating $494,848 to a Capital Project Account (Mayor) 37

3. Ordinance 2001-19-11: Appropriating $250,000 from the General Fund for the Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council to Fund Non-Tank Vessel Contingency Plans for Pollution Prevention in Cook Inlet, Inlet Mapping Services, Monitoring Potential Cook Inlf~t Contaminants and Other Related Activities (Popp, Navarre, Merkes) (First of Two Hearings) 40

4. Ordinance 2001-19-12: Accepting and Appropriating $57,000 from the Kenai Watershed Forum to Fund a Kenai River Center Research and Education Program Contract (Mayor) 43

N. NEW BUSINESS

1. Bid Awards

*a. Resolution 2001-097: Authorizing the Award of Pavement Professional Design Services for the K-B RIAD to Mike Tauriainen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. (Mayor) 83

*b. Resolution 2001-098: Authorizing the Sale of Kenai Peninsula Borough and Kenai Peninsula Borough School District Surplus Tangible Property and Awarding a Contract for Auctioneering Services (Mayor) 86

*c. Resolution 2001-099: Authorizing the Purchase of a 19 Foot Rigid Hull Inflatable FirelRescue Boat for Central Emergency Service Area (Mayor) 90

2. Resolutions

*b. Resolution 2001-101: Approving Capital Projects for Funding under the State's Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Municipal Capital Matching Grant Program (Mayor) 145

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Page I of2 FINANCE COMMITTEE

K. ITEMS NOT COMPLETED FROM PRIOR AGENDA - None

L. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ORDINANCES (Testimony limited to 3 minutes per speaker)

1. Ordinance 2001-19-08: Authorizing the Acquisition of Lots 2 & 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, Homer Recording District, for an Addition to the South Peninsula Hospital and Appropriating $121,000 to Acquire the Property (Mayor at the request ofthe South Peninsula Hospital Service Area Board) (Referred to Lands Committee) 10

2. Ordinance 2001-19-09: Authorizing the Receipt of a Municipal Capital Matching Grant from the State of Alaska for Road Projects and Appropriating $494,848 to a Capital Project Account (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 37

3. Ordinance 2001-19-11: Appropriating $250,000 from the General Fund for the Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council to FundNon-Tank Vessel Contingency Plans for Pollution Prevention in Cook Inlet, Inlet Mapping Services, Monitoring Potential Cook Inlet Contaminants and Other Related Activities (Popp, Navarre, Merkes) (First of Two Hearings) (Referred to Finance Committee) 40

4. Ordinance 2001-19-12: Accepting and Appropriating $57,000 from the Kenai Watershed Forum to Fund a Kenai River Center Research and Education Program Contract (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 43

5. Ordinance 2001-31: Authorizing the Sale of27 Parcels of Borough Land by Outcry Public Auction and Subsequently by Over-the-Counter Sales (Mayor) (First of Two Hearings) (Referred to Lands Committee) 56

M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

1. Postponed Items

a. Resolution 2001-093: Classifying Certain Borough Land Located in the Nikiski Area Near Suneva Lake Lying within Section 22, T8N, Rll W, S.M., Alaska as Residential (Mayor) (Second of Three Hearings) (Referred to Lands Committee) 81

N. NEW BUSINESS

1. Bid Awards

*a. Resolution 2001-097: Authorizing the Award of Pavement Professional Design Services for the K-B RIAD to Mike Tauriainen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 83

September 18, 2001 Page 2 of5

*b. Resolution 2001-098: Authorizing the Sale of Kenai Peninsula Borough and Kenai Peninsula Borough School District Surplus Tangible Property and Awarding a Contract for Auctioneering Services (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 86

*c. Resolution 2001-099: Authorizing the Purchase ofa 19 Foot Rigid Hull Inflatable Fire/Rescue Boat for Central Emergency Service Area (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 90

2. Resolutions

*a. Resolution 2001-100: Authorizing the Mayor to Offer for Competitive Bid, Fuel Reduction Sales in Unit 1 and Unit 2 as Approved by KPB Ordinance 2000-50 (Mayor) (Referred to Lands Committee) 93

*b. Resolution 2001-101: Approving Capital Projects for Funding under the State's Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Municipal Capital Matching Grant Program (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 145

*c. Resolution 2001-102: Supporting the Habitat Restoration and Education Project at the Kenai River Center and Acknowledging an Intent to Consider Providing a Required Match for Grants at Time of Grant Award (Mayor) (Referred to Finance Committee) 151

3. Ordinances for Introduction

*a. Ordinance 2001-32: Amending KPB 21.05.010 to Allow Variances from Other Than Area Requirement Provisions (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/23/01) (Referred to Lands Committee) 155

*b. Ordinance 2001-33: Revising the Procedures for Road Maintenance Decertification (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/23/01) (Referred to Lands Committee) 157

*c. Ordinance 2001-19-14: Accepting a Grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the Amount of$159,556 for the Purchase of a Vehicle for Kachemak Emergency Service Area and Appropriating the Grant and Matching Funds ($17,729) to a Capital Project Account (Mayor, Martin) (Hearing on 10/23/01) (Referred to Finance Committee) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LAYDOWN

*d. Ordinance 2001-19-15: Authorizing the Receipt of a Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant from the Alaska Department ofNatural Resources and Appropriating $4,960 to the Kachemak Emergency Service Area (Mayor, Martin) (Hearing on 10/23/01) (Referred to Finance Committee) LAYDOWN

September 18, 200 I Page 3 of5

4. Other

*a. Confirming Appointments to the Road Service Area Board (Referred to Lands Committee) 166

Appointment Seat Term Expires Susan C. Tauriainen North Region September 30,2004 S. A. Sam McLane At-Large September 30,2004

O. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS (3 minutes per speaker)

P. ASSEMBLY MEETING AND HEARING ANNOUNCEMENTS

October 2, 2001 Regular Municipal Election October 9, 2001 7:00 PM Regular Assembly Meeting in Soldotna

Q. ASSEMBLY COMMENTS

R. PENDING LEGISLATION (This item lists legislation which will be addressed at a later date as noted.)

1. Resolution 2001-027: Calling for a Special Advisory Election to Ask the Voters Whether the Borough Should Issue Revenue Bonds in the Approximate Amount of $80 Million for a Proposed Prison (Fischer) (Referred to Policies and Procedures Committee) (Tabled on 03/13/01)

2. Ordinance 2001-29: Amending KPB Chapter 2.40 Regarding Planning Commission Membership and Apportionment (Navarre) (Hearings on 10/23/01 and 11/20/01) (Referred to Policies and Procedures Committee)

3. Ordinance 2001-30: Approving Russian Gap Subdivision Local Option Zoning District as a Rural Residential (R-R) District and Amending KPB Chapter 21.46 (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Lands Committee)

4. Ordinance 2001-31: Authorizing the Sale of27 Parcels ofBorough Land by Outcry Public Auction and Subsequently by Over-the-Counter Sales (Mayor) (Final Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Lands Committee)

5. Ordinance 2001-19-10: Accepting and Appropriating a Grant of $69,020 from the State of Alaska for the Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal Management Program (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Finance Committee)

September 18,2001 Page 4 of5

6. Ordinance 2001-19-11: Appropriating $250,000 from the General Fund for the Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council to Fund Non-Tank Vessel Contingency Plans for Pollution Prevention in Cook Inlet, Inlet Mapping Serviees, Monitoring Potential Cook Inlet Contaminants and Other Related Activities (Popp, Navarre, Merkes) (Final Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Finance Committee)

7. Ordinance 2001-19-13: Accepting and Appropriating $750,000 in Federal Funds for Purposes of Improving Communication Capabilities During Emergency Responses (Mayor) (Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Finance Committee)

8. Resolution 2001-095: Requesting the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to Upgrade and Pave Jones Stub Road (Mayor, Sprague) (Final Hearing on 10/09/01) (Referred to Legislative Committee)

S. INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS AND REPORTS

T. NOTICE OF NEXT MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT

The next meeting of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly will be held on October 9, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. in the Borough Assembly Chambers, Soldotna, Alaska.

This meeting will be broadcast on KPEN-FM 101.7 (Central Peninsula), KPEN-FM 102.3 (Homer), KGTL-AM 620 (Homer), KPEN-FM 102.3 (Seward), KPEN-FM 99.3 (Anchor Point & Seldovia), KPEN-FM 100.9 (Kachemak City & East End).

Copies ofagenda items are available at the Borough Clerk's Office or outside the Meeting Roomjust prior to the meeting Forfurther i,!!ormation, please call the Clerk's Office at 262-8608 or tollfree within the Borough at 1-800478-4441, Ext. 308. Visit our website at www.borough.kenai.ak.us for copies of the agenda, meeting summaries, ordinances and resolutions.

September 18, 2001 Page 5 of5

.

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY· SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262-4441 FAX (907)262·1892

.. " ' .....,._.~"

DALE BAGLEY :MAYOR'S REPORT TO THE ASSEMBLY MAYOR

TO: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Members

FROM: Dale L. Bagley, Borough Mayor DL{!;

DATE: September 18,2001

Agreements and Contracts

1. Approval of bid award to URS for Landfill Feasibility Study in Seldovia. Copy attached.

2. Approval of sole source purchase with Pitney Bowes for new Postage Processing Machine and Folder/Stuffer for KPB mailroom. Copy attached.

3. Budget Revisions - August 2001. Copy attached.

4. Revenue-Expenditure Report - August 2001. Copy attached.

DBlbd

MAYOR'S REPORT MAYOR'S REPORT

1

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH Solid Waste Department 47140 East Poppy Lane

(907) 262-9667Soldotna, Alaska 99669 (907) 262·6090 Fax

to· FINANCE DEPARTMENT

FUNDS VERIFIED

MEMORANDUM ACT # gqD. 3d.570, t13t) II

TO: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor BY: ~ DATE:

THRU: ~ark Fowler, Purchasing and Materials Magr Tee c,,~ Catherine Mayer, Solid Waste Director

FROM: ~Lanie Hughes, Environmental Coordinator

DATE: August 23, 2001

SUBJECT: Landfill Feasibility Study - Seldovia, Alaska Request for Award

The Finance Department solicited and received five proposals for this project. The Request for Proposals was advertised in the Peninsula Clarion, Seward Phoenix Log, Homer News and Anchorage Daily News. Five proposals were submitted and all deemed responsive.

A team of three evaluators rated the proposals submitted and hereby recommends award of contract to URS, the firm receiving the highest composite score, for an estimated total cost of Twenty-Nine Thousand Seventeen Dollars and Forty-Eight Cents ($29,017.48).

The two-phase project includes preliminary evaluation of a 125-acre land parcel in Seldovia that the Borough is considering acquiring for development of a landfill site. The first phase of work includes identifying the best-suited 20-acre portion of the larger parcel and the second phase consists of preliminary design preparation and approximate development costs. A notice to proceed will be issued for the first phase of work, estimated at $14,744.39. The second phase will commence with a notice to proceed once the first phase has been successfully completed.

The work shall commence on approximately September 1, 2001 with all project work completed by November 30, 2001.

The Solid Waste Department hereby requests approval to execute an agreement with URS in the amount of $29,017.48 for the project. Funds are available in the following account: 290-32570-43011.

Please call me at 262-9667 if you have questions regarding this request.

IS*Approved: g..a d.. Date: .,./211/01 Disapproved: _

MAYOR'S REPORT

2

Seldovia Landfill Feasibility Study Proposal Evaluation

KPB Solid Waste Department August 2001

PROPOSER TOTAL SCORE

240 Points

Overall Rank

URS 220.3 1

International Consulting & Engineering 200.5 2

Shannon & Wilson 200.2 3

ASCG

f-.

Montgomery Watson Harza

181.3 4

175.35 5

MAYOR'S REPORTMAYOR'S REPORT

3

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669-7599 BUSINESS (907) 262·4441 FAX (907)262-1892

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

Memo

To: ,tOale Bagley, Mayo;R- ~ Thru: Mark Fowler, Materials & Purchasing Manage~ /"

From: Richard Campbell, General Services Director~ Date: 8/31/01

Re: Request for Sole Source Approval

This year $44,000 was budgeted to purchase a new postage processing machine .. and a back-up folder/stuffer. This is a request to purchase both items for a total of

$33,757.20 plus maintenance costs from Pitney Bowes. The only other supplier with a presence and servicing capability in Alaska is Neopost. We have tried their product before and have found their folder/stuffer (the one being replaced) to be inferior in performance, reliability and servicing.

REQUEST APPROVED: EYES NO

MAVOR'S REPORTMAVOR'S REPORT

4

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH - FINANCE DEPARTMENT

To: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Members of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Thru: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor D~ '8

From: Jeff Sinz, Finance Director q4 Date: September 6, 200 I

Subject: Budget Revisions - August 2001

The attached report reflects budget revisions made during August 2001. The list will only contain budget revisions between major expenditure categories (i.e., maintenance & operations and capital outlay) and transfers of budget between completed capital projects and those previously authorized by the borough assembly. In addition to those appearing on the attached, other minor transfers were processed between sub-object within major expenditure categories.


5

Decrease Increase

Custodial: The FY2002 budget did not include funds for contracted custodial services at the Homer annex. Cost savings were realized during July and August in the number of hours needed to clean the Borough building. The savings will be sufficient to pay for the increase in contract services.

100.11235.40110 100.11235.43011

$ 705.00 $ 705.00


6

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH - FINANCE DEPARTMENT

To: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Members of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Thru: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor DG 6

From: Jeff Sinz, Finance Director c:p. Date: September 6, 2001

Subject: Revenue -Expenditure Report - August 2001

Attached is the Revenue-Expenditure Report of the General Fund for the month of August 2001. Please note that although only 16.67% of the year elapsed, 79.83% of the budgeted expenditures have been made. This is the result of the timing of the transfers to other funds. All budgeted transfers are recorded at the beginning of the fiscal year. Without the non-departmental division (where all in the transfers are budgeted) the percent of budget used for the general fund is 10.98%.


7

Introduced by: Mayor at request of South Peninsula Hospital

Service Area Board Date: 08/07/01 Hearing: 09/l 8/0 I Action: Vote:

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ORDINANCE 2001-19-08

AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF LOTS 2 & 3, BLOCK 8, FAIRVIEW SUBDIVISION, PLAT NO. 56-2936, HOMER RECORDING DISTRICT,

FOR AN ADDITION TO THE SOUTH PENINSULA HOSPITAL AND APPROPRIATING $121,000 TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY

WHEREAS, the South Peninsula Hospital's strategic plan acknowledges that the hospital is currently landlocked with no ability to expand or correct long-standing problems with traffic flow and access to the hospitaJl; and

WHEREAS, the planned use of subject Lots 2 & 3 is to provide additional contiguous land that will provide space to replace the existing clinic building with a new administrative office and medical clinic building; and

WHEREAS, the owner has signed an Earnest Money Receipt and Purchase Agreement to sell subject Lots 2 & 3 for $120,000; and

WHEREAS, an appraisal completed by Derry and Associates in 1998 estimated a market value of$53,500 for subject Lots 2 and 3; and

WHEREAS, refinement of the South Peninsula Hospital's plans for the Phase II development has significantly changed the scope, timing and funding requirements of the construc~tion project; and

WHEREAS, a portion of the funds previously appropriated for the South Peninsula Hospital, Phase n development will need to be redirected by the Assembly for the acquisition of subject Lots 2 & 3; and

WHEREAS, the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area Board of Directors approved the land purchast;: with a purchase price of$120,000.00 on April 12, 2001; and

WHEREAS, the KPB Planning Commission at its regularly scheduled meeting of _ 2001 recommended ...

NOW, THEREFORlG, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH:

SECTION 1. That the purchase of the following described real property for $120,000.00 is in the best interests of the borough:

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-19-08 Page 1 of2

10

Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, according to Plat No. 56-2936, on file in the Homer Recording District, Third Judicial District, State of Alaska

SECTION 2. That the terms and conditions of the purchase agreement accompanying this ordinance are hereby approved.

SECTION 3. That the sum of $120,000.00 plus $1,000 in closing costs is redirected from previously appropriated South Peninsula Service Area account No. 601.81211.SPHP2.49999 to account 601.8121 1.02LND.48610 for the acquisition and closing costs of the land described in this ordinance. Closing costs paid by the borough shall not include any past due taxes, assessments, penalties, or interest associated with the property.

SECTION 4. That the proposed classification of this land is government.

SECTION 5. That the assembly finds that purchase of the real property, described in Section 1 of this ordinance, is in the best interests of the public and the Borough. This finding is based on:

a. The South Peninsula Hospital's strategic plan acknowledges that the hospital is currently landlocked with no ability to expand or correct longstanding problems with traffic flow and access to the hospital.

b. The planned use of the land described in Section 1 above is to provide additional contiguous land that will provide space to replace the existing clinic building with a new administrative office and medical clinic building.

c. Acquiring the land described in Section 1 above will contribute to the long-term viability of the current hospital site.

SECTION 6. That the mayor is authorized to execute any and all documents necessary to purchase the real property described in Section One on behalf of the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area for the price of $120,000.00 and pay up to $1,000 of the closing costs, in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this ordinance, the above-described purchase agreement, and consistent with applicable provisions of KPB Chapter 17.10.

SECTION 7. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS * DAY OF * 2001.

Timothy Navarre, Assembly President ATTEST:

Linda S. Murphy, Borough Clerk

Ordinance 2001-19-08 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska Page 2 of2

11

-..' ' .......~. _.;-11' .

DALE BAGLEY MAYORMEMORANDUM

TO: Roy E.. Dudley, Land Management Agent

THRu:.J)~ne Horan, Director of Assessing

FROM: Randy Hughes, Appraiser II DATE: July 26. 2001

SUBJECT: Appraisal of Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, According to Plat 56-2936, on File in the Homer Recording District, ·rhird Judicial District, State of Alaska. Parcel # 175-052-03 & 04

This reappraisal relates only to the raw land value. It does not address the improvements on parcel 175-052-04. An on site inspection was not performed.

A review of sales was conducted in the vicinity of the subject parcels to establish fair market value. This rE!view found four comparable sales of similar size and attributes. The subject parcels are zoned residential/office.

I found only two recent sales in Fairview Subdivision that are zoned residential/office.

1) Parcel 175-063,-09 (.28 acres) sold for $16,500 in October of 1998.

2) Parcel 175-0515-04 (.28 acres) sold for $15,000 in September of 1999.

I found two additional sales in Fairview Subdivision that are zoned Urban Residential:

1) Parcel 175-063,·03 (.28 acres) sold for $12,500 in April of 1997.

3) ParceI175-06~~-19 (.55 acres) sold for $49,000 in July of 2000.

Adjusting for size, the indicated value of parcels 175-052-03 & 04 based on the four sales ranges from $10,600 to $30,000 per parcel.

The median sales price per .19 acre parcel is $13,367. The mean sales price per .19 acre parcel is $16,850. The current assessment is $17,600 per parcel.

R:\Shane\Word\Memos\DUDLEY MEMO FAIRVIEW SUB.DOC

12

PA~CEL 3 10 AC.

@

SOUTH PENINSULA HOSPITAL SU8.

TFL A 6.24 AC.

t8

-.--.---. :1-;

... ---,.---,.-I

:-- --- .. -! U1:· .'"~------'r-: : ~6) L I I ••gl :r-"'---"---"'-: .w: :: ~ .: -1: ,. , 'i-I ::::· .' .......'- --_.a:: ....--.---.. --_a.. ---"---'

- -; .. __ e. -; CIJ ~_. __ .- _._- -----,.---,· ..<t

: : ..-----.. . (10) ': (5)1-------' ,--1 ::.

~-_----t. .I· .:I" ~---.a~ ~ :::

...." ~

.-.. ' ......' ~ .~

:: ~~-..,...--.. , ,- ,- ,.--,.1!f 2&":::;::.:.:-':::::::• 1 ; ~':r'-~ , "; j 1@';1 1 : ~ , f

r'---~- .: ~----~---- _l : L--i. -~1- :._.1 ; : I:" I IIt.:t

: I ~ ~ : : : : --;.-- . ~-----------~... ' . .., . _____ ~ I _.---------------------., • • • • • .. •. ~ : : : : ..-----: . ~------~ ., ...... -~_ I I I I , I :: I I " 'Of

\&:;~ -,-------·----1 ~ , I • I to-----· .I I I , .. ._\ ,---------- ... ------------.. :- ._ ••• _.,. .... .... I I I I ;

: I I ~ I I : : :------~ \. ",LA DEPT. In EllipsesJOT NOTE Assessor's Block Numbers Shown

Y Parcel Numbers Shown In CirclesAssessor's TATION

--_...:: ..,"-~ ...-:..-.-.~-:--j :L--...:::~~~~~~:~~:~!:'::~~

PAI=lCEL 2 9.5 AC.

@ 8i~E;~.J

DEHEL Si

.. :

3)''

I

• I • • • • • •I.... . :/,r- obl- 0'1: :

I

13

"." '-""._.~..

TO:

THRU:

THRU:

MEMORANDUM

Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Members, Kenai Peninsula Borough Ass(:mbly

~ale Bagley, Mayor ~ . .---.

Colett(~ Thompson, Borough Attorney .1/ Robert Bright, Planning Director -e-J-..9 Roy Dudley, Land Management Agent tfO

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

FROM: Charles Franz, CEO, South Peninsula Hospital

DATE: July 26,2001

SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001./f-.t'&uthorizing the acquisition of Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, Homer Recording District and appropriating $121,000.

The accompanying ordinance would authorize the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area through the borough to purchase Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, which are situated next to the South Peninsula Hospital. Both the nonprofit operating board of directors and the service area board of directors have approved the proposed purchase. As shown in the attached documents, for approximately seven years the hospital has attempted to negotiate with the owner of the properties to buy these parcels. The property is needed by the hospital in order to expand the hospital facilities. The hospital is in the process of developing a long-term strategic plan, but its options are severely limited by the lack of contiguous available property. At this time these parcels would probably be used to provide space to replace the existing clinic building with a new administrative office and clinic.

The proposed purchase price is significantly greatf:r than the appraised or assessed market value of these properties. Attached is a memorandum summarizing efforts to buy the property. The 1998 appraisal estimated these lots to be worth $53,500. The most recent appraisal by our assessing department, dated July 26,2001, finds that the current assessed value is $17,600 per parcel, or $35,200 total. Despite this disparity, the service area board and operating board have both requested that the assembly approve the purchase as they believe the hospital needs the property to better serve the service area, and the seller is unwilling to sell the property for a lesser sum.

14

SOUTH PENINSULA HOSPITAL SERVICE AREA BOARD REGULAR BOARD MEETING

Hospital Conference Room July 5, 2001

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by Mr. Green.

ROLL CALL:

Present: Lois Irvin LeRoy Gannaway Angelo Hillas

David Green Karen Berg-Forrester Dave Evans

Excused: Eileen Bechtol

Absent: Julie Woodworth Harry Gregoire

Also Present: Charles Franz. Chief Executive Officer Charles Button, Chief Financial Officer Tom Walpole, Personnel Director

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Mr. Green suggested adding SAB Attendance as Item C under NEW BUSINESS.

The Agenda was approved as amended.

COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE

There were no comments.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 7, 2001, REGULAR SERVICE AREA BOARD MEETING.

BERG-FORRESTERJEVANS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED.

The motion carried without objection.

REPORTS

Chairman

Mr. Green had no report.

Administrator

15

South Peninsula Hospiull July 5, 2001 Regular Service Area Board Meeting Page 2

Mr. Franz announced a picnic is planned for noon on Friday, July 13, with serving starting at 11 :00 a.m. It will be held on the concrete pad at the end of the building near PT and BBQ chicken will be served. He invited those attending the Strategic Planning Committee to stop by.

Mr. Franz reported the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association annual meeting will be held September 12 - 14 at the Talkeetna Princess Lodge. He said this is an excellent opportunity to obtain Board education. There will be one session which will be attended by Board members, Administrators and Chiefs of Staff. Mr. Franz said they should receive the agenda soon and encouraged the members to mark the date on their calendars.

tvlr. Franz said he had been approached by Ms. Angie Newby, of Homer Real Estate, regarding a program called the File of Life. She has also contacted the Homer Volunteer Fire Department and the Senior Citizen Center asking if they might like to participate in this program. He said they would distribute, throughout out the community, a flJlder with a magnetic strip on the back which is placed on the refrigerator. This folder contains emergency infonnation such as individuals to be contacted, medications the resident is on or should not have, and there would also be a decal on the front door to let emergency personnel know of this file. Mr. Franz said it is a fairly inexpensive program to organize with each organization contributing $150.00 each to purchase 1,000 packets. These packets would then be distributed at the Street Fair, Health Fair and other local activiti,es.

tvlr. Franz said they are moving along with the strategic planning process and have completed the first draft of objectives. This draft supports goals one through three which deal with the building plan, campus master plan, physician recruitment and complimentary and alternative medicine. At the next committee meeting they will be working on goals four and five, which are staff recruitment and retention and improving operations. He said the committee now has a good outline of where things are headed and they have a recommendation on the land acquisition.

Operating Board

There was no one pres(:nt from the BOD.

Current Financial

Mr. Button reported patient service revenue is above budget by $1.5 million, at $19.2 million year to date, which was a very significant increase for May. Deductions from revenue is also above budget and total operating revenue is still very strong at $719,000 above budget. Operating expenses are $1. 4 million above budget at $16.2 million, with a year to date figure of $17.6 million. Mr. Button said there was an operating gain of $13,000 and year to date a loss of $646.000.

~lr. Button said the indicators show the hospital is doing well with cash on hand at 50 days and a goal of 45. The goal for AR days was 68 and it is now at 60, bad debt is at budget and charity is somewhat over budget. He said Acute Care is at 46% and Long Term Care is at 93%.

Mr. Gannaway asked if PT is doing as well as hoped by having more room. Mr. Franz said they are still looking for an Occupation Therapist but.have hired Mr. Roger Tolman as the new Physical Therapist. He added the current therapists, Ms. Karen Northrup and Mr. Douglas

16

South Peninsula Hospital July 5, 2001 Regular Service Area Board Meeting PageJ

Westphal, have been going great guns with the new space and have been able to work with, and supervise, more patients at the same time. Mr. Franz said the prior full-time aide in PT is currently in school, using the Tuition Assistance Program, to become a certified PT assistant and will be returning to work at SPH.

OLD BUSINESS

Critical Access Hospital

Mr. Franz reported an ordinance was introduced to the Borough Assembly meeting in June and will be heard for the final vote July 10th. He did not see a problem with this being approved since this will allow the Borough to accept the grant money from the State and pass it through to SPH to conduct the critical access hospital analysis.

Public Service Annoupcements

Mr. Walpole reported he has received a proposal from KBBl for sponsoring public service announcements and has received a set of videos showing 30 second TV commercials. Mr. Gannaway mentioned they had tried radio commercials several years ago and received a few letters from residents unhappy that the taxpayers money was being spent this way. Ms. BergForrester said she remembered when this happened but felt the general public would appreciate finding out what services are now available to them at SPH. Mr. Evans asked if cable station Channel 3 had public access programming for announcements. Ms. Berg-Forrester suggested calling GCl Cable.

Land Acquisitiop

Mr. Franz said there were two approaches discussed at the prior Strategic Planning Committee meeting. One was to move ahead with purchasing any available land and the other was to arrive at a plan for land acquisition based on specific needs for the campus master plan and building plan At the last committee meeting it was recommended to consider purchasing available land within the area bounded by Hohe on the East, Fairview on the South and Woodard Creek on the West. He said the SAB must make a recommendation to the Borough Assembly on property purchases and all land purchases must be approved by the Assembly. Currently there are five lots available and a possible sixth lot which they have not had any response from the owners on. Mr. Franz said they are currently working on the Chow property but the Borough Administration is not comfortable with agreeing to pay the purchase price, which is more than two times the appraisal price. They suggested possibly using their imminent domain authority and felt if they were going to try and purchase more property it may be setting a bad precedent. Ms. BergForrester commented the other properties available are already on the market at a set price. Mr. Franz said the appraised price in 1998 was $53,000 and the final price agreed upon was $120,000.

Mr. Green said in talking about property acquisition it was strongly advised that the Strategic Plan be in place before buying property. At the same time they did not want their hands tied if the opportunity arose for property which might fit into the overall plan.

17

South Peninsula Hospital July S, 2001 Regular Service Area Board Meeting Page 4

Mr. Hillas asked what it would take to get the Borough to cooperate. Mr. Franz felt the Board will need to decide what they want to do and then convince the Assembly members to pay more than the appraised value is a reasonable thing to do. Ms. Berg-Forrester said the price of the property will not go down and if you look at the other side of Bartlett there is more land but there are also more structures to deal with.

After further decision Mr. Green asked Jor a motion to consider for purchase any property which became available as bounded by Hohe, Fairview and Woodard Creek.

HILLASIEVANS MOVED TO CONSIDER FOR PURCHASE ANY PROPERTY WHICH BECAM:E AVAILABLE AS BOUNDED BY HORE, FAIRVIEW AND WOODARD CREEK.

The motion carried 'without objection by voice vote.

Mr. Green said the BOD will accomplish the same thing making both the SAB and BOD on record supporting the same motion. Mr. Franz suggested contacting Borough Assembly members Ms. Milli Martin and Mr. Chris Moss, to inform them the hospital would like to move ahead with the land purchase of the Chow property.

Ms. Berg-Forrester wanted the record to show she abstained from voting due to the fact she is representing some of the properties available.

Mr. Evans asked if this: motion will be incorporated as one of the action plans for the Strategic Plan. Mr. Green felt it would.

Ms. Irvin asked what would happen if imminent domain was used to secure the property, and the hospital did not use the: property, could it be sold. Mr. Franz said this would be a legal question the Borough attorney would have to answer because it would be the Borough who would have it for sale. Mr. Hillas felt imminent domain would be the last course of action.

NEW BUSINESS

Hospital Informational Brochures

Mr. Franz had a copy of a brochure the SAB produced several years ago to inform the community of services available to them at SPH. He said when public service announcements were being planned he thought of updating these brochures and suggested the Board might consider using some contingency funds to do so. These brochures could include pull-out information on an individual's will, Social Security nwnber and Power of Attorney. Ms. BergForrester suggested having them available at the Chamber of Commerce and all real estate offices since they make up packets for people interested in moving to the area. It was a general feeling this would be money well spent. Mr. Franz offered to get estimates on the cost to update the brochures.

SAD Member Recruitment

18

South Peninsula Hospital JUly 5, 2001 Regular Service Area Board Meeting PageS

Mr. Green said there are three Board members, Mr. Gregoire, Mr. Hillas and Mr. Evans, whose terms will expire at the end of this year. Mr. Green encouraged the members to look among the community for individuals who might be interested and have the skills and experience to be a benefit to the SAB. Mr. Hillas said he would run for re-election. Mr. Franz added there would be four seats available since Ms. Irvin is actually replacing Mr. McRae. Mr. Evans also said he would run for re-election.

SAB Attendapce

Mr. Green said the general organization rules for the SAB have a number of criteria for attendance which includes physical incompacity. Due to Mr. Gregoire's health he has not been able to met the attendance criteria and has missed several meetings with no contact to the SAB as to the status of the absences. Mr. Gregoire does not wish to resign, has made a number of contributions to the community, has put in a number of years of service to the community, but there has been a problem with having a quorum for the SAB to conduct business. Mr. Green opened this subject to the Board members for discussion on their feelings as to the status of Mr. Gregoire continuing as a member of the SAB.

Mr. Hillas said Mr. Gregoire intends to continue and was not sure why he wasn't in attendance this evening. He suggested the Board not take any action at this time and wait for the election in October. It was decided to wait until October.

Mr. Gannaway reminded the members in a prior year the SAB ran a newspaper ad asking for community members, interested in serving on the SAB, to submit a resume. Mr. Franz mentioned Ms. Sandy Stark has indicated an interest in serving on the Board. Mr. Green suggested running an ad soon since those interested will need to file for election.

COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE

• Mr. Walpole said it was a great meeting and felt the Board operates very well.

COMMENTS OF THE BOARD

Ms. Irvin said although the Board has had a problem with having quorums felt they were doing well. She commented she has greatly missed coming to the meetings and Mr. Green felt maybe Ms. Irvin has decided to run for the next tenn.

Ms. Berg-Forrester infonned the Board she will not be able to attend the meeting in December.

Mr. Gannaway reminded the Board members to remember individuals in Ninilchik who might be interested in serving on the SAB and to possibly again hold some meetings there.

Mr. Hillas asked if the members received their checks from the Borough. The members confinned they had.

NEXT MEETING DATES

Strategic Planning Committee - SPH Conference Rooms 07/13/01 12:00 p.m.

19

South Peninsula Hospillal July 5,2001 Regular Service Area Board Meeting Page 6

Finance Committee - SPH Conference Room 1 07/23/01 12:00 p.m. Regular BOD Meeting - SPH Conference Rooms 07/25/01 6:00 p.m. Strategic PlaIming Committee - SPH Conference Rooms 07/27/01 12:00 p.m. Joint SABIBOD Meeting - SPH Conference Rooms 08/02/01 6:00 p.m.

Mr. Green mentioned the SAB tries to have a member of the Board on the various committees. So far there is no acti~ve SAB member on the Finance Committee. Mr. Evans said he would be glad to be on the committee but could not attend at the noon time. He then volunteered to represent the SAB at the BOD meetings. Ms. Berg-Forrester said she would attend the Finance Committee meetings but would not be able to until winter. Mr. Green suggested keeping this in mind when talking to potential candidates, along with attending the yearly Retreat, regarding serving as a SAB member.

HILLASI BERG·FORRESTER MOVED TO ADJOURN.

The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

~ ..C~" C ~~~ Janet E. Han~r David Green, Chai c

\1 r ~

20

N

~E

South Peninsula HospitalArea

0.05 o 0.05 0.1 Niles

Parcels.shp _ Private -j Federal

IC._-j Native Allotment L.. ,_"., I

_ University _State _ Nlental Health w _ Nklnicipal _ Borough !-.-----; Native L-, I s

JUN-19-01 rUE 10:27.AM SHEILA BURGESS FAX NO. 235 0253 P, 03

FAX NO, 235 0253 P, 01APR-13-01 FRl 05:08 PI1 SHEILA BURGESS

SOUTH PENINSULA HOSPITAL 4300 BARTL."'T. HOMIiR, ALASKA 8.••a~ • (D07) 235-8101

April 13, 2001

Mr. Guy Chow 3915 PJvecsideDrive Burballk. California 91S0S

Lou 2 Ie. 3. Block 8, Fairview SubclMiion. PlatNo, 56-2936. Homer DiaLriC*

Dear Mr. Chow.

Ai la&lttd in OUl'telepbone conversation IIrliec today. the S01rth PeniAnlla Hospital Service Atr:a Soud has mnhorlzed me10 offer you y~ aikin, price ofene Hund~d Twent)' Thousand DoU.. ($120,000.00) for tho IUbject PfOPI"Y.

Sine:t the hospital it ownltd by the Kenai PenlnNlaBorough (IO'B), the tePB will purchase your property on behalfot'he hospital. The KPB Alsemhly must u1tbn&tely authorize \he purchfth. If'the followhas tr::nnI ue aeecptabI. u» You. IwiU~t the Kn to PNPU' a. PurcMse Agreemeol tor your SiIDWEe based ~n 1heae term.. 'De KPB Mayor will1h1ll atgn the Purchase A;reemtnt. The Puttbue ~eemeDtwill be subjo=10 approval by the Suv(ee Arci Boani and the KPB A.ue:mbly.

Rued 011 f:Kli convenatioD, I would lib tI:llU:P$t ~ !olJawina' tums for the sale of )'O\it property.

1. The pun:hu, price win be One Hundred 'rwemy 'lboa••Jld Dollars (S120,000.00) cash at dOB\ns.

2. Closing will occur as 300n IS it ~ be aebeduled after the ~satY appmvW have he=obwned.

3. "I'M curr6nt nnwwID vacate mo property on or before clem!. 4. "l"hc Ho.piral will pay an c:locia.! costs usociateQ wi1b 1hopu.rohase ctthe property.

Itthese terms are aoceprab1e to you, please.sian 'tJM accepwu:c below mel (ax back 10 me at your earliest conven\eoco. If'you lIave any questions, I G8d be reached at telephone (901) 235:" . 0326 or ~ (~7) 235-0253.

Charlu C. Pranz Ch\tt&ecud.ve Offieer

~~,d:;i~-?~"

I accept the. otter as described in items 1 • 4 above::-1.~~a.A.~.£m!-Jo.t«$ ( 1

."

23


-." '-""""._-"..


TO: Roy E. Dudley, Land Management Agent

THRU:~ne Horan, Director of Assessing

FROM: Randy Hughes, Appraiser .tf DATE: July 26,2001

SUBJECT: Appraisal of Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, According to Plat 56-2936, on File in the Homer Recording District, Third Judicial District, State of Alaska. Parcel # 175-052-03 & 04

This reappraisal relates only to the raw land value. It does not address the improvements on parcel 17S-DS2-04. An on site inspection was not performed.

A review of sales was conducted in the vicinity of the subject parcels to establish fair market value, This review found four comparable sales of similar size and attributes. The subject parcels are zoned residential/office.

I found only two recent sales in Fairview Subdivision that are zoned residential/office.

1) Parcel 175-063-09 (.28 acres) sold for $16,500 in October of 1998.

2) Parcel 175-056-04 (.28 acres) sold for $15,000 in September of 1999.

I found two additional sales in Fairview Subdivision that are zoned Urban Residential:

1) Parcel 175-063-03 (.28 acres) sold for $12,500 in April of 1997.

3) Parcel 175-063-19 (.55 acres) sold ,for $49,000 in July of 2000.

Adjusting for size, the indicated value of parcels 175-052-03 &04 based on the four sales ranges from $10,600 to $30,000 per parcel.

The median sales price per .19 acre parcel is $13,367. The mean sales price per .19 acre parcel is $16,850. The current assessment is $17,600 per parcel.

R:\Shane\Word\Memos\DUDLEY MEMO FAIRVIEW SUB.DOC

24

South Peninsula Hospital

Memorandum

June 28, 2001

TO: Roy Dudley, Land Management Department, Kenai Peninsula Borough

From: Charlie Franz, CEO

Subject: Land Acquisition

Acquisition of the subject property, Lots 2 & 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision (Chow Property), is critical to South Peninsula Hospital's long range plan. The hospital is currently landlocked with no ability to expand or correct long-standing problems with traffic flow and access to the hospital. Ifwe are going to grow with our community and continue to meet the needs ofour service area residents, expansion of the campus beyond the current land is imperative.

Enclosed is an excerpt from the hospital's strategic plan that addresses our need for additional land. The planned use of this specific piece of property is to provide additional contiguous land that will provide space to replace the existing clinic building with a new administrative office and medical clinic building.

Both the Board ofDirectors of South Peninsula Hospital, Inc. and the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area Board have recognized the critical need to acquire the Chow property for several years. The boards authorized me to enter into negotiations with the senior Mr. Chow more than three years ago.

I met with Mr. Clarence Chow in 1997 regarding the potential purchase of the property. At that time, I offered to pay him the appraised value of the property. Mr. Chow's response was that he did not need the money; that we needed the property; and that he would wait until we needed it badly enough to pay a higher price. Clarence Chow died approximately a year later.

A few months after Clarence Chow's death, the boards again requested that I attempt to purchase the Chow property and authorized the expenditure ofup to $100,000 for the purchase. I contacted Mr. Chow's son, Guy, who had inherited the property. Guy indicated that he was not interested in selling the property. Several months later he contacted me stating that he had changed his mind and would be willing to sell the property for the right price. I asked him what he thought the right pric1e was and he stated, $100,000. Subsequent to that telephone conversation, I made a ",rritten counter offer of$90,000. Several weeks passed without a response from Mr. Chow and then he made a counter offer of$125,000. I took Guy's counter

25

offer to the board and they recommended waiting.

Almost a year passed and Mr. Chow again contacted me and offered to sell the property at the currently agreed upon price of $120,000 and stated that his price was firm. Based on his previous reaction to my counter offer, I believed him. The boards again approved the purchase at the higher price and I made a written offer to Mr. Chow which he accepted after considering it for a few weeks.

At this time, we have place $20,000 earnest money in escrow with the Kachemak Bay Title Agency in an effort to solidify the agreement with Mr. Chow pending the review and approval of the Assembly.

26

Objective #1.1:

Determine the feasibility of needs and resulting Services implementation.

Objective #1.2:

Establish benchmarks in demographics to ensure Appropriate facility development

1.2.1 Develop/update demographic information.

1.2.2 Review existing external & internal assessment for needs information.

1.2.3 Conduct feasibility study to accomplish Objective 1.1

Objective #1.3:

To design a facility and campus master plan that provides easy access; is customer friendly; has a functional service layout; meets identified needs; meets projected expansion needs; and will be well suited for' possible changes in the future.

1.3.1 Plan to build a clinic/office to replace old clinic - raze old clinic when new space developed.

1.3.1 To prepare and publish a request for proposals for architectural services that addresses objectives above.

1.3.2 To select an architect.

1.3.4 Ree:xamine and combine the components of Phase II, III and the Medical Clinic in order to come up with a facility/campus master plan.

Objectiv,e #1.4:

Develop a land acquisition plan based on the results pbjective #1-1-1.3

27

3. TITLE

Title shall be delivered at time of closing by Warranty Deed, which shall be issued to KPB. SELLERS warrant and covenant that at the time of closing there shall be no liens or judgments recorded against SELLERS in the same recording district in which the property subject to this purchase agreement is situated. Title shall be clear of liens and encumbrances except title is subject to reservations, easements, rights-of-way, covenants, conditions and restrictions of record.

KPB shall order within 15 days of signature on this agreement a preliminary commitment for title insurance from Ka_chemak Bay Title Agency, Inc.

4. ESCROW AND CLOSING COSTS

In addition to the purchase price, KPB agrees to pay for all closing costs in connection with this Agreement, including without limitation all escrow fees, title insurance charges, recording fees and bank charges. All costs will be paid in full at the time of closing.

5. CLOSING

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, closing will occur within 90 days of execution of the Purchase Agreement. At closing, KPB will pay the balance of the purchase price. Both parties will execute all documents required to complete the Purchase Agreement and, if applicable, establish an escrow account.

6. POSSESSION

Possession shall be delivered to KPB at time of recording.

7. KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVAL

Purchase of Lots 2 and 3, Fairview Subdivision, according to Plat No. 56-2936, on file in the Homer Recording District, Third Judicial District, State of Alaska. by the Kenai Peninsula Borough is subject to authorization by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly and appropriation offunds. Ifthe Kenai Peninsula Borough fails to enact an ordinance authorizing the purchase ofthe subject land and appropriation of funds, this agreement shall be terminated without penalty.

8. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL

SELLERS covenant and agree that no hazardous substances or wastes shall

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska KPB/Chow - Purchase Agreement Page 2 of5

be located on or stored on the property, or any adjacent property by SELLERS, or contractors, nor shall any such substance be owned, stored, used, or disposed of on the property or any adjacent property by SELLERS, its agents, employees, contractors, or invitee's, prior to KPB'S ownership, possession, or control of the property.

9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT

This Agreement and the documents referred to herein contain the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the SUbject matter hereof. Any changes, additions or deletions hereto must be made in writing and signed by both KPB and SELL.ERS or their respective successors in interest. Provisions of this agreement, unless inapplicable on their face, shall be covenants constituting terms and conditions of the sale and of the agreement to finance the sale, and shall continue in full force and effect until the purchase price is paid in full, or this agreement is earlier terminated.

10. BREACH REMEDY

Prior to closing of the sale, in the event that KPB or SELLERS fail to make any payment required, or fails to submit or execute any and all documents and papers nec:essary for closing and transfer of title within time period specified in this agreement, the SELLERS or KPB may terminate this agreement.

11. MISCELLANEOUS

A. Time. Time is of the essence in performance of this Agreement.

B. Cancellation. This agreement, while in good standing may be canceled in whole or in part, at any time, upon mutual written agreement by SELLERS and the mayor. This purchase agreement is subject to cancellation in whole or in part if improperly issued through error in procedure or with respect to material facts.

C. Notice. Any notice or demand, which under the terms of this agreement or under any statute must be given or made by the parties thereto, shall be in writing, and be given or made by registered or certified mail, addressed to the other party at the address shown on the contract. However, either party may designate in writing such other address to which such notice of demand shall thereafter be so given, made or mailed. A notice given hereunder shall be deemed received when deposited in a U.S. general or branch post office by the addressor.

Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska Page 3 of5KPBfChow - Purchase Agreement

31

D. Interpretation. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been jointly drafted by both parties. It shall be constructed according to the fair intent of the language as a whole, not for or against any party. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Alaska. The titles of sections in this Agreement are not to be construed as limitations of definitions but are for identification purposes only.

This Agreement has been executed by the parties on the day and year first above written.

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH: SELLER:

Dale L. Bagley, Mayor Guy A. Chow

Dated: _ Dated: _

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND SUFFICIENCY:

Linda S. Murphy, Holly B Montague, Borough Clerk Assistant Borough Attorney

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 4 of5KPB/Chow - Purchase Agreement

32

NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF ALASKA ) )ss

THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT )

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of __________, 2001, by Dale L. Bagley, Mayor ofthe Kenai Peninsula

Borough, an Alaska municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation.

Notary Public in and for Alaska My commission expires: _

NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss )

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ___________, 2001, by Guy A. Chow.

Notary Public in and for Washington My commission expires: _

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska KPB/Chow - Purchase Agreement Page 5 of 5

33

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262-4441 FAX (907)262-1892

.. o' '....." ..." ..

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


THRU: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor 0&.6

FROM: Bob Bright, Planning Director 7-~,g

DATE: August 15,2001

SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001-19-08 Authorizing the Acquisition of Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, Homer Recording District and Appropriating $121,000.

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the subject ordinance during their regularly scheduled August 13,2001 meeting. No one testified during the public hearing.

The motion to recommend enactment of Ordinance 2001-19-08 failed unanimously.

Draft, unapproved minutes of the subject portion of the meeting are attached.

34

AGENDA ITEM F. PUBLIC HEARINGS

5. Ordinance 2001-19-08 Authorizing the Acquisition of Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Fairview SUbdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, Homer R,ecording District and Appropriating $121,000.

Memorandum as read by Max Best. PC Meeting: 8-13-01

Memorandum to: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President; Members, Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Through: Dale Bagley, Mayor; Colette Thompson, Borough Attorney; Robert Bright, Planning Director; Roy Dudley, Land Management Agent

From: Charles Franz, CEO, South Peninsula Hospital

The accompanying ordinance would authorize the South Peninsula Hospital Service Area through the borough to purchase Lots 2 and 3, Blo(~k 8, Fairview Subdivision, Plat No. 56-2936, which are situated next to the South Peninsula Hospital. Both the nonprofit operating board of directors and the service area board of directors have approved the proposed purchase. As shown in the attached documents, for approximately seven years the hospital has attempted to negotiate with the owner of the properties to bUy these parcels. The property is needed by the hospital in order to expand the hospital facilities. The hospital is in the process of developing a long-term strategic plan, but its options are severely limited by the lack of contiguous available property. At this time these parcels would probably be used to provide space to replace the existing clinic building with a new administrative office and clinic.

The proposed purchase price is significantly greater than the appraised or assessed market value of these properties. Attached is a memorandum summarizing efforts to bUy the property. The 1998 appraisal estimated these lots to be worth $53,500. The most recent appraisal by our assessing department, dated July 26, 2001, finds that the current assessed value is $17,600 per parcel, or $35,200 total. Despite this disparity, the service area board and operating board have both requested that the assembly approve the purchase as they believe the hospital needs the property to better serve the service area, and the seller is unwilling to sell the property for a lesser sum.

END OF MEMORANDUM

Mr. Best commented that the Assembly narrowly approved introduction of the ordinance during their August 7 meeting. He believed introduction was approved so public testimony could be heard.

Mr. Bright commented about the Assembly's dissatisfaction with the assessed value versus the proposed purchase price, which is approximately 3.5 times the assessed value.

Vice Chairman Bryson openl~d the meeting for public comment. N() members of the public were present. Seeing and hearing no one Wishing to comment, Vice Chairman Bryson closed the public hearing and opened discussion among the Commission.

MOTION: Commissioner Hohl moved, seconded by Commissioner Boscacci, to recommend enactment of Ordinance 2001-19-08.

Vice Chairman Bryson re-stated the motion.

Commissioner Martin asked iif eminent domain would be in effect if the Assembly refused to buy the parcel. Mr. Bright replied the Assembly discussed eminent domain. Mr. Best commented that in order to utilize eminent domain, the Borough would have to have a specific project and show necessity. The Land Management Division requested a plan so the need for expansion of the hospital can be shown. At this time the Mayor is not in favor of implementing eminent domain, but he does not support paying 3.5 times the assessed value.

Commissioner Johnson said he would vote against the motion. He could not support paying $86,000 more than assessed value for the parcels. He hoped the property owner would propose a more realistic sale price in the \future.

'KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13.2001 MEETING PAGE 24

UNAPPROVED MINUTES 35

Commissioner Troeger also opposed the motion. He found the proposed price exorbitant and did not think the Borough should pay this price for property. He recognized the hospital's need for property, but he did not think the Borough should be held hostage to this exorbitant sale price.

Commissioner Hohl said she would also vote against the motion. She was unsure how many parcels the hospital would eventually need for their expansion. Once precedent is set, future prices might reflect the precedent. If the hospital would like to expand beyond the subject parcels, it may again face very high proposed purchase prices. Commissioner Hohl thought the assessed value might not accurate. She wondered if the Assessor considered the highest and best use for hospital expansion. The tax parcel information showed the property as residential use.

VOTE: The motion failed unanimously.

HAMMELMAN ABSENT

BRYSON NO

BOSCACCI NO

CLARK NO

HOHL NO

JOHNSON NO

MARTIN NO

PETERSEN NO

TAURIAINEN ABSENT

TROEGER NO

VACANT SEAT EIGHT NO TWO ABSENT ONE VACANT SEAT

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2001 MEETING PAGE 25


Introduced by: Mayor Date: 08/21/01 Hearing: 09118101 Action: Vote:


AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE RECEIPT OF A MUNICIPAL CAPITAL MATCIDNG GRANT FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA FOR ROAD PROJECTS; AND

APPROPRIATING $494,848 TO A CAPITAL PROJECT ACCOUNT

WHEREAS, the Borough has received notification from the State Department of Community and Economic Development of a grant award for fiscal year 2001/02 through the municipal capital matching grant program for the purpose of borough-wide road improvement projects, and that $494,848 has been awarded to the Borough for this purpose; and

WHEREAS, for each capital project grant that a municipality receives, a local match, or local share of the cost, must be provided by the municipality; and

WHEREAS, a mill rate in the amount of 1.00 was levied on all taxable property within the Road Service Area, a portion of which will be used to provide the necessary matching grant funds; and

WHEREAS, Alaska Statute 37.06.030 requires that municipalities with a population greater than 5,000 provide a 30% local match; and

WHEREAS, under AS 37.06.030, the Borough's local share percentage is 30%, or $212,078 for the FY'02 grant; and

WHEREAS, matching funds in the amount of $212,078 are available in the Road Service Area's account No. 434.33950.M5802.49999; and

WHEREAS, the local share contribution of $212,078 and the State's allocation of $494,848 will provide a total of $706,926 to be used for road improvements on Boroughmaintained roads; and

WHEREAS, through adoption of Resolution 2000-084 the Borough Assembly approved the list of road projects for inclusion in the State's FY'02 capital matching grant program;

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-19-09 Page lof2

37

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH:

SECTION 1. That the Mayor is authorized to execute a grant agreement, thereby accepting the provisions therein, and to accept a grant for capital improvement projects in the total amount of $494,848 as appropriated by the Alaska Legislature.

SECTION 2. That grant funds in the amount of $494,848 are hereby appropriated to the Road Service Area capital projects account No. 434-33950-M5802-49999.

SECTION 3. That the local match requirement was previously appropriated from service area tax revenues to account No. 434.33950.M5802.49999 (Road Service Area capital projects).

SECTION 5. That this ordinance takes effect immediately upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS * DAY OF *,2001.

Timothy Navarre, Assembly President

AITEST:


Ordinance 2001-19-09 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of2

38

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH Community & Economic Development Division

43335 Kalifornsky Beach Road, Suite 16 Soldotna, Alaska 99669·8250

BUSINESS: (907) 262-6355 FAX: (907) 262-6762 bgolden @borough.kenai.ak.us

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM

TO:

THRU:

Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Members of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor ./JLt!>

FROM: Bonnie L. Golden, Grants Manager b,


SUBJECT: Ordinance Authorizing the Receipt of a Municipal Capital Matching Grant from the State of Alaska for Road Projects; and Appropriating $706,926 to a Capital Project Account

The Alaska Legislature has appropriated $494,848 to the Kenai Peninsula Borough for its allocation under the FY'02 capital matching grant program. This is a $2,842 decrease from the amount received from the State last year ($497,690). Grant funds are to be used to continue our borough-wide road improvement program. The Road Service Area Board and the Assembly through adoption of KPB Resolution 2000-084 approved projects to be completed using these grant funds.

A local share must match the State's share on a 30170 split based on the total project cost. Therefore, using the appropriated amount of $494,848, the required local share is $212,078. The local share for the Road Service Area was approved within the service area's budget for fiscal year 2001/02. The attached ordinance transfers the State's share to the same account.

Ibg

!O!/~~

DATE: ~ ()BY:

FINANCE DEPARTMENT FUNDS VERIFIED

ACT # If,'!. H9ro·/hS"Bo;J. ''tif1

cc: Gary Davis, KPB Roads Director

I.;"I{fbttk",

39

Introduced by: Popp, Navarre, Merkes Date: 09/04/01 Hearings: 09/18/01 & 10/9/01 Action: Vote:


AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $250,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE COOK INLET REGIONAL CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL

TO FUND NON-TANK VESSEL CONTINGENCY PLANS FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION IN COOK INLET, INLET MAPPING SERVICES, MONITORING

POTENTIAL COOK INLET CONTAMINANTS AND OTHER RELATED ACTIVITIES

WHEREAS, the Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council (CIRCAC) is a federally mandated organization under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90), and;

WHEREAS, with the goal of maintaining the pristine nature of the Cook Inlet waterway, the mission of CIRCAC is to represent the citizens of Cook Inlet in promoting environmentally safe marine transportation and oil facility operations in Cook Inlet, and;

WHEREAS, CIRCAC funds are currently limited to addressing Cook Inlet environmental health issues with regard to crude oil vessels and facilities only, and;

WHEREAS, the Alaska State Legislature recently enacted Senate Bill 16 which requires nontank vessels exceeding 400 gross tons to provide oil discharge contingency plans and amending the duties of response action contractors and related matters; and

WHEREAS, CIRCAC has the infrastructure and expertise in place, but lacks the funds, to expand the scope of its duties to Cook Inlet's entire waterway in a comprehensive manner; and

WHEREAS, Alaska Statute 29.35.210 authorizes the Kenai Peninsula Borough to provide, by ordinance, water pollution control and to contain, clean up, or prevent a release or threatened release of oil or a hazardous substance in a manner that is consistent with a regional master plan prepared by the Department of Environmental Conservation under AS 46.04.210 on a nonareawide basis;


SECTION 1. The sum of two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000.00) shall be appropriated from the general fund to account No. 100.94910.43011 to fund a contract with CIRCAC in which CIRCAC shall:

Kenai Peninsula Borough., Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEA,. BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-19-11 Page lof2

40

1. Provide a comprehensive public review of non-tank vessel contingency plans of ships that transit Cook Inlet;

2. Expand the Shore-zone mapping program to encompass all of Cook Inlet's shorelines and the outer Kenai Peninsula coast and dovetail this web-based database with the KPB GIS mapping efforts;

3. Continue to monitor the background levels of a suite of potential contaminants to Cook Inlet's intertidal and subtidal habitats to ensure a program that is spatially and temporally comprehensive; and

4. Other related operational needs ofor opportunities for CIRCAC.

SECTION 2. That the mayor is authorized to negotiate and execute a contract that effectuates the intents and purposes of this ordinance.

SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TillS * DAY OF *,2001.


ATTEST:


Ordinance 2001-19-11 New Text Underlined: [DELETED TExT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2of2

41

~~ENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262-4441 FAX (907)262·1892

II DALE BAGLEY

MAYOR

MEMORANDUM

TO: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President Members, Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

FROM: Bill Popp, Assembly Member ~ Tim Navarre, Assembly President ;r:: Grace Merkes, Assembly Member 7Z "". e;....t.


SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001-/9-11 appropriating $250,000 for Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council

Recent events in Cook Inlet and Prince William Sound have brought to light the need for better baseline information about water quality in Cook Inlet, increased scrutiny of oil discharge contingency plans for non-tank vessels exceeding 400 gross tons, and the hundreds of miles of oil and natural gas underwater pipelines that have been in Cook Inlet for up to 40 years or more.

As oil and gas production and exploration continues to expand in Cook Inlet, increased monitoring is justified. In addition, the system of underwater oil and natural gas pipelines continues to age with a resulting increased potential for seepage and discharges into Cook Inlet.

The Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council's (CIRCAC) staff, institutional expertise, and unique familiarity with Cook Inlet make it the best qualified organization to perform the monitoring and assessments of contingency plans and baseline water quality studies to identify subtle changes in future water quality in the waters of Cook Inlet. In doing so, CIRCAC will be able to better help protect the waters of Cook Inlet so that the citizens of the Kenai Peninsula Borough may continue to enjoy the benefits of a vibrant oil and gas industry, commercial fishing industry, and tourism industry that all rely on the continued health of Cook Inlet.

42

Introduced by: Date: Shortened Hearing: Action: Vote:

Mayor 09/04/01 09/18/01


AN ORDINANC}: ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $57,000 FROM THE KENAI WATERSHED FORUM TO FUND A KENAI RIVER CENTER RESEARCH AND

EDUCATION PROGRAM CONTRACT

WHEREAS, the Kenai Watershed Forum agreed to provide $110,000 to the Kenai Peninsula Borough to assist with implementing the Kenai Peninsula Borough river habitat prote<:tion ordinances in KPB Chapters 21.18,21.20, and 21.24; and

WHEREAS, the authorization was for fiscal year 2001, and the assembly appropriated $53,000 of this sum in the fiscal year 2001 budget; and

WHEREAS, the contract was received and processed during the end of fiscal year 2001 ; and

WHEREAS, in order to accept the remaining funds, they must be accepted and appropriated by the borough assembly;


SECTION 1. That the mayor is authorized to accept $57,000 from the Kenai Watershed Forum on the terms and conditions contained in the accompanying contract agreement No. KWF-KRC-006, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by refe:rence.

SECTION 2. That the funds are appropriated to account No. 250.21135.02H20.49999.

SECTION 3. That the mayor is authorized to execute all documents necessary to complete this project in accordance with this ordinance and applicable law.

SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS * DAY OF * 2001.



Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-19-12

43 Page 1 of 1

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669-7599 BUSINESS (907) 262-4441 FAX (907)262-1892

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


THRU: j,Dale Bagley, Mayor ~ FROM~ JeffSinz, Finance Director

~Colette Thompson, Borough Attorney .~,John Mohorcich, Kenai River Center Coordinator

DATE: ~\ September 7,2001

SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001-19-12, Kenai Watershed Forum appropriation

The administration requests that the following changes be made to this ordinance:

TITLE. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING [AND APPROPRIATING $57,000] $110,000 FROM THE KENAI WATERSHED FORUM TO FUND A KENAI RNER CENTER RESEARCH AND EDUCATION PROGRAM CONTRACT

SECTION 1. That the mayor is authorized to accept [$57,000] $110,000 from the Kenai Watershed Forum on the tenns and conditions contained in the accompanying contract agreement No. KWF-KRC-006, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. That $53,000 of the funds [ARE] were previously appropriated to account No. 250.21 135.02H20.49999 as part of the FYOI budget, and the remaining $57,000 will be used to reimburse the borough for costs incurred and funded through a transfer from the general fund during FYOI.

44

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262-4441 FAX (907)262·1892

1If.. _

'-"._.~... DALE BAGLEY

MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


THRU: Dale Bagley, Mayor DL 6

FROM: Bob Bright, Planning Director ~ Colette Thompson, Borough Attorney ~


SUBJECT: Ordinance 2000-19-.1.A, Kenai Watershed Forum Contract

The accompanying ordinance accepts and appropriates the sum of $57,000 from the Kenai Watershed Forum. The Kenai Watershed Forum entered into a contract with the Kenai Peninsula Borough in which it would fund $110,000 to assist with implementing the borough's river habitat protection ordinances. The assembly appropriated $53,000 of this $110,000 in the fiscal year 2001 budget. The balance of $57,000 has not been appropriated as the contract was only recently executed. Upon acceptance and appropriation of these funds, the Kenai Peninsula Borough will be reimbursed for expenditures already made implementing the river habitat protection ordinances.

Shortened hearing is requested in order that the funds may be received, and the administration may close out this carry-over from the previous fiscal year.

Kenai Watershed Forum Kenai River Center Research and Education Program

Contract Agreement #: KWF-KRC-006

Contract Period For Expenses incurred: 07/25/2000 - 07/26/2001

Organization: Kenai Peninsula Borough

Project: To assist with the implementation of Kenai Peninsula Borough River Habitat Protection Ordinances 21.18, 21.20 and 21.24.

Amount of Contract: $ 110,000

Kenai Peninsula Borough is responsible for complying with all conditions of this Agreement, including all referenced materials. For the purposes of this Agreement, Kenai Peninsula Borough is referred to as the "Contractee."

1. Purpose of Contract. This contract is made to the Contractee for the purposes of supporting the Kenai Peninsula Borough River Habitat Protection ordinance. The intent of this ordinance is to ensure measures for the protection of salmon spawning and rearing habitat are consistently applied. while protecting private property rights. Within a described buffer zone. the ordinance restricts certain land uses to help prevent streamside pollution and impacts to the riparian vegetation and the integrity of the stream banks. It contains a number of measures detailing what activities are allowed and which activities must be permitted based on the potential for increased water pollution and riverine habitat damage. The $110.000 is to assist the KPB's implementation of the River Protection Ordinance. Funding for KPB staff will be applied to carry forward the River Protection Ordinance, and staff will be required to evaluate the existing conditions of pollution sources within the 50 foot buffer zone. This ordinance will require outreach, coordination, and cooperation from streamside landowners to survey the existing pollution sources along the newly regulated streams. All of these funds will be used for salaries to implement the Kenai River Protection Ordinance, including outreach. education. and any associated activities except writing permits.

Special Condition: May not be used for permitting

') Contract Conditions.

Use of Funds. Funds may only be used for the project described in Section 1 of this Agreement and in the Approved Project Budget (Attachment A).

Prohibition Against Lobbving. Funds provided under this Contract may not be used to support lobbying activities. defined as attempting to persuade members of any legislative or

Kenai Warershed Forum Page I

46

administrative branch (city, state, or US Congress) to enact, defeat, or repeal legislation or regulations of any kind.

Prohibition Against Assignment of Rights and Benefits. As of the date of this Agreement, the Contractee has not and will not assign or convey any rights or benefits arising from or connecting to either the Project or this Agreement to any party without the prior written consent of Kenai Watershed Forum. This includes but is not limited to photographs, newspaper and magazine articles, publishing rights and marketing agreements.

Unused Funds and Reversion. Any portion of the Project Total not expended at the end of the contract period will be returned to Kenai Watershed Forum within thirty (30) days, along with any interest earned on the Research / Education Contract.

3. Publicitv and Credit. Contractee will acknowledge, and give proper credit to, Kenai Watershed Forum and the Environmental Protection Agency. Such acknowledgment and credit should be included in any press releases, annual reports" brochures, video credits, dedications, and any other public communications related to this award. Copies of material should be provided to Kenai Watershed Forum as part of the reporting process. Kenai Watershed Forum shall have the opportunity to review materials prior to publication or release.

4. Payment Schedule. Funds can be disbursed by Kenai Watershed Forum to the Contractee after Kenai Watershed Forum has received:

• A signed copy of this Agreement; • Up-to-date financial and programmatic reports (Attachment B), conforming to the tenns

of Section 6.

S. Cash Management of Federal Funds. This Contract consists of $110,000.00 in federal funds appropriated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use in a Kenai Watershed Forum Contract. In accepting these funds, Contractee must comply with federal equal opportunity employment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and drug-free workplace requirements.

Contractee is also subject to all terms and conditions of applicable OMB Circulars (See Section 14); Contractee's financial management system must comply with internal control requirements covering. but not limited to, cash receipts, cash disbursements, indirect costs, procurement, labor costs. and interest eamed on federal funds.

Interest Earned on Contract. If a Contractee receives advance payment on the Kenai Watershed Forum Contract. the Contractee must place those funds in an interest bearing, insured bank account. If advanced payments are spent within 90 days, Contractee is not obligated to track interest earned on the federal funds.

If federal funds are held by the Contractee for longer than 90 days, Contractee becomes obligated to track and report interest earned from the date that the Contractee received the Kenai Watershed Forum Contract. Furthermore, all interest earned on the Kenai Watershed Forum

Kenai Watershed Forum Page :2

47

Contract remains the property of Kenai Watershed Forum and is to be reported and returned to Kenai Watershed Forum with the Final Report.

Subcontractees. If the Contractee uses federal funds to make subcontracts to other entities, all conditions applicable to this Agreement to federal funds shall be transferred in writing to the subcontractee. Contractee must infonn all subcontractees that funds provided consist of federal funds, and provide Kenai Watershed Forum with documentation that all requirements applicable to federal funds have been passed on to subcontractees.

6. Reporting Requirements. The Contractee will keep Kenai Watershed Forum infonned of project progress. The Report Fonn, included as Attachment B to this Agreement, is used to convey both financial and programmatic infonnation. Contractee will submit semi-annual reports that are due to Kenai Watershed Forum on the following dates:

Given the nature of this contract, Kenai Watershed Forum requires only that the Kenai Peninsula Borough submit one written report that acknowledges the receipt of these funds along with documentation that all conditions of this agreement were adhered to in this single report. Please document the following:

Financial Updates. The financial component of the Report Fonn (Attachment B) outlines receipts and expenditures made under the tenns of this Agreement during the contract period and is-due on the date(s) stated above.

Pro!!rammatic Updates. The programmatic component of the Report Fonn (Attachment B) should be a succinct written statement that documents progress during the contract period against the specific tasks and objectives outlined in the Contractee's approved proposal under Section 2 of this document. Research papers and other exhibits should be attached as appropriate. Photographs are welcome.

Final Report. In addition to the financial and programmatic reports described above, Contractee will submit a final report adhering to the Final Report Guidelines (Attachment C). The final report is due within three months of contract completion or by the end of the contract period, whichever comes first. In summary, the final report must include:

• Accomplishments achieved and knowledge gained during the tenn of the contract as compared to the goals and objectives described in the approved proposal and any additional conditions outlined in Section 2 of this document:

• A final accounting for all receipts and contract expenditures compared to the approved budget. including a statement of interest earned on the Kenai Watershed Forum contract, if any. and a check for that interest:

• A project evaluation of what worked, what didn't, and why, and how the contract results will be used to improve the project and advance the goals of the contractee and other organization(s) involved: and

Kenai Watershed Forum Page 3

48

• Copies of publications, press releases, and other "products" produced as a result of the contract funding that have not already been transmitted to Kenai Watershed Forum.

One hard copy and one electronic copy (MS Word preferred) are to be provided. It is important that the reporting requirements be observed. The Contractee must infonn Kenai Watershed Forum in writing (Section 10) if problems are anticipated in providing these reports on a timely basis. Inaccurate or incomplete fonns will delay payment of requested funds. Failure to provide complete and timely reports will be considered a breach of this Agreement.

7. FinanciaVAdministrative Responsibilities. Kenai Watershed Forum may, as its sole discretion, postpone any or all payments if the Contractee fails to submit satisfactory and timely reports, as set forth in Section 6, or otherwise fails to comply with the tenns of this Agreement.

Procurement Procedures. Contractee agrees to establish procurement procedures to ensure against unnecessary or duplicative purchases.

Third-Party Pavments. Kenai Watershed Forum can, in consultation with the Contractee, pay third-party vendors directly where said payment will expedite the project. Amounts paid to vendors shall be deducted from the amount of funds paid to the Contractee under this Agreement.

Supporting DocumentationlRecord Keeping. In addition to the reporting requirements set forth in Section 6, the Contractee will keep systematic records of all expenditures relating to this contract. Vouchers consisting of bills, invoices, canceled checks, receipts, etc., will be retained by the Contractee for three (3) years after the submission and acceptance of a final report by Kenai Watershed Forum and will be available for inspection and audit by representatives of Kenai Watershed Forum or the US Government at any time during this period.

Audit. Kenai Watershed Forum may. at its own expense, examine, audit or have audited the records of the Contractee insofar as they relate to activities supported by this contract. Contractee will reimburse Kenai Watershed Forum, at the Contractee's sole expense, the amount of any expenditures disallowed by auditors through an audit exception or other appropriate means. This will be noted as a written finding that such expenditures failed to comply with any provision of this Agreement including the cash management of federal funds (Section 5 and Section 14).

:\-133 .-\udits. For all federal funds, the Contractee is responsible for detennining the audit requirements and conditions set forth in OMB Circular A-I33 and other OMB Circulars (Section I-n. If an OMB A-I33 audit is found to be required, a copy of the audit must be submitted to Kenai Watershed Forum within thirteen months after the end of the Contractee's fiscal year in which the Kenai Watershed Forum Contract was received.

8. Amendments and Extensions. Kenai Watershed Forum makes this contract with the understanding that all contract funds will be used in accordance with the project description and budget as approved. Should there be any material change in the purpose, objectives, character, method of operation, budget, or contract period for the project, the Contractee will-request


49

changes in writing to Kenai Watershed Forum. Explanatory narrative, progress to date, revised budget and as appropriate new project timeline must always accompany request for amendments or extensions. Contractee must receive written acceptance by Kenai Watershed Forum of any proposed changes prior to proceeding with the revised project.

9. Termination. Should Contractee fail to comply with any of the conditions of this Agreement, Kenai Watershed Forum may, at its sole discretion, immediately tenninate the contract and demand the Contractee to repay, within sixty (60) days, all Kenai Watershed Forum Contract principal and interest earned which have been advanced but not expended. Moreover, Kenai Watershed Forum may cancel all unpaid installments of the Project Total. This contract may also be terminated by mutual agreement, in which case any sums advanced, but not expended, shall be returned to Kenai Watershed Forum.

10. Notice. Correspondence between the parties should be addressed to:

Robert Ruffner Kenai Watershed Forum PO Box 2937 Soldotna, AK 99669 907-260-5449 fax: 907-260-5412 e-mail: [email protected]

Contractee: Kenai Peninsula Borough 144 N. Binkley St. Soldotna AK 99669

Contractee will notify Kenai Watershed Forum immediately of changes to personnel, address, telephone, etc.

11. Patents and Copvrights. Contractee has the right to obtain patents and copyrights on any work produced under this Agreement. Contractee agrees to provide Kenai Watershed Forum a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to utilize and publish any and all works produced under this Agreement.

12. Additional Support. In making this contract, Kenai Watershed Forum assumes no obligation to provide further funding or support to the Contractee beyond the tenns stated herein.

13. Liabilitv. In making this contract, Kenai Watershed Forum assumes no liability for injuries or loss to persons or property resulting from Contractee's activities under this Agreement. The Contractee agrees to indemnify Kenai Watershed Forum for any claims, judgments, actions or suits of any kind whatsoever arising from the project funded by this Agreement. In case of state institutions barred by law from accepting this liability clause, a letter so stating and citing the appropriate statute must be submitted to Kenai Watershed Forum.


50

14. Federal Rules and Regulations. The Contractee certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief that it and its principals: (a) are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debannent, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department of agency; (b) have not within a three-year period preceding the proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or perfonning a public (federal, state, or local) transaction of contract under a public transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; (c) are not currently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated here; and (d) have not within a three-year period preceding the proposal had one or more public transactions (federal, state, or local) tenninated for cause or default. A false statement on this certification may be grounds for termination of the award. In addition, under 18 USC § 1001, a false statement may result in a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both.

The Contract Agreement requires an understanding of, and compliance with, all relevant documents issued by the US Office of Management and Budget. The items indicated below are incorporated by this reference. Please check with your accountant and notify Kenai Watershed Forum if you need copies.

OMB Circular A-21 or A-87 or A-I22 Allowable Costs OMB Circular A-102 or A-IIO Uniform Administrative Requirements OMB Circular A-128 or A-133 Audit Guidelines

15. Arbitration and Choice of Law.

Arbitration. All claims, disputes. and other matters in question arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement or the interpretation or breach thereof, may be decided by arbitration by a person mutually acceptable to both parties. The contract to arbitrate will be enforceable under applicable law in any court of competent jurisdiction. Notice of the demand for arbitration will be filed in writing with [he other party. The demand for arbitration shall be made within a reasonable time after [he claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen.

Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be subject to, and constructed in accordance with, the Jaws of Alaska. without regard to choice of law principles.

Executed and made effective as of 8/).. '1.16 I , 200 I, by the authorized .--_r... of Kenai Watershed Forum. e~l;,;resentative

\,Cw'-'""--Robert Ruffner. Executive Director Kenai Watershed Forum


51

The Kenai Peninsula Borough acknowledges receipt of this Agreement and pertinent attachments as referenced above. The terms and conditions set forth herein are acceptable and we agree to comply with them. We understand that failure to comply with all conditions listed herein may result in immediate termination of this contract.

Signature: _

Title: _ Date:

ATTEST:


Please sign and return to Kenai Watershed Forum, PO Box 2937, Soldotna, AK 99669

Once we receive the contract agreement, a check will be issued and mailed to you.

Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:

Colette Thompson, Borough Attorney


52

Attachment A --- Approved Project Budget

Kenai Watershed Forum - Research / Education Contract

Contract Agreement #: KWF-KRC-006 Contractee: Kenai Peninsula Borough Project: To assist with the implementation of Kenai Peninsula Borough River Habitat Protection Ordinances 21.18.010 through 21.20.040

Contract Period: 07/25/2000 - 07/26/2001 Amount of Contract: $ 110,000.00

Approved Budf?et Expenses To Date Salaries/Bene{ils 5110,000.00 ColZlractual Equipment Materials Travel 11l-8urance Other Administration Total $ 110.000.00

Approved Budget (not to exceed $ 110,000.00)

Kenai Warershed Forum AITACHMENT A

53

Attachment B - InterimlFinal Report Form

Note, please use a copy of this fonn to file your reports

Report Date:

Contract Agreement #: KWF-KRC-006 Contractee: Kenai Peninsula Borough Project: To assist with the implementation of Kenai Peninsula Borough River Habitat Protection Ordinances 21.18.010 through 21.20.040

Contract Period: 07/25/2000 - 07/26/2001 Amount of Contract: $110.000.00

Amount ofFunds receivedji-om Kenai Watershed Fomm to date: _

Financial Update: Please use the following chart to report financial activity for the contract project referenced above. Use NA to indicate that no.financial activity occurred in a given category.

Approved Budget Expenses To Date SaLarie:o.lBenejits S 110,000.00 Contractual Equipment Materials Travel Insurance Other Administration Toral $ lIO,OOO.OO

Program Update: Please sUllllllari~e the co1ltract activity for this period oftime against rhe specific tasks and objectives outlined ill the C01ztractee '.'I approved proposal and under Sectiol/ :! of this document; use additional pages as needed. Describe. when appropriate: the problem or issue rhe partnership addressed; the diverse interests invoLved; measurable accomplishments and future goals; and any "lessons leamed. .. Ifno activity has occurred. provide a brief statement ofplanned action.

Kenai Watershed Forum AITACHMENT B

54

Attachment C -Fimll Report Form

Note, please use a copy of this form to file your reports

Report Date:

Contract Agreement#: KWF·KRC·006 Contractee: Kenai Peninsula Borough Project: To assist with the implementation of Kenai Peninsula Borough River Habitat Protection Ordinances 21.18.010 through 21.20.040

Contract Period: 07/25/2000 - 07/26/2001 Amount of Contract.: 110,000.00

Approved Budget Expenses To Date Salaries/Benefits $ 110,000.00 Contractual Equipment Materials Travel Insurance Other Administration Total $ I I 0.000.00

Kenai Watershed Forum ATIACHMENT C

55

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/04/01 Hearing: 09!l8/01 & 10/09/01 Action: Additional Hearing Scheduled for 09/18/01 Action: Date: Vote:

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH ORDINANCE 2001-31

AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF 27 PARCELS OF BOROUGH LAND BY OUTCRY PUBLIC AUCTION AND

SUBSEQUENTLY BY OVER-THE-COUNTER SALES

WHEREAS, the borough has received patent to the land listed on Attachment A of this ordinance~ and

WHEREAS, the land has been appropriately classified for deposit into the land bank:; and

WHEREAS, the land has been deposited into the land bank: pursuant to KPB 17.1O.060(B); and

WHEREAS, the Pilanning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended authori.zation of the sale of borough land by outcry auction by unanimous consent during the regularly scheduled August 13,2001 meeting;


SECTION 1. The parcels listed on Attachment A are authorized for sale at fair market value as established by the assessing department.

SECTION 2. The m.~thod of disposal shall be by outcry public auction pursuant to KPB 17.10.1 OO(B). The date of the auction shall be October 20, 2001.

SECTION 3. All parcels will be conveyed by quitclaim deed. Either title insurance or another similar report must be obtained for all borough-financed sales, at the buyer's expense, showing the condition of title and that there are no unsatisfied judgments or liens against the buyer at the time of closing, the latter of which shall also be verified by the buyer. A borough approved credit report shall be required of all buyers prior to the borough's financing a sale. In the event a title report showing a reasonably acceptable condition of title cannot be obtained, then either the buyer or the borough may elect to terminate the purchase contract, in which case all monies on deposit will be refunded to the buyer.

SECTION 4. Upon successfully bidding or entering into an agreement to acquire the land, a down payment often percent (10%) of the:: sale price, or $1,500.00, whichever is

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Tut Underlined, [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-31 Page] of3

56

greater, shall be made, and the applicable terms and provisions of KPB 17. 10.120 and KPB 17.10.130 shall apply.

SECTION 5. Pursuant to KPB 17.10.070(0), if any lands are not sold by the authorized means within ninety days, or the period specifically authorized by the ordinance, the property may be available for sale as an over-the-counter sale to be conducted as provided in KPB 17. 10. 1OO(H). The assembly authorizes exceptions to KPB 17.10.070(D) which requires that any lands not sold within 120 days after being eligible over-the-counter will revert to the land bank. These exceptions are based on the following findings of fact pursuant to KPB 17. 10.230.

1. Special circumstances or conditions exist.

A. It is in the best interest of the borough to establish an ongoing, year-to-year, overthe-counter land sale after an outcry public auction rather than an over-thecounter sale that lasts only 120 days in order to save the expense associated with redoing the entire sale procedure.

B. If the borough does not sell a parcel through an outcry public auction, then it may need a longer exposure period in the market place. An ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale will provide the longer exposure period to the market place.

c. An ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale better serves the public by providing continuous opportunity to purchase public land.

D. The borough may add parcels to an ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale after subsequent outcry public auctions as an efficient and effective means of marketing borough land.

2. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right and is the most practical manner of complying with the intent of this chapter.

A. KPB 17. 10 through its numerous provisions and methodology for sale of borough land intended that borough land be sold on a regular basis. The intent of the land sale provisions was to provide the public the opportunity to purchase borough land. An ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale serves the public better than an over-the-counter sale that lasts only 120 days and is the most practical manner ofcomplying with the intent of this chapter.

B. As provided in Section 6 below, the ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale will commence the first business day following the public outcry auction. However, any parcels bid on at the public outcry action that are not successfully closed may be added later to the over-the-counter land sale, normally within ninety days, but after a longer period of time if circumstances warrant.

Ordinance 2001-31 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of3

57

3. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area. A. The above findings provide that an ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land

sale will benefit the public and not injure it.

B. The effect on private property in the area of borough land offered for sale through an ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale as opposed to another land sale method will be negligible.

SECTION 6. Based on the foregoing, the mayor is hereby authorized to establish an ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale of borough land as provided in KPB 17.10. 100(H) of the parcels that are not sold at the outcry public auction.

1. The ongoing, year-to-year, over-the-counter land sale shall commence the first business day following the public outcry auction authorized in sections 1 and 2 of this ordinance. Parcels will be sold at appraised value and on the same terms as the public outcry auction.

2. The mayor may later add to the over-the-counter land sale any parcels bid on at the public outcry action that are not successfully closed, normally within ninety days, but after a longer period of time if circumstances warrant.

3. A winning bidder who fails to complete the purchase of a parcel will forfeit the right to purchase the same parcel in the over-the-counter sale.

4. All conditions in KPB 17.1 0.130 and KPB 17.20.240 shall apply unless clearly inconsistent with this ordinance.

SECTION 7. The mayor is authorized to sign any documents necessary to effectuate this ordinance.

SECTION 8. The ordinance shall become effective immediately upon enactment.

ENACTED BY THI; ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS ". DAY OF"', 2001.



Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001·31 Page 3 of3

58


DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


THRU: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor OU1

FROM: Bob Bright, Planning Director 1.JJ1 Max Best, Borough Surveyor "['I':f?:)


SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001-31

Attached please find a substitute Attachment A which contains minimum bid amounts and parcel numbers that were not available when this ordinance was introduced. The administration respectfully requests that the assembly move to substitute the Attachment A.

59

SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE 2001·31 ATTACHMENT A

Tax Parcel No.

General Location Legal Description Classification Minimum Bid

a BE DETERMINED $88.000

a BE DETERMINED $91,000 .

a BE DETERMINED $91,800

OBEDETERMINED $65,700

$56,000.00

$12,600.00

$144,500.00

$20,000.00

$16,000.00

$63,900.00

$87,500.00


a BE DETERMINED $38,200 .


60

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262·4441 FAX (907)262-1892

DALE BAGLEY MEMORANDUM MAYOR


THRU: O",l' Dale L. Bagley, Mayor

THRU: 'l--~ Robert L. Bright, Planning Director ('!!JNlax. J. Best, Borough Surveyor

FROM: flD Roy E. Dudley, Land Management Agent

DATE: August 21,2001

SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001.ll authorizing the sale of 27 parcels of borough land by outcry public auction

KPB 17.1O.070(A) directs that two land sales be conducted each year, a tax. foreclosure sale and a competitive market value sale. The attached ordinance recommends 27 parcels for sale by outcry public auction. Maps showing the location of each parcel are attached.

Land Management staff reviewed the land bank inventory and recommended the 27 parcels based on size, price, location, soil conditions and access. Land Management staff felt it was important to recommend parcels for which there was perceived market demand. All parcels that were in last year's sealed bid land sale that did not sell are now included in the outcry auction.

A sealed bid land sale has been the method by which the borough has conducted its competitive mark(:t value land sale for the past six years. This year the proposed method is an outcry public: auction. The outcry public auction will be held in the Assembly Chambers of the Borough Administration building on October 20, 2001. Newspaper advertisement will begin and brochures will be available on September 20,2001 to meet the advertising requirements of KPB 17.10.110. The brochures will delineate the parcels and explain the outcry public auction process and procedures. All parcels will have the front property comers marked and sale signs posted.

Parcels that do not sell at the outcry public auction are proposed to be offered over-thecounter. The current over-the-counter sale of the borough's remaining inventory of parcels in the Gray Cliff and Moose Point Subdivisions will continue as authorized by Ordinances 98-27 and 98-43. Subject Ordinance 2001-_ will authorize a new over-thecounter land sale for all parcels that do not sell by means of the outcry public auction.

62

ORDINANCE 2001-31 ATTACHMENT A

Tax Parcel No.

General Location Legal Description Classification Minimum Bid

To be detennined

$56,000.00

$12,600.00

$144,500.00

$20,000.00

$16,000.00

$63,900.00

$87,500.00

ssessor Parcel No. to be assigned



ssessor Parcel No. to be assi ed

63








64

__________ _ .'...-,In,,,,,,-.__ _______.... • -....... .....e==h-·· ...-.......~"'". _._. oii._._·.., .

~

COOK

~AI".;:. noa,...Nt;;$

!iU~V;:( ••;

Ii _

;-- ' I/,\,I \ '

\

I

~ \ v;'

\ \

SUbject Parcel 012-020.07

Subject Parcel , 012-02G-06 iA"ATE BE"Cl'! suet>;

I AMENDEO .

I . L-..J

, , ~,~

,I I I I:

PLANNER 1"=1000 .Kenai Peninsula BoroughJun 06. 1999

65

I

I i !

! I I II

I I I I

{ I

i~

z

o

66

.. r

SUbject Parcel 039-010-55 ---;;

L....; ! I

:- ~·I I I

i

WILD'

•..

SITE MAP

PLANNER 1"=996'Kenai Peninsula Borough

Aug 23, 1998

67

13

"-...----=-:::::l

\ \

\ \

PLANNER 1"=594'SITE MAP Sep 10, 1999

1/2 ..,1/0

SU~';ECT-.-------1""'-__ 04S-07()-ti/

I

·..0'4'1

68 IS

------------_.. --.._-----------

I

PLANNER Sep 10, 1999

I

-

0-1 ~

I

I

, J

1-·594'SITE MAP 69 /7

\ IDU." 1Il1lO117:1 UUIA n.KT, I~ 055-290 UJL I~' JUUIA 'DIIII I 1_ SC8IlIDT /Ill I IN_" COOK N.ET SPIll .Ift. _31UUIA _I _ !ICIl1l1DT ftACI1 ~l a ~ IN_ I ...... IlCl 3 (llllll_l III-.!IC1IIImsulD. __ '1I111G3 HIlL ~ =:r':,":r:~~IIC·~. cr:., ULRA .....1tH ADD. IN_

I l.&.l ....:.~.~ .,, '@~

;1 ~~ ... ~"€) ~~ ,. ,J(AL8E~ sueD.

ADDlTldN NO. 1 SPUR VISTA SUBD. .....I.uxa

"@"KALBEA SUBD ... ,

NO.3 H II@A7 I @@:::j:~~

lOt

~ ~

, I~

'---, .1c @(Z) ~

I~"'@02

,~.

'3), i • '@'Ct .•I.e,: s ~ ~ L_@ ,.. r.:;.. ,

-SUGOCl S·..

TRACT 5 K.D,M. SUBDIVISION 00 •••

KALBEA SUBD. .......-o1"IOID 11(........" ..@ 1 ~

M"••". _cr.CIiI J1@ I I ~ _~OlO ", ......

~ r!I~

~ !I I I ,ij !lta b :; ~:::: . I

®0.... fE: SEE BELOW rH" MAP II PREPAIlED FOR KENAI PEN"5UlA

011 10 R& A""SWENr IIOl 10llOUGH ASSESSING DEPT. USf ONlY ANO " NOr

IIEVISfD

i

Oflfn AOO IHfENCED ~o. ANY orHER u.se oct REPRESlHfAflO"ro

~ JAN 12. tOOO Assessor's Map NOTE - .... sseuor·s BlOCk NumlJerS Shown In Ellipses "'01022 0"2.07.

Kenai Peninsula Borough ""essor's Parcel NumlJers Shown In CirCles05520051 055200751" = 500'

., ..

--

55-5*

,~

J--1

. ~...@) \\~

®l 1·4'~~ 11S.c., ... ,!; I..' ~,,,,,.,. I

- - - - _. • "... I , •• , ..... - i r1J'J"ji"@ ~\

TIAG' J4

-

~"".J'1'

I' ~ ...47

I....-J. ~ _. -\1'''-''"

\t

r.l:JU @)

~ fJl/,r,'

~ ~

055-540-18 TRACT F, KARLUK REEF SUB AnDN. NO.1, KN85-67 T5N,R11W,519 1.49 AC.

~ ~

/W. ~/",4HPJ~ 7.5/1. .ell~ ~M· ,~

@ '·'200' ...

®

~ KALIFDNSKY -BEACH - - ROA-D-\-v~ '.A' vI." U.·" 11I.C \ u,.... Tll.1> t ..OJ..... '\: .. \tl.,4 ~

INLET cool<.

NOTE _ AtseUOO'" Block Number. Sho""" In ElIlpMI AlslllOr', P.ree! Number' Shown In eire'"

Il

.,@ ~

@\I tl,;I&'

Assessor's Map Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska

55-5&1

PtJ2 vn;./9,ANI).14 T.51'f. .ell¥(, J/t1.

@@

8i

.

"....~.,

~

--ROAD

,~" -, -I oli. I ,...

I 7IAGTI,o

.W44'1"rf''''''' :lI:~"yO

\

"lUI.'I 1IL(.

® '~J @

~,C.7 "-!: a..as A.c~

....... -J p' ........ I ,..-.

-- -BEACH a .......,..... ..' .....".

1U ~~ - - I Tlt.']) ~~~ U® ..4.@\ ~ tJ55-$40-/1 '.-J\. 1.49 Ad ,tll,e~~SUBJECTLv'@\\h __ ", -- __--- ,.,.. ... ~ _"I9 I III · - -~- . ~_ ..••.- :; \ 1/ 1/~ I. ,-' ,u= ,u,::_-,

11 •......, ? ~6>

" ® I ~-Ii'''''_ , ,r.,"" ".11 \ \ ~~rJj I .¥~, ~. ' , . . . . • \'~,." . ~...- ~ I I l" " . . . •

@) I- -- - - '0- i " €I @ " •' ® \ ® ~ ® . @ @l •~ .@ ~ «11#-' I \ ,""'" ,~... ~ , ..~. ,_......,.,., ,,. """

_."'iT 1 T I ------ --------- ------. ~ _"" ..--.-J I / '-- I~ "'.,n _,.._, \1 I ~~ -I. _h' ,*"' ..",., ,.... ,..........::'J__ .... \ .'• ... tv. ~e". ...b· -- •.~--., I..,,,' 1i8#-/1 \ _. 3&.~. "'*_u· -' ,.,.... . .•.-clt',f'N"_ . ' I

.-=!-~ ~8u< ....~ --- - m\---..~ ~.....,;>$::::~~ , ~...?"""' ~--" ~~~~../"" :rNlEi " AssessOr's Mapcoot<.

Kenai peninsula Borough, Maska

NOTE _ ",teSIOI", Block Numbtn Shown In EIII...""IISO", Pircel Numbtn Shown In CI,clet

055-540-11 TRACT E, KARLUK REEF SUB ADDN. NO.1, KN85-67 T5N,RllW,S19 2.35 AC.

~

--/-::---~ ~Eo 5

® ® S.k04<"t:

TIINT A

@) 1tJ.05 ACr

~

~

¢SUBJECT

_ ~ ,,, .ocr

~:::::::;~J-iiT-;.~r~

h~"'C~k~~'''''SW::: ' ''l:UCT4 '/lss-n' ; _ ;f'4-fD ~"'~.-.. nl.• _ iii (.i;) J

: I -L __ ...L_,d4@~-

44.'4 Ae,

SITE MAP

/3/-07PTN. SEC. 24. T4N ~ Ie /2 W.,s. B. ~ At.

~~-......--. COOl( Z i-IAJI.E'T /N. 4-tJo'

~~$.' --== ~,,~ ------..::::---::::::::~~-II4

II CD

@I .. , /#tI'

(j Il @ @ ,..~

® o ... 39.07 Ac.tJ.8.UAc~ 9.7~Ac.tI9.7~.4..t 9.78 A•.

~ ~ Cl ~

0'

® SIA/l(JIU (;fax SIll /fNY/- 05

tel::!llr,!t

Assessor's Map

Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska 131-070-11 POR. OF NW1/4 NOTE - Assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses

SE1/4, LYING EAST OF Assessor's Parcel Numbers Shown in Circles

KALIFORNSKY BEACH RD. T4N,R12W,S24 39.07 AC.

133 -021

N 1/2 SEC. II, T3N, R12W , SM.'

@)

'--..

;",1

~\l @) ~.

"-

'\ \ '

1~11\ ~ ~li ~\'. ~ ~ 7ft> ..

IIOIfT

CD 12. 'l'AC.

I.DIU(. I/J-'

f'D.1JO

C!r @ .\ti .j7.0']AC.: lo"At. '!

~I ~

-.. l!!l!- L 2~

/8

r;';\ BL K IiL\ 1 ~I ~ 'iiI I.DON:..

IS' ." ..,.-. I fW~O ~ ';,; 'A ~

NESS lUMP

~ -.t!/ :t !I.tJt1<fc. •fU>.-

'21 '3~i @ is @ ~ I,.2ue.l! '.'10"(.

NEII·]DIlAIIIU/1{ ·11J1) ,.,JII5. tDT' IJLI< t /. (/(11'/11) ¢l'

.~

I ~

-.._.. -.._._~--=;;;;t. t. n

Df,. P JLJU .• ... I __ I ~ \ lu ,

..

..

,". fOO'

O'J)" '.i'J..

..

NTT/"'IJtHU'~'J 'JAG" oSlo

~

• ~t.tA

~III ~

I~·IS'

A

MII-",

@

''''.I''.

WfIJ,.U

f('• ...,~IhI~ .-... .I I, ®

~ "' ~

"

l e -- -H eJ~ '~'4S ;I,,#: +-IN'aI&'- rIrJ

'tV' " .....

-~~~~O~' t ®!l~ ~. ~! ~£ , ®

'''6''.''

8 ,~

@ • f.D""C.

,-$.1. /I~

fI} """"'I ~ ~ ® ~3 @

l! 12.I'A(.

I~ , ~

fJlttl'

@) ® ® " ).j Assessor's Map

'J Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska NOTE - ASMssor's Block Numbers Shown In Ellipses133-021-35 TRACT E,

Assessor's Perce' Number. Shown in CirelliPETTIFOGGERS PLACE SUB, KN89-25 T3N,R12W,S11 22.04 AC.

---

---

.LEGEl:m; e ......... ~ .-,t

• Witman EstcteySubd. Phose 111 !......... c ..... /' I ...,I/r .... ( ..-,t _..... -.., 9ICIIIIrY/' IllOCk <i.L Itr_l _ l 2

Z IW'Lot 6 lot61N () .....UIUr.... ."' .. " ... I II ........ IIU'.... ~ 8 c~------~'~~?~~ --T--T---. ,(, I..... DAlW .....' .... _I J ~IrN , ',. ~

~. )

'-""

.~'''''» ....!''2F\' IJIf' ...~

/.11 I... \ r~~~/, " ,,~:;::;:.:f:- CERTJf1CATE of OJNERSHJP ondDEDICATJQN

1.-,.GIIWY _TI. ,. _ ... ...,., ___..-,__ ,. ..1 ---.. fILMSubject Parcel ,. _ ............... IIIICA .. ~~~ ..,,....uc.. 11 fWlE _ ,. ..., b"UefII 11(Portion of 131~80-28)

fftd 4 1\ J~ ~~-; eeL 1iU1iMIrI,,_. ,. ,I~ , .... -...... .....- ~ot~l--~_ ....... -.rr ...

I I ,.1.JIlIDII; "tI., w .g ---

'I} .. - , .... ~lot8 Vi --I

-._ ..... '6 fI) I !--I 1)---~

---.,......~-- I I., ..-----

~

c .. II......--.. .. ~

"/

I LO~~ L NOTARY'S ACKNO!I.EDGfjIIJM....-D,. ...,,1Ay.~ .»H4J =C-.:::-.:..-=:.....=:=---......

:>

..................---- ....... .... l)wt.~, ~~ ~'nt:::.: .::.-.=:.::..---" 'u .~ ir tI,.,.. _ .. ~ .... • .,. ItUI \ a........... _.._ ..-- L,." ,{ 7.H.- 1r~ LfIfI ct. \ John Ford. ct.! Iii' III~ =--='-==='.:=:':.:.,-,.== :4~ I " -

e-...:.;:-"':J....,~ 'P)- IIt. ....... .... ~~ ...,'.....

=:~-:. ---:::......:::= I ti.lot 1 I£i£{]I!lllOCk7G7:r.: - -.::,.=;::.:::=._..-- • -----J

~0 ...___-~::.,.;;;",.;~t_-_...::/:;,

~ aSUbject Parcel /';,..

f'Nc1 IS ----- ~I ,...(Portion of 131-080-28): ( J7.11Z...... ..../-:~ .g 0 ................""..- L PLAT APPROVAL

/ /;,t' ......... .. IUT .........__

I"" --- ~- H;;;;w. A;'" - ~ AT_~••_y-.I I .. T-fI (itot'lC) ij"Ii". ----:A:t-J:" ~ ~~"r- -Lt';

lIlZ ~_

'II '\ - .. ,,", iii ~ ._ I",::J@ , t.,l" ~.~ ...~_-;;r.,...... '--14~ It- -fLot lA l~U~ - I - I -'T ".... -,!Zj\ LotIi _ / '\;J:J i Tr. A Tr. B Tole View SubdivisionTR.D II~

mmiYmrS CQIIPICATZ & II -/ Nil";' IJI I I YR. C .., Leisure Lake Subd .... iIo.I ~ I• ...,-,. .... 1_ .................... ....., . i~1 Ipepper-Ml'kis SUbd "~o:rt's Forty

............. _/..... I1......... u.,~=.-.:n,~-:=:,::--...:.: i II .......................................Subd.......................................................... _--'

- aAf,e.L 0"'IRECORDED 'D.K.1IIa.L .... _. SEGESSER SURVEYS__4111.

:.,~~ _.. 101_, AX nee_ _. GIIlIQ l2-1__I~--..-_or.'............... - IICIU: ,"'. .~, l.en ,tI'-- • --

. ~:: .. " ~~(..£.~. .~\.~~.~?,

,~j H'J~

J'r/ t

':

' .. ~~

'.~j ':;", . ?""" '~'l

:',~~:\ ·'i·

r~~,~"

,~~ ~:

.r~;

':: .

-~ ~>!f.,··,.' ~~i":;'

~":'.

:,~..

t

.. ... tnrrF _ ..... ...,

~----_.........---.........

I

~J

I ......0 /;... \-"--~------;

~;;l>'''. i"". 2 "\" ' >

/ j) j

/ Ii' i I/ I ' , 'MADDEN SUBDIVISION!

I ' ! I.AKE 51 E ADON. I

~ ... --~-- ..~ _. ---.Hj=====:!...k:::==t~~c:=-=~

j--; !~~

;;

11 :::J:... a: o z

PLANNER 1"=1000'Kenai Peninsula Borough

.Jun 06. 1999 _.J

76

I -~ . ....-......----... ______-.......-.-P........~--- ---------"...~.

,

. /,I

i/ I

X I ; ,

.==~!M.=="",!!:::::.,,~==-_,__,_ ._---.:.....

i ~,

~

-_.(

/

//./

/

, /

V

\r J: l e:: o z

t i

!I

•I I I I I !

i !

i I I i

PLANNER Jun 01. 1999 Kena i Pen i nsu 1a Borough 1 .... 1000· J

L--";~~-----------'------------_._-n

---- -- --

":-'* ..)~

BECOROEO __ lOtt.llOST.

...tl:--IO.....-:

.. f\.Alw.s .......... I't' ...... ~~1J\.NMIG

COlM$SDI AT _ ..nc (II AI'~ '0 Z!?!9_-..

~

PLAT APPROVAL

,... .. ....., ........................

J .-'

MIIM""",..-Non 1) -" ., ...................... ..,

I ./

~...... ., ~1 - wyma"c.J i·.....~ i - - - ~~U_ -1-Ji~~:-7~-- - -'\w--~~ -;."~;::; I) :-.::-" ~-=:r=:.1::

~

':-=.............,-. ...................... ....... 41~ .. _ .. ---.. ~I~""'- I

S) rn-.!Ll'fZ"..-:=:":,,.-:,-='=.= r -..... . I.......---......... --.. .... -r .... r 'W"U'W ..,..:'.:..~..-=.=.::::=L.. .. ~ iUI'

QB .......

1'nIct 2........

7'ratt 1.......4!W.-~ ®{/!-_. --' ._..' -m"-zp'dl £ -,"'_

(rnzft 5'>MIt· ~I

J" /1"/, /'1> / ,. 1/' .'I..~

HoP

~ ~.,~

I"

rr:

7'ratt 7 II-mAc

.,:.=..~=-'~~ _ ........ I--_ ....... ~I

I

I) ---~....................................... "~........... .......- ........ ...-wT(O'WY ..... , .... o.MJI("CF ... 1llIl.....,.,

~.,u;otS.IIIllQ. 'hd So J) ........ ~ ....- .. ~ ...... j .-:- MID ~~ IiJIC 'atll.' 1II:.cRIn ~"I\.M

" ........ _ I'l' (kit f1IlO: CDeIDll DlDl:A1I -.rs-ar- ,II .YiNJlIl.a.JClII[Aj 1Il;J1'lAUeft[ MGOUIIo' ~ ..., .. -.... - ... ... -, c...-. r-.. -_ .... ii'j.,~~·" l{./ l{ii·:,

f.llI.: l , .

~{,£~ J-'f,... ~& ..." J, / II, ~" ® I,.=-,..

r ..... IIft'•... I I •

.iEID!!L+ ( .-,t I ' -$ I-lfF C4 {_ ... ...." " ~ ..,... f ...." I~ I

IJ - &..-t' ........... ............. tttz I J

=~~,u-

• •, ""1'1 __II", @, ~

I(I) (!).t I@ -'1r- ~... .._-- _ ..... -- :t-' •

Ci r n.

I 2iii.ii' I or_=-.",,,_..... ~ (leo) -.....

_. --::=----_..I -

r .

-----" IlUMftII ..-..,.... ..." :. ~'-

CMIC. IllAkA Mil• I I --.~>;~~..lIl."""""I ...~,~ ~ . KPB FILE No. _-108~

J I;

~ N

T IIIClNITY

"AP 1- .. ,-..:

-,. ~"!;....

f~Fb1·\ « ... ... ~ ~

I•••" ~ ...

rJ. ......... '.tooo

C£BllfICAJt Of SU1lllEYOB ,.....,--,.. t_....-tp ........ .. ---. ,... ...-.~_"'_ .,.lIrwt ............ ---- - ..... --..... ---, ............... ..-"' ......,.... " ..

-~,,.. ...

II

+ (l)~

"'I~""'C.

I I

Q~r-=Q ....... ~J:"':

Russian GapSubdivision

A _.I/·_"'~ ..... '.:I ~ _I· .. kU. .. ".,-a-. ~ ""'-" Dlftnfl. .....

c---. 'tUGl' __

~91~ tm~Ot+- ........... M,I-"" ....... ~.: =::: II\.-.s

... 110 2'OOU I OIl".. IS -,,:IODO CI

.--c ..... - .a-:IODO 11UiLI' ,0 ••ru.o .. 1DGD--1." 4.:1_ I __ ...... «4


4. Ordinance 2001-XX: Authorizing the Market Value Sale of Twenty-Seven Parcels of Borough Land By Outcry Public Auction.

Staff report PC Meeting: 8-13-01

Background: KPB 17.10.070(A) directs that two land sales be conducted each year. One disposal is the tax foreclosure sale. The other sale is a competitive market value sale.

Attached is Ordinance 2001-XX that recommends 27 parcels for sale by outcry public auction. Maps showing the location of each parcel are attached.

Land Management staff reviewed the land bank inventory and recommended the 27 parcels based on size, price, location, soil conditions, and access. Land Management staff felt it was important to recommend parcels for which there was perceived market demand. All parcels that were in last year's sealed bid that did not sell are now included in the outcry auction.

The bid opening date is scheduled for . Brochures are scheduled to be available . which will delineate the parcels and explain the outcry public auction process and procedures. All parcels will have the front property comers marked and sale signs posted.

While reViewing the staff report, Mr. Best commented that the bid opening date had not yet been scheduled. He was unsure when the brochures would be ready for distribution.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend to the Assembly that the 27 parcels be sold in a public outcry auction sale.

END OF STAFF REPORT

Vice Chairman Bryson opened the meeting for pUblic comment. No members of the public were present. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Vice Chairman Bryson closed the public hearing and opened discussion among the Commission.

MOTION: Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Boscacci, to recommend to the Assembly that the 27 parcels be sold in a public outcry auction as recommended by staff.

Commissioner Hohl inquired about the funds received from this sale. Mr. Best replied the money was deposited into the land trust fund. A portion of the land trust fund is used to operate the Land Management Division and acquire any other properties the Borough might need for public purposes.

Commissioner Hohl asked if all the properties were in the sealed bid. Mr. Best replied no. The Mayor requested the properties not sold in the sealed bid sale be included in the public outcry auction.

Vice Chairman Bryson asked if Russian Gap Subdivision was the subdivision being developed by the Borough. Mr. Best replied yes.

Vice Chairman Bryson asked if the funds received for Russian Gap Subdivision parcels would be used to defray costs associated with the subdivision. Mr. Best responded yes.

Vice Chairman Bryson asked if funds received from other properties on Attachment A would be applied to expenses of the Russian Gap Subdivision. Mr. Best replied yes. Funds to construct the roads and develop the Russian Gap Subdivision came from the land trust fund. Sale of other properties will help defray these expenses.

Vice Chairman Bryson asked if developing the Russian Gap Subdivision would be a break-even situation financially for the Borough. Mr. Best replied the contractor conducted a market feasibility study. If all the lots sell, it appears the Borough will make money on this subdivision.

Commissioner Johnson asked if all parcels would have a minimum bid during the outcry auction. Mr. Best replied yes. KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2001 MEETING PAGE 23

79 UNAPPROVED MINUTES

Commissioner Johnson asked if the sealed bid sale had already been conducted. Mr. Best replied yes. Another sealed bid will not be held this year. If the parcels do not sell in the outcry auction. per the Borough Code they may be placed in an over-the-counter sale. The minimum bid is still required.

Commissioner Hohl noted an objective in the Transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan was to consider whether parcels are suitable for possible airport use. She asked if staff considered possible airport use during the land selections. Mr. Best replied no. At this time staff does not address Borough owned land in conjunction with future airport use. Comprehensive planning for airports would be applicable to State owned parcels or existing airports. Commissioner Hohl commented this section of the Comprehensive Plan may needed updating.

Commissioner Johnson recalled considerable controversy in the Cooper Landing area regarding the proposed sale of a tract of land in a Borough subdivision. He asked if this parcel had been sold. Mr. Best commented this sale involved a 10-acre tract in the Sunrise Subdivision. This matter is still in litigation at this time.

VOTE: The motion passed by unanimous consent.

HAMMELMAN ABSENT MARTIN YES

BRYSON YES PETERSEN YES

BOSCACCI YES TAURIAINEN ABSENT

CLARK YES TROEGER YES

HOHL YES VACANT SEAT

JOHNSON YES EIGHT YES TWO ABSENT ONE VACANT SEAT

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PU~NNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2001 MEETING PAGE 24

80 UNAPPROVED MINUTES

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/04/01 Action: Public Hearings Scheduled for 09/18/01 & 10/09/01 Action: Vote: Date:

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH RESOLUTION 2001-093

A RESOLUTION CLASSIFYING CERTAIN BOROUGH LAND LOCATED IN THE NIKISKI AREA NEAR SUNEVA LAKE LYING WITHIN SECTION 22, T8N, RIIW, S.M., ALASKA AS RESIDENTIAL

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough has received State of Alaska Patents for the subject land; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to KPB Chapter 17.10.080 dassification provides direction for the management of borough land; and

WHEREAS, public notice was published and notification was sent to land owners and/or leaseholders of record within a one-half mile radius of the land proposed for classification, applicable agencies, and interested parties; and

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed classifications August 13, 2001 and recommended by unanimous consent the property be classified residential; and

WHEREAS, based on the findings of fact and analysis, a Residential classification is in the best interest of the Kenai Peninsula Borough.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH:

SECTION 1. The following described borough land shall be classified as Residential:

Parcel 013-020-11: The W1I2NE1/4, SE1I4NE1/4, W1I2NE1/4NE1/4, NE1I4SW1/4, SEl/4NW1/4, S1/2NE1/4NW1/4, NW1I4NE1/4NW1I4, W1I2NE1/4NE1/4NW1I4, Section 22, T8N, R1lW, S.M., Alaska, containing 115.00 acres, more or less

Parcel 013-020-12: Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 22, T8N, R11W, S.M., Alaska, containing 59.77 acres, more or less

SECTION 2. This classification shall take effect immediately upon adoption of this resolution.

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001-093 Page I of2

81

ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001.


ATTEST:


Kenai Peninsula Borough, AlaskaResolution 2001-093 Page 2 of2

82

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/18/01 Action: Vote:


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF PAVEMENT PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE K-B RIAD TO MIKE TAURIAINEN, PE,

CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC.

WHEREAS, the finance department solicited and received proposals for this project; and

WHEREAS, Road Improvement Assessment Districts (RIADs) may be fonned pursuant to KPB ]4.31; and

WHEREAS, five finns obtained RFP documents; and

WHEREAS, two finns filed proposals with the finance department by the deadline; and

WHEREAS, one proposer was deemed nonresponsive; and

WHEREAS, the proposal of Mike Taureianen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. was evaluated as fair and reasonable; and

WHEREAS, the RSA board recommended award to Mike Tauriainen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. at its meeting on September 6, 2001 ;


SECTION 1. That the mayor is authorized to award a contract to Mike Tauriainen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. to provide professional design services for the K-B Subdivision road improvement project for the professional fee of $33,748, plus reimbursable expenses.

SECTION 2. That expenditures for this project will be charged to account number 237.33960.00000.43011.

SECTION 3. That the mayor is authorized to execute all documents and make all agreements deemed necessary to complete this project in accordance with this resolution and contract documents.

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001-097 Page 1 of2

83

SECTION 4. That this resolution takes effect immediately upon its adoption.

ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2001.

Timothy Navarre, Assembly President AITEST:


Resolution 2001-097 Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of2

84


e. " '-",...,.,. .

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


THRU: Dale Bagley, Mayor 0"..(3 ~~~ Mark Fowler, Purchasing & Materials Manage#V

FROM: Gary Davis, Roads Direc~ DATE: September 6,2001

SUBJECT: Resolution 2001-~K-B Subdivision RIAD design services

The finance de,partment solicited and received proposals for the above referenced project on August 30,2001. The request for proposals (RFP) was advertised in the Peninsula Clarion on August 7,8, and 10,2001; in the Homer News on August 9,2001; and Seward Phoenix Log on August 9, 2001.

This is the road service area's first RIAD project. The professional services include field survey work, civil design, preparation of contract documents and contract administration, and inspection for the K-B Subdivision RIAD project. The RlAD project will be designed to improve drainage, modify the roadway subbase, and enhance the driving surface by applying a paved driving surface.

Five RFP packets were obtained by potential proposers, and two proposals were received. The proposal of Nelson and Associates was rejected as nonresponsive for failing to meet the manual signature requirements of KPB 5.28.240 and the proposal documents. The evaluation team consisted of the roads director, a road service area board member, and a roads inspector. The proposal of Mike Tauriainen, PE, Consulting Engineers Inc. was deemed to be fair and reasonable. The evaluation was based on qualifications and experience, key project staff and subconsultants, methodology and approach, available resources and firm location, and cost.

Professional services will not exceed $33,748, plus reimbursable costs.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT FUNDS VERIFIED

ACT /I ;;1,37. 3~fDlJ. ~30 1/

BY: DATE:Cf/' /0 J 85

Introduced by: Date: Action: Vote:

Mayor 09/18/01

KENAI PENINSULA BOROURESOLUTION 2001-098

GH

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH AND KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

SURPLUS TANGmLE PROPERTY AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR AUCTIONEERING SERVICES

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough administration, the Borough service areas, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District have declared certain items of tangible property surplus; and

WHEREAS, Chapter 5.28.500, Section B of the Borough Code authorizes the sale of obsolete and surplus tangible property by sealed bid or at public auction; and

WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals for Auctioneering Services was issued on August 16, 2001, and three proposals were received on August 30,2001; and

WHEREAS, Blakeley's Auction Company received the highest score and submitted the lowest cost;


SECTION 1. That the items on the attached list, as well as any other items which may be considered surplus before September 29,2001, are declared as surplus tangible property.

SECTION 2. That these surplus items will be sold at a public outcry auction in accordance with KPB 5.28.500.

SECTION 3. The contract for Auctioneering Services be awarded to Blakeley's Auction Company with a not-to-exceed cost of9.75% of gross sales.


ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TIllS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2001.



Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001·098 Page I of I

86



TO: Timothy Navarre, President Members of the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

THRU: Dale Bagley, Mayor Ol,.6 ~L ~ Jeffrey Sinz, Finance Director~~ J ?5

FROM: Mark Fowler, Purchasing and Materials Manager ~ DATE: September 6,2001

SUBJECT: Resolution 0 l.:"!~thOrizing the sale of the Kenai Peninsula Borough And School District Surplus Tangible Property and Awarding a Contract for Auctioneering Services

The attached resolution declares the items on the enclosed list as surplus and prescribes the manner of sale as a public outcry auction. Borough departments, service areas, and the school district have until September 14, 2001 to pull items from the list. The list will be adjusted and finalized to recognize all deletions and to add any other items which are deemed to be surplus.

A Request for Proposals for Auctioneering Services was issued on August 16, 2001 and advertised in the Peninsula Clarion on August 20, 2001. Of the three proposals received on the due date of August 30, 2001 (two from local firms and one from Anchorage) Blakeley's Auction Company received the highest score and submitted the lowest cost. The Borough will pay a fee of 9.75 percent of gross sales. Attached is copy of the evaluation sheet.

The auction will be held on Saturday, September 29, 2001, beginning at 10:00 A.M., in the fenced-in area behind the Borough Administration Building.

87

AUCTIONEERING SERVICES - 2001 SURPLUS AUCTION PROPOSAL EVALUATION

GRUBSTAKE IDEALBLAKELEY Experience (0-30 points)

30Evaluator 1 30 20

Evaluator 2 25 25 20


Evaluator 4 3025 20

Total 110 115 75

Key Staff!Available Resources 14 15Evaluator 1 12(0-15 points)

12Evaluator 2 1215


Evaluator 4 13 15 5

Total 54 60 41

Contractor Location (0-5 points) Evaluator I 5 3 5

Evaluator 2 5 52

Evaluator 3 35 5

Evaluator 4 5 5 5

Total 20 13 20

Methodology/Approach Evaluator I 20 20 20(0-20 points)



Evaluator 4 20 20 to

Total 78 76 65

Subtotal 262 264 201

Cost (0-30 points) 30 12 25.5

Total 12 25.530

276 226.5Grand Total 292

Average 73 56.669

88

Copies of the 2001 Surplus Auction List

are available for review at the Borough Clerk's Office

and at the Borough Finance Office

89


Mayor 09/18/01


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A 19 FOOT RIGID HULL INFLATABLE FIREIRESCUE BOAT FOR

CENTRAL EMERGENCY SERVICE AREA

WHEREAS, the Borough Finance Department, on behalf of Central Emergency Services, has solicited and received two bids for a 19 Foot Rigid Hull Inflatable FireIRescue Boat; and

WHEREAS, both bids have been reviewed by Central Emergency Services personnel; and the low responsive bid was submitted by Northwind Marine,. Inc. of Washington; and

WHEREAS, the purchase has been approved by the Central Emergency Service Area Board; and

WHEREAS, funding has been appropriated in Central Emergency Services' Capital Projects Equipment Account number 443.51611.02461.48514


SECTION 1. That the Mayor is authorized to accept the bid submitted by Northwind Marine, Inc. and issue a purchase order in the amount of $63,200.00.


ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TillS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.


ATTEST:


Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001-099 Page I of I

90

CENTRAL EMERGENCY SERVICES central Kenai Peninsula Fire & EMS Providers 231 SOUTH BINKLEY SOLDOTNA, AK99669-8084 907·262-4792. Fax 907·262-5770

TO:

THRU:

THRU:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

-Prepsred for the Worst, ProvIdIng the s.t-

MEMORANDUM 00-062

Tim Navarre, Assembly President Members, Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Dale Bagley, Mayor .a'6

Mark Fowler, Purchasing and Materials Manager~~ Len Malmquist, CES Fire Chief ~L

September 6, 2001

Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of a 19' FirelRescue Boat for Central Emergency Service Area

On August 16,2001, the Kenai Peninsula Borough solicited bids for one (l) 19 Foot Rigid Hull Inflatable FirelRescue Boat for the Central Emergency Service Area. Bid packets were sent to three (3) vendors and the Invitation to Bid was advertised in the Peninsula Clarion and the Anchorage Daily News.

As shown on the attached tab sheet, two bids were received on the due date of September 5,2001. One bid was for a new boat, and one bid was for a demonstration model boat. CES Fire Chief Len Malmquist reviewed both bids to ensure that they met minimum specifications. Based upon that review, Chief Malmquist recommends the purchase of the Demo Boat, submitted by Northwind Marine Inc., at a cost of $63,200.00.

The purchase of this boat was authorized by the Service Area Board and approved in fiscal year 2002 capital projects budget. Funds are available in account number 443.51611.02461.48514.

303 FINANCE DEPARTMENT

FUNDS VERIFIED

ACT# Lj~3. 6/ft,1I.oZ4lt..,1.

91

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH CENTRAL EMERGENCY SERVICES

TAD SHEET FOR: 19 Foot FirelRescue Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat With Fire Pump

Firm TaxComp Certificate

Bid Signed

Delivery ARO

Bid Price New Unit

Delivery ARO

Bid Price Demo Unit

Northwind Marine, Inc. X X 120 Days $68,850.00 45 Days $63,200.00

Bid Due Date:

Purchasing & Materials Manager

KPB Official: ~~~~~-/.~~~:=:::::::~ F ler

92

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/18/01 Action: Vote:


A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO OFFER FOR COMPETITIVE BID FUEL REDUCTION SALES IN UNIT 1 AND UNIT 2 AS APPROVED BY KPB

ORDINANCE 2000-50

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough is heavily infested with spruce bark beetles with more than 1,000,000 acres infested during the past six years; and

WHEREAS, the Spruce Bark Beetle Program has identified areas where there is a hazard offorest fire from dead spruce; and

WHEREAS, ofthe 48,122 acres ofborough lands in the 12 units identified under KPB Ordinance 2000-50, approximately 18,694 acres, or 39%, have been identified as at high or moderate hazard of forest fire from dead spruce; and

WHEREAS, the expeditious removal of this dead spruce will reduce the fire hazard and provide for enhanced protection for persons and property within the borough; and

WHEREAS, the KPB Assembly enacted Ordinance 2000-50 on December 12, 2000 authorizing the emergency harvest of spruce bark beetle killed timber identified as representing a forest fire hazard; and

WHEREAS, Ordinance 2000-50 requires a single Forest Management Sales Report be prepared for each harvest unit identified in Ordinance 2000-50; and

WHEREAS, Ordinance 2000-50 requires that unit Forest Management Sales Reports be subject to review by the advisory planning commission where appropriate, by the planning commission, and approved by the assembly in accordance with Ordinance 2000-50 andKPB 17.50.035; and

WHEREAS, units 1 and 2 are not located within the jurisdiction of an advisory planning commission; and

WHEREAS, Forest Management Sales Reports have been prepared for units 1 and 2 as identified in Ordinance 2000-50 and presented to the KPB Planning Commission for review; and

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001-100 Page 1 of2

93

WHEREAS, the KPB Planning Commission conducted a public hearing during its regularly scheduled meeting ofAugust 27,2001, and recommended approval by unanimous consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLYED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH:

SECTION 1. That the mayor is authorized to offer for competitive bid in accordance with KPB Ordinance 2000-50 the Fuel Reduction Sales in the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Forest Management Sales Reports.

SECTION 2. That the mayor is authorized to execute all docwnents deemed necessary to complete this project in accordance with ordinance 2000-50 and KPB 17.50.035.

SECTION 3. That this resolution takes effect immediately upon enactment.

ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TillS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2001.


ATTEST:


Resolution 2001-100 Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of2

94


1. A Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Offer for Competitive Bid Fuel Reduction Sales in Unit 1 and Unit 2 as Approved by KPB Ordinance 2000-50

Verbal staff report by Bob Bright and Will Raemaeker. PC Meeting: 8-27-01

Mr. Bright introduced Will Raemaeker, Spruce Bark Beetle Program Manager, and Earl Breyfogle, Borough Forester. Mr. Bright asked Mr. Raemaeker to update on the Commission on activities in conjunction with Ordinance 2000-50.

Mr. Raemaeker said he wanted to review a few items in bringing the timber harvests to the Commission. Units 1 and 2 are presented to the Planning Commission based on Ordinance 2000-50, which authorizes the emergency harvest of spruce bark beeUe killed timber identified as representing a forest fire hazard. The Assembly enacted Ordinance200050 on December 12, 2000. A prime objective of the ordinance is to reduce the fire hazard on Borough propertythrough the removal of dead or dying spruce bark beetle infested trees. Ordinance 2000-50 identifies all the Kenai Peninsula Borough parcels south of Kasilof that have been rated as having a high or moderate wild fire hazard.

The southem peninsula is divided into 12 management units for the strategic planning of the sales. The ordinance authorizes the Mayor to prepare a single Forest Management Sales Report for each management unit. All Forest Management Sale Reports must be reviewed by the local advisory planning commissions, Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission, and be approved by the Assembly.

Mr. Raemaeker introduced Earl Breyfogle, Borough Forester. Messrs. Raemaeker and Breyfogle offered to answer questions. No questions were heard.

END OF VERBAL STAFF REPORT

Vice Chairman Bryson opened the meeting for public comment. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Vice Chairman Bryson closed the pUblic hearing and opened discussion among the Commission.

MOTION: Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Troeger, to recommend that the Assembly adopt the Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Offer for Competitive Bid Fuel Reduction Sales in Unit 1 and Unit 2 as Approved by KPB Ordinance 2000-50.

Vice Chairman Bryson asked if staff had additional comments. Mr. Bright replied no.

VOTE: The motion passed by unanimous consent.

HAMMELMAN ABSENT

BRYSON YES

BOSCACCI YES

CLARK YES

HOHL YES

JOHNSON YES

MARTIN YES

PETERSEN YES

SMITH ABSENT

TAURIAINEN YES

TROEGER YES

NINE YES lWOABSENT

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 27,2001 MEETING PAGE 12


J<Mu,i P'm1ineu!613orough

Spruce Bark Beetle Mitigation Program

MEMORANDUM

To: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President

Members, Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly

Thru: Dale Bagley, Mayor DL.fJ

Thna: Bob Bright, Borough Planning Directo+ ~ From: Will Raemaeker, Spruce Bark Beetle Program Manager

Date: August 29, 2001

Subject: ResolutionJbd/-IOC ; Approval ofForest Sales Management Reports for Units 1 and 2 as identified in KPB Ordinance 2000-50

The KPB Planning Commission reviewed without comment or revision the Forest Management Sales Reports for management units 1 and 2 that are included in this resolution on August 27, 2001. The purpose ofthese Forest Management Sales Reports is to provide information so the best interest of the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) may be served by offering for sale timber rights for KPB tracts in Unit 1 and Unit 2 as identified in KPB Ordinance 2000-50.

These fuel reduction sales will decrease the potential ofcatastrophic wildland fire in Unit 1 and Unit 2 by salvaging dead or dying spruce bark beetle infested spruce on KPB tracts identified by the KPB Spruce Beetle Mitigation Program as having moderate or high wildland fire hazards. On the average, spruce beetles have killed or infested over 80% ofthe mature spruce trees within the Unit 1 and Unit 2 sale areas.

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Spruce Bark Beetle Mitigation Program, 36130 Kenai Spur Hwy, Soldotna, AX. 99669: 907 2~202

96

K'fmJili PtminfJu/a lJorough

5pruce Bark Beetle Mitigation Program

August 2001

FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT: UNIT 1

Refuge Interface Sale:

KPB Parcel #13312035

Cohoe/St. Elias Sale:

KPB Parcels #13302122, 13302134, 13302135, 13302222, 13302223, and 13307508

CohoelElaine Sale:

KPB Parcels #13301010, 13301011, 13305001, 13306208, 13306216, and #13701004

Forest Management Sales Report: Unit 1

97

TABLE OF CONTENTS: UNIT 1 FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT

I. Introduction A. Purpose of FMSR 3 B. Location of Fuel Reduction Parcels 3 C. Title, Classification, and Other Active or Pending Interests 3 D. Objectives of Forest Management Sales Report 3 E. Harvest Methods and Reforestation Requirements 4

II. Background and Issues A. Physical Features and Parcel Descriptions 4 B. Water Bodies 5 C. Land Use 6 D. Transportation and Access 6 E. Cultural Resources 6 F. Recreation Resources 6 G. Current Stand Conditions on Bark Beetle Impacted Sites 6 H. Changing Forest Fuel Conditions and Fire Suppression Caused by

Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation 8 I. Changes to Wildlife Habitat Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle

Infestation 11 J. Changes to Scenic Values Caused by the Spruce Bark Beetle

Infestation 13

m. Impacts of Fuel Reduction Sales A. Effects on Wildlife Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 13 B. Effects on Fisheries Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 C. Effects on Subsistence Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 D. Effects on Recreation Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 E. Effects on Erosion Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 F. Effects on Mining Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 G. Effects on Mineral Sources Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18

IV. Timber Harvest and Contract Requirements A. Estimated Volume of Parcels 18 B. Method of Payment 18 C. Boundary Requirements 19 D. Authority to sell Timber 19 E. Requirements for Scaling the Harvested Timber 19 F. Contract Requirements 19 G. Sale Procedure, date, and time 19 H. Requirements and Qualifications of Bidders 19

V. Attachment A: Unit Sale Parcel Summaries and Maps


98 2

UNIT 1 FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT

1. INTRODUCTION

A. Purpose of Forest Management Sales Report

The purpose of this Forest Management Sales Report (FMSR) is to provide infonnation so the best interest of the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) may be served by offering for sale timber rights for KPB tracts in Unit 1 identified in KPB Ordinance 2000-50.

As approved in Ordinance 2000-50, the borough mayor is authorized to prepare a single FMSR for this unit and enter into necessary contracts on individual parcels. This FMSR shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Assembly in accordance with KPB 17.50.035

These fuel reduction sales will decrease the potential of catastrophic wildland fire in Unit 1 by salvaging dead or spruce bark beetle (Dendroctonus rujipennis Kirby) infested spruce on KPB tracts identified by the KPB Spruce Beetle Mitigation Program as having moderate or high wildland fire hazards. On the average, spruce beetles have killed or infested over 80% of the mature spruce trees within the Unit 1 sale areas.

B. Location of Fuel Reduction Parcels

Unit 1 encompasses tracts in T03N RllW S28, T03N RllW S33, T03N R12W Sll, T03N R12W S02, T03N R12W S14, T03N R12W S09, T03N R12W S16, and T02N R12W S04. Individual parcels are described in Section n, A.

C. Title, Classification and Other Active or Pending Interests:

The sale area was acquired under the municipal land entitlement program. These tracts are not classified. Classification of these tracts before fuel harvesting is not required under KPB Ordinance 2000-50. The sale area is suitable for resource development, residential sale and development, and recreational use. No sales are proposed or imminent.

D. Objectives: 1. Reduce the wildland fire hazard in Unit 1 by removing fuel loads 2. Accelerate reforestation on beetle-impacted sites 3. Increase plant species diversity on beetle-impacted sites 4. Improve long-tenn forest growth and vigor by harvesting the dead and insect

infested timber 5. Salvage timber affected by spruce beetles 6. Provide jobs from logging and wood processing 7. Enhance KPB Spruce Bark Beetle Reforestation Program by providing

positive royalties to KPB in the fonn of tonnage stumpage payments to be dedicated to continued SBB mitigation work.


99 3

E. Harvest Methods and Reforestation Requirements

All merchantable dead or infested spruce trees will be whole tree logged, or removed as directed by the KPB Forester. Snags will be left for cavity nesters upon the direction of the KPB Forester. Green reserves consisting of live, non-infested spruce trees as well as all hardwood trees will be left on site. Every practical effort shall be made to perform clearing work to minimize the damage to surrounding live spruce and/or hardwoods that are not a part of the hazard removal program. Scattered large-downed woody debris necessary for wildlife cover and migration, under the direction of the KPB Forester and in compliance with KPB Forest Fire Science Technical Committee's recommendations, will be left on site.

Slash shall be bucked and scattered or spread out so that debris is not stacked or piled. Stumps will be left no higher than 12 inches. Slash piles must be burnt in accordance with all Federal and State requirements, and under the direction of the KPB Forester. Material left on site shall be broken down so that it lies within 4 inches of the natural ground level or as directed by the KPB Forester.

Reforestation will occur on all harvested parcels, in accordance with KPB Ordinance 2000-50. A Reforestation Technical Committee has been created in accordance with KPB Ordinance 2000-19-19 to provide scientific oversight and technical guidance levels for KPB reforestation projects. The Reforestation Technical Committee will monitor the KPB reforestation program, assist in designing reforestation projects, provide expertise for implementing reforestation projects, and provide recommendations for individual site prescriptions. Members of the Reforestation Technical Committee represent federal and state agencies, the University of Alaska, and the KPB and are knowledgeable in the areas of natural resource conservation, ecological research, silviculture, agriculture, tree regeneration, and other related forestry fields.

II. BACKGROUND AND ISSUES

A. Physical Features and Parcel descriptions

Unit 1 fuel reduction sales are located in the Cohoe Loop area south of the Kasilof River. The sale areas lie on mostly level plains with well drained, Kenai or Tustumena silt loam soils. Elevations range from 46 feet near the Kasilof River mouth to 275 feet near the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. Most sale parcels are adjacent to or near the road system.

Tract 1: Refuge Interface, #13312035: This sale encompasses approximately 419 acres of dead, Lutz spruce timber in the 6 to 12 inch Diameter at Breast Height range. The estimated yield is 10 tons per acre. This parcel lies between a developed subdivision and the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. The terrain is gentle with well drained, Kenai silt loam soils. There are two gravel roads on platted right-of-ways that access the West boundary of this Parcel. Although the soil conditions would indicate summer harvest is possible, it may not be economical due to the low yields of the timber. This unit will be


100 4

harvested in dry summer conditions or frozen winter conditions. Existing Regeneration: There is a healthy component of sapling spruce, birch scattered throughout the sale with a few aspen clones present.

Tract 2: Cohoe/St. Elias, #13302122, 13302134, 13302135, 13302222, 13302223 and 13307508:

There are approximately 116 acres of dead, high hazard Lutz spruce timber on five of the six parcels that make up this sale. All six parcels are classified as well-drained Tustumena silt loam soils and five have road access to their boundaries. Parcel #13307508 contains approximately 24 acres of similar timber and also has soil classified as Tustumena silt loam. This parcel is isolated from any dedicated access and would require the cooperation of the adjacent private landowner. These stands are characterized as a relatively young 70-80 year old class with a Diameter at Breast Height ranging from 6 to 10 inches. The estimated yield is 5 log tons per acre. This sale will be harvested in dry summer conditions or frozen winter conditions.

Existing Regeneration: There are sapling-size spruce, a few birch and a few aspen scattered throughout the area. In some areas 50% of the saplings have also been killed by beetle attacks.

Tract 3: Cohoe/Elaine, #13301010, 13301011, 13305001, 13306216, 13306208 and 13701004:

There are approximately 152 acres of dead, high hazard Lutz spruce in parcels 13301010, 13301011, 13306216, 13306208 and 13701004. All five parcels contain similar stands of dead Lutz spruce with 6 to 10 inch Diameter at Breast Height. These stands are characterized as 60 to 80 years old with an estimated yield of 5 log tons per acre. The soil is classified as well drained Tustumena silt loam on level slopes. Parcels 13301010, 13301011, 13306216, and 13306208 have road access on this sale. Parcel #13701004 is isolated without platted access and will require cooperation from adjacent landowners. The timber on this approximately IS-acre stand is mature and dead with an estimated yield of 15 log tons per acre. The soil on parcel #13701004 is classified as well drained Kenai silt loam. This sale will be harvested in dry summer conditions or frozen winter conditions. Parcel 13305001 contains approximately 320 acres of dead Lutz spruce but has limited access. Due to the projected yield parcel 13305001 probably would not economically justify summer harvest. Existing Regeneration: Parcels 13301010, 13301011, 13305001, 13306216, and 13306208 have good spruce saplings with some mortality, scattered birch and aspen. Parcel #13701004 has very little spruce regeneration with scattered birch.

B. Water-bodies

Excluded from all harvests in the sale areas in Unit 1 is a 300-foot riparian buffer zone on both banks of all anadromous streams. However the contractor may harvest trees between 100 and 300 feet from the ordinary high water mark of an anadramous river if the contractor submits, and the borough approves, a variance application as provided in


101 5

KPB 17.08.020M. A variance will not be approved if it is likely to increase erosion or if there would be adverse effects on habitat as provided in KPB 17.08.020M(3).

C. Land Use

There is no known intention for land disposal of these sites that would otherwise obviate the plan to salvage dead spruce trees.

D. Transportation and access

Transportation and access is discussed in the narrative for each individual parcel.

E. Cultural Resources

There are no known cultural resources on Fuel Reduction parcels in Unit 1

F. Recreation Resources

Several of the parcels are used for cross country skiing and snow machining. Known use is listed in each parcel description. The removal of dead spruce on these parcels will lessen the risk of injury to recreational users that is posed by the danger of falling dead trees.

G. Current Stand Conditions on Spruce Bark Beetle-Impacted Sites

The following section is a compilation of data from forest ecology studies and includes references from the 1998 State of Alaska KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan (by Wade WahrenbrocklJohn See), and research published by State and Private Forestry, USFS and by ADF&G. Literature cited in this section can be obtained from or viewed at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Office.

Forest stands in the area are predominantly upland stands of mature spruce of small sawlog size at 50 to 80% densities. About one tenth of the area is covered with spruce poles and mixed shrub. Forest stands in the area are predominately upland stands of spruce or mixed spruce and birch with scattered cottonwood. They would be classified as closed white spruce forests grading into more open white spruce forest (Viereck et al. 1992).

On the Kenai Peninsula, there are natural hybrids between white spruce and Sitka spruce (Picea glauca X sitchensis). This hybrid is called Lutz spruce (picea X Lutzii Little). Researchers believe that this hybridization (a hybrid swarm) occurs at varying degrees with some trees showing strong white spruce characteristics, while others will show strong Sitka spruce characteristics. Muskeg, riparian willow, upland willow, and upland alder types are also found. Over 80% of all Lutz spruce 6 inches Diameter at Breast Height and greater on these fuel reduction parcels have been killed by spruce bark beetles.


102 6

While the spruce bark beetle infestation remains active in this management unit, the complete loss of needles on many spruce suggest they were attacked as early as 1997. Many larger spruce have lost significant amounts of bark and wood decay is advancing as evident by occasional wind-snap and soft borings. Very few spruce in the 7 to 12 inch Diameter at Breast Height class are green. Most of these green spruce trees are heavily infested with spruce bark beetles and are assumed dead.

There will be considerable changes to the living forest stand structure as a result of the spruce bark beetle infestation, including a reduction in average age of surviving trees, lower average Diameter at Breast Height, lower average tree height, and decline in stand density. Residual surviving trees initially consist of suppressed and intermediate spruce resulting in decreased canopy cover (Schmid and Frye 1977). Also, stand species composition may be altered. There are a number of successional pathways that may occur.

Natural spruce regeneration occurs when there is an adequate supply of viable seed and an appropriate seedbed (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #9). However, beetle impacted stands experience a significant influx of grass within five years of spruce bark beetle-caused mortality and often lack an appropriate seedbed for tree regeneration. Light to moderate levels of bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) are already present throughout the area. Hence, competition with regeneration is expected to be high if reforestation is delayed.

Bluejoint reedgrass quickly establishes itself in stands killed by the spruce bark beetle. Because this grass lowers the soil temperature and is such an aggressive competitor, it inhibits the regeneration of both tree seedlings and browse species (Lieffers, et al 1993). One study indicates that even after 11 years, no natural tree or browse regeneration had occurred on a beetle-impacted site (Holsten, et al 1995). In addition, an adequate viable spruce seed source is not present for rapid reforestation in many areas because spruce bark beetles have killed most of the mature, cone-bearing trees. Birch regeneration is also decreased due to the severe competition of grass and inadequate seedbed availability. Holsten et al also noted that plant species diversity declined in beetle-killed stands that were invaded by grass.

Within two to four years following mortality, beetle killed trees begin to wind-snap and fall to the ground. The time-span between mortality and having the tree break-off and fall to the ground appears to be a function of the level of decay in the base of the tree at the time of mortality. Recent research has shown that 50 percent of the beetle killed trees break off and fall to the ground within 10 years (Holsten, et alI995). These downed trees fall across each other or jackstraw and limit access and mobility of both human and wildlife use of the area (Thomas 1979).

H. Changing Forest Fuels and Fire Suppression Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation


103 7


The changes occurring in the forests of the Kenai Peninsula as well as other parts of Alaska are unprecedented in recorded history (Holsten, personal communication 2001). Spruce bark beetles are greatly influencing the composition of forests by killing almost all whitelLutz spruce trees over 6 inches in diameter. In forest stands composed almost entirely of spruce trees, the effects to the forest structure being caused by the spruce bark beetle epidemic are clearly visible. The almost total loss of mature seed bearing trees over large landscapes will have very long tenn and profound affects on the Kenai Peninsula.

After spruce bark beetle-caused mortality, dead spruce trees begin a physiological change that occurs over time. The loss of nutrient availability causes trees to shed needles during late winter and the remaining foliage turns red during the second summer after beetle attack. Smaller twig size branch material usually breaks off trees within a couple years after death. As trees drop needle foliage and lose smaller branch material, an increase of direct sunlight reaches the forest floor. Surface vegetation changes with this event. Most noticeably, native blue joint reedgrass begins to dominate surface vegetation.

The boles of dead spruce trees are subject to natural decay processes such as "sap rot". The wood fiber structure changes so that tree boles loose elasticity and are not as flexible during windy conditions. As mentioned earlier, a study of vegetative survey plots on the Kenai Peninsula (Holsten et.al. 1995) indicate that tree stem breakage begins to accelerate between 5-10 years after bark beetles attack forest stands.

As time progresses, standing trees begin to break off and fall into one another becoming jack strawed. This provides a means for surface fires to accelerate the transition to crown fires in the remaining canopy. Overtime trees begin to fall to the ground where they become part of the surface fuel matrix and as years progress the regenerating forests develop over heavy concentrations of fuels. The heavy concentration of fuel under this regeneration will be available for combustion for many years. In some cases in the Yukon it has been reported that the material will be readily combustible for 50 years after it has fallen to the ground (Beaver 1997). While this period of heavy fuel concentration will likely be shorter on the Kenai Peninsula, especially when wood is in direct contact with the ground, these conditions are expected to still last for decades.

The high proportion of trees being killed by spruce bark beetles has created a substantial and significant change in the risk of wildland fire on the Kenai Peninsula. The greatest single change in the trees is that of water volume or moisture content. Tree foliage supported by moisture from root systems in live trees usually contains from 200 percent water content during the early summer to 120 percent during drought conditions. The moisture content of live tree boles usually ranges from 40% to 70%. This water content


104 8

significantly decreases after tree mortality. Based on previous sampling of large dead tree material it has been determined that dead spruce will reach equilibrium with environmental conditions within approximately 60 days following mortality. This material will typically have moisture content of approximately 10%.

Downed trees create additional surface fuel loading, which combines with the heavy grass mat to create a serious wildfire hazard. As beetle killed stands unravel, grass cover increases from near zero to over 50 percent of the ground cover (Schutz 1995). Fires in this fuel type can be intense, rapid moving and difficult to control (See 1997). A 1994 study of a past beetle infestation showed a general tendency for increasing surface fuel loads in later stages of an infestation (Schulz 1995). This study showed an increase in woody surface fuel loading from approximately 9 tons per acre in 1987 to over 35 tons per acre in 1994; nearly a 400 percent increase. Another case study of fire in beetleimpacted forests was conducted in 1997 (Beaver 1997). An important product generated from this study is a comparison of fire "critical surface intensity" (CSI). CSI is the term used to describe the amount of surface fire heat production that is necessary to generate full crown fire involvement of tree canopies. In the case of spruce forests that are alive and unaffected by spruce bark beetles, Beaver determined that 1,704 kilowatts/meter (KVV1M) of surface heat intensity is required to ignite green trees whose crown begins an average of four feet above the ground. In dead beetle kill spruce with the same crown height ratio, only 192 KWIM is required to generate crown fires.

The moisture content in live trees is supported by root systems. By comparison, the moisture content of dead trees is subject to daily changes due to changing weather conditions and long term drying in drought periods. In an average year, it is estimated that environmental conditions necessary to allow for full crown fire involvement of live spruce forests only occurs about 2 to 3 days each year. The number of days where environmental conditions are reached that will allow for crown fire in dead trees occurs with much greater frequency. It is estimated that dead spruce forests can reach crown fire involvement about 30 days/year on the average.

The spread of fire is greatly enhanced in beetle-killed spruce. The amount of dead and dry fine material, such as Old Mans Beard lichen, that is contained in standing dead trees aids spot fire occurrence. Dead material down wind of a fire creates a condition where hot embers initiate new fire starts with much greater frequency when compared to green live forests (personal observation W. Wahrenbrock).

Another factor affecting the fire risk of forests is termed as the probability of ignition. Probability of ignition is a term used as an expression of how easily a fire will ignite. Dead spruce with low moisture content will ignite far more readily than green spruce. Lightning has historically been an infrequent cause of fire ignition on the Kenai Peninsula (See 1998), however, wildland fire research scientists have declared the potential for lightning fire starts will increase as a result of the "sea of snags" that have been created (Alexander and Stocks 1997).


105

9

The probability of crown fire events is greatly enhanced as a result of the spruce beetle infestation. Once fires reach crown fire stage, they are difficult to suppress and are often uncontrollable. This fire risk condition will be sustained for about 10 years until such time as dead timber stands begin to break apart and unravel. The reduction of vertical fuel load continuity will not diminish the fire risk problem. To the contrary, increased fuel loading on the ground surface will extend the fire problem in fuel types that are known to be of short season duration. Specifically, grass that evolves with increased exposure to sunlight usually only creates fire control problems during the early summer season before "green-up". The addition of large woody material from downed beetle killed trees will create fuel conditions that will support fire occurrence throughout the summer season. These fuel types have been observed to burn with high intensity levels (personal communication Kromery). Fires in this fuel type burn up to 20 times faster and 6 times more intensely than the fuel type associated with healthy white spruce stands, particularly in the spring and early fall (See 1997). Fires in downed spruce trees in grass fuels exhibit a high resistance to control by firefighters. This downed timber impedes access into a fire area by firefighters and will severely limit the use of tactical ground forces such as engines, dozers and hand crews (See 1998). Even when suppressing fires during moderate environmental conditions, placing crews in this type of fuel poses a significant personal safety risk should winds begin to rapidly increase, change direction, or if sudden slope changes are encountered.

Large wildland fires have been noted to occur on the Kenai Peninsula since the beginning of recorded history. Large intense fires may become stand replacement fires because the burned areas regenerate with even aged trees that form young successional forests. The intensity of the spruce beetle attack has created a circumstance where spruce seed will not be readily available to regenerate burned areas. The advent of large landscapes of dead trees has also created a condition where fires will burn at high intensity but may not produce seedbeds that are receptive to forest regeneration. Several early season fires such as Pot Hole Lake, Hidden Creek, and Crooked Creek fires, which resulted in cumulative suppression costs of $6.6 million dollars, demonstrate this problem. Even though the dead spruce canopy of these fires burned with high intensity, surface vegetation consumption was low due to high moisture content. Surveys of one of these burned areas revealed that the fire consumed only 2 to 3 centimeters (cm) of duff material and less than 2% of the surface area had exposed mineral soils (Berg 1996). To compound the problem of regenerating these areas, virtually all birch, and the sapling size spruce that had not succumbed to the earlier spruce bark beetle epidemic, were killed as a result of fire intensity. The lack of a seed source within and adjoining these burned areas will compound the problem of reforesting these burned areas.

Had these large fires occurred closer to towns or improvements, structures may have been seriously threatened or lost. The risk factors for a catastrophic wildland fire are starting to stack up on the Kenai Peninsula. With the right weather conditions, the scenario for a catastrophic urban/wildland interface fire with property loss and loss of life is a definite possibility. Defensible space on a landscape scale is one of the most important actions that can be undertaken to reduce the potential of a large fire. This can be accomplished through harvesting the dead and dying timber in order to break up the continuity of fuels.

Forest Management Sales Repon: Unit 1

106

10

Studies in Alaska and Canada show that a large percentage of spruce bark beetle-killed trees will fall to the ground in five to ten years. This downed fuel loading will add to the fire problem potential (See 1998). Of the three main factors affecting fire behavior (fuel. weather, and topography) fuel is the only component over which some measure of management may be exerted. Extensive fuel management is the only option for mitigating potential losses (Beaver 1997).

I. Changes to Wildlife Habitat Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation

The following section is a compilation of data from forest ecology studies and includes references from the 1998 State of Alaska Kenai/Kodiak Forest Land Use Plan (by Wade WahrenbrocklJohn See), and research published by State and Private Forestry, USFS and by ADF&G. literature cited in this section can be obtained from or viewed at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Office.

Large-scale infestations of spruce bark beetles have a significant influence on wildlife habitats by changing their structure and function (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #11). The loss of the mature spruce and the potential loss of the younger spruce component will result in the loss of hiding and thermal cover (DF&G 1994). What birch is present often has defect indicators and will likely begin to experience higher rates of weather-related breakage. The remaining live forest component will be composed primarily of scattered birch and young spruce seedling/saplings. Grass, in locations where residual tree density is minimal, will become the predominant ground cover and will inhibit the development of suckering and sprouting plants which reduces the availability of browse (Holsten, et. a1. 1995). Spruce regeneration is very poor on these sites as the grass quickly out competes any seedlings that germinate. Without ground disturbance the heavy organic layer will continue to preclude desirable regeneration.

When mortality of the stand is 80-100%, wildlife diversity may be expected to decrease (Stone 1995). Of the 92 bird species that may be expected to occur on the Kenai Peninsula, 37 will decrease in abundance (e.g. spruce grouse. grosbeaks, Townsend's warblers) and 24 will increase in abundance (e.g. warblers and sparrows associated with shrubs). Eleven will have mixed or unknown response and 20 would not be expected to change in abundance (Le. those not associated with forested habitats). Of the 39 mammal species expected to occur on the Kenai Peninsula, 13 may be expected to decrease in abundance following spruce bark beetle infestations (e.g., red squirrels, porcupines, flying sqUirrels) and 8 may increase (e.g., hares, voles). Eight will probably have mixed or unknown response and 10 would not be expected to change in abundance, Le., those not associated with forested habitats (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #11).

Within the boreal forest, moose are generally more closely associated with forest cover in summer than in winter. This association may be a function of preference for forage, which are of higher quality as a result of delayed plant development or different plant characteristics. Cows may prefer to calve and bed their newborns on forested knolls or other vegetated high points from which predators are more easily detected. These features may also present varied escape routes that require minimal energy expenditure by calves

Porest Management Sales Report: Unit 1

107 11

(Collins 1995). As the dead spruce fall to the ground, escape routes will become diminished and it is likely that energy expenditure by newborn moose (neonates) for escape will be increased. The increase over time in the amount of dead-fall which will occur without intervention will also decrease sight distance which may result in additional predation of neonates. The increasing amount of deadfall and debris on the forest floor could limit access to preferred foraging areas and limit mobility during critical times of the year for moose (DF&G 1994).

As the number of spruce trees die, red squirrel populations will decline as squirrels move to nearby lower quality, marginal habitats where food may be available (ADFG 1994). Cover habitat for squirrels will also decline after the first two years as trees lose their needles. The absence of conifers will make the squirrels more susceptible to predation from raptors and larger mammals (USFS 1994). It takes at least 30-50 years after spruce has been reestablished before the area will proVide quality red squirrel habitat (USFS 1994).

Spruce grouse are also affected by the loss of spruce trees to the spruce beetle primarily through the loss of winter feeding habitat (ADFG 1994). Gradual loss of escape and thermal cover habitat will also occur as the spruce trees lose their needles and eventually fall over (ADFG 1994). Predators associated with grouse, such as owls and goshawks, can be expected to show a response to the increased vulnerability of individual birds displaced by the infestation (USFS 1994). In large-scale infestation areas, such as the proposed sale area, increased amounts of deadfall, grass, and other debris will impede grouse reproductive displays and reduce summer feeding habitat (ADFG 1994). The end result of no treatment of these dying stands will be a decline in local spruce grouse populations (USFS 1994).

The infestation will result in an increase in the number of snags and downed woody material, likely benefiting cavity-nesting birds such as woodpeckers, some owls, brown creepers, nuthatches, and chickadees (DF&G 1994). Most snags are beetle-killed spruce. However, mature hardwood stands that contain some hardwood snags offer the most cavities. This is due to the morphological differences between spruce and hardwoods. Living spruce seldom has soft heartwood preferred by cavity nesters. Spruce that die usually falls to the ground within 10 years, which is the time it takes for the heartwood to soften. The larger diameter birch and cottonwood trees are more important than spruce for cavity nesters. Even though the sale area has fewer birch and cottonwood snags, they are most important to cavity nesters. After the beetle outbreak subsides, woodpeckers will still benefit from the large numbers of secondary insects (cerambycids, ants, other scolytids) present, but this food abundance should only last 2 to 3 years (Schmid and Frye, 1977). The feeding value of these insects for woodpeckers will decrease because they are generally fewer in number and less accessible (they feed in deeper recesses in the wood). Bird populations would be expected to decline because of a lack of food after these insects decline. (DF&G 1994).

The spruce bark beetle infestation may reduce the value of the sale area over time for brown bear as hiding cover decreases and vegetation composition of the understory


108 12

changes. Because of the relatively large home range and mobility of bears, the future degradation of the infested stands will probably not have significant impacts on the bear populations (USFS 1990 and DF&G 1994).

J. Changes to Scenic Values Caused by the Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation

The following is reprinted from the 1998 State of Alaska "KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan":

Residents and visitors to Alaska consistently rated forest vistas damaged by spruce bark beetles lower in scenic beauty, and the more tree mortality present the lower the perceived scenic beauty. Both residents and visitors cite loss of scenic values as an important effect of spruce bark beetle damage. Visitors consistently report sightseeing as a dominant activity, and indicate views seen as a major factor affecting the quality of their visit to Alaska. Respondents of a recent USFS study consistently preferred preventative thinning treatments to a no-treatment scenario. For forested areas already severely impacted by spruce bark beetles, respondents preferred the visual conditions produced by rehabilitation strategies that resulted in more rapid regeneration of forest cover. From a list of proposed actions including a no action alternative, respondents continued to prefer actions which would include cutting and removing dead trees, even if selling them would only recover part of the costs (Daniel et. al. 1991). Cutting and removing the dead trees was also chosen over the possibility of burning a site for forest regeneration. Similar results were obtained in other studies within the U.S. (Orland, 1997 and Oriand et. al. 1993).

ill. IMPACTS OF FUEL REDUCTION SALES

A. Effects on Wildlife Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

The following section is a compilation of data from forest ecology studies that includes references from the 1998 State of Alaska KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan (by Wade WahrenbrocklJohn See), and research published by State and Private Forestry, USFS and by ADF&G. Literature cited in this section can be obtained from or viewed at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Office.

The effects of the proposed timber sale will vary depending on species. As noted earlier, the spruce bark beetle infestation is already impacting wildlife. Wildlife species that prefer mature and over-mature spruce stands will either be displaced or decline in numbers. Species preferring the grass-forb successional stage will likely increase in abundance (DF&G 1994). The proposed silvicultural harvest prescription and the post-harvest site preparation treatment will encourage the regeneration of both birch and spruce (Collins 1992) although opportunities for birch regeneration are limited and some parcels are almost void of birch trees. Scarification should enhance the reestablishment of the forest. Documented natural trends show re-colonization by browse and tree species to be very slow to non-existent due to grass competition (Holsten et al. 1995). Muskeg edges and harvested sites, which are prepared for the regeneration of hardwood species,


109 13

will often provide for an earlier food source in late winter/early spring (Schwartz, 1998 personal communication). Snow depth and browse availability at this time of year can be especially important for moose survival as fat reserves are at the lowest.

Possible effects of the proposed timber harvest on several wildlife species are outlined below.

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Black Bears

For black bear: Timber harvest during the winter denning period could disturb black bears denning in or near harvest activity. Human presence and associated development may preclude bear use of traditional feeding areas and movement corridors during periods of harvest activities (DF&G 1994).

Increased vulnerability of local black bear populations to hunting is a function of road location and road density which, in tum, is related to the timber harvesting systems used and the level of logging activity (DF&G 1994).

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Brown Bears

The brown bear population on the Kenai is presently estimated to range between 250-400 bears (Schwartz & Arthur 1996). The highest densities of brown bears are in the forested lowlands and sub-alpine areas west of the Kenai Mountains. There is presently no indication of a decreasing population. The population numbers were probably at an all-time low in the 1920's due to the tendency of locals to shoot most bears on sight (Shuster personal communication. 1997) and the population had been poisoned in the early part of this century (Jacobs 1989). Their distribution often overlaps that of black bears (DF&G 1994). They generally frequent remote, higher elevation, sub-alpine and alpine habitats more often than black bears (DF&G 1994. ... Dens on the Kenai are generally in the mountains or on steep hillsides. Most brown bear denning occurs at higher elevations than the proposed sale area (Jacobs 1989). However, recent research has shown that some bears do den in forested lowlands.

Logging can benefit grizzly bear populations if production of berry producing shrubs is increased. Roads associated with the timber harvest may cause behavioral changes with the bear population. Although evidence suggests that road avoidance behavior and habitat loss leads to changes in wildlife productivity and survivorship, there is little data currently available to support this hypothesis (Frederick 1991). To be of major concern to wildlife managers, behavioral responses to disturbance must have demonstrable demographic consequences. Demographic responses do not necessarily follow, even from significant behavioral responses to changes of the habitat (McLellan and Shackleton 1988). Significantly, the demographic response by brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula has been an increase in the population. Since the 1950's the brown bear population on the peninsula has increased to a current estimated population of 300 (Schwartz personal communication). This is despite a human population increase on the Kenai Peninsula from 9,053 in 1960 to 48,815 in 1998.


110

14

A number of researchers suggest that hunting keeps bears wary of humans because bears learn from experience with hunters. Hunters quickly eliminate bears that are not secretive. Bear populations in areas of high human density persist apparently because individuals have learned to avoid human confrontation and withdraw from human contact. Researchers suggest that a strong negative response of grizzly bears to people does not affect population size, and therefore may actually benefit bears by reducing the frequency of human-bear encounters (Frederick 1991).

Several researchers suggest that grizzly bears habituate to open roads by shifting to a more nocturnal activity pattern. Apparently, darkness may serve as cover, allowing bears to use roads and adjacent habitats and to cross open areas where they are vulnerable to human harassment and hunting mortality. To use areas within 100 meters of roads within their home range, bears have often done so under the cover of darkness by being nocturnal in their travel and feeding patterns (Frederick 1991). This travel period may have a shortened duration in Alaska due to the state's latitude. However, in numerous studies it has been shown that brown bears will utilize highly disturbed areas by being nocturnal, while bears in undisturbed areas tend to be more crepuscular (active during twilight)(Frederick 1991). Some studies have shown that bears and some yearlings within cover did not change position when vehicles approached. It has also been noted that sows with cubs and yearling juveniles more frequently used habitats near roads than other bears. These habitats near roads may have been relatively secure because roads were avoided by potentially aggressive adult males (McLellan and Shackelton 1988). Several researchers reported that adult bears in open sites usually retreated to cover when a vehicle approached within 300 meters. However, researchers McLellan and Shackleton found that bears fled even further when approached by people on foot; in 5 of 9 cases when bears in remote areas were approached by humans, bears fled for distances greater than 1 Ian (0.6 miles), or out of the immediate drainage (Frederick 1991). This illustrates that bears find vehicular traffic less threatening than people on foot. This may be attributable to habituation.

To maintain and potentially increase the brown bear population on the Kenai Peninsula, DF&G continues to adjust hunting seasons for brown bears. An estimate of the total bear population and reproductive rates is used to determine the annual harvest. Bear population goals have been met in the past four years by a spring bear hunt and Defense of Life and Property (DLP) takings. Therefore it was determined that a fall hunt should not be conducted. In 1998 DF&G placed the brown bear residing on the Kenai Peninsula on the State's species of concern list.

Wildlife biologists have expressed concern about the increasing trend in brown bear mortality caused by DLP takings and potential for additional mortality from human encroachment into bear habitat. The number of non-hunting kills, which includes DLP, research mortalities, and other known human-caused mortalities, increased each year from three in 1991 to ten in 1995 and fell back to six in 1998. Since 1986, approximately a third of the DLP's are occurring near homes, another third is associated with hunting, and the last third is across the board of different activities such as fishing, hiking,


111 15

ranching, etc. None of the DLP's have directly been associated with timber harvest operations (Ted Spraker personal communication 1998 & Gino Del Frate, DF&G, personal communication 1997).

In the fall bears travel great distances to feed on devils club berries in the mountainous portion of the peninsula (Collins, DF&G 1998 personal communication). It is also important to note that berries, where present, are an important summer and fall food item for brown bears (Suring 1998). In the spring, bears diet often consists of skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum), grasses (Calamagrostis spp.) and horsetail (Equisetum spp.), which are widely distributed across the peninsula. Bears consume ungulate carrion and bears have been effective predators on moose. Recent research has shown that spring and early summer range is important because brown bears are very efficient predators of moose calves (Charles C. Schwartz, DF&G, personal communication 1997). Generally, the areas of highest habitat value include areas with southern aspects and wet habitats within defined ungulate winter range (Suring 1998).

The availability of security cover is considered important in how brown bears are influenced by human activities. Brown bears are at least twice as likely to be displaced from open areas where they can see or be seen by humans (Suring 1998). The spruce saplings, residual birch, alder thickets and willow thickets, as well as the retention areas, will provide cover to bears moving through the area while the seedlings and saplings continue to grow and reduce visual distances.

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Moose

The impacts of timber harvesting on moose is often determined by the size of the harvest. While biologists recognize the importance of overstory disturbance in the boreal forest in terms of enhanced production of moose browse, recommendations for the size and shape of the forest openings vary greatly from 5 acres to a square mile or more. Generally, the most important reported relationship between size/shape of created openings and their utilization by moose is related to seeding distance and establishment of important species (Collins 1995). On state-owned lands that have been harvested and scarified, a high stocking level of browse species has occurred (e.g. birch seedlings, aspen seedlings, etc.). Peak browse production occurs 10-16 years after disturbance (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #4).

Provided excessive browsing of birch is controlled, it takes approximately 3 to 5 years for birch to become tall enough to be available as winter browse. Birches that are 4 to 5 years old are tall enough to provide equal or greater wind protection and security cover than mature forest. Cover is more important in summer conditions. Moose have an efficient way of keeping warm in severe weather but are less efficient in moderating the effects of high summer temperatures that can cause them to overheat (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #6).

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Ermine, Mink, River Otters, Spruce Grouse


112

16

It is anticipated that harvest operations will likely reduce available prey for ermine for an extended period of time. To help offset this potential reduction, the proposed silvicultural prescription will retain the younger spruce component and the hardwoods. Snag retention and muskeg leave areas will also offset some of the impact on ermine habitat.

Mink use of the area, both presently and post-harvest, is expect to be low. Mink are commonly found near streams, ponds, marshes, beaches, or muskegs. The aquatic and riparian habitats are the most important mink habitat and this proposed sale provides for a leave retention area along the wetland areas within the sale.

River otters, like mink, prefer aquatic and streamside habitats. Since streamside areas are not proposed for harvest, it is expected that no impact will occur to river otters from this sale.

Lynx will use early successional habitats resulting from timber cutting, but require proximity to mature mixed forests (DF&G 1994). Retention of small residual stands, and uncut movement corridors along streams and/or muskegs will maximize edge effect and provide a mix of cover and early successional feeding areas. Potential improvement in snowshoe hare habitat quality should appear evident after logging (DF&G 1994). It is expected that lynx numbers could then show a corresponding increase as hares prosper in these areas (DF&G 1994).

Spruce grouse will be affected by the loss of canopy that will result in increased mortality of spruce grouse from predation on more visible nests and from the loss of protection from inclement weather (DF&G 1994). The decreased winter food supplies (loss of spruce needles and buds) may displace grouse into areas of lower quality habitat that could increase nutritional stress, and lead to increased mortality (DF&G 1994). Sapling and advanced regeneration areas within the sale are often patchy, but may provide sufficient cover to serve as courtship display areas. Live mature spruce stands for winter escape cover and protection will be difficult to find due to the heavy mortality of spruce caused by the spruce bark beetle. Leave areas will help to offset this loss to the extent that they are useful.

The potential effects of the fuel reduction sales on non-game birds will be the shortage of suitable nesting trees, which could result in lower numbers of birds. The conversion of sites to early successional stages could result in a shift in bird species composition to favor birds that prefer grass, shrub/forb, and sapling habitats (DF&G 1994). The retention of the younger spruce component and the hardwoods will maintain some foraging and nesting habitats. The retention of the leave areas and residuals will help to provide a range of different stand ages and micro-habitat features that will help to maintain the diversity of boreal forest bird species (DF&G 1994).

To minimize impacts to wildlife populations, roads will be carefully designed to minimize vehicular access to sale units other than that necessary for harvest activities.


113

17

B. Effects on Fisheries Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

None envisioned. A setback of 300 feet from anadramous streams is provided by KPB ordinance 2000-50 with variances within 100 to 300 feet given to a contractor only upon application approval by KPB with due deference given to Alaska Department of Fish and Game regarding the effects on fish and wildlife habitat from timber harvesting in riparian areas.

C. Effects on Subsistence Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

D. Effects on Recreation Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

The fuel reduction sales will decrease the threat of injury to recreational users of these fuel reduction tracts. As noted above, dead spruce suffers structural failure between 5 and 10 years post-mortality, and currently represent a high hazard to recreational users of these fuel reduction parcels.

E. Effects on Erosion Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

F. Effects on Mining Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

G. Effects on Mineral Sources Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

IV. TIMBER HARVEST AND CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

A. Estimated Volume of each parcel (tons)

1. Refuge Interrace 4192 2. Cohoe/St.Elias 703 3. CohoelElaine 2586

B. Method of payment

Ten percent of the bid amount will be paid upon execution of a timber sale contract agreement. The remainder is due with the signed contract within 30 days for bids less than $1,000. For bids between $1,000.00 and $10,000.00, 25% is due with the signed contract and the rest is paid as specified in the contract. For


114

18

bids more than $10,000, 10% is due with the signed contract and the rest is paid as specified in the contract.

C. Boundary Requirements

KPB will mark harvest units on maps and contractor will mark the harvest units on the ground with flagging. The location and marking of all boundaries where a timber harvest unit coincides with the tract boundary will be accomplished according to procedures and standards identified by the Borough Surveyor.

D. Authority to Sell the Timber

Kenai Peninsula Borough ordinance 2000-50 authorizes the disposal of forest resources on Unit 1 for wildland fire hazard mitigation.

E. Requirements for Scaling the Harvested Timber

This is a tonnage and/or an estimated tonnage sale based upon Unit Sale Parcel Summery (see Attachment A) so scaling of harvested timber is not required. In the event the tonnage and/or estimated tonnage based bid process is not successful and an over the counter proposal involves sale based on volume, scaling requirements will be negotiated and specified for any volume to weight conversions.

F. Contract Requirements

Successful bidder will have 14 days from the date of notification to execute a timber sale contract agreement along with all required payments, bonds, and certificates.

The Agreement for the Sale of Timber provides information on the operating and harvest plans and operations, standards, reforestation requirements. Copies of the contract form are available from the Kenai Peninsula Borough, Planning Department, 144 N. Binkley Street, Soldotna, Alaska 99669.

G. Sale Procedure, Date And Time

Fuel Reduction Sales will be by competItIve sealed bid, as authorized in Ordinance 2000-50. Requests for Bids on Unit 1 Fuel Reduction Sales will be advertised as soon as possible after Assembly approval of this FMSR. It is expected that sealed bids will be accepted at 2:00 p.m. on or before November 29, 2001, but the final specific date will be included in the public notice.

H. Requirements and Qualifications of Bidders

An individual, organization or firm is qualified to bid if they are:


115

19

a. Represented by an individual at least 18 years of age; b. Legally competent and/or authorized to carry out the provisions of a

permit or contract; c. Licensed to do business in the borough and state; d. Not in violation of current pemtits or contracts and performed

satisfactorily on previous permits or contracts; e. In compliance with the Borough Code provisions with respect to tax

compliance requirements.

Forest Management Sales Report: Unit I

116

20

Kenlli Peninf!Julll J'orough

Spruce Bark Beetle Mitigation Program

August 2001

FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT: UNIT 2

Aurora Sale:

KPB Parcels #13905008, #13905013, #13906018, and #15701113,

Clammer's Haven Sale:

KPB Parcels #13902017, #13902083, #13902084 and #13918001

Facio Sale:

KPB Parcel #13901001


117

TABLE OF CONTENTS: UNIT 2 FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT

I. Introduction A. Purpose of FMSR 3 B. Location of Fuel Reduction Parcels 3 C. Title, Classification, and Other Active or Pending Interests 3 D. Objectives of Forest Management Sales Report 3 E. Harvest Methods and Reforestation Requirements 4

II. Background and Issues A. Physical Features and Parcel Descriptions 4 B. Water Bodies 5 C. Land Use 6 D. Transportation and Access 6 E. Cultural Resources 6 F. Recreation Resources 6 G. Current Stand Conditions on Bark Beetle Impacted Sites 6 H. Changing Forest Fuel Conditions and Fire Suppression Caused by

Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation 7 I. Changes to Wildlife Habitat Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle

Infestation 11 J. Changes to Scenic Values Caused by the Spruce Bark Beetle

Infestation 13

III. Impacts of Fuel Reduction Sales A. Effects on Wildlife Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 13 B. Effects on Fisheries Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 e. Effects on Subsistence Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 D. Effects on Recreation Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 E. Effects on Erosion Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 F. Effects on Mining Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18 G. Effects on Mineral Sources Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales 18

IV. Timber Harvest and Contract Requirements

A. Estimated Volume of Parcels 18 B. Method of Payment 18 e. Boundary Requirements 19 D. Authority to sell Timber 19 E. Requirements for Scaling the Harvested Timber 19 F. Contract Requirements 19 G. Sale Procedure, date, and time 19 H. Requirements and Qualifications of Bidders 19

V. Attachment A: Unit Sale Parcel Summaries and Maps


118 2

UNIT 2 FOREST MANAGEMENT SALES REPORT

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Purpose of Forest Management Sales Report

The purpose of this Forest Management Sales Report (FMSR) is to provide infonnation so the best interest of the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB) may be served by offering for sale timber rights for KPB tracts in Unit 2 as identified in KPB Ordinance 2000-50.

As approved in Ordinance 2000-50, the borough mayor is authorized to prepare a single FMSR for this unit and enter into necessary contracts on individual parcels. This FMSR shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Assembly in accordance with KPB 17.50.035 and Ordinance 2000-50.

These fuel reduction sales will decrease the potential of catastrophic wildland fire in Unit 2 by salvaging dead or spruce bark beetle (Dendroctonus rujipennis Kirby) infested spruce on KPB tracts identified by the KPB Spruce Beetle Mitigation Program as having moderate or high wildland fire hazards. On the average, spruce beetles have killed or infested over 80% of the mature spruce trees within the Unit 2 sale areas.

B. Location of Fuel Reduction Parcels

Unit 2 encompasses tracts in TOIS R13W S07, TOIN, Rl3W S24, TOlN R12W S19, TOIN R12W S05, and TOIN R13W S12. Individual parcel descriptions are given in Section II, A.

C. Title, Classification and Other Active or Pending Interests:

The sale area was acquired under the municipal land entitlement program. These tracts are not classified. Classification of these tracts before fuel harvesting is not required under KPB Ordinance 2000-50. The sale area is suitable for resource development, residential sale and development, and recreational use. No sales are proposed or imminent.

D. Objectives:

1. Reduce the wildland fire hazard in Unit 2 by removing fuel loads 2. Accelerate reforestation on beetle-impacted sites 3. Increase plant species diversity on beetle-impacted sites 4. Improve long-tenn forest growth and vigor by harvesting the dead and insect

infested timber 5. Salvage timber affected by spruce beetles 6. Provide jobs from logging and wood processing


119 3

7. Enhance KPB Spruce Bark Beetle Reforestation Program by providing positive royalties to KPB in the fonn of tonnage stumpage payments to be dedicated to continued SBB mitigation work

E. Harvest Methods and Reforestation Requirements

All merchantable dead or spruce bark beetle infested spruce trees will be whole tree logged, or removed as directed by the KPB Forester. Snags will be left for cavity nesters upon the direction of the KPB Forester. Green reserves consisting of live, non-infested spruce trees as well as all hardwood trees will be left on site. Every practical effort shall be made to perfonn clearing work to minimize the damage to surrounding live spruce and/or hardwoods that are not a part of the hazard removal program. Scattered largedowned woody debris necessary for wildlife cover and migration, under the direction of the KPB Forester and in compliance with KPB Forest Fire Science Technical Committee's recommendations, will be left on site.

Slash shall be bucked and scattered or spread out so that debris is not stacked or piled. Stumps will be left no higher than 12 inches. Slash piles must be burnt in accordance with all Federal and State requirements, and under the direction of the KPB Forester. Material left on site shall be broken down so that it lies within 4 inches of the natural ground level or as directed by the KPB Forester.

Reforestation will occur on all harvested parcels, in accordance with KPB Ordinance 2000-50. A Reforestation Technical Committee has been created in accordance with KPB Ordinance 2000-19-19 to provide scientific oversight and technical guidance levels for KPB reforestation projects. The Reforestation Technical Committee will monitor the KPB reforestation program, assist in designing reforestation projects, provide expertise for implementing reforestation projects, and provide recommendations for individual site prescriptions. Members of the Reforestation Technical Committee represent federal and state agencies, the University of Alaska, and the KPB and are knowledgeable in the areas of natural resource conservation, ecological research, silviculture, agriculture, tree regeneration, and other related forestry fields.

II. BACKGROUND AND ISSUES

A. Physical Features and Parcel descriptions

Unit 2 fuel reduction sales are located near the Sterling Highway from South Cohoe Loop to Mile Post 130. Elevations of the sales are from 160 to 300 feet. The soils of these sales are classified as primarily Cohoe silt loam with some wet inclusions. Cohoe soils are well drained and will support summer logging under dry conditions after break up is complete. All units are adjacent to existing roads, although some negotiations with private property owners will be required on two parcels.


120

4

Tract 1: Aurora, #13905008, #13905013, #15701113, & #13906018 The Northern portion of this sale, parcels in Tract 1 encompass 83 acres of mature dead spruce with Cohoe soils on gently sloped terrain 10% or less except for some steeper areas on the edges of the stands. The soil has been classified as Cohoe silt loam. Cohoe is well drained and will support logging during dry summer conditions. The estimated yield for this stand is 20 log tons per acre. There is a developed, gravel access to the Northwest comer of this sale that could allow minimal summer logging without road building. The value of the timber will decide if any more of this tract is summer logged. Note: there is an existing, abandoned, barbed wire fence in the Northwest corner of this tract that could be hazardous to a logging operation. The Southern portion of this sale, parcel # 15701113, is at Mile Post 130 Sterling Highway and has approximately 14 acres of mature, dead, Lutz spruce that will require a winter road access from the landowner to the South. The soils are classified as well drained Cohoe series but have a wet Doroshin inclusion that will preclude summer harvest. The yield is estimated at 15 log tons per acre. Harvesting on this parcel will occur in frozen winter conditions.

Existing Regeneration: There is a healthy stand of spruce saplings up to 25 years old, and birch scattered throughout the sale area.

Tract 2: Clammer's Haven, #13902017,13902083,13902084, & #13918001 This sale has three platted right-of-ways that could be developed for access. The timber on this tract is mature dead spruce with an average size of 8 to 10 inches Diameter at Breast Height with a few larger trees. The estimated yield for this tract is 15 tons per acre on approximately 266 acres. Most of the sale area is classified as well drained Cohoe soil with a small area to the Southeast classified as Kenai soils. There are a few wet inclusions of Doroshin soils. Harvesting on the parcels will occur in dry summer conditions or frozen winter conditions. Existing Regeneration: There is a fair spruce regeneration component up to 35 years old throughout the unit with some willow and scattered birch.

Tract 3: Facio, #13901001 This approximately 6-acre tract has mature, dead, Lutz spruce that will yield approximately 20 log tons per acre. This parcel has soils classified as Cohoe and is adjacent to an oil well pad. The access road crosses private property and will require a negotiated use agreement.

Existing Regeneration: This sale has a small amount of spruce regeneration and scattered birch trees. Harvesting on this parcel will occur in dry summer conditions or frozen winter conditions.

B. Water-bodies

Excluded from all harvests in the sale areas in Unit 2 is a 300-foot riparian buffer zone on both banks of all anadromous streams. However the contractor may harvest trees between 100 and 300 feet from the ordinary high water mark of an anadramous river if the contractor submits, and the borough approves, a variance application as provided in


121 5

KPB 17.08.020M. A variance will not be approved if it is likely to increase erosion or if there would be adverse effects on habitat as provided in KPB 17.08.020M(3).

C. Land Use

There is no known intention for land disposal of these sites that would otherwise obviate the plan to salvage dead spruce trees.

D. Transportation and access

Transportation and access is discussed in the narrative for each individual parcel.

E. Cultural Resources

There are no known cultural resources on Fuel Reduction parcels in Unit 2

F. Recreation Resources Several of the parcels are used for cross country skiing and snow machining. Known use is listed in each parcel description. The removal of dead spruce on these parcels will lessen the risk of injury to recreational users that is posed by the danger of falling or fallen dead spruce trees.

G. Current Stand Conditions on Spruce Bark Beetle-Impacted Sites


Forest stands in the area are predominantly upland stands of mature spruce of small sawlog size at 50 to 80% densities. About one tenth of the area is covered with spruce poles and mixed shrub. Forest stands in the area are predominately upland stands of spruce or mixed spruce and birch with scattered cottonwood. They would be classified as closed white spruce forests grading into more open white spruce forest (Viereck et al. 1992).

On the Kenai Peninsula, there are natural hybrids between white spruce and Sitka spruce (Picea glauca X sitchensis). This hybrid is called Lutz spruce (Picea X Lutzii Little). Researchers believe that this hybridization (a hybrid swann) occurs at varying degrees with some trees showing strong white spruce characteristics, while others will show strong Sitka spruce characteristics. Muskeg, riparian willow, upland willow, and upland alder types are also found. Over 80% of all Lutz spruce 6 inches Diameter at Breast Height and greater on these fuel reduction parcels have been killed by spruce bark beetles.


122 6

While the spruce bark beetle infestation remains active in this management unit, the complete loss of needles on many spruce suggest they were attacked as early as 1997. Many larger spruce have lost significant amounts of bark and wood decay is advancing as evident by occasional wind-snap and soft borings. Very few spruce in the 7 to 12 inch Diameter at Breast Height class are green. Most of these green spruce trees are heavily infested with spruce bark beetles and are assumed dead.

There will be considerable changes to the living forest stand structure as a result of the spruce bark beetle infestation, including a reduction in average age of surviving trees, lower average Diameter at Breast Height, lower average tree height, and decline in stand density. Residual surviving trees initially consist of suppressed and intermediate spruce resulting in decreased canopy cover (Schmid and Frye 1977). Also, stand species composition may be altered. There are a number of successional pathways that may occur.

Natural spruce regeneration occurs when there is an adequate supply of viable seed and an appropriate seedbed (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #9). However, beetle impacted stands experience a significant influx of grass within five years of spruce bark beetle-caused mortality and often lack an appropriate seedbed for tree regeneration. Light to moderate levels of bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) are already present throughout the area. Hence, competition with regeneration is expected to be high if reforestation is delayed.

Bluejoint reedgrass qUickly establishes itself in stands killed by the spruce bark beetle. Because this grass lowers the soil temperature and is such an aggressive competitor, it inhibits the regeneration of both tree seedlings and browse species (Lieffers, et al 1993). One study indicates that even after 11 years, no natural tree or browse regeneration had occurred on a beetle-impacted site (Holsten, et al 1995). In addition, an adequate viable spruce seed source is not present for rapid reforestation in many areas because spruce bark beetles have killed most of the mature, cone-bearing trees. Birch regeneration is also decreased due to the severe competition of grass and inadequate seedbed availability. Holsten et al also noted that plant species diversity declined in beetle-killed stands that were invaded by grass.

Within two to four years following mortality, beetle killed trees begin to wind-snap and fall to the ground. The time-span between mortality and having the tree break-off and fall to the ground appears to be a function of the level of decay in the base of the tree at the time of mortality. Recent research has shown that 50 percent of the beetle killed trees break off and fall to the ground within 10 years (Holsten, et alI995). These downed trees fall across each other or jackstraw and limit access and mobility of both human and wildlife use of the area (Thomas 1979).

H. Changing Forest Fuels and Fire Suppression Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation


123 7

The following section is a compilation of data from forest ecology studies and includes references from the 1998 State of Alaska KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan (by Wade Wahrenbrock/John See), and research published by State and Private Forestry, USFS and by ADF&G. Literature cited in this section can be obtained from or viewed at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Office.

The changes occurring in the forests of the Kenai Peninsula as well as other parts of Alaska are unprecedented in recorded history (Holsten, personal communication 2(01). Spruce bark beetles are greatly influencing the composition of forests by killing almost all whitelLutz spruce trees over 6 inches in diameter. In forest stands composed almost entirely of spruce trees, the effects to the forest structure being caused by the spruce bark beetle epidemic are clearly visible. The almost total loss of mature seed bearing trees over large landscapes will have very long term and profound affects on the Kenai Peninsula.

After spruce bark beetle-caused mortality, dead spruce trees begin a physiological change that occurs over time. The loss of nutrient availability causes trees to shed needles during late winter and the remaining foliage turns red during the second summer after beetle attack. Smaller twig size branch material usually breaks off trees within a couple years after death. As trees drop needle foliage and lose smaller branch material, an increase of direct sunlight reaches the forest floor. Surface vegetation changes with this event. Most noticeably, native blue joint reedgrass begins to dominate surface vegetation.

The boles of dead spruce trees are subject to natural decay processes such as "sap rot". The wood fiber structure changes so that tree boles loose elasticity and are not as flexible during windy conditions. As mentioned earlier, a study of vegetative survey plots on the Kenai Peninsula (Holsten et.al. 1995) indicate that tree stem breakage begins to accelerate between 5-10 years after bark beetles attack forest stands.

As time progresses, standing trees begin to break off and fall into one another becoming jack strawed. This provides a means for surface fires to accelerate the transition to crown fires in the remaining canopy. Overtime trees begin to fall to the ground where they become part of the surface fuel matrix and as years progress the regenerating forests develop over heavy concentrations of fuels. The heavy concentration of fuel under this regeneration will be available for combustion for many years. In some cases in the Yukon it has been reported that the material will be readily combustible for 50 years after it has fallen to the ground (Beaver 1997). While this period of heavy fuel concentration will likely be shorter on the Kenai Peninsula, especially when wood is in direct contact with the ground, these conditions are expected to still last for decades.

The high proportion of trees being killed by spruce bark beetles has created a substantial and significant change in the risk of wildland fire on the Kenai Peninsula. The greatest single change in the trees is that of water volume or moisture content in affected trees. Tree foliage supported by moisture from root systems in live trees usually contains from 200 percent water content during the early summer to 120 percent during drought conditions. The moisture content of live tree boles usually ranges from 40% to 70%. This


124 8

water content significantly decreases after tree mortality. Based on previous sampling of large dead tree material it has been determined that dead spruce will reach equilibrium with environmental conditions within approximately 60 days following mortality. This material will typically have moisture content of approximately 10%.

Downed trees create additional surface fuel loading, which combines with the heavy grass mat to create a serious wildfire hazard. As beetle killed stands unravel, grass cover increases from near zero to over 50 percent of the ground cover (Schutz 1995). Fires in this fuel type can be intense, rapid moving and difficult to control (See 1997). A 1994 study of a past beetle infestation showed a general tendency for increasing surface fuel loads in later stages of an infestation (Schulz 1995). This study showed an increase in woody surface fuel loading from approximately 9 tons per acre in 1987 to over 35 tons per acre in 1994~ nearly a 400 percent increase. Another case study of fire in beetleimpacted forests was conducted in 1997 (Beaver 1997). An important product generated from this study is a comparison of fire "critical surface intensity" (CSI). CSI is the tenn used to describe the amount of surface fire heat production that is necessary to generate full crown fire involvement of tree canopies. In the case of spruce forests that are alive and unaffected by spruce bark beetles. Beaver determined that 1,704 kilowatts/meter (KVVIM) of surface heat intensity is required to ignite green trees whose crown begins an average of four feet above the ground. In dead beetle kill spruce with the same crown height ratio, only 192 KWIM is required to generate crown fires.

The moisture content in live trees is supported by root systems. By comparison, the moisture content of dead trees is subject to daily changes due to changing weather conditions and long tenn drying in drought periods. In an average year, it is estimated that environmental conditions necessary to allow for full crown fire involvement of live spruce forests only occurs about 2 to 3 days each year. The number of days where environmental conditions are reached that will allow for crown fire in dead trees occurs with much greater frequency. It is estimated that dead spruce forests can reach crown fire involvement about 30 days/year on the average.

The spread of fire is greatly enhanced in beetle-killed spruce. The amount of dead and dry fine material, such as Old Mans Beard lichen, that is contained in standing dead trees aids spot fire occurrence. Dead material down wind of a fire creates a condition where hot embers initiate new fire starts with much greater frequency when compared to green live forests (personal observation W. Wahrenbrock).

Another factor affecting the fire risk of forests is tenned as the probability of ignition. Probability of ignition is a tenn used as an expression of how easily a fire will ignite. Dead spruce with low moisture content will ignite far more readily than green spruce. Lightning has historically been an infrequent cause of fire ignition on the Kenai Peninsula (See 1998), however, wildland fire research scientists have declared the potential for lightning fire starts will increase as a result of the "sea of snags" that have been created (Alexander and Stocks 1997).


125 9

The probability of crown fire events is greatly enhanced as a result of the spruce beetle infestation. Once fires reach crown fire stage, they are difficult to suppress and are often uncontrollable. This fire risk condition will be sustained for about 10 years until such time as dead timber stands begin to break apart and unravel. The reduction of vertical fuel load continuity will not diminish the fire risk problem. To the contrary, increased fuel loading on the ground surface will extend the fire problem in fuel types that are known to be of short season duration. Specifically, grass that evolves with increased exposure to sunlight usually only creates fire control problems during the early summer season before "green-up". The addition of large woody material from downed beetle killed trees will create fuel conditions that will support fire occurrence throughout the summer season. These fuel types have been observed to bum with high intensity levels (personal communication Kromery). Fires in this fuel type burn up to 20 times faster and 6 times more intensely than the fuel type associated with healthy white spruce stands, particularly in the spring and early fall (See 1997). Fires in downed spruce trees in grass fuels exhibit a high resistance to control by firefighters. This downed timber impedes access into a fire area by firefighters and will severely limit the use of tactical ground forces such as engines, dozers and hand crews (See 1998). Even when suppressing fires during moderate environmental conditions, placing crews in this type of fuel poses a significant personal safety risk should winds begin to rapidly increase, change direction, or if sudden slope changes are encountered.

Large wildland fires have been noted to occur on the Kenai Peninsula since the beginning of recorded history. Large intense fires may become stand replacement fires because the burned areas regenerate with even aged trees that fonn young successional forests. The intensity of the spruce beetle attack has created a circumstance where spruce seed will not be readily available to regenerate burned areas. The advent of large landscapes of dead trees has also created a condition where fires will burn at high intensity but may not produce seedbeds that are receptive to forest regeneration. Several early season fires such as Pot Hole Lake, Hidden Creek, and Crooked Creek fires, which resulted in cumulative suppression costs of $6.6 million dollars, demonstrate this problem. Even though the dead spruce canopy of these fires burned with high intensity, surface vegetation consumption was low due to high moisture content. Surveys of one of these burned areas revealed that the fire consumed only 2 to 3 centimeters (cm) of duff material and less than 2% of the surface area had exposed mineral soils (Berg 1996). To compound the problem of regenerating this area, virtually all birch, and the sapling size spruce that had not succumbed to the earlier spruce bark beetle epidemic, were killed as a result of fire intensity. The lack of a seed source within and adjoining this burned area will compound the problem of reforesting these burned areas.

Had these large fires occurred closer to towns or improvements, structures may have been seriously threatened or lost. The risk factors for a catastrophic wildland fire are starting to stack up on the Kenai Peninsula. With the right weather conditions, the scenario for a catastrophic urban/wildland interface fire with property loss and loss of life is a definite possibility. Defensible space on a landscape scale is one of the most important actions that can be undertaken to reduce the potential of a large fire. This can be accomplished through harvesting the dead and dying timber in order to break up the continuity of fuels.


126

10

Studies in Alaska and Canada show that a large percentage of spruce bark beetle-killed trees will fall to the ground in five to ten years. This downed fuel loading will add to the fire problem potential (See 1998). Of the three main factors affecting fire behavior (fuel, weather, and topography) fuel is the only component over which some measure of management may be exerted. Extensive fuel management is the only option for mitigating potential losses (Beaver 1997).

1. Changes to Wildlife Habitat Caused by Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation


Large-scale infestations of spruce bark beetles have a significant influence on wildlife habitats by changing their structure and function (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #11). The loss of the mature spruce and the potential loss of the younger spruce component will result in the loss of hiding and thermal cover (DF&G 1994). What birch is present often has defect indicators and will likely begin to experience higher rates of weather-related breakage. The remaining live forest component will be composed primarily of scattered birch and young spruce seedling/saplings. Grass, in locations where residual tree density is minimal, will become the predominant ground cover and will inhibit the development of suckering and sprouting plants which reduces the availability of browse (Holsten, et. al. 1995). Spruce regeneration is very poor on these sites as the grass quickly out competes any seedlings that genninate. Without ground disturbance the heavy organic layer will continue to preclude desirable regeneration.

When mortality of the stand is 80-100%, wildlife diversity may be expected to decrease (Stone 1995). Of the 92 bird species that may be expected to occur on the Kenai Peninsula, 37 will decrease in abundance (e.g. spruce grouse, grosbeaks, Townsend's warblers) and 24 will increase in abundance (e.g. warblers and sparrows associated with shrubs). Eleven will have mixed or unknown response and 20 would not be expected to change in abundance (i.e. those not associated with forested habitats). Of the 39 mammal species expected to occur on the Kenai Peninsula, 13 may be expected to decrease in abundance following spruce bark beetle infestations (e.g., red squirrels, porcupines, flying squirrels) and 8 may increase (e.g., hares, voles). Eight will probably have mixed or unknown response and 10 would not be expected to change in abundance, Le., those not associated with forested habitats, (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #11).

Within the boreal forest, moose are generally more closely associated with forest cover in summer than in winter. This association may be a function of preference for forage, which are of higher quality as a result of delayed plant development or different plant characteristics. Cows may prefer to calve and bed their newborns on forested knolls or other vegetated high points from which predators are more easily detected. These features may also present varied escape routes that require minimal energy expenditure by calves


127 11

(Collins 1995). As the dead spruce fall to the ground, escape routes will become diminished and it is likely that energy expenditure by newborn moose (neonates) for escape will be increased. The increase over time in the amount of dead-fall which will occur without intervention will also decrease sight distance which may result in additional predation of neonates. The increasing amount of deadfall and debris on the forest floor could limit access to preferred foraging areas and limit mobility during critical times of the year for moose (DF&G 1994).

As the number of spruce trees die, red squirrel populations will decline as squirrels move to nearby lower quality, marginal habitats where food may be available (ADFG 1994). Cover habitat for squirrels will also decline after the first two years as trees lose their needles. The absence of conifers will make the squirrels more susceptible to predation from raptors and larger mammals (USFS 1994). It takes at least 30-50 years after spruce has been reestablished before the area will provide quality red squirrel habitat (USFS 1994).

Spruce grouse are also affected by the loss of spruce trees to the spruce beetle primarily through the loss of winter feeding habitat (ADFG 1994). Gradual loss of escape and thermal cover habitat will also occur as the spruce trees lose their needles and eventually fall over (ADFG 1994). Predators associated with grouse, such as owls and goshawks, can be expected to show a response to the increased vulnerability of individual birds

. displaced by the infestation (USFS 1994). In large-scale infestation areas, such as the proposed sale area, increased amounts of deadfall, grass, and other debris will impede grouse reproductive displays and reduce summer feeding habitat (ADFG 1994). The end result of no treatment of these dying stands will be a decline in local spruce grouse populations (USFS 1994).

The infestation will result in an increase in the number of snags and downed woody material, likely benefiting cavity-nesting birds such as woodpeckers, some owls, brown creepers, nuthatches, and chickadees (DF&G 1994). Most snags are beetle-killed spruce. However, mature hardwood stands that contain some hardwood snags offer the most cavities. This is due to the morphological differences between spruce and hardwoods. Living spruce seldom has soft heartwood preferred by cavity nesters. Spruce that die usually fall to the ground within 10 years, which is the time it takes for the heartwood to soften. The larger diameter birch and cottonwood trees are more important than spruce for cavity nesters. Even though the sale area has fewer birch and cottonwood snags, they are most important to cavity nesters. After the beetle outbreak subsides, woodpeckers will still benefit from the large numbers of secondary insects (cerambycids, ants, other scolytids) present, but this food abundance should only last 2 to 3 years (Schmid and Frye, 1977). The feeding value of these insects for woodpeckers will decrease because they are generally fewer in number and less accessible (they feed in deeper recesses in the wood). Bird populations would be expected to decline because of a lack of food after these insects decline, (DF&G 1994).

The spruce bark beetle infestation may reduce the value of the sale area over time for brown bear as hiding cover decreases and vegetation composition of the understory


128 12

changes. Because of the relatively large horne range and mobility of bears, the future degradation of the infested stands will probably not have significant impacts on the bear populations (USFS 1990 and DF&G 1994).

J. Changes to Scenic Values Caused by the Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation

The following is reprinted from the 1998 State of Alaska "KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan":

Residents and visitors to Alaska consistently rated forest vistas damaged by spruce bark beetles lower in scenic beauty, and the more tree mortality present the lower the perceived scenic beauty. Both residents and visitors cite loss of scenic values as an important effect of spruce bark beetle damage. Visitors consistently report sightseeing as a dominant activity, and indicate views seen as a major factor affecting the quality of their visit to Alaska. Respondents of a recent USFS study consistently preferred preventative thinning treatments to a no-treatment scenario. For forested areas already severely impacted by spruce bark beetles, respondents preferred the visual conditions produced by rehabilitation strategies that resulted in more rapid regeneration of forest cover. From a list of proposed actions including a no action alternative, respondents continued to prefer actions which would include cutting and removing dead trees, even if selling them would only recover part of the costs (Daniel et. al. 1991). Cutting and removing the dead trees was also chosen over the possibility of burning a site for forest regeneration. Similar results were obtained in other studies within the U.S. (Orland, 1997 and Oriand et. al' 1993).

m. IMPACTS OF FUEL REDUCTION SALES

A. Effects on Wildlife Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

The following section is a compilation of data from forest ecology studies that includes references from the 1998 State of Alaska KenailKodiak Forest Land Use Plan (by Wade WahrenbrocklJohn See), and research published by State and Private Forestry, USFS and by ADF&G. Literature cited in this section can be obtained from or viewed at the Kenai Peninsula Borough Spruce Bark Beetle Office.

The effects of the proposed timber sale will vary depending on species. As noted earlier, the spruce bark beetle infestation is already impacting wildlife. Wildlife species that prefer mature and over-mature spruce stands will either be displaced or decline in numbers. Species preferring the grass-forb successional stage will likely increase in abundance (DF&G 1994). The proposed silvicultural harvest prescription and the post-harvest site preparation treatment will encourage the regeneration of both birch and spruce (Collins 1992) although opportunities for birch regeneration are limited and some parcels are almost void of birch trees. Scarification should enhance the reestablishment of the forest. Documented natural trends show re-colonization by browse and tree species to be very slow to non-existent due to grass competition (Holsten et al. 1995). Muskeg ,~dges and harvested sites, which are prepared for the regeneration of hardwood species,


129 13

will often provide for an earlier food source in late winter/early spring (Schwartz, 1998 personal communication). Snow depth and browse availability at this time of year can be especially important for moose survival as fat reserves are at the lowest.

Possible effects of the proposed timber harvest on several wildlife species are outlined below.

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Black Bears

For black bear: Timber harvest during the winter denning period could disturb black bears denning in or near harvest activity. Human presence and associated development may preclude bear use of traditional feeding areas and movement corridors during periods of harvest activities (DF&G 1994).

Increased vulnerability of local black bear populations to hunting is a function of road location and road density which, in turn, is related to the timber harvesting systems used and the level of logging activity (DF&G 1994).

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Brown Bears

The brown bear population on the Kenai is presently estimated to range between 250-400 bears (Schwartz & Arthur 1996). The highest densities of brown bears are in the forested lowlands and sub-alpine areas west of the Kenai Mountains. There is presently no indication of a decreasing population. The population numbers were probably at an all-time low in the 1920's due to the tendency of locals to shoot most bears on sight (Shuster personal communication 1997) and the population had been poisoned in the early part of this century (Jacobs 1989). Their distribution often overlaps that of black bears (DF&G 1994). They generally frequent remote, higher elevation, sub-alpine and alpine habitats more often than black bears (DF&G 1994. ... Dens on the Kenai are generally in the mountains or on steep hillsides. Most brown bear denning occurs at higher elevations than the proposed sale area (Jacobs 1989). However, recent research has shown that some bears do den in forested lowlands.

Logging can benefit grizzly bear populations if production of berry producing shrubs is increased. Roads associated with the timber harvest may cause behavioral changes with the bear population. Although evidence suggests that road avoidance behavior and habitat loss leads to changes in wildlife productivity and survivorship, there is little data currently available to support this hypothesis (Frederick 1991). To be of major concern to wildlife managers, behavioral responses to disturbance must have demonstrable demographic consequences. Demographic responses do not necessarily follow, even from significant behavioral responses to changes of the habitat (McLellan and Shackleton 1988). Significantly, the demographic response by brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula has been an increase in the population. Since the 1950's the brown bear population on the peninsula has increased to a current estimated population of 300 (Schwartz personal communication). This is despite a human population increase on the Kenai Peninsula from 9,053 in 1960 to 48,815 in 1998.


130

14

A number of researchers suggest that hunting keeps bears wary of humans because bears learn from experience with hunters. Hunters quickly eliminate bears that are not secretive. Bear populations in areas of high human density persist apparently because individuals have learned to avoid human confrontation and withdraw from human contact. Researchers suggest that a strong negative response of grizzly bears to people does not affect population size, and therefore may actually benefit bears by reducing the frequency of human-bear encounters (Frederick 1991).

Several researchers suggest that grizzly bears habituate to open roads by shifting to a more nocturnal activity pattern. Apparently, darkness may serve as cover, allowing bears to use roads and adjacent habitats and to cross open areas where they are vulnerable to human harassment and hunting mortality. To use areas within 100 meters of roads within their home range, bears have often done so under the cover of darkness by being nocturnal in their travel and feeding patterns (Frederick 1991). This travel period may have a shortened duration in Alaska due to the state's latitude. However, in numerous studies it has been shown that brown bears will utilize highly disturbed areas by being nocturnal, while bears in undisturbed areas tend to be more crepuscular (active during twilight)(Frederick 1991). Some studies have shown that bears and some yearlings within cover did not change position when vehicles approached. It has also been noted that sows with cubs and yearling juveniles more frequently used habitats near roads than other bears. These habitats near roads may have been relatively secure because roads were avoided by potentially aggressive adult males (McLellan and Shackelton 1988). Several researchers reported that adult bears in open sites usually retreated to cover when a vehicle approached within 300 meters. However, researchers McLellan and Shackleton found that bears fled even further when approached by people on foot; in 5 of 9 cases when bears in remote areas were approached by humans, bears fled for distances greater than 1 Ian (0.6 miles), or out of the immediate drainage (Frederick 1991). This illustrates that bears find vehicular traffic less threatening than people on foot. This may be attributable to habituation.

To maintain and potentially increase the brown bear population on the Kenai Peninsula, DF&G continues to adjust hunting seasons for brown bears. An estimate of the total bear population and reproductive rates is used to detennine the annual harvest. Bear population goals have been met in the past four years by a spring bear hunt and Defense of Life and Property (DLP) takings. Therefore it was detennined that a fall hunt should not be conducted. In 1998 DF&G placed the brown bear residing on the Kenai Peninsula on the State's species of concern list.

Wildlife biologists have expressed concern about the increasing trend in brown bear mortality caused by DLP takings and potential for additional mortality from human encroachment into bear habitat. The number of non-hunting kills, which includes DLP, research mortalities, and other known human-caused mortalities, increased each year from three in 1991 to ten in 1995 and fell back to six in 1998. Since 1986, approximately ,a third of the DLP's are occurring near homes, another third is associated with hunting, and the last third is across the board of different activities such as fishing, hiking, ranching, etc. None of the DLP's have directly been associated with timber harvest


131

15

operations (Ted Spraker personal communication 1998 & Gino Del Frate, DF&G, personal communication 1997).

In the fall bears travel great distances to feed on devils club berries in the mountainous portion of the peninsula (Collins, DF&G 1998 personal communication). It is also important to note that berries, where present, are an important summer and fall food item for brown bears (Suring 1998). In the spring, bears diet often consists of skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum), grasses (Calamagrostis spp.) and horsetail (Equisetum spp.), which are widely distributed across the peninsula. Bears consume ungulate carrion and bears have been effective predators on moose. Recent research has shown that spring and early summer range is important because brown bears are very efficient predators of moose calves (Charles C. Schwartz, DF&G, personal communication. 1997). Generally, the areas of highest habitat value include areas with southern aspects and wet habitats within defined ungulate winter range (Suring 1998).

The availability of security cover is considered important in how brown bears are influenced by human activities. Brown bears are at least twice as likely to be displaced from open areas where they can see or be seen by humans (Suring 1998).... The spruce saplings, residual birch, alder thickets and willow thickets, as well as the retention areas, will provide cover to bears moving through the area while the seedlings and saplings continue to grow and reduce visual distances.

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Moose

The impacts of timber harvesting on moose is often determined by the size of the harvest. While biologists recognize the importance of overstory disturbance in the boreal forest in terms of enhanced production of moose browse, recommendations for the size and shape of the forest openings vary greatly from 5 acres to a square mile or more. Generally, the most important reported relationship between size/shape of created openings and their utilization by moose is related to seeding distance and establishment of important species (Collins 1995). On state-owned lands that have been harvested and scarified, a high stocking level of browse species has occurred (e.g. birch seedlings, aspen seedlings, etc.). Peak browse production occurs 10-16 years after disturbance (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #4).

Provided excessive browsing of birch is controlled, it takes approximately 3 to 5 years for birch to become tall enough to be available as winter browse. Birches that are 4 to 5 years old are tall enough to provide equal or greater wind protection and security cover than mature forest. Cover is more important in summer conditions. Moose have an efficient way of keeping warm in severe weather but are less efficient in moderating the effects of high summer temperatures that can cause them to overheat (Inter-Agency Forest Ecology Study Team #6).

Impacts of Fuel Reduction Harvest on Ermine, Mink, River Otters, Spruce Grouse


132

16

It is anticipated that harvest operations will likely reduce available prey for ermine for an extended period of time. To help offset this potential reduction, the proposed silvicultural prescription will retain the younger spruce component and the hardwoods. Snag retention and muskeg leave areas will also offset some of the impact on ermine habitat.

Mink use of the area, both presently and post-harvest is expected to be low. Mink are commonly found near streams, ponds, marshes, beaches, or muskegs. The aquatic and riparian habitats are the most important mink habitat and this proposed sale provides for a leave retention area along the wetland areas within the sale.

River otters, like mink, prefer aquatic and streamside habitats. Since streamside areas are not proposed for harvest, it is expected that no impact will occur to river otters from this sale.

Lynx will use early successional habitats resulting from timber cutting, but require proximity to mature mixed forests (DF&G 1994). Retention of small residual stands, and uncut movement corridors along streams and/or muskegs will maximize edge effect and provide a mix of cover and early successional feeding areas. Potential improvement in snowshoe hare habitat quality should appear evident after logging (DF&G 1994). It is expected that lynx numbers could then show a corresponding increase as hares prosper in these areas (DF&G 1994).

Spruce grouse will be affected by the loss of canopy that will result in increased mortality of spruce grouse from predation on more visible nests and from the loss of protection from inclement weather (DF&G 1994). The decreased winter food supplies (loss of spruce needles and buds) may displace grouse into areas of lower quality habitat that could increase nutritional stress, and lead to increased mortality (DF&G 1994). Sapling and advanced regeneration areas within the sale are often patchy, but may provide sufficient cover to serve as courtship display areas. Live mature spruce stands for winter escape cover and protection will be difficult to find due to the heavy mortality of spruce caused by the spruce bark beetle. Leave areas will help to offset this loss to the extent that they are useful.

The potential effects of the fuel reduction sales on non-game birds will be the shortage of suitable nesting trees, which could result in lower numbers of birds. The conversion of sites to early successional stages could result in a shift in bird species composition to favor birds that prefer grass, shrub/forb, and sapling habitats (DF&G 1994). The retention of the younger spruce component and the hardwoods will maintain some foraging and nesting habitats. The retention of the leave areas and residuals will help to provide a range of different stand ages and micro-habitat features that will help to maintain the diversity of boreal forest bird species (DF&G 1994).

To minimize impacts to wildlife popUlations, roads will be carefully designed to minimize vehicular access to sale units other than that necessary for harvest activities.


133

17

B. Effects on Fisheries Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

None envisioned. A setback of 300 feet from anadramous streams is provided by KPB ordinance 2000-50 with variances within 100 to 300 feet given to a contractor only upon application approval by KPB with due deference given to Alaska Department of Fish and Game regarding the effects on fish and wildlife habitat from timber harvesting in riparian areas.

C. Effects on Subsistence Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

D. Effects on Recreation Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

The fuel reduction sales will decrease the threat of injury to recreational users of these fuel reduction tracts. As noted above, dead spruce suffers structural failure between 5 and 10 years post-mortality, and currently represent a high hazard to recreational users of these fuel reduction parcels.

E. Effects on Erosion Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

F. Effects on Mining Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

G. Effects on Mineral Sources Caused by Fuel Reduction Sales

No known effect.

IV. TIMBER HARVEST AND CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

A. Estimated Volume of each parcel (tons)

1. Aurora 1877 2. Clammer's Haven 3992 3. Facio 124

B. Method of payment

Ten percent of the bid amount will be paid upon execution of a timber sale contract agreement. The remainder is due with the signed contract within 30 days for bids less than $1,000. For bids greater than $1,000.00, 25% is due with the signed contract and the rest is paid as specified in the contract.


134 18

C. Boundary Requirements

KPB will mark harvest units on maps and contractor will mark the harvest units on the ground with flagging. The location and marking of all boundaries where a timber harvest unit coincides with the tract boundary will be accomplished according to procedures and standards identified by the Borough Surveyor.

D. Authority to Sell the Timber

Kenai Peninsula Borough ordinance 2000-50 authorizes the disposal of forest resources on Unit 2 for wildland fire hazard mitigation.

E. Requirements for Scaling the Harvested Timber

This is a tonnage and/or an estimated tonnage sale based upon Unit Sale Parcel Summery (see Attachment A) so scaling of harvested timber is not required. In the event the tonnage and/or estimated tonnage based bid process is not successful and an over the counter proposal involves sale based on volume, scaling requirements will be negotiated and specified for any volume to weight conversions.

F. Contract Requirements

Successful bidder will have 14 days from the date of notification to execute an Agreement for the Sale of Timber along with all required payments, bonds. and certificates.

The Agreement for the Sale of Timber provides information on the operating and harvest plans and operations, standards, reforestation requirements. Copies of the contract form are available from the Kenai Peninsula Borough, Planning Department, 144 N. Binkley Street. Soldotna. Alaska 99669.

G. Sale Procedure. Date And Time

Fuel Reduction Sales will be by competitive sealed bid, as authorized in Ordinance 2000-50. Requests for Bids on Unit 2 Fuel Reduction Sales will be advertised as soon as possible after Assembly approval of this FMSR. It is expected that sealed bids will be accepted at 2:00 p.m. on or before November 29, 2001, but the final specific date will be included in the public notice.

H. Requirements and Qualifications of Bidders

An individual, organization or firm is qualified to bid if they are:

a. Represented by an individual at least 18 years of age;


135 19

b. Legally competent and/or authorized to carry out the provisions of a permit or contract;

c. Licensed to do business in the borough and state; d. Not in violation of current permits or contracts and performed

satisfactorily on previous permits or contracts; e. In compliance with the Borough Code provisions with respect to tax

compliance requirements.


136

20

~ 0 W

Earl Breyfogle Kenai Peninsula Borough Forester 5/31/'01

Sale Parcel Summary 2000-50 Fuel Load Reduction Sale

Summer 2001

....... U) ........

Unit # Name Parcel #

15701113

Winter Acres

Timber

Summer Acres

Timber

Yield I Acre (tons)

Estimated Yield (tons)

Est. Sale Value @ $4/ton

2 Aurora 14.3 15 215 858

13905008 83.1 20 1662 6648

13905013

13906018

13902017

0 0

2 Clammer's Haven 266.1 15 3992 15966

13902083 0 0

13902084 0 0

13918001 0 0

13901001

0 0

2 Facio 6.2 20 124 496

.,

369.7

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

Total 363.5 6.2 5992 23968.0

Total

J i k i- :- J=jll~ g Unit 2 I'

i

Iill I

I !

I I

Roads 10 Alaskan Highways

N Anadromous Streams "0 Facio

-L

cu o Aurora (X) Clammer's Haven

c::::::J KPB Lands Unit 2

N

6 o 6 12 Miles

. JI

II (1) I

I -co (/l

"0 c I (/lCIl

....Jen ""0 ~ di ui, e en ...C :J a.. CIl "'

I Q) « ~ a.. ~

I

) Q) ~

CO C) Z.~

0 ....J ~

I

I

I

10~ : I «I I

I ,, " I

I 1/1

oS! ~ C'! 0

CII E

CII III:-,CU CIll::: CU

>~U) III-CCII ::I:01::11 CII.- 0 CII

~o::I: E -.. ccu-co IIICII III ..

0 ..III E ...I Z-EiiiilS :::!tN~~~ III CII III ·u e E !Xl Olll~ III ::II ..!!! a. ·c0:::« u.«U~

<Do 0:::J

o

I

II I ' I

I

I

L _ d~ 05

I

, I

Ii II I/JQ)

c: CD >ca

::I: tn

-l.

I CD

i I ~ I ca110

DOD

CD-ca en o.u ca

LL

lO

-Q)

"C

H: ca II)

c: !!l j Wen "'0 .g ~ coc ell [l.

Q) S!. ~() C> [l. z.~..- Q)

CJ -J ~lJDI--1

ca J u..

- I

C')

o

o

C')

o'

N... .

Q...

144----

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/l 8/0 I Action: Vote:

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH RESOLUTION 20ot-l0l

A RESOLUTION APPROVING CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR FUNDING UNDER THE STATE'S FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003

MUNICIPAL CAPITAL MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM

WHEREAS, a municipal capital project matching grant program was adopted during the 1993 legislative session, to be governed by the provisions of AS 37.06; and

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough is eligible for a grant allocation for fiscal year 2003 under AS 37.06 as set forth in 3 AAC 154.030; and

'''HEREAS, municipalities are required to submit a list of their proposed capital projects to the Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development by October 1, 2001, for projects to be funded for fiscal year 2002-2003; and

\\i'HEREAS, for each capital project grant that a municipality receives in the program, a local match, or local share of the cost, must be provided by the municipality; and

WHEREAS, AS 37.06.030 states that the calculation for the local share is based on the population of a municipality and for municipalities with a population of 5,000 or more the local share shall be 30 percent; and

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough deems it in the best interest of the public to participate in the State's capital matching grant program;


SECTION 1. That the Assembly hereby approves the capital project identified below and in the attached "Priority Projects" form and requests grant funding under AS 37.06 for said project.

Project Name: Borough wide Road Improvements State Funds Requested: $497,495.00

SECTION 2. That the Assembly agrees to provide the local share for the project as required under AS 37.06, which will be satisfied through local tax sources.

Kemi Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001-101 Page I of2

145

SECTION 3. This resolution becomes effective upon its adoption.

ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.


ATIEST:


Resolution 2001-101 Kenai Peninsula Borough. Alaska Page 2 of2

146

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH Community &Economic Development Division

43335 Kalifomsky Beach Road, Suite 16 Soldotna, Alaska 99669-8250

PHONE: (907) 262-6355 • FAX: (907) 262-6762 E-Mail: [email protected]

MEMORANDUM To: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Members

Tbl1l: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor OL.-~

From: Bonnie Golden. Grants Manager ~ Gary Davis, Roads DirectO~

Date: September 6, 2001

Subject: Resolution approving capital projects for funding under the State's fiscal year 2002-2003 municipal capital matching grant program.

In 1993 the legislatw"e established the Municipal Capital Project Matching Grant Program, governed by the provisions ofAS 37.06. According to AS 37.06.010(d), applications for grants mder this program must be submitted no later than October 1 ofeach year. The Borough has participated in this program since its inception Each year we have requested funding for road improvements.

The attached resolution approves the capital project to be submitted to the state for funding under the FY 2003 matching grant program. As in the past, the only project on the application is our road improvement program. The Road Service Area Board approved the list ofspecific road projects at their meeting on August 14,2001. A copy ofthe approved list is attached and will be included with the application packet. Upon Assembly approval, the application will be submitted to the Department ofCOUDDunity and Economic Development.

The level of funding for the program is detemrined during the legislative session, but is expected to remain at the same level as the past few years - approximately $496,000. The required matching portion will be provided from Road Service Area funds. The road list includes more projects than can be funded under the State's program. Requesting more than the anticipated amount provides the Road Service Area fleXIbility in completing their projects. Iffor some reason a project cannot be initiated or completed as originally anticipated, road crews can immediately proceed to the next project on the list. Projects will be completed in priority order until grant funds are depleted. Remaining projects will be kept on the Road Service Area's list ofprojects and completed when funding is available.

/bg

Attachments (Resolution, Grant Application, Road List)

147

mailto:[email protected]

PRIORITY PROJECTS

Kenai Peninsula Borough . Applicant Name: Community Name:....;B=-o=-r_o_u~g~h_W_~_d_e _

Contact Person: Bonnie L. Golden Phone #: 907 262-6355 Fax #:907 262-6762

Project Name Road Improvement Program

Grant Amount Requested $497,495.00

TYPE OF PROJECT OFacility ~Roads []Water & Sewer OEquipment OBulkFuel OLandfill DOther

__New Renovation _New ~Upgrade

_New _Upgrade _New _Repair _New _Upgrade _New _Upgrade

_

Priority Rank # 1

Local Share Amount $ 213,212.00

LOCAL SHARE CONTRIBUTION ~Cash OMaterialslSupplies OEquipment UsageoLabor OLand OOther _

DYes [!]No Project is phased (having received CPMG program $ previous year(s».

Project Name _

Grant Amount Requested $ _

TYPE OF PROJECT OFacility _New Renovation oRoads _New _Upgrade DWater & Sewer _New _Upgrade DEquipment _New _Repair DBulkFuel _New _Upgrade oLandfill _New _UpgradeoOther _

Priority Rank #2

Local Share Amount $, _

LOCAL SHARE CONTRIBUTION DCash OMaterialslSupplies DEquipment Usage DLabor DLand OOther _

DYes DNo Project is phased (having received CPMG program ~ previous year(s».

Project Name _

Grant Amount Requested $ _

TYPE OF PROJECT OFacility _New _Renovation ORoads _New _Upgrade DWater & Sewer _New _Upgrade DEquipment _New _Repair DBulk Fuel _New _UpgradeoLandfill _New _UpgradeOOther _

Priority Rank #3

Local Share Amount $ _

LOCAL SHARE CONTRIBUTION DCash DMaterialslSupplies OEquipment Usage DLabor OLand DOther _

DYes DNo Project is phased (having received CPMG program $ previous year(s».

FY 2003 CMG Application Packet Issued July 2001

148

II I

2003 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - KPB Road Service Area I

ROAD EST. UNIT PROJ # UNIT' ROAD LENGTH TOTAL TOTAL

FY03·S1 2 Oil Well Rd 5280 $52,800.00 FY03·S2 3 Silverberry Ave 1500 $15,000.00 FY03·S2 3 Cranberry Rd 3800 $38,000.00 FY03-S3 4 Knob Hill 2305 $23,050.00 FY03·S3 4 Dorothy Dr 700 $7,000.00 FY03·S3 4 ChakokRd 2000 $20,000.00 FY03·S4 5 Garden Park 2900 $29,000.00 FY03-S4 5 Lincoln Dr 1575 $15,750.00 FY03·S4 5 Lincoln Cr 500 $5,000.00 FY03·S5 6 Sandford Dr 1850 $18,500.00 FY03·S5 6 Mary Ln 1300 $13,000.00 FY03·S5 6 Dorthy Dr 1500 $15,000.00 FY03·S6 7 Portlock Dr 1575 $15,750.00 FY03·S6 7 Glacier View Rd 2000 $20,000.00 FY03·S7 8 South Trail Ct 400 $4,000.00

--FY03·S7 8 Aurora Cr 460 $4,600.00

. FY03·S7 8 Trail Mnt Rd 525 $5,250.00 FY03·S7 8 Trail Mnt Ct 500 $5,000.00

$306,700.00

FY03·Nl 2 Lighthorse Way 750 $6,000.00 FY03·Nl 2 Hoover St 350 $2,800.00 FY03·Nl 4 Durainey Ln 1220 $9,760.00 FY03·N2 5 Scenic View Lp 1760 $14,080.00 FY03-N3 2 Byrd Ave 1070 $8,560.00 FY03-N3 2 Hendrix St 300 $2,400.00 FY03·N3 2 Newberry Ave 1225 $9,800.00 FY03-N3 2 Canova Ct 500 $4,000.00 FY03·N4 3 English St 2300 $18,400.00 FY03·N4 3 Ramona St 2450 $19,600.00 FY03·N5 5 Northwoods St 4730 $37,840.00 FY03-N5 5 E. Marguerite Ct 750 $6,000.00 FY03-N6 1 Nikishka Rd 2650 $21,200.00 FY03-N6 1 Warren Ave 2100 $16,800.00 FY03·N7 1 S/L North 5160 $41,280.00 F'Y03·N7 1 Lower Salmanotof Ave 600 $4,800.00

$223,320.00 fY03·E3 3 Tinker Trail Bridge $30,000.00 IFY03·E3 3 Old Exit Glacier Rd. 1000 $8,000.00 $38,000.00

FY03·Cl 1 Dale Ln 2800 $22,400.00 FY03·Cl 1 Kel Ln 550 $4,400.00

Page 1

149

2003 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - KPB Road Service Area

ROAD EST. UNIT PROJ # UNIT ROAD LENGTH TOTAL TOTAL FY03·C1 1 Laurie Ln 700 $5,600.00 FY03·C2 2 Great Land St 2300 $18,400.00 FY03·C2 2 Roy St 1300 $10,400.00 FY03·C2 2 Elva St 1300 $10,400.00 FY03·C2 2 Jim St 2640 $21,120.00 FY03·C3 2 Grandview Dr 3200 $25,600.00 FY03·C3 2 Sunrise Ln 3800 $30,400.00 FY03·C4 2 Moose Ridge Rd 1900 $15,200.00 FY03·C4 2 Entrance Ave 650 $5,200.00 FY03·C5 2 Tallirico St 1750 $14,000.00 FY03·C5 2 Enberg St 600 $4,800.00 FY03·C5 2 Martins Dr 2625 $21,000.00 FY03·C6 5 Peregrine PI 350 $2,800.00 FY03·C6 5 Ptarmigan PI 650 $5,200.00 FY03·C7 5 Regine Ave 2100 $16,800.00 FY03·C7 5 Hillrest St 1300 $10,400.00 FY03·C7 5 Wooded Ln 1100 $8,800.00 FY03·C7 5 Lumber Jack Ln 1125 $9,000.00 FY03·C8 5 Everwell 1300 $10,400.00 FY03·C8 5 View Ln 500 $4,000.00 FY03·C8 5 Central Ave 1125 $9,000.00 FY03·C9 7 Kalgin Ave 3550 $28,400.00 FY03·C9 7 Kalgin Ct 500 $4,000.00 FY03·C9 7 Reef St 600 $4,800.00 FY03·C10 8 Lincoln Ln 1450 $11,600.00 FY03·C10 8 Phyllis Cir 600 $4,800.00 FY03·C11 9 Terrance Dr 4550 $36,400.00 FY03·C11 9 Kasilof River Rd 2700 $21,600.00 FY03·C11 9 Elaine Ave 2350 $18,800.00 FY03·C12 9 Tina Dr 1400 $11,200.00 $426,920.00

Total $994,940.00

Page 2

150


Mayor 09/18/01

KENAI PENINSULA BOROURESOLUTION 2001-102

GH

.A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE HABITAT RESTORATION AND EDUCATION PROJECT AT THE KENAI RIVER CENTER AND ACKNOWLEDGING AN INTENT

TO CONSIDER PROVIDING A REQUIRED MATCH FOR GRANTS AT TIME OF GRANT AWARD

WHEREAS, in 2000 the Kenai Peninsula Borough completed construction of the Kenai River Center on property adjacent to the Kenai River; and

WHEREAS, the Kenai River Center is a nationally recognized multi-agency organization working to maintain, develop, and protect the Kenai River watershed; and

\\'HEREAS, the Kenai River Center is used as a demonstration site for the application of environmentally sound riverbank restoration and stabilization practices as well as an outdoor classroom for riverine and riparian habitat ecology; and

WHEREAS, the riverbank at the site has suffered significant bank erosion along the entire 567.23 feet of water frontage due to historic bank use by pedestrians; and

WHEREAS, the Kenai Peninsula Borough is seeking supplemental funding through various granting agencies for the purpose of habitat restoration, continued public use, and education/training programs that occur at the Center; and

WHEREAS, granting agencies sometimes require either an in-kind or cash match as a condition to its grant funding;


SECTION 1. That the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly supports the habitat restoration and education project at the Kenai River Center located in Soldotna, Alaska.

SECTION 2. That the Assembly supports the efforts of the administration to acquire funding for the project and intends to consider an ordinance appropriating any grant funds as well as any matching requirements that may be obligatory under the grant conditions.

SECTION 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Resolution 2001·102 Page I of2

___________1L:J5i.l1----------

ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TIDS 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2001.



Resolution 200 I-I 02 Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of2

152

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH Community & Economic Development Division

43335 Kalifomsky Beach Road, Suite 16 Soldotna, Alaska 99669-8250

PHONE: (907) 262-6355 • FAX: (907) 262-6762 E-Mail: [email protected]

MEMORANDUM To: Timothy Navarre, Assembly President

Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Members

Thru: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor DL;~

From: Bonnie Golden, Grants Manager bq Bob Bright, Planning Director

Date: September 6,2001

Subject: Resolution Supporting the Habitat Restoration and Education Project at the Kenai River Center and Acknowledging an Intent to Consider Providing a Required Match for Grants at Time of Grant Award

The attached resolution is being submitted to the Assembly for its support of the Borough's habitat restoration and education project at the Kenai River Center ("Center"). Improvements are needed to meet the current and future needs for habitat restoration, continued public use, and education/training programs that occur at this site. Significant bank erosion has occurred along the entire 567.23 feet of water frontage. Previous vegetative and bank damage is associated with historic bank use by pedestrians (most notably bank anglers during the sockeye season).

The project has three components: (1) riverbank restoration, (2) environmentally-friendly public access, and (3) public education. Our goals are intended to provide improved habitat for anadromous fish species, continued access to the River but in an environmentally safe manner, and continued bank stabilization in other areas of the River through the educational process. King salmon and other anadromous fish species in the Kenai River will benefit from an improved habitat for spawning and rearing. This, in turn, will improve the diminished fish stocks not only for the Kenai River but also the Cook Inlet and Pacific Ocean. Alaska commercial fishennen, as well as sportfishers, will derive a benefit from an improved fishery resource.

The Kenai River Center is a nationally recognized multi-agency organization working to ma,ntain, develop, and protect the Kenai River watershed. The Center is used as a demonstration site for the application of environmentally sound riverbank restoration and stabilization practices as well as an outdoor classroom for riverine and riparian habitat ecology. Hands-on instruction is given to students learning about the importance of a healthy river, to landowners learning about bank restoration and erosion control measures, and to fishermen learning about habitat protection.

153

mailto:[email protected]

Memo to Assembly September 5,2001 Re: Habitat Restoration and Education Project Page Two

Our plan is to fund this project through multiple grants, with multiple resource agencies and non-profit organizations collaborating. Our preliminary cost estimate for all three components of the project is $445,000. Notice of a grant award in the amount of $75,000 has been received from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The NOAA grant requires a 1:1 match. The Borough or any other non-federal source may provide matching funds for the NOAA grant. Additional potential funding partners have been identified. The attached resolution, if adopted, will support our requests to those agencies. It is our intent to have project funds in place by the end of the year so that design and construction can begin as soon as possible in 2002.

Ibg

154

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09118/01 Hearing: 10/23/01 Action: Vote:


AN ORDINANCE AMENDING KPB 21.05.010 TO ALLOW VARIANCES FROM OTHER THAN AREA REQUIREMENT PROVISIONS

WHEREAS, variances from land use regulations may be granted for a variety of reasons; and

WHEREAS, currently only variances from area requirements are allowed by KPB Chapter 21.05, while AS 29.40.040 also allows some variances from land use requirements; and

WHEREAS, variance provisions may not allow uses in districts where such uses are prohibited but may allow other reasonable variances which would not harm the health and safety of borough residents or undermine the original intent of the land use regulation; and

WHEREAS, the borough's interests would be best served by following the less restrictive statutory standards;


SECTION 1. That KPB 21.05.010 is amended as follows:

21.05.010. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to grant relief from the literal application of this title where unusual individualized situations result in more stringent burdens being placed on some parcels of land than others and to prevent special hardships to individual landowners or deprivation of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in a district. [THIS CHAPTER ALLOWS VARIANCES ONLY FROM AREA, NOT LAND USE, REQUIREMENTS.]

SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH TIllS * DAY OF *, 200t.

Tim Navarre, Assembly President ArrEST:


Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TExT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-32 Page I of 1

155

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY. SOLDOTNA, ALASKA. 99669·7599 BUSINESS (907) 262·4441 FAX (907)262-1892

"~ .. '-,._.~ ..

DALE BAGLEY MAYOR

MEMORANDUM


FROM: Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor Dt..P


SUBJECT: Ordinance 2001-...t6. amending KPB 21.05.010

Recently it was discovered that language in KPB 21.05.010 is more restrictive than state law regarding variances. The purpose of the final sentence in this clause was to clarify that a variance cannot be used to allow an otherwise prohibited land use in a zoning district. For example, an applicant cannot use a variance to acquire an industrial use in a residential zoning district. However, the provision that variances are only allowed from area requirements is more limiting than AS 29.40.040, which would allow other variances, provided the strict criteria AS 29.40.040 are met as well as the KPB 21.05 criteria. For example, a variance could be used to relax an appeal time frame.

156

Introduced by: Mayor Date: 09/18/01 Hearing: 10/23/01 Action: Vote:


AN ORDINANCE REVISING THE PROCEDURES FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE DECERTIFICATION

\\'HEREAS, there are a number of roads certified for maintenance which are substandard and have no resident access; and

WHEREAS, the borough assembly adopted decertification standards in 1998; and

WHEREAS, the decertification process is lengthy and cumbersome; and

WHEREAS, only three roads have been decertified under KPB 14.06.070 despite there being a number of roads that meet decertification standards; and

WHEREAS, the proposed revisions require the same amount of public notice for the road service area board hearing regarding decertification as the current code; and

WHEREAS, the proposed revisions to decertification procedures still require a public hearing before the assembly; and

WHEREAS, the road service area board recommended revisions to the decertification process at its August 14,2001 meeting;


SECTION 1. That KPB 14.06.070 is hereby amended as follows:

14.06.070. Road decertification.

A. Authority. Roads may be decertified for maintenance by the borough as provided in this section.

B. Procedure. Any road decertification must comply with the following procedures:

[1. A ROAD THAT HAS RECEIVED BOROUGH MAINTENANCE MAY ONLY BE

DECERTIFIED BY THE ASSEMBLY BETWEEN MAY 15 AND SEPTEMBER 15.]

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-33 Page 1 of 5

157

[2]1. Staff recommendation. The roads director shall make a written recommendation to the road service area ("RSA") board with findings based on the standards set forth in KPB 14.06.070(C).

[3]2. Notice and hearing. A public hearing shall be held before the [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA board regarding decertification. Notice of the hearing shall be published once a week for [A ONE-MONTH PERIOD]

four consecutive weeks prior to hearing with the last publication appearing [NOT LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS, NOR MORE THAN 21] within 14 days[,] before the hearing date. A notice of the decertification hearing shall also be posted at the beginning and ending points of the road proposed for decertification which are drivable by motor vehicles as defined by KPB 14.06.200 for a two-week period after the first date of publication and prior to the date of the hearing. Both posted and written notices shall invite public comment, state the name and phone number of a contact person regarding decertification information, state the date, place, and time of the public hearing, and a deadline for the submittal of written comments.

[4]J.. Board action. If the [ROADS] RSA board finds that the proposed road meets the decertification standards set forth in KPB 14.06.070(C), and there has been no written objection to the decertification, it shall recommend decertification by resolution to the assembly [BY

RESOLUTION]. If written [OR ORAL PUBLIC] comment is received objecting to decertification, the [ROADS] RSA board shall not recommend decertification at this time, but shall require the [ROADS]

RSA director to explore options to bring the road to borough standards.

[5]1. Decertification alternatives. The [ROADS] RSA director or his designee may meet with property owners to discuss the necessary upgrades to avoid decertification. A local improvement district may be considered pursuant to KPB 14.31 or 14.32. The borough may engage in cooperative efforts to the extent allowed by law with property owners to upgrade roads where property owners contribute material, equipment, professional services, and right-of-way for the project. The RSA director shall report at a subseQuent meeting of the RSA board what efforts have been met to bring the road to RSA maintenance standards and if there are feasible alternatives to decertification.

[6. 1'10T LESS THAN 90 DAYS NOR MORE THAN 270 DAYS AFTER THE PUBLIC

HEARING, THE ROADS DIRECTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE ROAD SERVICE

AREA BOARD WHETHER THERE IS A FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE TO

DECERTIFICATION.] If the roads board finds that there is no viable option presented for bringing the road to borough standards, the roads board, by resolution, shall recommend to the assembly decertification of the road.

Ordinance 2001-33 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TExT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 2 of5

158

[7. AT LEAST 180 DAYS SHALL PASS AFTER THE ROAD BOARD RESOLUTION BEFORE A DECERTIFICATION RESOLUTION IS FORWARDED TO THE CLERK FOR ASSEMBLY CONSIDERATION.]

[8]~. Decertification withdrawal. If the road has been brought to borough standards or the [ROADS] RSA director determines that a viable plan for bringing the road to borough standards has been proposed prior to the assembly hearing regarding decertification, the [ROADS] RSA director may withdraw the proposed decertification from assembly consideration.

[9]Q. Assembly-hearing required. A public hearing shall be held before the assembly regarding decertification in conjunction with consideration of a decertification resolution. [NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING SHALL APPEAR ONCE A WEEK FOR FOUR WEEKS PRIOR TO THE HEARING.]

[10]2. Assembly action. If the assembly finds that the road is eligible for decertification based on KPB 14.06.070(C) and (D), the assembly shall decertify the road. If the decertification resolution is adopted by the assembly between September 15 and May 15, the decertification shall not be effective until on or after May 15, unless the road has [NEVER] not received maintenance within five years prior to assembly decertification.

[11 ]~. Signage. Decertification shall not be effective until signage has been placed regarding discontinued maintenance if the road has received maintenance within five years prior to the assembly resolution.

C. Dwellings standards. No road shall be decertified which provides the only vehicular access to dwellings. Dwellings are structures currently habitable by human beings, either for residential or recreational purposes. "Habitable" for purposes of this chapter means adequate permanent shelter from the elements such as rain, wind, snow, and sun.

D. Additional standards. The following standards support, but each alone does not require decertification:

1. Safety. The [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA will review whether maintenance can provide adequate grade, width for travel, room for snow removal, adequate sight distances and clear zone, and prevent accumulation of water and snow in the traveled right-of-way. The potential for accidents because of inadequate road design or inability to maintain the road to a safe standard on a regular basis shall be considered in a decertification determination.

Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-33 Page 3 of5

159

2. Road condition. Whether the types of road material, soils, terrain, road surface and width of right-of-way do not meet borough road standards shall be considered in a decertification determination.

3. Drainage problems. Whether a road has inadequate ditching, culverts, and drainage causing water to accumulate on the road surface or which undermines the road bed shall be considered in a decertification determination.

4. Access. Whether roads are outside a dedicated right-of-way and whether substandard roads on the maintenance system are accessed by a state or borough maintained road shall be considered in a decertification determination.

5. Snow storage. Whether snow easements or places to store snow are inadequate to maintain sufficient travel width and vision shall be considered in a decertification determination.

6. Funding. Excessive cost of maintaining a particular substandard road shall be considered in a decertification determination.

7. Prior maintenance. Whether the road is not now nor has in the past received either summer or winter maintenance shall be considered in a decertification determination.

E. Vacations. Notwithstanding KPB 14.06.070(B), a road that is vacated through the process set forth in KPB 20.28 shall be decertified for maintenance by resolution of the [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA board.

F. Alternate Route. Notwithstanding KPB 14.06.070(B), any portion of a road that has been maintained outside of dedicated right-of-way may be decertified for maintenance by resolution of the [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA board where the travel surface has been moved into the right-of-way and the new travel surface is certified for maintenance by the borough. Every decertification approved by the [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA board under this subsection shall be submitted to the assembly for consideration. The assembly shall have 45 days from the date of the [ROAD SERVICE AREA] RSA board decertification resolution to veto decertification of a road under this subsection.

SECTION 2. That KPB 14.06.200 is hereby amended as follows:

14.06.200. Road Construction Standards-Definitions.

For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:

Ordinance 2001-33 New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska Page 4 of5

160

"AASHTO" means "American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials."

"Arterial road" means a road intended to carry traffic from local and subdivision roads to major highways. Such roads primarily accommodate relatively large volumes of traffic for relatively long distances at relatively high speeds.

"Board" means the Kenai Peninsula Borough Road Service Area Board, unless otherwise specified.

"Collector road" means roads which provide both land access and carry traffic from local or subdivision roads to arterial or major highway systems.

"Local roads" means internal subdivision roads or a road designed and intended to serve local areas. Such roads primarily accommodate land access to abutting property. Local roads feed traffic into collector and arterial street systems.

"Motor vehicle" means a vehicle which is self-propelled except a vehicle manned by human or animal power.

"Road construction standards" means the minimal standards set forth in this chapter for the purposes of certification for RSA maintenance.

"Subcollector road" means a local road which also provides through traffic service between local roads and collector, arterial, or major highway roads.

SECTION 3. That this ordinance takes effect immediately upon its enactment.

ENACTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH THIS * DAY OF *,2001.



Kenai Peninsula Borough, Alaska New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED] Ordinance 2001-33 Page 5 of5

161

MEMORANDUM KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH LEGAL DEPARTMENT 144 N. Binkley Street Tel. (907) 262-8609 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Fax (907) 262-8686


THRU: ~ale Bagley, Mayor ~ FROM: \~.Montague, Assistant Borough Attorney

CC: Gary Davis, Roads Director


SUBJECT: Decertification procedures and proposed decertification ofnumerous roads

In 1998, the borough assembly adopted decertification procedures and standards. (KPB 14.06.070). The standards are sensible. However, the procedures are cumbersome and leave a large margin for error. (The standards include factors such as the road not accessing dwellings, safety, drainage, and adequate right-of-way concerns.) Currently, it can take over a year to decertify a road that meets all decertification standards. According to the road service area (RSA), there is a list of roads that meet decertification standards. This memo explains the legal concerns regarding those roads and proposes amendments to simplify the decertification process.

One of the key questions posed regarding substandard roads certified for maintenance is the borough's liability for accidents. While the borough would argue municipal immunity in such a case (AS 29.71.020), this statute has not been interpreted by the Alaska Supreme Court, and case law indicates responsibility for known hazardous conditions regardless of this statute. The borough has a number of roads certified for maintenance that do not currently receive maintenance and do not meet borough standards. The borough could be liable or induced to settle lawsuits based on its acceptance of state funds for a number of years for maintenance specifically for the road, the existence of dangerous conditions, and an occasional dropping of a blade on the road by the road service area.

Unfortunately, the above facts are probably true regarding a number of roads certified for maintenance and could result in significant borough liability. Numerous substandard roads were certified for maintenance in approximately 1982-1983 based on marginal aerial photography with the benefit of the doubt being given to road construction and reliance on "say-so" that constructed roads existed without verification by the borough of the physical existence of the roads. (Memo by Jane Gabler, Planner, 12/8/82.) The roads were supposed to be dedicated and "constructed" to qualify for maintenance. There may have been no standards for "construction"

162

in 1982. In 1986 when road construction standards were ultimately adopted by the assembly, numerous substandard and prescriptive roads were "grandfathered" as having been previously maintained by the road service area. The borough was motivated to certify roads for maintenance because borough tax revenue did not fund maintenance. Rather, state money for each mile of road certified for maintenance was plentiful ($2,500 per mile pursuant to AS 29.60.110) which has since been substantially depleted.

The three roads decertified under the initial adoption ofKPB 14.06.070 included a road platted in a river and a road consisting of a mature stand of trees. A single objection to the decertification of an unconstructed road resulted in its never coming back for decertification consideration because of the bureaucratic process involved once an objection has been lodged, regardless of whether the objection has merit. In an effort to avoid liability in future lawsuits, it is recommended that amendments simplifying the decertification process approved by the RSA board at its August 14, 2001 meeting as reflected in the enclosed memo be adopted by the assembly.

2

163

MEMORANDUM KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH LEGAL DEPARTMENT 144 N. Binkley Street Tel. (907) 262-8609 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Fax (907) 262-8686


THRU: [)t,.(; Dale Bagley, Mayor

FROM: ~}t~.Montague, Assistant Borough Attorney

CC: Gary Davis, Roads Director


SUBJECT: Ordinance amending decertification process

Following is a list of the proposed amendments to the decertification procedures approved by the road service area board at its August 14,2001 meeting:

• Titles are added to the paragraphs regarding procedures to help clarify and organize the process.

• It is clarified that posting of roads proposed for decertification is only applicable to somewhat constructed, somewhat drivable roads. It is pointless if not impossible to post roads that are forests or stream beds.

• The publication, posting, and public hearing requirements are retained but the language is modified to make it easier for staff to interpret and comply with these requirements.

• One of the most burdensome procedures in the current decertification process is waiting between three and nine months if a single objection, even if meritless, has been made to decertification. There is also currently no requirement that the objection be in writing. Oral comments are often equivocal in nature; therefore, the code is revised to require that the objection be made in writing. A public hearing is still required before the board because the board could make a decision based on testimony that decertification should be denied or delayed until further alternatives to decertification are explored.

• A public hearing is still required before the assembly, but the 30-day notice requirement is omitted. The road will already have received at least one hearing before the RSA board with both published and posted notice. The assembly decertification resolution will be advertised

164

in the paper as part of the meeting agenda and will be available on the borough website as is the practice for all assembly resolutions.

• There is still a requirement for the decertification to become effective during summer months (May IS-September 15); however, this limitation on the timing of decertification is made applicable only to roads that have received maintenance within five years before decertification. This change is recommended because the current criteria of the road "never" having received maintenance is administratively difficult to ascertain, especially for roads that may have been occasionally maintained in the 1980s when state money was plentiful and there were four separate road service areas. Additionally, the decertification deadline of September 15 coordinates with the annual submittal of mileage to the state of Alaska for road maintenance funding.

• There is still a signage requirement for roads decertified for maintenance, but again a fiveyear window is inserted since it is pointless to provide a warning that maintenance has ceased if maintenance has not even occasionally occurred within the past five years. Also some of the roads that have been or will be decertified are not quite recognizable as roads, again indicating the futility of a notice that maintenance has ceased.

The above recommendations approved by RSA board vote on August 14,2001.

~~~-Stan A. McLane, RSA Chair

2

165

KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH 144 N. BINKLEY· SOLDOTNA, ALASKA· 99669-7599 BUSINESS (907) 262·4441 FAX (907)262-1692

-\ '-,.._". . DALE BAGLEY

MAYOR

NOTICE OF APPOINTMENTS TO ROAD SERICE AREA BOARD


FROM: DI.-\? Dale Bagley, Borough Mayor

DATE: September 5, 2001

SUBJECT: Appointments to the KPB Road Service Area Board

Pursuant to KPB 16.41.050, I hereby submit the following reappointments to the Road Service Area Board for confirmation by the assembly. They are both registered voters and reside within the service area.

Appointment Board Seat Term Expires Susan C. Tauriainen North Region member September 30, 2004 S. A. Sam McLane At-Large September 30, 2004

Copies of their requests for reappointment are attached for your review.

leo Attachments cc: Gary Davis, KPB Roads Director

166

tvlcLANb. CONSULTING GROUP

MCGRSAOI

4 September, 2001

Mayor Dale Bagley Kenai Peninsula Borough ]44 N. Binkley Soldotna, AK 99669

Re: Road Service Board

Dear Mayor Bagley:

I would like to serve another term if you would consider reappointment.

Sincerely,

~~~Lane Rnu,.d 1m", M.yor'. Offi....

Clerk A••emb" lelll Fin.nee -.3 AsseuiII.- ~ PiaDlIiaI - .~ • 0tIIer 2' e,L.

Dele ~4l.

P.O. BOX 468 SOLDOTNA, ALASKA 99669 (907) 283-4218 FAX (907) 283-32675

167

SUSAN C TAURIAINEN

FAX NO. 907 776 5302SEP-04-2001 rUE 03:18 PM COOK INLET PROC NIKISKI I •

I I i !I

P 0 BpX 8678 NIKISKI, AK

I i I I t

SePtemb~r 4, 2001 I

j I i

Mayor D~le Bagley Kenai Peninsula Borough 144 N. Binkley SC1ldotna,1 AK 99669

R,~: Bo'tUQh Road Maintenance Board Position

I Dear Mayor Bagley,

i I

I would li~e to be included for consideration of re-appointment to the seat on the road seNjice board for the North Region.

Thank y~r for the opportunity to serve our community in thili way. I look forward to contin41ing in this position.

i

Sia~ Susan T,uriainen

ce:. Ga~ Davis, RSA Director i

i I i J

I

168

1Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly Committees

2001-2002

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEES • Finance Committee

Grace Merkes, Chair Pete Sprague, Vice Chair

Lands Committee Chris Moss, Chair Ron Long, Vice Chair

• Legislative Committee Bill Popp, Chair

Policies & Procedures Committee Paul Fischer, Chair Milli Martin, Vice Chair

President Pro Tem Chris Moss

Parliamentarian Linda Murphy

Prison Project Committee Tim Navarre Bill Popp Pete Sprague

OTHER BOROUGH & SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMITTEES • KPB Emergency Planning

Tim Navarre

• Planning Commission Representative Pete Sprague Milli Martin, Alternate

• School Board Chris Moss Paul Fischer, Alternate

• Joint Technology Committee Bill Popp Pete Sprague

• KBEA Health Care Grace Merkes Pete Sprague

• Kenai Peninsula Schools Activities Assoc. Chris Moss Tim Navarre, Alternate

S:\WPWlN\DATA\COMMITTE\Ol-02 Assembly Committee Lisl.wpd

SERVICE AREA BOARD LIAISONS • Anchor Point Fire & EMS - Milli Martin

Bear Creek Fire - Ron Long Central Emergency Service - Paul Fischer LI!ntral Peninsula EMS - Grace Merkes Central Peninsula General Hospital

Tim Navarre, Grace Merkes, Mark Powell Kachemak Emergency Service Area

Milli Martin KPBRoads

Grace Merkes, Chris Moss, Paul Fischer Nikiski Seniors - Mark Powell Nikiski Fire - Mark Powell

• North Peninsula Recreation - Mark Powell South Peninsula Hospital - Chris Moss

NON-BOROUGH COMMITTEES • Cook Inlet LNG Pipeline Terminus Group

Bill Popp

• Cook Inlet Aquaculture Chris Moss Ron Long, Alternate

• Cook Inlet R.C.A.C. Grace Merkes, Term 01/02 Tim Navarre, Alternate

• Economic Development District Paul Fischer Pete Sprague Craig Chapman

Kenai Peninsula College Council Pete Sprague

• Kenai River Special Management Area Advisory Board Tim Navarre Grace Merkes, Alternate

• Kenai Peninsula Municipal Coalition Bill Popp Tim Navarre, Alternate

• Prince William Sound R.C.A.C. Blake Johnson, Term 3/01 Gerald R. Brookman, Alternate

Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM...CO TERCOPY. Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM....

Documents

Transcript of Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM...CO TERCOPY. Assembly Packet September 18, 2001 7:00 PM....