The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10122015 City Council Packet Seward City Council Agenda Packet it1101G wit it , _ ,....„,, 6 COL Ut1 f3Us hAy 4$0 ,--,:; e 0,„„ \,..,/, Columbus Day is October 12, 2015 October 12, 2015 City Council Chambers Beginning at 7:00 p.m. 1963 1965 2005 The City of Seward,Alaska brail CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA /` r {Please silence all cellular phones during the meeting} M!' { P g g} 4,.arF.► October 12, 2015 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Jean Bardarson 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Term Expires 2015 3. ROLL CALL 4. CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT Marianna Keil THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING Vice Mayor [Those who have signed in will be given the first opportunity to Term Expires 2016 speak Time is limited to 3 minutes per speaker and 36 minutes total time for this agenda item] Ristine Casagranda 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Council Member [Approval of Consent Agenda passes all routine items indicated by Term Expires 2016 asterisk (*). Consent Agenda items are not considered separately unless a council member so requests. In the event of such a request, Christy Terry the item is returned to the Regular Agenda] Council Member Term Expires 2015 6. SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS David Squires A. Proclamations and Awards— None Council Member B. Borough Assembly Report Term Expires 2015 C. City Manager's Report Pg. 3 D. (rescheduled to the next meeting) Dale Butts E. Other Reports and Presentations Council Member Term Expires 2016 1. 2014 Audit Presentation by BDO, USA 2. - - . _ _ _ ___ - . • _ .. . - (rescheduled to the Iris Darling October 26, 2015 meeting) Council Member Term Expires 2015 James Hunt City Manager Johanna Kinney City Clerk Eric Wohlforth City Attorney City of Seward, Alaska Council Agenda October 12, 2015 Page 1 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinances for Public Hearing and Enactment 1. Ordinance 2015-004, Amending Portions Of Seward City Code § 14.05.010 Refuse Service Provided And Required, To Clarify That Refuse Billing Is Not Required On Vacant Lots And That Mandatory Refuse Service Does Not Preclude Individuals From Disposing Of Their Own Refuse, But Still Requires Payment For Refuse Service, And Seward City Code § 14.05.040 Frequency Of Collection, To Clarify That The Requirement To Clean Garbage Receptacles Is That Of The Person Occupying And/Or Owning The Property. Pg. 18 B. Resolutions Requiring A Public Hearing 1. Resolution 2015-086, Authorizing The City Manager To Enter Into A Permit Agreement With The U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers (USACE), Dedicating Tract A- 1A, Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2, As The Mitigation Site Specified In The Conditions And Mitigation Details Included In The USACE Permit#POA-1980-469-M13 Issued May, 2015. Pg. 53 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS—None 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Other New Business Items *1. Approval of the September 14, 2015 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes, the September 2, 2015 and the September 14, 2015 Special City Council Meeting Minutes. Pg. 69 *2. Certification of the October 6, 2015 Municipal Election. Pg. 83 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No Action Required)—None 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. CITIZEN COMMENTS 13. COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS 14. ADJOURNMENT City of Seward, Alaska Council Agenda October 12, 2015 Page 2 CITY OF SEWARD Jim Hunt, City Manager P.O. Box 167 Telephone (907)224-4047 Seward,AK 99664 Facsimile (907)224-4038 MANAGER'S REPORT September 19th thru October 2°d, 2015 The following purchase orders for between$10,000 and$50,000 have been approved by the City Manager since the last council meeting: Roads& Streets Metco 9/25 20,000.00 Purchase of sand, sand storage and transportation ADMINISTRATION • Attended International City Manager's Conference in Seattle HARBOR • Harbor has started winterizing the water and sewage systems. • The harbor is continuing to move boats for the A, B, C, and S-float project, a total of 13 vessels have utilized the free lift option to be removed from the water and 13 free tows have been completed, most vessels are moving on their own. • The Harbor has moved the north launch ramp for construction of the fish cleaning station. • The harbor office will be closed on Sundays through the winter; we still have a crew working on Sundays that will check for messages throughout the day. • We had a pre-construction meeting with Hamilton Construction and R&M for the SMIC breakwater project on 10-1-15. • SMIC boat yard has surpassed all previous years in vessels hauling out for the winter. A few vessels have come to Seward because of our wash down pad and rates; (according to some new SMIC users) ELECTRIC • We are nearing the completion of the generator project. Both generators are now moved into the building. • With the RCA's direction on the creation of a Transmission Company(Transco)and a Unified System Operator(USO)the council may want to consider a work session to learn more about how this impacts the City of Seward Electric Utility. • The Electric Department contacted the other utilities requesting letters of interest for power purchase. The five other utilities have until the end of October to submit documentation regarding their interest. We will then evaluate all received versus what we currently are getting from Chugach Electric. If we find any that are better,in terms of rates and service,than Chugach we will approach those utilities to negotiate a contract by our December 31St deadline. • On 10/2 two Swans contacted the power lines on the South side of the Lagoon. The deceased birds were brought to the Sealife Center. PUBLIC WORKS Water/Wastewater: • The closeout of the Sludge Removal Project was completed on September 22nd. Working with Finance to finalize the paperwork for the grant and loan close outs. • The water tank is ready to be pressure tested and then painting will begin. We are still on track for an on-time completion December 31St, 2015 3 Administration: • A list of encroachments was provided from Dryden&LaRue. Will work with Community Development to determine the best course of action to take care of these items to get the Certification of Rights of Ways completed by November 15th. Streets: • Working on alley maintenance, grading and brush trimming Shop: • Preparing the sand truck and winter machinery for the first frost SPRD Sports& Rec • Consider working a booth at the Halloween Carnival this year. It's a great way to celebrate the holiday with families and friends. You can promote your agency or club while you make a little money,too. Contact SPRD to apply for a booth for free. • Recruiting players, sponsors, managers and officials for upcoming leagues: Basketball, Recreational Volleyball & Racquetball Leagues. We hope to have great seasons this year as we continue to focus on rules regarding ranked players. • Prep for upcoming Halloween Events: Pumpkin Prowl& Family Masquerade Ball—Sat, Oct 24 and the Halloween Carnival Sat, Oct 31st from 6 to 9pm. • Hosting Lights on After School at Sports and Rec Thursday, October 22,2015 Teen and Youth Center • ASP attendance ranges from 20-28 kids daily; MS numbers are steady at 10-15. We hosted the Seward Middle School Cross Country running team and coach with a pizza party. • TYC Coordinator, Josie McClain, attended training with others from the Seward Prevention Coalition in Anchorage. • SVFD utilized TYC vans for the statewide Fire Conference. • We are hosting a"Lights on After School"party at the TYC Thursday, October 22, 2015 Teen Rec Room • The Teen Rec Room / Teen Council hosted pizza parties for High School Cross Country and Football Teams and the Middle School Soccer team! • The Teen Rec Room continues to hit a record attendance numbers, is serving between 20 to 50 kids each night, Tuesday through Saturday. • Hosting"Lights on After School"at the Rec Room Thursday, October 22, 2015 —Karaoke Event. • Full October schedule of fun activities for Teens! Activities include games with refreshments, for example: Charades and Cookies. Tournaments, Rock Wall, Roller Skating, Dodgeball &more! • Hosted"First Friday Fun"event at TYC for fourth and fifth graders with a spooky, Halloween theme (last)Friday, October 2. x �► Park Maintenance& Campgrounds • Park Maintenance and Campgrounds is preparing for the winter while continuing to serve our limited visitors and local park users. Weather pending, our restrooms will remain open until the 12th of October. The Resurrection Campground will remain open for the winter;the others will be closed until April 15, 2016. We had a great season this year,with record revenues and camper night totals not seen since 1999. In the coming weeks we will be pressure washing and repainting the inside of our restrooms and shower house facility. Parking • This past week Parking has been shutting down and putting everything in storage for the winter. • The Yellow parking curbs have been stacked with help from City Shop loader. • The Luke pay stations have been put into indoor storage. • All signs and A-frames have been taken down. • Ray Troll Banners and Park Service flags have been taken down from lamp posts. Admin • ALPAR Grant • Senior Center Use Agreement work Records request research • Two Lakes Park Trails work • Continued seeking sponsorships and on-going partnerships ir 5 September 30, 2015 Regulatory Commission of Alaska 701 West Eighth Avenue, Suite 300 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3469 RE: Docket No. I-15-001: First Status Report on Voluntary Development of Independent Railbelt Electric Transmission Company—Regulatory Commission of Alaska Recommendation No. 1 Dear Commissioners: On behalf of Anchorage Municipal Light and Power(ML&P), Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (Chugach), the City of Seward (Seward), Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (GVEA), Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA), Matanuska Electric Association, Inc. (MEA) and the American Transmission Company LLC, by its corporate manager, ATC Management Inc. (together ATC), the above parties (Parties)file this joint report on the progress of voluntary efforts to establish an independent electric transmission company (Transco) in the Railbelt. On June 30, 2015, then Chairman Robert M. Pickett issued a response to the 2014 Legislative directive requesting the Commission's recommendation on "whether creating an independent system operator or similar structure in the Railbelt area is the best option for effective and efficient electrical transmission."The Commission's resulting Informational Docket includes a variety of assessments of, and suggested improvements to, the Railbelt transmission system leading to the efficient use of generation resources.The June 30, 2015 response letter includes a digest of that record and a number of specific recommendations. In Recommendation No. 1, the Commission endorses the creation of a Transco and requests a status report by September 30, 2015 on the current voluntary efforts amongst the Railbelt electric utilities to create such an entity.This filing provides a status report of those efforts. Recommendation No. 1:An independent transmission company should be created to operate the transmission system reliably and transparently and to plan and execute major maintenance, transmission system upgrades, and new transmission projects necessary for the reliable delivery of electric power to Railbelt customers. This independent transmission company should be certificated and regulated as a public utility under AS 42.05. The RCA should be granted siting authority for new generation and transmission, and granted explicit authority to regulate integrated resource planning in the Railbelt electrical system. A mandatory report on the status of the current efforts to develop an independent Railbelt electric transmission company shall be filed with the Commission no later than September 30, 2015. A second report on transmission restructuring shall be filed with the Commission no later than December 31, 2015. Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 2 of 8 STATUS REPORT In 2014, the Parties established and endorsed principles for the voluntary formation of a Railbelt Transco. Following the agreement on these principles, the Chief Executive Officers and General Managers established a senior staff working group (the Working Group') charged with developing and evaluating a business model for a Railbelt Transco. Since December 2014, the Working Group has met monthly and has engaged subgroups of subject matter experts on specific tasks.These efforts are organized around a work plan with the following primary deliverables: 1. Due diligence on subgroup matters described in Appendix A; 2. Validation of the benefits of Railbelt-wide economic dispatch; 3. Design of a tariff structure that ensures equitable rate recovery for existing and future transmission assets; and 4. Design of a business model for a Railbelt Transco. The Railbelt electric utilities and ATC are continuing to delineate the steps necessary to transition from a transmission network of separately operated assets to a business model whereby the operation, maintenance, and construction are the responsibility of a single Railbelt Transco. In other regions of the country, this model has provided increased efficiencies through economies of scale in transmission operations, leading to increased reliability and economically efficient generation. A preliminary step is to determine whether this model will provide sufficient reliability and efficiency improvements in Alaska to warrant the cost of creating a Transco. ATC began operations in 2001 in Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan as the result of just such a transition, and its formation and operating experience has been the starting point in this particular Railbelt discussion. The Working Group and specific subgroups from each of the Railbelt utilities and ATC are meeting regularly to scope and complete tasks constructive to a business model for a Railbelt-wide single transmission utility.These subgroups include: Economic Dispatch, Finance, Governance, Human Resources and Organizational Structure, Legacy Agreements, Operations and Maintenance, Real Estate and Permitting, Regulatory, and Standards (see Appendix A). Voluntary Efforts The Railbelt utilities have a history of collaborating on many important energy infrastructure projects. The Parties have engaged the support of outside consultants to assist in the completion of Recommendation No. 1 objectives, including tariff structure, reliability and planning standards, pooled generation and dispatch, and other key functions. Even as this process proceeds with the participation and expertise of American Transmission Company, the Railbelt Utilities are committed to identifying and evaluating business models and other 1 MEA declined to sign a joint-development agreement hence has not been a party to all discussions or activities of the working groups. Ti Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 3 of 8 approaches that may improve the efficiency and reliability of Railbelt transmission infrastructure for the benefit of consumers. Each of the Parties will need to determine for itself whether becoming part of a Transco would be beneficial for its ratepayers and other stakeholders. The Parties recognize that this determination will not be possible until the Transco's business model is clearly defined. Independent Transmission Company In general, a Transco owns no generating assets and accomplishes transmission operation, planning and construction consistent with transparent and nondiscriminatory planning and reliability standards. Governance of the Transco must balance the need to effectively operate and invest in the Railbelt's transmission infrastructure with the ongoing obligations each utility has to its members, customers and other stakeholders. The Parties are working on solutions that strike this balance. Reliable Operation All transmission assets integrated under the Transco would be operated under a common set of standards for increased generation and transmission reliability, and increased efficiencies in the overall operation of the utility. The Parties are working to reconcile existing reliability, planning and interconnection standards in an effort to establish uniform standards for the Transco. In addition, the Parties are working on draft service agreements by which the Transco could undertake maintenance activities through the existing utilities.This approach maintains existing regional scope and expertise, and may create opportunities for adopting best practices.The Parties are working to clarify both the operating standards and the attendant service agreements between the Transco and the other Railbelt utilities. Transparency In all facets of the operation of the Transco, transparency is important.To this end, the Parties are examining how a Transco could operate under an open access transmission tariff which would allow equal access to both load serving entities and independent power producers. Such a tariff would assign the cost of transmission to end use consumers based upon a cost allocation ratio that assigns costs equitably.The Parties are working to define such a cost allocation ratio. Clear stakeholder driven reliability standards and planning protocols can provide consistent direction to capital improvements, as well as a predictable and transparent basis for evaluating requests for new transmission service. The Transco would be accountable to its owners, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, and other stakeholders to operate in accordance with tariff requirements pertaining to cost recovery, interconnection, planning, operations and maintenance. If implemented, the Transco would be certificated and regulated by the Commission.2 Accordingly, the Parties have been Z Alaska Statute 42.05.990(6)defines a public utility to include any entity that furnishes,"by generation, transmission,or distribution,electrical service to the public for compensation." The Commission has previously granted certificates to public utilities that provide only transmission,or transmission and generation,electrical service. Thus,existing statutory authority may be sufficient for the Commission to grant the Transco a certificate of public convenience and necessity. Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 4 of 8 identifying the information that would be needed in the event the Parties agree to file a CPCN application for the Transco to furnish electric transmission service. Major Maintenance and Transmission System Upgrades Transmission assets are long-lived, and replacement of facilities at the end of useful life or replacement as the result of storm, avalanche,fire, or other episodic damage can result in substantial capital obligations.The Parties are focused on elements of the business model that address the Transco's capacity to accomplish major maintenance.A significant goal of the integrated operation of the Railbelt's transmission assets is to improve operational,financial, and technical capacity to accomplish major transmission upgrades and new transmission projects necessary for the reliable delivery of electric power to Railbelt customers.The business model under development specifically addresses the Transco's capacity to accomplish transmission system upgrades. Conclusion The undersigned utilities appreciate the opportunity to provide an update on our progress toward improving the integrated operation of transmission assets and the economic utilization of the Railbelt's energy resources.We will report again on the status of this work by the Commission's requested deadline of December 31, 2015. Should you have any questions regardin: this report or our ongoing efforts, please let us know. A A A o 13A,oe ra•ley J•norschke General Manager Alaska Electric and Energy Cooperative, Inc. & Homer Electric Association, Inc. Brad Evans Chief Execu iv •fficer Chugach Electric Association, Inc. John Foutz Utility Manager City of Seward Ci Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 5 of 8 gcps. Cory Borgeson President and Chief Executive Officer Golde (alley Elecr Association, Inc. Ay_r�j E :n J. Griffith /, eneral Mana ■ Matanuska Electric Association, Inc. — Mark A.John on General Manager Municipality of Anchorage d/b/a Municipal Light and Power /40eive Mike Rowe President and Chief Executive Officer American Transmission Company LLC By its Corporate Manager,ATC Management Inc. 10 Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 6 of 8 Appendix A Work Plan Structure and Key Tasks The Chief Executive Officers and General Managers of the Parties have organized a senior staff working group (the Working Group) charged with developing and evaluating a business model for a Railbelt Transco.The Working Group and supporting Subgroups are executing a work plan that clarifies key elements of Transco formation and facilitates a full evaluation of this approach. The Working Group serves as a steering committee for the work plan, and has been meeting monthly since December 2014, and weekly since August of 2015. Depending on the tasks, subgroups are meeting as often as weekly to advance specific deliverables and collaborate with other experts. While any work plan of this size will be subject to change as the specific tasks and associated needs of the Parties and other stakeholders become better understood, the headings below provide insight into the scope of this exercise. Economic Dispatch The Economic Dispatch Subgroup is working to validate the current analyses and establish a consensus view on the value of economic dispatch that will be created by the formation of the Transco. It is also supporting the development of a settlement mechanism for pooled dispatch. Key Tasks: - Consensus View on Economic Benefits - Support of Pooling/Settlement Mechanism - Overall Rate Impact Finance The Financing Subgroup has been considering possible financing structures for the new entity, including its capital structure. Other tasks under its purview include establishing the rules for equity participation by the owners and evaluating cost allocation methodologies. Key Tasks: - Equity Participation Structure - Transco Overhead Costs/Benefits - Cost Allocation Structure - Overall Rate Impact Governance The Governance Subgroup has been tasked with creating the Transco's governance and organizational structure, with an emphasis on ensuring clear accountability. It has also begun creating the election process for the Transco's board members and senior management and working on a dispute resolution process. Key Tasks: - Board Structure and Composition 1 t Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 7 of 8 - Leadership Selection Process - Bylaws - Dispute Resolution Process - Operating Agreement Human Resources& Organizational Structure The Human Resources & Organizational Structure Subgroup is assessing the Transco's labor and workforce impacts and needs, as well as examining possible policies and practices for utilizing shared resources and recruiting new labor. Key tasks also include the development of initial organizational charts. Key Tasks: - High-Level Organization Chart - Recruiting and Seconding Policies - Key Leadership Selection Process - Staffing Model Legacy Agreements The Legacy Agreements Subgroup is examining how existing Railbelt agreements for jointly- owned assets should be addressed in the context of a Railbelt-wide Transco. Key Tasks: - Assessment of Existing Agreements - Strategy for Addressing Transmission Restrictions of Existing Agreements Operations and Maintenance The Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Subgroup is charged with creating the service agreements that will be needed by the Transco. It is also working on formulating current and future O&M plans for the Transco's plant. Key Tasks: - Services Agreements Between Utilities and Transco - Transco O&M Plan - Planning and Reliability Standards Real Estate and Permitting Real Estate and Permitting Subgroup is evaluating existing transmission-related real estate rights and obligations, including easements. It will also be looking at the implications of future asset transfers. Key Tasks: - Permit/Right-of-Way Records Assessment - Public Lands Assessment a Response of ML&P,Chugach,Seward,GVEA,HEA,MEA and ATC. September 30,2015 Page 8 of 8 Regulatory The Parties have agreed that any Transco should be certificated and regulated by the Commission.3 The Regulatory Subgroup has been working on delineating the information needed if the Parties agree to file an application for the Transco to furnish electric transmission service.' As part of that process, the regulatory subgroup also has begun reviewing terms and conditions for an open access transmission tariff to support non-discriminatory, open-access, Railbelt-wide transmission service. Key Tasks: - Tariff Structure - Draft CPCN Application - Rate Impact Analysis - Interim, Ongoing and Final Reports to RCA Standards The Standards Subgroup's focus is to reconcile existing reliability, planning and interconnection standards in an effort to ensure the Transco has a cohesive set of standards to guide planning, operation, and new construction. Key Tasks: - Reliability Standards - Planning Standards - Interconnection Standards 'Alaska Statute 42.05.990(6)defines a public utility to include any entity that furnishes,"by generation, transmission,or distribution,electrical service to the public for compensation." The Commission has previously granted certificates to public utilities that provide only transmission,or transmission and generation,electrical service. Thus,existing statutory authority may be sufficient for the Commission to grant the Transco a certificate of public convenience and necessity. 4 Each of the Parties will need to determine for itself whether becoming part of a Transco would be beneficial for its ratepayers and other stakeholders. The Parties recognize that this determination cannot be made until the Transco's business model is clear. 13 EC LAs., c5...varm-1-06)0111.01iLltrt.;:_mx%, September 30, 2015 Regulatory Commission of Alaska 701 W. 8th Ave., Suite 300 Anchorage, AK 99501 Dear Commissioners: On behalf of the Alaska Railbelt Cooperative Transmission and Electric Company(ARCTEC), please accept this response to your recent request for periodic reports on the progress of voluntary efforts to restructure the Railbelt electric system by establishing an independent transmission company and through the pooling of utility resources to achieve a more economic dispatch of the region's electric generation. We appreciate the Regulatory Commission of Alaska's (the "Commission) continued support of bottom-up stakeholder driven solutions instead of top-down government designed approaches. ARCTEC was formed in 2010 to address issues of common interest to Railbelt utilities. ARCTEC's members include Seward Electric System, Chugach Electric Association, Matanuska Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric Association and Copper Valley Electric Association. Invitations to join ARCTEC have recently been extended to Homer Electric Association and Anchorage Municipal Light and Power. On June 30 2015, then Chairman Pickett issued a response to the 2014 Legislative directive requesting the RCA's recommendation on "whether creating an independent system operator or similar structure in the Railbelt area is the best option for effective and efficient electrical transmission." The Commission's resulting Informational Docket includes a variety of assessments of and suggested improvements to the Railbelt transmission system and the efficient use of generation resources. Although the September 30 report required by Recommendation 1 is specifically related to formation of a Transco, we provide our comments here as well to emphasize the need for coordination of efforts in both the formation of a Transco and the creation of an Independent or Unified System Operator(USO). This filing also provides the Commission with a summary of the critical functions of the USO in relation to the Transco, and ARCTEC's on-going efforts in support of the restructuring of the Railbelt electric generation and transmission system. Efforts of the utilities are proceeding along two coordinated tracks: evaluating the formation of a Transco and establishment of an Independent or Unified System Operator (USO) to facilitate more economic dispatch of generation resources. I"1 In 2014, the Railbelt Utilities and American Transmission Company(ATC) established and endorsed principles for formation of a Railbelt Transco (the Transco Effort). Their efforts have been organized around a workplan whose deliverables include 1) a validation of the benefits of Railbelt-wide economic dispatch, 2) monthly meetings to support initial due diligence by each utility, and 3)the formation of a workplan to produce the business model for a transmission- only utility(Transco). ARCTEC supports the effort to evaluate if a Transco is right for the Railbelt. In parallel,the ARCTEC member utilities have embarked on an outreach effort to establish the case for action and guiding principles that would govern the possible formation of a Railbelt USO. ARCTEC wishes to facilitate negotiations on behalf of all stakeholders. Introductory meetings have been held with a diverse range of stakeholders including customers, independent power producers and government agencies. The Role of the USO The main objective of the USO is to establish policies and procedures that represent a broad array of stakeholder input and are not dominated by any single stakeholder or group of stakeholders. The USO also creates a separation between generation and transmission that ensures owners of transmission assets provide non-discriminatory and open access and do not use them in such a way as to unfairly advantage their own generation assets. The USO's role in a restructured Railbelt can be defined in three primary areas: 1. Economic Dispatch and Settlement 2. Oversight of transmission planning criteria 3. Oversight of reliability criteria. Economic Dispatch and Settlement Establishing a Railbelt Transco can create many benefits for our consumers. But establishing a Transco by itself is not enough. The greatest benefits for consumers come through more economic dispatch and utilization of generation resources. This is a fundamental role of the USO. While the Transco Effort is performing the initial modeling of potential benefits of economic dispatch, it will not be evaluating the allocation of those benefits (This allocation of benefits is usually referred to as the "Settlement Process"). During the coming months ARCTEC intends to facilitate a dialogue and negotiation amongst stakeholders to establish an appropriate Economic Dispatch and Settlement methodology. Issues include: • What should generators that make their output available to the pool be paid? Are incentives necessary to compensate generators for making their output available? • What should utilities pay for generation they receive from others as part of the dispatch process? 15 • How can independent power producers be integrated into the process? • How can a robust bi-lateral market be nurtured? • What policies are necessary to ensure investment decisions of the past are honored so assets are not "stranded"? • Are there tax implications? Significant progress has already been made on this front, and over recent years the economic dispatch of the existing system has improved greatly.Today, utility dispatch centers coordinate continually to control dispatching of power and gas to customers. Both elements—the basis of dispatch and the settlement of transactions—are key to ensuring the most efficient use of existing and future energy resources and to ensuring that any change in the dispatch of generation resources benefits end users. Initial kick-off meetings will be held to outline potential alternative dispatch/settlement models. Consulting resources have been engaged to bring the experience gained in the Lower 48 to bear on our unique Railbelt circumstances. We anticipate that negotiations on this important feature will be ongoing, and we will provide a status update when the first report is due on this recommendation on January 30, 2016. Oversight of Transmission Planning Criteria As the Commission has recognized, formation of a Transco can potentially bring great benefits to the Railbelt, but there is a need for independent oversight. Most existing Transcos are for- profit entities whose primary missions are to invest capital and earn a return on that investment. There needs to be a healthy tension between the Transco's desire to build more infrastructure and consumers' interest in ensuring only the "right" infrastructure is constructed. By placing responsibility for setting planning standards with the USO this balance between interests is achieved. There is no need for the USO to "reinvent the wheel". Much of this work will be (and is being) done already by the utilities in such groups as the Intertie Management Committee (IMC), the Bradley Project Management Committee (BPMC) and the Railbelt Utility Group (RUG). In practice, it is often the case that the USO's role is one of"review, revise and approve". Oversight of Reliability Criteria Similar to Planning Criteria, there is a need for an independent answer to "How much reliability is enough?" Also like Planning Criteria, much work has already been done on this subject by the IMC, and other groups. Here too, there is no need to reinvent the wheel, and the USO's role will again be to review, revise and approve. ltp Other Activities Much additional work is necessary to develop the policies and procedures needed to implement the USO's mission. These include establishing: • The right governance structure, including the qualifications necessary to participate in the USO's governing body; • A regulatory compact that defines the USO's relationship with the Commission; • Enforcement authority. The members of ARCTEC appreciate the opportunity to provide this update and we look forward to our next progress report in January 2016. Very truly yours, i• David A. Gillespie Chief Executive Officer Alaska Railbelt Cooperative Transmission and Electric Company I q Sponsored by: Hunt Introduction: September 28,2015 Public Hearing: October 12,2015 Enactment: October 12, 2015 CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA ORDINANCE 2015-004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA,AMENDING PORTIONS OF SEWARD CITY CODE § 14.05.010 REFUSE SERVICE PROVIDED AND REQUIRED, TO CLARIFY THAT REFUSE BILLING IS NOT REQUIRED ON VACANT LOTS AND THAT MANDATORY REFUSE SERVICE DOES NOT PRECLUDE INDIVIDUALS FROM DISPOSING OF THEIR OWN REFUSE, BUT STILL REQUIRES PAYMENT FOR REFUSE SERVICE, AND SEWARD CITY CODE § 14.05.040 FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION, TO CLARIFY THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO CLEAN GARBAGE RECEPTACLES IS THAT OF THE PERSON OCCUPYING AND/OR OWNING THE PROPERTY WHEREAS,the Seward City Code provides for mandatory refuse service in order to protect public health and hygiene,remove incentives to dump trash in public receptacles or in trash cans of other paying customers, equitably share the cost of this public health service, and reduce the likelihood of trash being otherwise improperly disposed of; and WHEREAS, the City of Seward maintains a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No.618 with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska--which is charged by Alaska Statute with regulating public utilities --for the purpose of regulating refuse service within the prescribed boundaries of the Seward City Limits; and WHEREAS,the City has,since at least 1974,contracted out refuse collection and disposal services through a competitive bid process resulting in a franchise agreement with a private sector refuse company as allowed by City Code,to avoid the need to equip and operate this service utilizing public employees; and WHEREAS,past practice has been to exempt vacant lots from payment of refuse charges and Codification of this practice will exempt properties from which have no commercial or residential structures, from the mandatory requirement to pay for refuse services. NOW THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, HEREBY ORDAINS that: Section 1. Seward City Code Section 14.05.010 is amended as follows: (Deletions are Bold Strike; Additions are Bold Underline) CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA ORDINANCE 2015-004 14.05.010. - Refuse service provided and required. (a) Every person occupying and/or owning any house, apartment building, duplex, triplex, condominium,townhome, mobile home park or home outside of a mobile home park, trailer, other residential or co mmercial dwelling or commercial building, including buildings under construction, within the city shall use and pay for the system of refuse disposal provided in this chapter,unless the person utilizes a carrier holding a valid permit from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. (b) The city shall either provide or contract for collection and disposal of refuse. The public works department of the city or the contractor shall prescribe routes and days for collection. When such routes or days are established or changed,reasonable notice thereof shall be given to affected customers. No other carrier other than one authorized by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska may collect,dispose,or remove refuse from any premises in the city. Nothing in the preceding sentence is-seetion shall be deemed to prohibit an occupant and/or owner from removing or causing the removal of refuse accumulated on the premises occupied by him and disposing of the same in a lawful manner. Disposing of one's own refuse does not however, eliminate the mandatory requirement to pay for solid waste service. Section 2. Seward City Code Section 14.05.040 is amended as follows: (Deletions are Bold ; Additions are Bold Underline) 14.05.040.—Frequency of collection. All garbage and rubbish receptacles shall be emptied and-elea-ned at least weekly. All garbage and rubbish receptacles shall at all times be kept clean by the person occupying and/or owning the property. All waste material must be removed at least once each month. Building or construction waste and debris shall be removed weekly and upon completion of construction. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect 10 days following its enactment. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 12th day of October, 2015. THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Jean Bardarson, Mayor It Council Agenda Statement e C of SELL Meeting Date: September 28, 2015 and October 12, 2015 From: James Hunt, City Manager �`f < 4LAS�P Agenda Item: Garbage and Refuse Ordinance BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: Applicable Statutes,Regulations and Ordinances Alaska Statute Chapter 42.05 Alaska Public Utilities Regulatory Act establishes the Regulatory Commission of Alaska's (RCA) powers to regulate every public utility engaged in a utility business inside the state of Alaska. AS §42.05.221 requires a public utility obtain a Certificate of Public Use and Necessity from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska prior to providing utility services,and establishes refuse as a public utility subject to such certification. The City of Seward holds a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 618 from the RCA under an Order Approving Application for Certificate and Closing Docket U-99-22 Order No. 1 dated July 25, 2000. AS §42.05.220(2)(d)provides that the RCA may limit the number of public utilities competing to furnish identical utility service in certain geographic locations if competition is determined not to be in the public interest (i.e. to eliminate duplication and paralleling of services) and the City of Seward is the only utility certified to provide refuse services within the service area boundaries of the Seward City Limits. AS §29.35.050(a)authorizes a municipality to require residents to utilize and pay for refuse services provided by the municipality or its contractor. Seward City Code §14.05.010 Garbage and Refuse — Refuse service provided and required, mandates that residents utilize and pay for the City's system of refuse disposal provided, and SCC 14.01.065(a)(5) authorizes disconnection of any utility service based on nonpayment of any bills for utility service. The City's current waste management contract was approved by the City Council on August 13, 2012 in Resolution 2012-068. The contract period is from January 1,2013 to December 31,2019, with options to extend for three additional years. The franchise agreement with Alaska Waste was approved by the Seward City voters on October 2,2012 by a vote of 246 to 114, or 68%approval. Proposed Ordinance In recent months, public confusion and complaints over the City's ability to mandate payment of refuse service resulted in an in-depth discussion of the topic in two refuse work sessions held on September 14,2015 and March 9,2015. The nature of the complaints included: 1)customers who elect not to use the provided refuse service or absent landlords who do not live in Seward year- round, object to having to pay for a service they do not use; 2) objection to the City's ability to disconnect other utility services for unpaid refuse bills; 3) requests for waiver from mandatory service for certain groups (i.e. individuals on fixed income, individuals on disability, seasonal residents);4)confusion over whether refuse payment is required on vacant properties; 5)objection to the requirement to pay for refuse for a stand-alone garage on a property not used for either residential or commercial purposes; 6)requests to codify a payment hiatus for up to three months so that travelers could be exempt from payment of refuse for a period; and 7) questions regarding �0 the authority by which the City is able to mandate payment for refuse services for customers who elect not to receive such service. The City Council met in two work sessions to discuss these issues. The administration provided documentation demonstrating the City's authority to mandate refuse service and payment of same (i.e. State Statute, RCA regulations, Seward City Code). The result of the work sessions was a consensus to continue requiring mandatory refuse service and mandatory payment for refuse by all residents,in order to protect the public health and most fairly allocate the costs of refuse services among a smaller customer base. The Council did not elect to codify a `vacation status' which would have provided for a payment hiatus for up to 90 days. Given Seward's small population, waivers for any particular group, including a payment hiatus,was seen as likely to redistribute the cost of service among a smaller pool, thereby increasing costs for those who are required to pay. It was acknowledged that City staff make every effort to obtain voluntary compliance from customers before terminating utility services for non-payment of refuse, but without the ability to terminate other utilities, some customers would not pay, leaving the franchisee with no ability to enforce the provisions of the contract between the franchisee and the City. The proposed Ordinance does the following: 1) clarifies that payment for refuse services is not required on vacant land or on properties which are not used for a residential dwelling or commercial purpose (i.e. exempts stand-alone garage on an otherwise vacant lot); 2)clarifies that the payment of refuse services is mandatory for every person occupying and/or owning a commercial building or residential dwelling; 3) clarifies that choosing to dispose of one's own refuse does not eliminate the mandatory requirement to pay for solid waste services; and 4) clarifies that the requirement to clean a garbage receptacle is the responsibility of an occupant or owner, and not the refuse company. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A 1 Comprehensive Plan: Page 11- Community Appearance, Page 13-City X Government, Page 26- Public Facilities. 2. Strategic Plan: Page 4-Nautural, Promote a Safe Community-Page 18 X Other(list): AS 42.05 Alaska Public Utilities Regulatory Act; AS 42.05.221 requirement to obtain Certificate of Public Convenience 3. and Necessity; AS 29.35.05 municipal authority to mandate refuse X payment; SCC 14.05.110 Garbage and Refuse service provided and required; SCC 14.01.065(a)(5) authority to disconnect utility service. ATTORNEY REVIEW: Yes X No FISCAL NOTE: These proposed revisions do not result in additional costs to the City, or additional revenues. Approved by Finance Department: C' RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Ordinance 2015-004 approving modifications to Seward City Code Chapter 14.05 Garbage and Refuse. City Council Work Session on Refuse Ordinance Fact Sheet September 14, 2015 • The City of Seward maintains a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 618 through the Regulatory Commission of Alaska for refuse services within Seward City limit boundaries (attachment',"). • Alaska Statute requires the regulation of public utilities', including refuse. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska is assigned responsibility for regulating public utilities. • Regulation under the Regulatory Commission of Alaska is intended to allow and regulate an exclusive franchise for a geographical area'. In other words,there is no other contractor with a valid permit,to provide refuse services within the Seward City Limits. • The City has contracted with a private contractor to provide refuse services since at least 1974 when it contracted with Herman Leirer dba Seward Service, rather than invest in the equipment and personnel to provide this service. • The City's current waste management contract was approved by the Seward City Council on August 13, 2012 via Resolution 2012-068". The contract period is from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2019,with an option to extend for three additional years'. The franchise agreement was approved by Seward City voters on October 2, 2012" by a vote of 246 to 114,or 68%approval. • Seward City Code mandates payment for refuse services(SCC 14.05.010). • Seward City Code authorizes discontinuation of utility service based on nonpayment of any bills for utility service (SCC 14.01.065(a)(5)). Recent customer complaints: 1. Objection to the City's mandatory garbage service for those who prefer not to have the service,especially by those who do not live in Seward other than seasonally. 2. Objection to the City having the ability to disconnect other utility services for unpaid refuse bills. 3. Request for waivers from the mandatory service for certain demographics(i.e. individuals on fixed income, individuals on disability,seasonal residents). City Council asked for proposed revisions to the City's refuse Ordinance. Draft Ordinance attached. Changes include: 1)clarifies refuse billing is not required on vacant lots; and 2) mandatory refuse service does not preclude individuals from disposing of their own refuse but still requires payment for refuse service. Previous discussion items included whether to exempt any demographic group from requirement to pay for refuse;whether to eliminate mandatory garbage service requirements;whether to allow customers to request a three-month "vacation status"from refuse billing; and whether the City could shut off other utilities for refusal to pay. There appeared to be no consensus to change these other provisions. 'Regulatory Commission of Alaska Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No.618 "Regulatory Commission of Alaska Order Approving Application for Certificate and Closing Docket, U-99-22 Order No. 1 dated July 25,2000. "'Alaska Statute 42.05 Alaska Public Utilities Regulatory Act '"Regulatory Commission of Alaska Map of Refuse Utility Service Area "Seward City Council Resolution 2012-068 approved August 13,2012 "'City of Seward refuse franchise agreement with Alaska Waste effective January 1,2013 ""Proposition language: "Do you approve a seven-year franchise agreement with Alaska Waste...for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse? The franchise agreement contains an option to extend for up to an additional three years. The agreement allows for costs to be adjusted annually based on 140%of the consumer price index. The agreement provides an opportunity for period rate reviews with all other consumer rates to be set by resolution of the City Council." Iv h Chapter 42.05 ALASKA PUBLIC UTILITIES REGULATORY ACT Sec. 42.05.010. -42.05.131. Establishment of Public Utilities Commission.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970;Sec.24 ch 25 SLA 1999]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.141.General powers and duties of the commission. (a)The Regulatory Commission of Alaska may do all things necessary or proper to carry out the purposes and exercise the powers expressly granted or reasonably implied in this chapter, including (1) regulate every public utility engaged or proposing to engage in a utility business inside the state, except to the extent exempted by AS 42.05.711; (2) investigate, upon complaint or upon its own motion,the rates, classifications, rules, regulations, practices,services,and facilities of a public utility and hold hearings on them; (3) make or require just,fair,and reasonable rates, classifications, regulations, practices, services, and facilities for a public utility; (4) prescribe the system of accounts and regulate the service and safety of operations of a public utility; (5) require a public utility to file reports and other information and data; (6)appear personally or by counsel and represent the interests and welfare of the state in all matters and proceedings involving a public utility pending before an officer, department, board, commission, or court of the state or of another state or the United States and to intervene in, protest, resist, or advocate the granting, denial,or modification of any petition, application, complaint, or other proceeding; (7)examine witnesses and offer evidence in any proceeding affecting the state and initiate or participate in judicial proceedings to the extent necessary to protect and promote the interests of the state. (b)The commission shall perform the duties assigned to it under AS 42.45.100-42.45.190. (c) In the establishment of electric service rates under this chapter the commission shall promote the conservation of resources used in the generation of electric energy. (d)When considering whether the approval of a rate or a gas supply contract proposed by a utility to provide a reliable supply of gas for a reasonable price is in the public interest,the commission shall (1) recognize the public benefits of allowing a utility to negotiate different pricing mechanisms with different gas suppliers and to maintain a diversified portfolio of gas supply contracts to protect customers from the risks of inadequate supply or excessive cost that may arise from a single pricing mechanism; and (2)consider whether a utility could meet its responsibility to the public in a timely manner and without undue risk to the public if the commission fails to approve a rate or a gas supply contract proposed by the utility. Sec.42.05.145.Telecommunications regulation policy; restriction on regulation of telephone directories. (a)A utility that provides local exchange or interexchange telecommunications service in the state affects the public interest. Regulation of these utilities shall, consistent with this chapter, seek to maintain and further the efficiency,availability,and affordability of universal basic telecommunications service. (b) Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter,the commission may not regulate the production and distribution of telephone directories. Sec. 42.05.150.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.151. Regulations and hearing procedures. (a)The commission may adopt regulations, not inconsistent with the law, necessary or proper to exercise its powers and to perform its duties under this chapter. (b)The commission shall adopt regulations governing practice and procedure, consistent with due process of law, including the conduct of formal and informal investigations, pre-hearing conferences, hearings, and proceedings,and the handling of procedural motions by a single commissioner.The regulations must provide for the hearing or,when a hearing is not required, other consideration of a matter in accordance with AS 42.04.080.Technical rules of evidence need not apply to investigations, pre-hearing conferences, hearings, and proceedings before the commission.The commission shall provide for representation by out-of-state attorneys substantially in accordance with Rule 81,Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure. (c)The commission,each commissioner, or an employee authorized by the commission may administer oaths,certify to all official acts, and issue subpoenas,subpoenas duces tecum,and other process to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of testimony, records, papers, accounts,and documents in an inquiry, investigation, hearing, or proceeding before the commission in any part of the state. Each commissioner is authorized to issue orders on procedural motions.The commission may petition a court of this state to enforce its subpoenas, subpoenas duces tecum, or other process. Sec. 42.05.160. (Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.161.Application of Administrative Procedure Act. (a)The administrative adjudication procedures of AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act)do not apply to adjudicatory proceedings of the commission except that final administrative determinations by the commission are subject to judicial review under that Act as provided in AS 42.05.551(a). (b)AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act) applies to regulations adopted by the commission. Sec. 42.05.170.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.171. Formal hearings.A formal hearing that the commission has power to hold may be held by or before a hearing panel appointed under AS 42.04.080, a hearing examiner, or an administrative law judge designated for the purpose by the chair of the commission. In appropriate cases, a formal hearing may be held before an arbitrator or mediator designated for the purpose by the commission.The testimony and evidence in a formal hearing may be taken by the panel, by the hearing examiner, by the arbitrator, by the mediator, or by the administrative law judge to whom the hearing has been assigned.A decision of a hearing examiner, an arbitrator, a mediator,or an administrative law judge is not final until approved by the commission. A commissioner who has not heard or read the testimony, including the argument, may not participate in making a decision of a hearing panel.A party may file a petition for reconsideration of, or an administrative appeal of, a decision by a hearing examiner, an arbitrator, a mediator, or an administrative law judge that has been approved by the commission,or a decision of a hearing panel. The full commission shall act on the petition for reconsideration or the appeal. In determining the place of a hearing,the commission shall give preference to holding the hearing at a place most convenient for those interested in the subject of the hearing. Sec.42.05.175.Timelines for issuance of final orders. (a)The commission shall issue a final order not later than 180 days after a complete application is filed for an application (1)for a certificate of public convenience and necessity; (2)to amend a certificate of public convenience and necessity; (3)to transfer a certificate of public convenience and necessity;and (4)to acquire a controlling interest in a certificated public utility. (b) Notwithstanding a suspension ordered under AS 42.05.421,the commission shall issue a final order not later than 270 days after a complete tariff filing is made for a tariff filing that does not change the utility's revenue requirement or rate design. (c) Notwithstanding a suspension ordered under AS 42.05.421,the commission shall issue a final order not later than 450 days after a complete tariff filing is made for a tariff filing that changes the utility's revenue requirement or rate design. (d)The commission shall issue a final order not later than 365 days after a complete formal complaint is filed against a utility or, when the commission initiates a formal investigation of a utility without the filing of a complete formal complaint, not later than 365 days after the order initiating the formal investigation is issued. (e)The commission shall issue a final order in a rule-making proceeding not later than 730 days after a complete petition for adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation under AS 44.62.180-44.62.290 is filed or,when the commission initiates a rule- making docket, not later than 730 days after the order initiating the proceeding is issued. (f)The commission may extend a timeline required under this section if all parties of record consent to the extension or if,for one time only, before the timeline expires,the (1)commission reasonably finds that good cause exists to extend the timeline; (2)commission issues a written order extending the timeline and setting out its findings regarding good cause;and (3)extension of time is 90 days or less. (g)The commission shall file quarterly reports with the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee identifying all extensions ordered under(f)of this section during the previous quarter and including copies of the written orders issued under(f)(2) of this section. (h) If the commission does not issue and serve a final order regarding an application or suspended tariff under section (a), (b), or (c) of this section within the applicable timeline specified, and if the commission does not extend the timeline in accordance with (f)of this section,the application or suspended tariff filing shall be considered approved and shall go into effect immediately. (i) In adjudicated docket matters that come before the commission under state law or federal law and are not subject to a timeline under federal law or(a) - (e)of this section,the commission shall issue a final order not later than 180 days after the filing of an initiating petition. If the matter is commenced on the commission's own motion,the commission shall issue a final order not later than 365 days after the issuance of an order opening the docket.This subsection does not apply to a complaint against a utility, a petition to revoke a certificate of public convenience and necessity, or a functionally equivalent filing. (j) If the commission does not issue and serve a final order governed by(i) of this section within the applicable timeline specified, including any extension granted by the commission in accordance with (f) of this section, the initiating petition shall be considered approved and shall take effect immediately, or, if the matter was commenced by the commission,the docket shall be closed with no action taken. (k) If proceedings subject to different timelines under this section are consolidated or if a single proceeding implicates more than one timeline,the latest applicable deadline for the issuance of a final order shall apply. (I)The commission may not evade the requirement of this section by terminating a proceeding in a docket and opening a proceeding in another docket on substantially the same matter. (m) For purposes of this section, "final order" means a distos2iitiq administrative order that resolves all matters at issue and that may be the basis for a petition for reconsideration or request for judicial review. (n) For purposes of this section, an application,tariff filing,formal complaint, or petition is complete if it complies with the filing, format, and content requirements established by statute, regulation, and forms adopted by the commission under regulation. Sec. 42.05.180.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.181. Notice and hearing before final orders.A final order of the commission compelling affirmative action, denying a right or privilege, or granting a right or privilege over protest of the public utility or any party of record may not be entered without giving the interested party reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard. Sec. 42.05.190. (Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.191.Contents and service of orders. Every formal order of the commission shall be based upon the facts of record. However,the commission may,without a hearing, issue an order approving any settlement supported by all the parties of record in a proceeding, including a compromise settlement. Every order entered pursuant to a hearing must state the commission's findings,the basis of its findings and conclusions,together with its decision.These orders shall be entered of record and a copy of them shall be served on all parties of record in the proceeding. Sec. 42.05.193. -42.05.196.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec. 42.05.200.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.201. Publication of reports,orders,decisions,and regulations.All reports, orders,decisions, and regulations of the commission shall be in writing. The commission shall apprise all affected utilities and interested parties of these reports, orders, decisions,and regulations as they are issued and adopted, and,when appropriate to do so, shall publish them in a manner that will reasonably inform the public or the affected consumers of any public utility service.The commission may set charges for costs of printing or reproducing and furnishing copies of its reports, orders, decisions and regulations.The publication requirement, as it pertains to regulations, does not supersede the requirements of AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act). Sec. 42.05.210.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Sec.42.05.211.Annual report.The commission shall, by November 15 of each year, publish an annual report reviewing its activities during the previous fiscal year and notify the legislature that the report is available. The report must address the regulation of public utility service in the state as of June 30 and must contain details about the commission's compliance with the requirements of AS 42.05.175(a)- (e),with the timeline extensions made by the commission under AS 42.05.175(f), and with other performance measures established by the commission. Sec. 42.05.220.(Repealed,Sec. 5 ch 113 SLA 1970]. Repealed or Renumbered Article 02.CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY Sec.42.05.221.Certificates required. (a)A public utility may not operate and receive compensation for providing a commodity or service without first having obtained from the commission under this chapter a certificate declaring that public convenience and necessity require or will require the service.Where a public utility provides more than one type of utility service,a separate certificate of convenience and necessity is required for each type. A certificate must describe the nature and extent of the authority granted in it, including,as appropriate for the services involved, a description of the authorized area and scope of operations of the public utility. (b)All certificates of convenience and necessity issued to a public utility before July 1, 1970, remain in effect but they are subject to modification where there are areas of conflict with public utilities that have not previously been required to have a certificate or where there is a substantial change in circumstances. (c)A certificate shall be issued to a public utility that was not required to have one before July 1, 1970,and that is required to have one after that date, if it appears to the commission that the utility was actually operating in good faith on that date. Such a certificate is subject to modification where there are areas of conflict with other public utilities or where there has been a substantial change in circumstances. (d) In an area where the commission determines that two or more public utilities are competing to furnish identical utility service and that this competition is not in the public interest,the commission shall take appropriate action to eliminate the competition and any undesirable duplication of facilities.This appropriate action may include, but is not limited to, ordering the competing utilities to enter into a contract that, among other things,would: (1)delineate the service area boundaries of each in those areas of competition; (2)eliminate existing duplication and paralleling to the fullest reasonable extent; (3) preclude future duplication and paralleling; (4) provide for the exchange of customers and facilities for the purposes of providing better public service and of eliminating duplication and paralleling; and (5) provide such other mutually equitable arrangements as would be in the public interest. (e) If the commission employs professional consultants to assist it in administering this section, it may apportion the expenses relating to their employment among the competing utilities. (f)[Repealed,Sec. 12 ch 136 SLA 1980]. c tiJ r`Y Commission o f Alaske 9e9Ut0 Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 618 Having found that the grantee of this certificate is fit, willing,and able to provide the utility services applied for and that such services are required for the convenience and necessity of the public, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska,pursuant to the authority vested in it by AS 42.05, hereby issues this certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to CITY OF SEWARD authorizing it to operate a public utility,as defined by AS 42.05.990(4)(F)for the purpose of furnishing REFUSE SERVICE This Certificate is issued under, and subject to, the provisions of AS 42.05 and all rules, regulations, and orders from time to time promulgated by the Commission governing the rates, charges, services,facilities, and practices of utility operations of the kind authorized herein. The specific nature,scope, terms, conditions,and limitations of the authority granted by this Certificate,as amended to date,are set forth in the appendix hereto and in the following order(s)of the Commission which, by this reference,are incorporated in and made a part hereof as though fully set forth herein. Docket No. Date of Order U-99-22(1) July 25, 2000 (Chronology and service area description shown on the attached Appendix A) IN WITNESS THEREOF,the undersigned members of the Commission have executed this Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity at Anchorage,Alaska on this 17m day of January 2003. Regulatory Commission of ✓disk( (CHAIR) (COMMISSIONER) (COMMISSIONER) (COMMISSIONER) t APPENDIX A Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 618 Granted to CITY OF SEWARD (Refuse Utility) DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA: Ti N R1W Sections: 28, 33, 34, and the SW 1/2 of Sections 27 and 35 drawn on a diagonal from the NW to the SW corner of those sections T1S R1E Sections: 7, 8, 9, 16, and 17 T1S R1W Sections: 1, 2, 3,4, 9, 10, 15, and 16 (All of the above in reference to the Seward Meridian) CHRONOLOGY: Certificate Granted: 07/25/00 (U-99-022(1)) Appendix A-Certificate No.618 Issued January 15, 2003 Page 1 of 1 Note:The service area description and history log in this document are for reference only. The controlling document is the Commission Order which modified the Certificate and Appendix A. 1 r I '1 22 II I2 24 JJ/ 10 /0 21 22 L !1/J +rN 26 25 29 Regulatory Commission 27 of Alaska _ DRAFT --�� APPENDIX A Certificate of Public Convenience II ;,' and Necessity No. 618 Granted to 32 33 Ir / RO1N 1E '.z 34 CITY OF SEWARD(Refuse Utility) $ Service Utility Type: . Y/ j— Refuse `S7 618 — 7 r�,s Legend 4 2 T01S 3 I ' Ro1w _ Service Area in ■in s t°� 9 HMI 11 12 = TeJ� Seward ,'' rao-nanx: Canada • Q\, Anc homage • ,r a, Juneau or. `•..c`may 16 15 :h 13 18 _ 17 1, ':a+ I Mlles 0 0.9 1.8 — I ' Scale:1:40.400 3 Alaska Albers Equal Ana Conic 21 :2 19 20 21 22 1983 North American Datum map'.RCA Servic.Areas_11x17L_Certa_v02.mxd Data April 18,2006 \ .■------' File SA_0818 20080018 Author RDI-0WS Sir nicrE TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR[Mc[1\ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND 1016 WEST SIT AVENUE,SUITE 400 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501.1963 PHONE: (907)276.6222 FAX: (907)276.0160 REGULATORY COMMISSION OFALASKA TTY: (907)276.4533 RIGINAL September 26, 2000 Rick Gifford Finance Director City of Seward P.O. Box 167 Seward, AK 99664 Dear Mr. Gifford: Enclosed you will find a new parchment for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity No. 618 (Certificate) . The service area description and the chronology are attached as Appendix A. Review the Certificate parchment and Appendix A to ensure they are accurate. Also, please return any Certificates and Appendix A' s previously issued to you. Feel free to contact me at (907) 276-6222, ex. 127, if you have any questions pertaining to your Certificate Parchment or if any corrections need to be made to your Certificate Parchment as well. Sincerely, REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA Cristin Hatfield Engineering Administrative Clerk II Enclosures 1"1 1 STATE OF ALASKA 2 THE REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA 3 Before Commissioners: G. Nanette Thompson, Chair 4 Bernie Smith Patricia M. DeMarco 5 Will Abbott James S. Strandberg 6 7 In the Matter of the Application by CITY OF ) SEWARD for a Certificate of Public ) U-99-22 8 Convenience and Necessity for Refuse Utility ) Operations ) ORDER NO. 1 9 ) 10 ORDER APPROVING APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE AND 11 CLOSING DOCKET 12 BY THE COMMISSION: 13 14 Background On March 3, 1999, the City of Seward (Seward) filed an application for a 15 certificate of public convenience and necessity for its refuse utility. On 16 March 26, 1999, the application was noticed to the public with a closing date of Ro c, 17 ° co April 27, 1999, for the submission of comments in support of, or in opposition to, the ter- - 18 Q "= oc�o c rn N application. No comments were received in response to the notice. c rn 19 Seward made additional filings at the request of the Commission Staff wc 20 E a Q (Staff) on March 30, 1999, April 14, 1999, June 23, 2000, and July 3, 2000. XEN 21 O Cn 2 N Staff reviewed the filings in this proceeding and, on July 6, 2000, � o (9 22 o a (.0 23 submitted its analysis and recommendation (Report) thereon. Staffs Report sets out o o in detail the history of the proceeding, the public noticing of the application, and Staffs 24 CC findings and recommendations regarding disposition of the application. Staff 25 recommended that the Commission approve Seward's application, and approve the 26 U-99-22(1) - (7/25/00) Page 1 of 3 3° 11 1 service area described in Attachment JAK-1 to Staffs Report. A copy of Staffs Report 2 is attached to this Order as an Appendix. 3 Discussion 4 Based on its review of the record in this proceeding, the Commission 5 finds that the public convenience and necessity require the provision of refuse public 6 utility service within the areas described in Staffs report and that Seward is fit, willing, 7 and able to furnish the proposed service. Accordingly, the Commission will approve 8 Seward's application and accept the map and service area filed by Seward. 9 With approval of the application, there are no outstanding substantive or 10 procedural issues to be disposed of in this proceeding, and there are no allocable 1 costs under AS 42.05.651 and 3 AAC 48.157. Therefore, this Docket should be 12 closed. 13 14 ORDER 15 THE COMMISSION FURTHER ORDERS: 16 1. The application filed by the City of Seward for a certificate of public Y o 2 17 convenience and necessity to furnish refuse public utility service to the area described a o ti 18 in Attachment JAK-1 of the Appendix attached hereto is approved. ocn CT) N 19 o H (I) n 20 EQQ E .c 21 o X_ �N U ' N o ca 22 � v co C IV QN 23 5 • o C 24 25 26 U-99-22(1) - (7/25/00) Page 2of3 � 12 1 2. Docket U-99-22 is closed. 2 DATED AND EFFECTIVE at Anchorage, Alaska, this 25th day of July, 2000. 3 BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION 4 (Commissioner Will Abbott, not participating.) 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Y ° M co 17 Pl. in 18 ocnaN 1 ' 9 o 0 N w N 20 > co E s X Q 21 o �N U � 2N 22 0 co 0 "" N 23 c fl m— ti ° rn 24 25 26 U-99-22(1) - (7/25/00) Page 3 of 3 32 , STATE OF ALASKA The Regulatory Commission of Alaska 1016 West Sixth Avenue, Suite 400 Anchorage,Alaska 99501 MEMORANDUM TO: Commissioners: DATE: July 24,2000 G.Nanette Thompson,Chairman Bernie Smith Patricia M. DeMarco Will Abbott James S. Strandberg FROM: James Keen,Utility Engineer Subject: U-99-22,In the Matter of the Application by CITY OF SEWARD for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Refuse Utility Operations - Staff Recommendation. Statement of Case Before the Commission is an application by the City of Seward(Seward)to obtain a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for authority to provide refuse utility service within city limits. Recommendation The Commission Staff(Staff)recommends that: 1) The Commission approve the refuse application made by Seward to acquire a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. a) The Commission find that refuse utility service is required for the public convenience and necessity in the area Seward is requesting. b) The Commission find that Seward is fit,willing, and able to provide the proposed service. 2) The Commission accept the tariff filed by Seward, and 3) The Commission approve the service area included as attachment JAK-1 to this recommendation Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility • ORDER U-99-22(1) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page 1 of 6 ^-ge 1 of 7 14 Procedural History On March 11, 1999, Seward filed an application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity for its refuse utility. This application was noticed to the public with a closing date of April 27, 1999,for the submission of comments in support of, or in opposition to,the application. No comments were received in response to the notice. Seward made additional filings on March 30, 1999,supplying technical information requested by Staff and on April 19, 1999, supplying a USGS Service Area Map requested by Staff. On June 23,2000, Seward filed a copy of its FY99 annual financial report. Finally,on July 3,2000, Seward filed a verification of its service area based upon the service area proposed by Staff. Issues 1) Whether Seward should be granted a certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity a) Whether granting of the certificates is required for the public convenience and necessity b) Whether Seward is fit,willing, and able to provide refuse utility service in the requested area. 2) Whether the tariff filed in conjunction with this proceeding should be accepted. 3) Whether the service area requested by Seward be approved. 4) Whether any conditions should be placed on the certificate Analysis Public Convenience and Necessity Is granting a certificate required for the Public Convenience and Necessity? According to AS 42.05.221, a public utility may not operate and receive compensation for providing a commodity or service without first having obtained from the Commission a certificate declaring that public convenience and necessity require or will require the service. The following is an excerpt from Seward's Statement of Public Benefit. Seward has been providing garbage service since at least 1974 when it contracted with Herman E. Leirer d/b/a Seward Service. In 1990,Herman Leirer sold his business to Jason McDonald d/b/a Jason Enterprises. The City assigned the remainder of the contract to Jason McDonald until October 1992 when the City entered into a Franchise Contract with Jason Enterprises. The contract was extended in September 1997 to December 31, 1998. In June of 1998,Jason McDonald sold his business to USA Waste of Alaska,Inc and the City assigned the contract to them. Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility ORDER U-99-22(I) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page2of6 3 \ Page2of7 15 The City of Seward has a long history of providing refuse services to its residents. The service has been provided on a contract basis in order to provide good services while maintaining control of the refuse utility. The City is able to handle billing,customer request and complaints, as well as discontinuing customers, all at a central location. This arrangement has provided an excellent service to the community while maintaining a reasonable rate for the services. The City and its citizens are concerned about the appearance of its community and have thus provided regulations that require all residents to utilize and pay for the service. This in turn has provided the revenues sufficient to provide a good service to the community and help beautify the community at the same time. Based on the above, Staff believes the Commission should find the public convenience and necessity requires the proposed service within the city limits of Seward. Fitness.Willingness,and Ability Is Seward fit,willing and able to provide refuse utility service in the requested service area? AS 42.05.241 states that a certificate may not be issued unless the Commission finds that the applicant is fit,willing,and able to provide the utility services applied for and that the services are required for the convenience and necessity of the public. Managerial and Technical Fitness As explained above, Seward contracts out the refuse utility service to USA Waste(USA) for its residents. The resumes of the key management personnel indicate that they have a strong background in city and financial management that will enable them to competently manage the service. In addition,the Commission has found USA to be technically competent to provide refuse service in the service area previously served by Jason Enterprises'. USA will be utilizing a 1996 Peterbilt 320 Refuse truck and a 1982 International Harvester Rolloff Truck to provide service in Seward. All refuse collected in Seward is currently being delivered to the Kenai Borough Solid Waste Transfer Facility, located in Seward. The refuse is then transferred to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Baling facility in Soldotna. Finally,the bales are disposed of in the Kenai Borough landfill facility located near Soldotna. The Kenai Peninsula Borough holds the required permit from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation(ADEC). The ADEC does not require the refuse hauling vehicles to have a permit. Based on the above, Staff recommends the Commission finds Seward managerially and technically fit,willing, and able to provide the requested service. Financial Fitness 'USA Waste was granted a conditional transfer of Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity 211,previously held by Jason Enterprises,in Order U-98-171(1). Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility ORDER U-99-22(1) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page 3 of 6 Page 3 of 7 5; 16 Staff recommends that Seward's audited financial statement for FY 99, as filed in Docket U-99- 22,be used as an indicator of its financial fitness because the financials have been independently audited and show the financial results of the utility combined with the other accounts from the city. As Seward will not be subject to economic regulation under AS 42.05.711(b),it will not be required to develop cost based rates and can develop rates that do not follow the traditional rate making methodologies. Based upon the financial statements provided, Seward does not subsidize its refuse utility service from other general fund accounts. Seward charges its customers for refuse pick-up according to the rate table below. Compared to rates charged by other Alaskan refuse utilities, Seward's rates are very reasonable. Businesses—Basis for Monthly Fee No. Pickups per First Can Each Additional Week Can 1 $8.65 $3.90 2 $17.30 $7.80 3 $26.80 $11.70 4 $34.60 $15.60 5 $43.25 $19.50 6 $51.90 $23.40 Offices,wastepaper $5.40 $3.25 only(1 Pickup) Residential—Basis for Monthly Fee Dwelling Type Monthly Rate Pack-Out Service Fee Single Family Residence $10.85 $14.05 Apartments(more than 2 units $9.90 $2.60/dwelling unit having common cans,each unity billed individually) Apartments(more than 2 units $9.25 $2.60/dwelling unit having common cans,with a single billing to the Landlord) According to Seward's audited financial statements for FY99,the city received$43,975 in revenue. This sum is 12.5%of the Total Revenues collected by Seward. The other 87.5%of the revenue is paid to USA Waste. Seward does not keep track of billing expenses directly attributed to its refuse utility and was therefore unable to accurately calculate Total Operating Expenses. Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility ORDER U-99-22(1) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page 4 of 6 Page 4 of 7 3(19 17 As a whole,the financial fitness of the City of Seward is strong. Seward had total Assets, Liabilities,and Capital of$184,137,950,$24,613,264,and$159,524,686 respectively. Total Revenues for the city were$7,322,027,and Total Expenditures were$7,052,277,providing a Net Profit of$269,750. After net funds transferred to and from other accounts were considered,the net excess of revenues added to the fund balance totaled$419,955. This indicates that the overall city is lucrative and self-sustaining. Staff concludes that the self-sustaining city funds, in conjunction with the general authority of the City to levy taxes,shows the applicant to be financially fit. Based upon the above, Staff believes the Commission should find that Seward is overall fit, willing,and able to provide the proposed service. Tariff Should the tariff filed in conjunction with this proceeding be accepted? The Commission,according to AS 42.05.711 (b),does not economically regulate Seward because it is a public utility owned by a political subdivision of the state. However,a copy of its tariff for the refuse utility was filed with the Commission for review. Staff reviewed the submitted tariff and found it to be sufficient and accurate. Based on the above, Staff recommends that the tariff submitted by Seward be accepted. Service Area&Map Should the service area description and map filed in conjunction with this proceeding be approved? The service area request submitted by Seward includes the area surrounding and within the City limits of Seward on both the East and West banks of Resurrection Bay. Seward has expanded its city limits since the original service area was granted to USA. Part of Seward's new corporate city limits includes a small area of land within the approved service area of USA. Seward determined that rather than forcing this area of land to be annexed by the city so that it could control refuse development,it would continue to allow USA to maintain control of the refuse market in that area. A USGS map delineating the requested area was submitted and reviewed by Staff. Staff finds this request to be reasonable and recommends the service area included as attachment JAK-1 be approved. Conditions What conditions,if any,will be imposed upon Seward? Seward has fulfilled all of the requirements for certification and therefore does not need any conditions to be imposed. Conclusion Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility ORDER U-99-22(1) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page 5 of 6 Page 5 of 7 1 18 For the reasons stated above, Staff believes that refuse utility service is required for the public convenience and necessity in the area Seward is requesting and that Seward is fit,willing,and able to provide the proposed service. Therefore, Staff recommends that the application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity for the refuse utility be approved. Memorandum—U-99-22,City of Seward—Refuse Utility ORDER U-99-22(1) July 24,2000 APPENDIX Page 6 of 6 Page 6 of 7 3% 19 "APPENDIX A" Certificate of Public Convenience And Necessity No. ?granted to THE CITY OF SEWARD (Refuse Utility) DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA: T1N R1W Sections: 28, 33, 34, and the SW 1/2 of Sections 27 and 35 drawn on a diagonal fr om the NW to the SW corner of those sections T1S R1E Sections: 7, 8, 9, 16, and 17 T1S R1W Sections: 1,2,3,4,9, 10, 15, and 16 (All of the above in reference to the Seward Meridian) CHRONOLOGY: Original Certificate granted??, (U-99-22-(?)) ORDER U-99-22(1) APPENDIX Page 7 of 7 f6 61 20 Sponsored by: Hunt CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA RESOLUTION 2012-068 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, APPROVING A FRANCHISE FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND REFUSE WITH ALASKA WASTE-KENAI PENINSULA, LLC, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE VOTERS OF SEWARD AT THE OCTOBER 2, 2012 REGULAR CITY ELECTION WHEREAS, the Seward City Charter ("Charter") and Code of Ordinances ("Code") provides for the sanitary,economic,and efficient collection and disposal of garbage,rubbish,and waste material in the City and its service area,and permits,pursuant to such Charter and Code and voter approval,the use of a contractor to provide such services;and WHEREAS, the City of Seward ("City")currently contracts with Waste Connections of Alaska,Inc. dba Alaska Waste—Kenai Peninsula LLC,for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse,with said contract set to expire December 31,2012;and WHEREAS, the City solicited a request for proposals to provide solid waste collection services,and received three responsive and responsible proposals,and based on the scoring of those proposals, the administration recommends approval of a contract with Alaska Waste — Kenai Peninsula,LLC,subject to voter approval at an election to be held on October 2,2012,and subject to successful negotiations between the City and the proposer;and WHEREAS, the administration recommends entering into a seven-year contract with an option to extend for up to three additional years,subject to approval by the City Council;and WHEREAS,this franchise agreement provides for automatic annual adjustments in the Rate Schedule based on 140%of the CPI',with such automatic increases not subject to further approval, and with all other changes to rates and conditions of service subject to City Council review and approval;and WHEREAS,the agreement provides for new services such as a bulky-item curbside pickup service for appliances and furniture, and through a levelized rate schedule, encourages the use of bear- resistant containers and bear-resistant dumpster lids to reduce bear/human/garbage encounters,and includes a franchise fee to be paid to the City,equal to 3%of the gross revenues collected by the contractor;and I Consumer Price Index(CPI)means the consumer price index(CPI•U),all items, 1982-1984-100 for urban wage earners and clerical workers,Anchorage,Alaska area,as published by the U.S.Department of Labor,Bureau of Labor Statistics(initial release). The 2014 Rate Schedule will be adjusted utilizing the CM data from the calendar year 2012. CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA RESOLUTION 2012-068 WHEREAS,approval of a seven-year franchise,with an option to extend for an additional term of up to three years,provides sufficient incentive for the contractor to make improvements to the local fleet of available equipment,trucks,and container inventories,and to address issues such as the availability of bear-resistant garbage cans and bear-resistant dumpster lids,and to consider future options for the community to encourage and facilitate recycling efforts;and WHEREAS, granting of a franchise for a public utility requires the affirnlative vote of a majority of electors voting on a proposition to approve such a franchise,and WHEREAS, the Seward City Council finds that it is in the public interest to provide for quality, local garbage and refuse collection and disposal services, and therefore opts to place this proposition before the voters of Seward at the regular election of October 2,2012. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA,that: Section 1. A franchise agreement between the City of Seward and Alaska Waste—Kenai Peninsula LLC, for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved subject to voter approval, in accordance with Section 4 below. Section 2. The city manager is authorized to finalize and execute such additional documents as necessary to finalize the franchise agreement and to agree to revisions to the documents so long as the essential terms and conditions of the franchise agreement are not substantially changed. Section 3. The city manager is authorized to include collection of a franchise fee in the amount of 3% of gross revenues collected from the franchisee, and that amount is considered adequate compensation for the maintenance and use of City streets and alleys in the conduct of this contract. The City Council will also retain rate approval as provided in the City Charter and Code. Section 4. At the regular municipal election to be held on October 2,2012,the City shall submit to the qualified voters of the City the question of approval of the franchisee agreement noted above. An affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting on the proposition shall be required for approval of the franchise agreement. ■ j CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA i RESOLUTION 2012-068 Section 5. The proposition shall be substantially in the following form: Proposition No.2 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND REFUSE Do you approve a seven-year franchise agreement with Alaska Waste—Kenai Peninsula, LLC for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse? The franchise agreement contains an option to extend for up to an additional three years. The agreement allows for costs to be adjusted annually based on 140% of the Consumer Price Index. The agreement provides an opportunity for periodic rate reviews with all other consumer rates to be set by resolution of the City Council. Yes No A"Yes"vote approves a seven-year franchise agreement with Alaska Waste— Kenai Peninsula, LLC for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse, L. with options to extend the agreement for up to three additional years. A "No"vote does not approve a seven-year franchise agreement with Alaska Waste—Kenai Peninsula,LLC for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse,with options to extend the agreement for up to three additional years. Section 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The franchise agreement shall not be effective until it has been approved by a majority of the electors voting on a proposition to approve the same. The franchise agreement shall go into effect January 1,2013 or as soon thereafter as practicable. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this I Ih day of August,2012. THE CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA David Sewwa , ayo 6. 142- CITY OF SEWARI), ALASKA RESOLUTION 2012-068 J anal AYES: Valdatta, Bardarson,Keil, Shafer, Casagranda,Terry.Seaward NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: 4 `LI.�.L.%-Aly• -e ohanna Kinney,CMC \ ity Clerk (City Seal) '1NnIIehi ��,s0 of SEW,,ppR, • i SEAL = • :•f4 •` P%-, �3 Council Agenda Statement ir 4of seas.q Meeting Date: August 13, 2012 ut ^' �$ Through: James Hunt, City Manager From: Kristin Erchinger, Finance Director Agenda Item: Approving Franchise Agreement for Solid Waste Collection Services with Alaska Waste-Kenai Peninsula, LLC BACKGROUND&JUSTIFICATION: The City of Seward, through its Charter and its Code of Ordinances, provides for the collection and disposal of garbage and rubbish. To that end, the City previously applied for, and was granted, a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, for its refuse utility(Certificate U-99-22). Since at least the early 1970s, the City has utilized a private contractor to provide refuse services in Seward. The City Code requires that a franchise for a public utility be approved by a majority of voters in a regular City election. Over the past 38 years, the City has issued Requests for Proposals for solid waste collection four times, as follows: 1974, one respondent; 1980, one respondent; 1983, two respondents; 1987, one respondent. In 1987, the City contracted with Seward Service (Herman Leirer), and the business was subsequently assigned five times, as follows: in 1989 to Jason Enterprises; in 1998 to USA Waste of Alaska; in 1999 to Peninsula Sanitation, a division of Waste Management, Inc.; in 2005 to Alaska Pacific Environmental Services Anchorage, LLC dba Alaska Waste - Kenai Peninsula LLC; and in 2012 to Waste Connections of Alaska, Inc. The most recent franchise agreement was approved by the voters on October 5, 2010 for a period of two years, with a request by the City Council to solicit Requests for Proposal at the end of the term. The current contract for refuse services expires December 31,2012. The City solicited a Request for Proposals for solid waste collection services and received three responses. All three proposals were considered responsive and responsible. The following criteria and associated weightings were used to score the proposals: Proposed rates = 30%; Firm's technical qualifications(fleet, container inventory, etc.)=20%; Firm's experience= 15%; Bear Awareness = 10%; Litigation History = 10%; Contract exceptions = 10%; and Customer service and billing=5%. The proposals received the following overall scores: Alaska Waste- Kenai Peninsula, LLC Score=88.52 Alaska Pacific Environmental Services 1, LLC Score= 71.78 Mid State Truck and Trailer, LLC Score= 70.50 Based on the scoring of criteria, the administration recommends approving a franchise for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse with Alaska Waste - Kenai Peninsula, LLC ("Alaska Waste"), subject to approval by the voters of Seward at the October 2, 2012 regular City election, and subject to successful contract negotiations. 1� A few highlights from the successful proposal: The RFP allowed for a new fee to be implemented,based on standard waste management industry practice. That fee would have been a fuel adjustment factor to be added to the bill each month based as a percentage of the services charges on the bill (excluding taxes and surcharges), with an option to escalate each year based on a percentage of the Producer Price Index for No. 2 Diesel Fuel. Alaska Waste opted not to propose adding a new fuel adjustment factor, but to instead include all cost escalations as a percentage of the annual Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). Their proposal includes the following: 1) initial rates are increased from the current Rate Schedule by approximately 25% for regular cans and 7% for bear-resistant cans, effective January 1, 2013; 2) the Rate Schedule has been amended to add a monthly charge for renting a dumpster from the Contractor (rent has been charged previously,but that item was omitted from the schedule);3)annual increases to the Rate Schedule will be equal to 140%of the Consumer Price Index over the life of the contract; 4) a new "bulky item pickup" service will be implemented at a minimum cost of$42.18 per item (small appliances, furniture, etc.); 5) incentivizes the use of bear-resistant garbage cans by charging the same $2.00 per month charge for a leased bear-resistant can or a regular can; 6) adds lockable dumpster lids; 7) continues the current practice of the contractor bearing responsibility for billing customers and providing direct customer service; 8) the contractor agrees to make available bear-resistant garbage cans and bear-resistant dumpster lids for sale or lease, to anyone interested in obtaining one; and 9) provides for a seven-year term with options to extend for an additional term of up to three years at the discretion of the City Council. Alaska Waste's base price for monthly service will be$26.91 (up from the current $21.53), and this represents the median quoted rate (quotes ranged from $20.88 to $41.75) of the three proposals. Waste Connections of Alaska, Inc. (dba Alaska Waste — Kenai Peninsula, LLC) became the City's current refuse franchisee, upon completion of a buyout of the City's previous contractor, and upon the City Council's approval of consent to a change in ownership, approved by Resolution in February, 2012. Since that time, the contractor has provided safe and reliable service to the residents of Seward, and the City has received very few calls regarding service. The contractor has been responsive to City staff and we have developed a positive working relationship. The administration recommends approval of this franchise agreement, for final approval by the voters of Seward at the October election. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A 1 Comprehensive Plan: Page 11-Community Appearance, Page 13-City X Government, Page 26- Public Facilities. 2. Strategic Plan: Page 4-Nautural, Promote a Safe Community-Page 18 X 3. Other(list): X ATTORNEY REVIEW: YES X No FISCAL NOTE: Approval of this contract will result in an increase in a residential customer's monthly standard charge of $5.38, representing an approximate increase of 25% (from $21.53 to $26.91 per month). The City will collect a 3% franchise fee based on gross revenues collected, estimated at approximately $20,000 per year. The franchise fee is intended to compensate the City for maintenance and use of its roads and alleys, per Seward City Charter §13.5(7). The agreement allows further annual rate reviews, whereby the Seward City Council is required to approve refuse rates charged by the contractor. Approved by Finance Department: 4€1. 0 t/tt.+ + RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Resolution 2012 , approving a franchise for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse with Alaska Waste-Kenai Peninsula, LLC, subject to approval of the voters at the October 2, 2012 regular city election, and to successful contract negotiations. IA. Final Certificate of Results Regular Municipal Election Tuesday,October 2,2012 Page 2 Proposition 1. ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING A FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM AND GUIDELINES FOR THE CITY OF SEWARD AND EXEMPTING MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF STATE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE LAWS - Shall the City of Seward establish and adopt its own financial disclosure form and provisions for the Mayor, City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Manager by requiring substantially the same information as the Alaska Public Offices Commission required prior to 2007, and be exempt from Alaska Statute 39.50, the Alaska Public Officials Financial Disclosure Law? Election Day Votes After Canvass Votes Total Votes YES 204 21 225 NO 120 14 134 Proposition 2. FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND REFUSE - Do you approve a seven-year franchise agreement with Alaska Waste — Kenai Peninsula, LLC for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse? The franchise agreement contains an option to extend for up to an additional three years. The agreement allows for costs to be adjusted annually based on 140%of the Consumer Price Index. The agreement provides an opportunity for periodic rate reviews with all other consumer rates to be set by resolution of the City Council. Election Day Votes After Canvass Votes Total Votes YES 219 27 246 NO 107 7 114 A total of 338 people voted at this election plus 38 counted absentee votes=376 Total. Upon completion of the canvass, it is our opinion that the attached summary of election returns compiled above, accurately reflect the final totals for the Regular City Election held October 2, 2012. Dated this 4th day of October, 2012. - - . • --• --'- / ♦_�� • •�. Seward, AK Code of Ordinances Page 1 of 3 Chapter 14.05. - Garbage and Refuse] Footnotes: ---(3)--- State Law reference—See AS 29.35.050 for state provisions allowing municipalities to provide for a system of garbage and solid waste services; see AS 29.35.060 for state provisions allowing municipalities to grant franchises;see§7.10.210 et seq.as to garbage disposal in trailer courts. 14.05.010. - Refuse service provided and required. (a) Every person occupying and/or owning a building or building site within the city shall use the system of refuse disposal provided in this chapter, unless the person utilizes a carrier holding a valid permit from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. (b) The city shall either provide or contract for collection and disposal of refuse.The public works department of the city or the contractor shall prescribe routes and days for collection.When such routes or days are established or changed, reasonable notice thereof shall be given to affected customers. No other carrier other than one authorized by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska may collect, dispose, or remove refuse from any premises in the city. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit an occupant and/or owner from removing or causing the removal of refuse accumulated on the premises occupied by him and disposing of the same in a lawful manner. (Ord.415, 1975; Ord. 428, 1976; Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. No. 2012-008, § 1, 9-10-2012) 14.05.015. - Deposit of refuse. (a) No person shall place or deposit any refuse in or upon any public alley, street or highway, sidewalk, park or other public place in the city except as herein expressly authorized. No person shall place any refuse on land of another. (b) Dumpsters or trash receptacles located on public property may only be used for depositing small quantities of refuse generated in connection with public activities such as picnicking, camping, touring, pleasure boating, sport fishing, or other outdoor recreation. No person shall deposit refuse generated by residential, commercial, or industrial uses in or near any dumpster or trash receptacle located on public property. No person shall deposit refuse in or near any dumpster or trash receptacle located on public property contrary to any instructions posted on or near the dumpster or trash receptacle. (c) No person shall deposit refuse in a private dumpster without the owner's consent. Owners of dumpsters may post signage on or near privately owned dumpsters stating that unauthorized use is a violation of the City Code. (d) Violation of this section is subject to a fine of$100.00 for each offense. (Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. 96-28) 14.05.020. -Transportation. No person shall transport refuse within the city unless it is transported in a covered or enclosed vehicle or one which is loaded in such manner as to prevent any of the contents from escaping. (Ord. 417, 1976; Ord. 504, 1982) 14.05.025. - Use of containers and placement. (a) fin{ % about:blank 9/11/2015 Seward, AK Code of Ordinances Page 2 of 3 Every person occupying and/or owning a building in the city shall provide containers suitable for collection of refuse. All refuse such as vacuum cleaner dust, nonexplosive liquids, sweepings and other refuse that poses a hazard to collection or risk of spillage in normal collection shall be individually packaged prior to placement in a container. (b) Customer containers shall be placed abutting a dedicated public right-of-way. Only city containers may be placed upon the public right-of-way. (Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. No. 2012-008, § 2, 9-10-2012) 14.05.030. -Container specifications generally. (a) All containers shall conform to the following minimum specifications: (1) Shall not exceed ninety-six gallons capacity; (2) Shall not exceed two hundred twenty pounds when filled; (3) Shall not exceed sixty-five pounds empty weight; (4) Shall be watertight with an animal-proof lid and of adequate durability for continued use. No corrugated cardboard box shall be used except as herein provided. No fifty or fifty-five gallon steel petroleum drums or the like shall be permitted,whether cut down or otherwise altered. (b) Certain bulk rubbish and waste material containers may be approved by the public works department of the city. Such containers shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition and shall be provided with tight lids. (Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. 95-06; Ord. No. 2012-008, § 3, 9-10-2012) 14.05.035. - Container racks. Containers or container racks shall be designed so as to prevent the upsetting or spillage by wind, weather, animals, or accident.Violation of this section due to bear attractants is subject to a fine of one hundred dollars for each offense.The fine for the first offense only will be waived upon proof of purchase or lease of the appropriate containment measure (e.g. locking dumpster lid, bear-resistant dumpster, or bear-resistant garbage can), provided the containment measure is in place within thirty days of the date of the violation. More than one violation of this section by dumpster customers will require the occupant and/or owner to obtain a locking dumpster lid or bear-resistant dumpster for the period May through October. In addition to the one hundred dollar fine, more than one violation of this section by customers utilizing garbage cans will require the occupant and/or owner to purchase or lease a bear-resistant garbage can. (a) Containers or container racks shall not be placed on the public right-of-way. (Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. 95-06; Ord. No. 2012-008, §4, 9-10-2012) 14.05.040. - Frequency of collection. All garbage and rubbish receptacles shall be emptied and cleaned at least weekly.All waste material must be removed at least once each month. Building or construction waste and debris shall be removed weekly and upon completion of construction. (Ord. 504, 1982) 14.05.045. - Brush,tree trimmings, etc. about:blank 9/11/2015 Seward, AK Code of Ordinances Page 3 of 3 Brush,trees, lawn cuttings or similar materials shall be securely bound in bundles not to exceed two feet in diameter.They may be placed in disposable cardboard containers. Branches or logs shall not be more than three inches in diameter or more than four feet in length. Containers shall not exceed 65 pounds in weight. (Ord. 504, 1982) 14.05.050. - Large boxes, crates, etc. Large appliance cartons, shipping crates or small non-bulky items or furniture and similar materials shall be disassembled prior to collection. (Ord. 504, 1982) 50 about:blank 9/11/2015 Seward, AK Code of Ordinances Page 1 of 1 14.01.065. - Discontinuance of service and remedies by city. (a) Termination of service. Upon five days'written notice,the city reserves the right to discontinue or reduce any one or more utility services for any one or more of the following reasons: (1) Intent to defraud the city of payment for all or any part of such use; (2) Use in an illegal manner or for the furtherance of an illegal purpose or for any purpose other than that described in the application for service; (3) Resale or redistribution of a utility service; (4) Tampering with any utility service connection or property of the city; (5) Nonpayment of any bills for utility services; (6) Refusal of reasonable access to the premises for inspection, repair, maintenance, replacement or operation; (7) Noncompliance with any requirement imposed by the code or by resolution; (8) Failure to repair any defect or break in utility service,to the extent it is the customer's obligation to do so; (9) Other equipment or structures which by their proximity or nature introduce a safety hazard; (10) Such other reason or condition as the city may deem appropriate. (b) Lien on property. Charges levied in accordance with this title shall be a debt due to the city and a lien upon the property which has been benefitted by the services. Change of ownership or occupancy of premises delinquent shall not be the cause for reducing or eliminating any applicable penalties. (c) Expenses. The expense of discontinuance, reduction, removal or closing, as well as the expense of restoring service, shall be a debt due to the city(and a lien upon the property)and may be recovered by civil action in the name of the city against customer,the person, or both. (d) Criminal penalties. Any person who shall continue any violation other than an obligation to pay money beyond written notice and reasonable time to cure shall be guilty of a misdemeanor in addition to being liable in damages and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in an amount not exceeding$25.00 for each violation. Each day in which any such violation shall continue shall be deemed separate offense. (e) Safety. Conditions which cause a clear and immediate safety hazard to customers or other personnel shall be cause for immediate disconnection of service without notification. (Ord. 504, 1982; Ord. 610, 1988; Ord. 95-06) 0 about:blank 9/11/2015 Alaska Statutes 2014 Page 1 of 2 Sec. 29.35.050. Garbage and solid waste services. (a) Notwithstanding AS 29.35.200 - 29.35.220, a municipality may by ordinance (1) provide for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of a system of garbage and solid waste collection and disposal for the entire municipality, or for districts or portions of it; (2) require all persons in the municipality or district to use the system and to dispose of their garbage and solid waste as provided in the ordinance; (3) award contracts for collection and disposal, or provide for the collection and disposal of garbage and solid waste by municipal officials and employees; (4) pay for garbage and solid waste collection and disposal from available money; (5) require property owners or occupants of premises to use the garbage and solid waste collection and disposal system provided by the municipality; (6) fix charges against the property owners or occupants of premises for the collection and disposal; and (7) provide penalties for violations of the ordinances. (b) The governing body of a municipality may not prohibit a person holding a valid certificate from the former Alaska Public Utilities Commission or from the Regulatory Commission of ALaska from continuing to collect and dispose of garbage, refuse, trash, or other waste material, or provide other related services in an area in the municipality if the certificate authorizes the collection and disposal of garbage, refuse, trash, or other waste material and providing of other services in the area, and the certificate was originally issued before the municipality provided similar services. Except as provided in (c) of this section, a municipality may not provide for a garbage, refuse, trash, or other waste material collection and disposal service in an area to the extent it Lies in an area granted to a garbage, refuse, trash, or other waste material carrier by a certificate issued by the former Alaska PubLic Utilities Commission or by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska to the carrier until it has purchased the certificate, equipment, and facilities of the carrier, or that portion of the certificate that would be affected, at fair market value. A municipality may exercise the right of eminent domain to acquire the certificate, equipment, and facilities of the carrier, or that portion of the certificate that would be affected. (c) A municipality may establish an intermediate transfer site for the collection and disposal of garbage, refuse, trash, or other waste material without purchasing the certificate, equipment, or facilities of a waste material carrier certificated by the former Alaska Public Utilities Commission or by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. The municipality may, without compensating a certificated waste carrier operating in the area, provide for or contract with a certificated or noncertificated entity to provide for the collection and disposal of waste material Left at the intermediate transfer site. (d) A municipality that owns or operates a landfill or dumping area for the disposal of waste material may, by ordinance, partially or totally exempt from a fee for the use of the landfill or dumping area the disposal of waste material generated from the substantial rehabilitation, renovation, demolition, removal, or replacement of a structure on deteriorated property. The exemption may apply to some or all types of deteriorated property, as provided in the ordinance. An ordinance adopted under this subsection must include specific eligibility requirements and require a written application for the fee exemption. In this subsection, "deteriorated property" has the meaning given in AS 29.45.050. (e) Subsections (a) - (c) of this section apply to home rule and general Law municipalities. 5 http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/statutes.asp 9/19/2015 Sponsored by: Hunt CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2015-086 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PERMIT AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE), DEDICATING TRACT A-1A, SEWARD TIDELANDS SURVEY ATS 1574, TRACT A, REPLAT NO. 2, AS THE MITIGATION SITE SPECIFIED IN THE CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION DETAILS INCLUDED IN THE USACE PERMIT # POA- 1980-469-M13 ISSUED MAY, 2015. WHEREAS, a fully developed and thriving Seward Marine Industrial Center(SMIC) has been a long standing goal of the City and the Community of Seward; and WHEREAS, the Council has awarded contracts for the SMIC expansion project including breakwater engineering and construction; and WHEREAS, the engineering contractor, R & M Consultants, Inc. has worked diligently with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to secure the needed permitting for the construction of the SMIC expansion breakwater; and WHEREAS, mitigation is a requirement of the USACE breakwater permit issued for the construction of the SMIC expansion breakwater; and WHEREAS, mitigation is defined by the USACE as cash to a conservation fund, Conservation Easement(s) on the land, or Restrictive Covenant(s); and WHEREAS, a Restrictive Covenant is preferred as least impactful to City budget, staff resources, and potential future development; and WHEREAS, a subtidal mitigation site of ten (10) acres and meeting the requirements of the USACE was proposed by the City and accepted by the USACE as a mitigation site upon condition of designation as a Restrictive Covenant; and WHEREAS, the ten (10) acre site selection is located on the east side of Resurrection Bay approximately 1.5 miles north of the SMIC project area; and WHEREAS, the site was surveyed and a replat created the parcel to be known as Tract A-1A, Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2; and WHEREAS, Council recommended the Kenai Peninsula Borough approve the replat on August 10, 2015 by Resolution 2015-065. 6 CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA RESOLUTION 2015-086 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. The Seward City Council approves and authorizes the ten (10) acre proposed mitigation site to be known as Tract A-1A, Seward Tidelands Survey, ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2 as the required mitigation site as noted in POA-1980-468-M13. Section 2. The Council further authorizes the City Manager pursuant to execute, upon completion of necessary replatting, the Mitigation Plan POA-1980-468-M13 and Restrictive Covenant. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect 30 days after passage and posting as required by Seward City Code § 7.05.145. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 12th day of October, 2015. THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Jean Bardarson, Mayor AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Johanna Kinney, CMC City Clerk (City Seal) Agenda Statement Meeting Date: September 28, 2015 ' �. To: City Council &04 Through: Jim Hunt, City Manager "Al Ron Long,Assistant City M. :ger From: Donna Glenz, Planner Agenda Item: DEDICATING TRACT A-1A, SEWARD TIDELANDS SURVEY ATS 1574, TRACT A, REPLAT NO. 2, AS THE MITIGATION SITE AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION DETAILS INCLUDED IN THE USACE PERMIT#POA-1980-469-M13 ISSUED MAY, 2015. BACKGROUND &JUSTIFICATION: Development of the Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC) is and has been a high priority of the community and the City for a number of years. A phased plan was adopted and State funding towards the expansion project, including breakwater engineering and construction was awarded. R and M Consultants, Inc. was awarded the contract for coastal marine engineering services and have worked diligently with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the City to secure the needed permitting for the construction of the SMIC expansion breakwater. Mitigation is a condition of the USACE permit issued for construction of the Seward Marine Industrial Center Improvements Project. As mitigation, the Corps would consider cash into an account managed by the Corps, Conservation Easement(s) overlaid on parcels meeting the criteria, or Restrictive Covenant(s) to generally the same criteria. As least impactful to City budgets, staff resources and future development, the City of Seward has proposed a restrictive covenant to preserve a tract of equitable tidelands within Resurrection Bay, and the Corps accepts them as suitable to offset unavoidable impacts to the marine environment subject to the establishment of the Restrictive Covenant. The identified tract of land known as, Tract A-1A, Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2, shall be preserved in perpetuity as a Restrictive Covenant with established uses and prohibitions to maintain the ecological value of the tidelands. Permit conditions and mitigation details are included in the USACE Permit#POA- 1980-469-M13 issued May, 2015 (relevant sections included). Council recommended Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of the replat of this parcel through Resolution 2015-065 at the August 10, 2015 regular meeting. INTENT: To dedicate Tract A-1A, Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2 as a mitigation site and to authorize the City Manager to execute, upon completion of necessary replatting,the USACE Mitigation Plan POA-1980-468-M13. 5`� CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A Comprehensive Plan (2020, approved by Council 2005): Economic Base: Complete development of Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC) as a revenue source with year-round employment opportunities.(Bullet X 12,page 16) Section 3.5.1.2 &(Bullet 5) Supports the continued development of the Seward Marine Industrial Center. (page 24) Strategic Plan (1999): Economic Base X • Expand Development in the Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC). (page 7) Municipal Lands Management(2014—Update) Description: Tidelands east side Resurrection Bay X Recommendation: Retain ownership FISCAL NOTE: The City's costs of executing the replat involve staff time and minimal out-of-pocket cost. Approved by Finance Department: Al&e44,4tAttp__ ATTORNEY REVIEW: Yes No RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 2015- °34 approving Tract A-1A, Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2 as a mitigation site and authorizing the City Manager to execute the USACE Mitigation Plan POA-1980-468-M13. 5� April 24, 2015 R&M No. 1770.01 Katherine McCafferty U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • Regulatory Division, Kenai Field Office 805 Frontage Road, Suite 200C Nrirrmconsult.com Kenai, AK 99611 RE: Mitigation Plan REIM coNSUUANTS,INC. POA-1980-468-M 13, Resurrection Bay 9101 Vanguard Drive Seward Marine Industrial Center(SMIC) Improvements Project Anchorage,Alaska 99507 Dear Ms. McCafferty: phone 907.522.1707 fax907.522.3403 The City of Seward (City) is proposing compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S. within Resurrection Bay. The following mitigation plan has been prepared for Department of the Army permit modification file number POA-1980- 468-M 13 in accordance with the requirements outlined in 33 CFR332.4(c)(2) through (c)(14). As outlined in this mitigation plan, preservation of 10 acres of comparable tidelands within the Resurrection Bay watershed is proposed as compensatory mitigation. AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION The ultimate location for the proposed project is dictated by the existing SMIC facilities. There is no practicable way to completely avoid jurisdictional impacts given the existence, location, and function of the SMIC facility. No other site would avoid impacts to waters of the U.S. while meeting the purpose and need for the Proposed Action.The project area is a previously disturbed site consisting of an existing. developed facility and basin frequented by vessel traffic and harbor operations. Proposed improvements are highly dependent on the local marine topography and environmental factors such as wind and wave energy. Wetland impacts have been completely avoided by utilizing the existing facility. Mitigation in the form of avoidance and minimization measures has been included throughout project design. The Proposed Action meets the project purpose and need while minimizing impacts to the greatest extent practical. Impacts have been substantially reduced by utilizing and expanding the existing facility; development of a new harbor in a new location would incur more impacts. Uplands would be utilized for work and staging areas to avoid temporary impacts. Temporary erosion control and stabilization measures would be used during construction activities to prevent erosion of soils and transportation of sediment beyond the immediate construction site. Fill slopes and other disturbed areas would be stabilized using appropriate methods to prevent erosion. Construction of a rock breakwater is necessary to mitigate wave energy within the SMIC basin and cannot be reasonably avoided or further minimized. The lengths and widths of the proposed breakwaters have been minimized while providing adequate protection and structural integrity. Furthermore, after the original permit application was submitted, the proposed breakwater was redesigned to include a gap to allow for fish passage and minimize potential impacts to any fish migration (Attachment A). Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24, 2015 Page 2 of 7 MITIGATION PLAN (Under 33 CFR 332.4(c)) (2)Objectives The impact acreage will be compensated for via preservation of tidelands currently owned by the City. Both the impact and mitigation sites are classified as either subtidal or intertidal estuarine areas. Subtidal has been classified as the area below the mean lower low water line (MLLW); intertidal acreage represents the area between MLLW and the high tide line (HTL). A total of 5.0 acres of fill is required for the proposed SMIC improvements; 4.1 acres of fill would be placed in subtidal areas whereas the remaining 0.9 acres of fill would be placed in intertidal areas of Resurrection Bay. The proposed 10-acre mitigation site is subtidal. The primary ecological functions that would be lost within the project area include subtidal benthic habitat loss. Minor impacts to fish migration could occur, but have been sufficiently minimized during design of the breakwater. Preserving 10 acres of subtidal lands in an undeveloped area of Resurrection Bay only 1.5 miles north of the project area would adequately offset the unavoidable impacts and loss of ecological functions incurred by the proposed project. (3) Site Selection The tract of land proposed for preservation was selected based on location and similarity to the impact area and for the important physical and biological functions it would contribute to the ecological sustainability of the watershed. The mitigation site is located within the same watershed, approximately 1.5 miles north of the project area along the eastern shore of Resurrection Bay (Attachment B, Figures 1 and 2). The proposed mitigation site mirrors the ecological and physical characteristics of the SMIC basin prior to development. Preserving 10 acres of undeveloped, City-owned tidelands would provide important biological and physical functions lost at the project site to include providing habitat for marine wildlife as well as federally-listed species, maintaining species diversity and richness, and maintaining the natural hydrology of the area. The primary function is preservation of subtidal habitat for the benthic and marine populations (species types are summarized below under (5) Baseline information). Habitat preservation is essential in maintaining species diversity. Prohibiting development at this site will also maintain the long-term integrity and currently unspoiled physical and chemical characteristics of the site. Resurrection Bay is dynamic by nature; the influx of alluvial material from contributing glacier-fed river systems is high, and the tidal currents and wave energy are powerful. Permanent protection of the mitigation site will allow for the natural long shore current and sedimentation rates to occur unobstructed allowing for a stable and healthy marine ecosystem within Resurrection Bay. The proposed mitigation site will also provide permanent, unobstructed fish passage for out- migrating smolt that typically travel close to the shoreline in this area. Federally protected marine mammals that frequent Resurrection Bay would also benefit from the 10 acres of undeveloped waters for foraging, resting,and migration. The proposed compensatory mitigation site meets the specific criteria identified in 33 CFR 332.3(h). The development potential for this tract of land is high based on adjacent land ownership and anticipated localized growth. The proposed mitigation site is accessible from Nash Road and development is occurring and expanding along this area of the community towards the SMIC and adjacent commercial facilities. The proposed project would increase the mooring capacity, docking facilities, and usage at the SMIC facility while At1/4, cl,. t,,, Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24,2015 Page 3 of 7 encouraging commercial growth along the eastern side of Resurrection Bay. Additionally, property ownership of the shipyard located at SMIC was recently transferred to Vigor Alaska, the new "anchor tenant" at SMIC. The City has projected foreseeable growth at the SMIC. ultimately becoming a "thriving working waterfront" within the next five years. These expectations of commercial growth at the impact area indicate a realistic prediction of growth in the greater area to include the mitigation site. As outlined above, the tidelands proposed for preservation provide important physical and biological functions and contribute substantially to the ecological sustainability of the watershed as habitat suitability, species richness and diversity, and maintaining natural hydrologic conditions are critical components of a healthy and productive watershed. The preserved site will be permanently protected through a Restrictive Covenant (RC) that will be approved and codified by the City of Seward in perpetuity(Attachment C). (4)Site protection instrument The tract of land proposed for preservation will be set aside as a RC owned by the City in order to ensure long- term protection of the mitigation site. The City would retain ownership of the mitigation site and would be responsible for monitoring, maintaining, and enforcement against prohibited uses within the mitigation site; refer to the attached draft RC for a list of prohibited and allowable uses. (5) Baseline information Special aquatic sites are defined as sanctuaries and refuges, wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle/pool areas. There are no current or known historical special aquatic sites located within the impact site. A description of the baseline conditions at the impact and mitigation sites is provided below. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) occurs within the proposed impact and mitigation sites for the following species: flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon), pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus), walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma), skates (Rajidae sp.), Pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), and Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch). Impact Site The material composing the impact site is alluvial, coming primarily from the nearby Fourth of July Creek and Spring Creek. Alluvial material composing the mitigation site is deposited by the larger Resurrection River located at the north of Resurrection Bay. These river systems deposit large amounts of glacial sediment into Resurrection Bay causing cloudy, sediment-laden, turbid water conditions often visible in aerial imagery. The tidal currents are large enough that these conditions dissipate quickly. Boring logs for the offshore geotechnical effort indicate that the finer-grained seafloor surface sediment (0-2 feet) is underlain with coarse-grained material; the bore logs also indicate that the seafloor within the SMIC basin is primarily unvegetated. The relevant bore logs and full geotechnical report were previously submitted for reference. The project area is located between two sample points for a nearshore fish study conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in 2009. A total of 22 species were identified in this study; however, the abundance and diversity of fish species at the SMIC site is unknown. Sample locations for this study were north and south of the SMIC in undeveloped areas where biodiversity is expected to be higher(NMFS, 2009). Mitigation Site Sot Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24, 2015 Page 4 of 7 The proposed 10-acre mitigation site is located on the eastern side of Resurrection Bay approximately 1.5 miles north of the project. Subsurface characterization of the seafloor has not been conducted in support of this project. It is assumed, based on proximity, similar depth, and similar hydrologic influences that the substrate is relatively similar in composition as the project site; i.e. coarse-grained material overlain with fine-grained seafloor surface sediment. According to a nearshore fish study conducted near the proposed mitigation site, the seafloor includes eelgrass and provides habitat for at least 17 different fish species(NMFS, 2009). The presence of eelgrass indicates that vegetated shallows exist within portions of the site and are considered a Special Aquatic Site (40 CFR 230.43). The seafloor slopes generally to the southwest with maximum depth of approximately -3 feet (Attachment B, Figure 3). It is in the photic zone with notable upwelling and a rich diversity of aquatic life where the shelf rises towards the shore. (6)Determination of Credits Although some vegetation was documented in a few of the surface grab samples, a majority of the offshore samples collected from the impact site indicated that the seafloor is primarily unvegetated. The proposed redesign of the rock breakwater to include a fish passage gap, would reduce or eliminate potential fish habitat impacts. Given these considerations, the impacted estuarine waters are proposed for mitigation at a 2:1 ratio for compensatory mitigation. There are 5.0 acres of permanent fill proposed for construction of the breakwater(3.8 acres). the shoreline erosion protection (0.9 acres), and north dock extension (0.3 acres). This would require compensation in the amount of 10 acres. (7) Mitigation Work Plan The mitigation site proposed for preservation would be protected in perpetuity via a Restrictive Covenant (RC). The site was selected based on its ecological and hydrologic similarity to the impact site, its proximity to the impact site, and its inherent unspoiled condition. Because the mitigation site has already been established, the proposed mitigation plan addresses the specific measures to ensure long-term viability of the site. The initial effort will be to have the property re-platted, marked with signage, and communicate to marine users that a RC exists for this offshore area. The City anticipates establishment of the RC within approximately 180 days of permit issuance. This timeframe will allow for the RC to be reviewed and codified through the proper City channels. During this time, the City will educate the community and the harbor users that this area of Resurrection Bay is a mitigation site with prohibited uses. The City will install (and maintain in perpetuity) signage within 120 days of permit issuance along the land side of the site as needed to protect the site from degradation. (8) Maintenance Plan As warranted based on quarterly monitoring activities, maintenance will be conducted at the mitigation site (i.e. removal of debris, clearing of prohibited structures/items, cleanup activities) to uphold and maintain the identified conservation values. For purposes of this RC, the proposed mitigation site is already viable. Visual observations of the site during monitoring periods will be utilized as ecologically based performance standards to determine the continued success and viability of the site. Observations should include general water quality (sheen, debris, etc.). species identification (marine and avian as applicable), and any other indicators that the site is unimpaired and upholding the identified conservation values. Maintenance (replacement or repair) or the placement of additional identifying signs will be a part of the plan. The City shall make reasonable attempts as O Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24, 2015 Page 5 of 7 necessary to identify the parties responsible for prohibit uses/activities to remediation and/or enforcement activities. The City will be responsible for costs associated with cleanup/structure removal/etc. if the responsible party is unknown. 9) Performance Standards The purpose of this RC is to protect the conservation values of the mitigation site: • Provide habitat to support fish migration and maintain connectivity of natural migratory patterns along the shoreline. • Maintain and preserve designated Essential Fish Habitat. • To maintain and improve the quality of water resources within and hydrologically connected to Resurrection Bay. • To maintain and improve the quality of marine and benthic habitat to enhance biodiversity and maintain native species populations. • To preserve natural and scenic resources. • To ensure that non-commercial uses on the property are for the enjoyment of the community and conducted in a manner that will neither diminish the biological integrity of the site nor deplete natural resources over time nor lead to an irreversible disruption of ecosystems and associated processes. Performance standards are the observable or measurable physical, chemical, and/or biological attributes used to determine if a mitigation project meets its objections and that the conservation values are being upheld. Since the mitigation site is already established and meets the identified conservation values, a mitigation "project" is not necessary. As a result, the following performance standards are observational and have been set forth to ensure continued compliance with the allowable and prohibited uses of the site as well as long-term maintenance of the site's unspoiled condition. • The Permittee shall ensure that no tideland disturbing activities are occurring (filling, mining, grading, dredging,excavation, removal of aquatic vegetation, etc.). • The Permittee shall ensure that no permanent or temporary structures or vessels are constructed, installed,anchored, or abandoned within the boundaries of the mitigation site. • The Permittee shall ensure that the site remains free of refuse, sewage, contaminants, and pollutants to the greatest extent practicable. Any observational signs of contamination (i.e. odor, sheen, etc.) will be documented and remedied immediately. • The Permittee shall ensure that the natural flow of water is not impeded by any made-made materials, structures, or activities. • The Permittee shall ensure the mitigation site provides physical, hydrological, and ecological features necessary to maintain the marine habitat function. With the preceding performance standards in place, it can be reasoned that the established conservation values are being maintained at the mitigation site through the establishment and enforcement of the associated Restrictive Covenant. b 46616. le Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24, 2015 Page 6 of 7 (10) Monitoring Requirements The City of Seward shall visually monitor the mitigation site on a quarterly basis (at a minimum) to ensure that the informational signage is in place and in adequate condition, that no prohibited uses are occurring, and that the inherent conservation values are maintained in perpetuity. To supplement the formal quarterly monitoring. the City will include the mitigation site in its regular harbor maintenance activities. The City will also inspect the site should there be any indication that restricted uses are occurring. On an annual basis, the City will summarize the observations and results of the inspections as well as document any occurrences of prohibited uses and the methodology used to remedy the situation. The report must include photos taken during each quarterly monitoring event from two photo "stations". A map indicating the location of and coordinates of these stations must also be included in the report. Maintenance and/or enforcement actions against the responsible party (i.e. fines or legal action) will be implemented in order to preserve the above stated conversation values. The annual report must be provided to the USACE, either by mail or email, no later than December 1 of each calendar year: Department of the Army U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska Kenai Field Office 44669 Sterling Highway, Suite B Soldotna, AK 99669-7915 cepoa-rd-kenai'ajusace.army.mi l (11)Long-Term The identified Monitoring, Maintenance, and Adaptive Management Plans will be followed to ensure the long- term viability of the preservation site. (12) Adaptive Management Plan Should an intentional, incidental, or naturally occurring event ensue that negatively affects the mitigation site to the extent that the environmental condition of the property is degraded, the City of Seward will contact the USACE within one business day of the City becoming aware of the issue. If for any reason, the mitigation site is degraded such that it does not retain the conservation values stated above, the City of Seward agrees to restore the site and/or remedy the cause of the degradation. The USACE must approve any proposed remedies prior to implementation of any corrective action. If the site cannot be restored, the City shall find an alternate suitable mitigation site. Plans for site restoration or the proposition of a new mitigation site will be submitted to the USACE for approval. (13) Financial Assurance The City would provide a formal documented commitment as a RC for the tidelands proposed for mitigation; financial assurance is not required. (pl 44&r Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Katie McCafferty, USACE April 24,2015 Page 7 of 7 (14) Other Information It should be noted that the anticipated timeframe to formally adopt the proposed Restrictive Covenant is 180 days. In order to minimize the potential for temporal loss, the City will informally adhere to the details of the RC at the time of permit issuance until it is executed. The primary responsibility of the City will be to ensure that the current environmental conditions and conservation values of the property proposed for mitigation is maintained. If for any reason, the property proposed for mitigation is degraded such that it does not retain the conservation values stated above, the City of Seward agrees to find an appropriate and effective remedy or an alternative mitigation site for USACE approval. The platted survey, documentation of the resolution/adoption of the RC, and a deed of title will be submitted to the USACE within 210 days of permit issuance. There are no recorded easements or liens on the property; there is no associated drawing of developmental design. As always, feel free to contact us with any additional questions. Sincerely, R&M Consultants, Inc. Kristi M. McLean, LEED AP BD+C Group Manager—Environmental Services Attachments: A: Design Sheets C2.1 and C2.2—South Breakwater Redesign to Accommodate Fish Passage B: Mitigation Site Figures 1 through 3 C: Draft Resurrection Bay Restrictive Covenant REFERENCES National Marine Fishers Service(NMFS, 2009). Nearshore Fish Assemblages in Resurrection Bay,Alaska, Trip Report for August 20,2009. A66, (el)) Innovating Today for Alaska's Tomorrow Sponsored by: Planning&Zoning Commission Public Hearing: August 10,2015 CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA RESOLUTION 2015-065 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEWARD CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDING KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH APPROVAL OF THE CITY OWNED SEWARD TIDELANDS SURVEY ATS 1574, TRACT A, REPLAT NO. 2; LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RESURRECTION BAY WITHIN THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, administration hired Cline and Associates Land Surveyors to prepare a preliminary replat of the City owned Seward Tidelands, ATS 1574, located on the east side of Resurrection Bay; and WHEREAS, Cline and Associates has submitted the preliminary replat to be known as Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat Number 2; creating two (2) new lots to be known as Tract A-1A and Tract A-2B; and WHEREAS, this platting action will create a ten (10) acre tidelands tract (Tract A-1A) that will be designated as the project mitigation site required by the Corp of Engineers dredging permit for the Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC) breakwater improvements; the second tract(Tract A-2B)is the remaining tidelands area, approximately 49.11 acre; and WHEREAS, Tract A-1A is being reserved from future development in exchange for the proposed dredging and breakwater improvements and will be subject to a restrictive covenant to be recorded after this plat has been recorded; and WHEREAS, access to these parcels is by public waters which requires an exception to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Subdivision Code; and WHEREAS, the area included within this replat is currently zoned Resource Management (RM), this replat does not create any non-conforming structures or lots within the current zoning district; and WHEREAS,no subdivision installation agreement is necessary as this replat contains no uplands or developable area; and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed,commented and support the proposed replat; and WHEREAS, it is the Planning and Zoning Commission's responsibility to act in an advisory capacity to the Seward City Council and the Kenai Peninsula Borough regarding subdivision plat proposals; and YA CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA RESOLUTION 2015-065 WHEREAS, the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and approved Resolution 2015-14, recommending the Seward City Council and the Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of the Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574,Tract A,Replat Number 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA,that: Section 1. The Seward City Council approves, in accordance with Seward City Code Section 16.01.015 (B),the submittal of the Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat Number 2 to the Kenai Peninsula Borough for final approval. Section 2. The Seward City Council further recommends the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission approve the Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A,Replat No. 2. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect 30 days after passage and posting as required by Seward City Code§ 7.05.145. PASSED AND APPROVED by Seward City Council this 10th day of August 2015. THE CITY OF SEWARD,ALASKA •an Bardarson,Mayor AYES: Keil, Casagranda,Terry, Squires,Butts, Darling, Bardarson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: J J. anna Ki wy,, CMC C Clerk ..L,` .;' �•�I. �y ®Y,4 ;`. r.) (City Seal) ��•�*�OFPOl�• "�` `p •l • SriAr I- Agenda Statement e of sew Meeting Date: August 10, 2015 � 'z�=� To: City Council Through: Jim Hunt, City Manage Ron Long, Assistant City Manager From: Donna Glenz, Planner Agenda Item: Resolution 2015- tIP recommending City Council and Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of the Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat No. 2 BACKGROUND &JUSTIFICATION: Attached for the Council's review and recommendation to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission is a preliminary plat submitted by Cline and Associates on behalf of the City of Seward. In accordance with Seward City Code (SCC) 16.01.015(B)"No preliminary plat of City-owned property may be submitted to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Planning Commission for approval without the prior consent of the City Council." Cline and Associates was hired to provide a preliminary plat of City owned Seward Tidelands to be known as Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574, Tract A, Replat Number 2; creating two (2) new lots to be known as Tract A-1 A and Tract A-2B. This platting action will create a ten (10) acre tidelands tract (Tract A-1 A) that will be designated as the project mitigation site required by the Corp of Engineers dredging permit for the Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC) breakwater improvements. Tract A-1A is being reserved from future development in exchange for the proposed dredging and breakwater improvements and will be subject to a restrictive covenant to be recorded after this plat has been recorded. SUBDIVISION REVIEW: These parcels are considered to be within the Resource Management Zoning District, (RM) per City Code 15.01.030(e)(7) Official Maps "Boundaries indicated as intersecting the shoreline of Resurrection Bay are considered to continue in a cardinal direction to the center of the bay or an intersection line, making the tidal and bay map designation the same as the adjoin upland designation." Utilities: There are no public utilities available to these parcels. The parcels are within the submerged 6(P tidelands of Resurrection Bay. No subdivision agreement is required. Existinz Uses: There are no existing uses. Flood Zone: Most of this area is located within a Velocity Zone of the Special Flood Hazard Area. INTENT: To establish a ten (10) acre tidelands tract (Tract A-1 A) that will be designated as the project mitigation site required by the Corp of Engineers dredging permit. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Yes No N/A Comprehensive Plan (2020, approved by Council 2005): Economic Base: Complete development of Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC) as a revenue source with year-round employment opportunities.(Bullet X 12, page 16) Section 3.5.1.2 & (Bullet 5) Supports the continued development of the Seward Marine Industrial Center. (page 24) Strategic Plan (1999): Economic Base • Expand Development in the Seward Marine Industrial Center X (SMIC). (page 7) Municipal Lands Management(2014—Update) Description: Tidelands east side Resurrection Bay X Recommendation: Retain ownership FISCAL NOTE: Survey fees, platting fees to the Kenai Peninsula Borough and Certificate to Plat costs were paid from the SMIC Capital Improvement Fund. Approved by Finance Department: jCi o ' II ATTORNEY REVIEW: Yes: No: _X _ _ N/A: X 411111/ Staff Comments: All staff and administration concerns have been addressed and all City department heads recommend approval of this preliminary replat. H (DJ Public Comment: Property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed platting action were notified of the public hearing. Public notice signs were posted adjacent to the Nash Road Right of Way, and all other public hearing requirements of Seward City Code §15.01.040 were complied with. Planning and Zoning held a public hearing and approved P&Z Resolution 2015-14 at their July 14, 2015 meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 2015- 045 recommending Kenai Peninsula Borough approval of the Seward Tidelands Survey ATS 1574,Tract A, Replat No. 2. City of Seward,Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 2,2015 Volume 39, Page 504 CALL TO ORDER The September 2, 2015 special meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Jean Bardarson. OPENING CEREMONY Assistant City Manager Ron Long led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL There were present: Jean Bardarson presiding and Ristine Casagranda Christy Terry David Squires Dale Butts comprising a quorum of the Council; and Ron Long, Assistant City Manager Brenda Ballou, Deputy City Clerk Absent—Marianna Keil, Iris Darling CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING—None APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion (Terry/Casagranda) Approve Agenda and Consent Agenda Motion Passed Unanimous There were no consent agenda items. Special Orders, Presentations And Reports—None NEW BUSINESS Resolution 2015-079, Approving The 2016 Grant Year Budget For The Seward Seward Community Health Center As Required By The Co-Applicant Agreement Between The City Of Seward And The Seward Seward Community Health Center. Motion (Terry/Squires) Approve Resolution 2015-079 Long said the Seward Community Health Center (SCHC) was submitting their budget to council for approval as required by their co-applicant agreement.Administration believed the SCHC City of Seward,Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 2,2015 Volume 39, Page 505 needed to have a fully-staffed solid year of operations under its belt to serve as a performance baseline. Council suspended the rules to allow Patrick Linton to speak. Seward Community Health Center Executive Director Patrick Linton provided an overview of the two resolutions before council: the first resolution provided the SCHC's proposed budget for 2016 per their co-applicant agreement with the city;the second resolution authorized the SCHC to move forward on applying for a service area competition grant application that was due on September 15, 2015. Linton added that the SCHC was moving into the first year of a three year budget cycle. Linton reflected that the SCHC had been open for about 18 months, since March 10,2014. They were currently working with two permanent, full-time, board-certified family medicine physicians plus one permanent, full-time physician's assistant. The SCHC opened with six employees and was now fully staffed with 19 employees. They saw 1,072 unduplicated patients in 2014, and were on track for seeing over 2,100 unduplicated patients in 2015 and projecting to see over 3,000 unduplicated patients by year end 2016.Approximately one-third of SCHC patients were brand new,first-time patients. Approximately 15%of those patients were from out-of-service area. The federal base grant for the SCHC had grown from approximately $650,000 to over $900,000. Very shortly, Linton was expecting to receive notice of another increase in grant funding and with that additional grant money, the SCHC would be recruiting a three-quarter-time internal medicine physician;the physician would work one-quarter time with the Providence Seward Medical Center at Mountain Haven. The SCHC was now fully compliant with all 19 program requirements as a fully qualified health care facility. Linton said that after 18 months in operation he was pleased to report that the SCHC had either met or exceeded the expectations and hopes of the City Council and the community. Bardarson disclosed that she sat on the SCHC board, but had not voted on the budget as an SCHC board member. Linton explained that the federal grant budget calendar began on February 1St and ran through January 315`;the budget figures presented tonight were crafted very rigorously and were compliant with federal requirements. Terry made the observation that the SCHC and council must remain diligent,conscientious and good stewards of the sales tax monies being contributed to the SCHC.To that end,she thought it would be wise to ask the question ever year,"How many more years did the SCHC think they needed to be part of the City of Seward?" Squires asked if council and the SCHC should be contemplating the impact of SCHC employees getting off the city's insurance,the coverage for which would contractually expire after three years,and Linton replied that the SCHC had been researching insurance but had not yet found a cost-effective product yet. Bardarson suggested that issue would be addressed in the SCHC's 2017 budget next year, and not the 2016 budget being considered tonight. q City of Seward,Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 2, 2015 Volume 39, Page 506 In response to Casagranda's inquiry about contractual services,Linton said if the SCHC was approached by the city to offset the cost of additional Management Information Systems (MIS) staffing increases, the SCHC would be open to contributing to that cost. Motion Passed Unanimous Resolution 2015-080, Authorizing Submission Of A Service Area Competition Grant Application To The Health Resources And Services Administration On Behalf Of The City Of Seward And The Seward Seward Community Health Center,For The Purpose Of Continuing Operations As A Federally Qualified Health Center. Motion (Terry/Casagranda) Approve Resolution 2015-080 Long said this application was building on the work already begun,was a requirement of the co-applicant agreement,and clearly outlined the boundaries of the service area.In response to Terry, Long said Finance Director Kris Erchinger had sent an email outlining the total amount of taxpayer money from sales tax that was going towards Providence and the SCHC. Council recessed at 6:34 p.m. Council resumed at 6:43 p.m. Long corrected himself by stating the email Erchinger sent was a working document sent only to the City Manager. He added that Erchinger would be working with the SCHC staff to formulate the answer to what the overall cost was to the taxpayers of Seward for Providence Seward Medical Center and the SCHC.Long said council would see the numbers when they worked on the upcoming City of Seward budget and could,at that time,recommend a different amount for Providence and the SCHC if they saw fit. Terry reiterated her concern and request that the taxpayers be clearly informed about the true financial situation of both facilities,and that the city provide an honest answer to the question,"[Is the city] subsidizing health care more at this point than in the past?"Terry suggested that council self-impose this question every year on behalf of its citizens. Long agreed that was a fair approach, especially since the SCHC was stilldeveloping their business model. Motion Passed Unanimous COUNCIL COMMENTS Casagranda felt it was important that the public was as involved in this process as possible, and would prefer to have the health care discussions during a regular meeting rather than a special meeting because regular meetings were televised and would potentially help a broader audience of citizens stay informed. Bardarson agreed and would be requesting that the SCHC prepare their budget in a more timely manner going forward in order to accommodate council's regularly scheduled meetings. _ l � City of Seward,Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 2, 2015 Volume 39, Page 507 CITIZEN COMMENTS Skip Reierson thanked council for their support of the SCHC. He said it was absolutely critical that the city helped fund this operation when it started.Reierson said he had learned over the past year how competitive and how important it was to attract good physicians to the CHC,and how much it contributed to physician retention when they became embedded in the community.He added that as the SCHC matured and evolved,the finance committee was being very diligent,disciplined and conscientious. He commended the quality of work that Pat Linton provided. COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS Terry thanked the board and Pat Linton for their hard work. Squires said council asked the hard questions on behalf of the community, and in turn, council was building up their confidence in the board and administration at the SCHC. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Brenda Ballou, CMC Jean Bardarson Deputy City Clerk Mayor (City Seal) I12— City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page CALL TO ORDER The September 14, 2015 regular meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Jean Bardarson. OPENING CEREMONY Police Chief Tom Clemons led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL There were present: Jean Bardarson presiding and Marianna Keil Ristine Casagranda Christy Terry David Squires Iris Darling comprising a quorum of the Council; and Jim Hunt, City Manager Will Earnhart, City Attorney Johanna Kinney, City Clerk Absent—Dale Butts CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING Tim McDonald said it had been a busy season with a lot of congestion on the streets. He stated the city should think about an access road from the dump to Exit Glacier Road.There was also aerial traffic growing in Seward as well, and the city should plan better with their infrastructure, including protection of Seward's fisheries and wildlife. McDonald thought it was a waste to allow duck hunting inside the city limits anymore. Joe Fong,Administrator of Seward Providence Medical and Care Center,noted an external survey was conducted at the facility in August. These surveys were to be done every three years. Providence received some deficiencies that they were seeking to rectify and come into compliance within the given timeframe. Fong wished to speak to the council at an upcoming meeting to give a more formal report. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion (Keil/Terry) Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda With no objection from council,Terry moved the order of the resolutions to allow Resolution 2015- 083 to be the first item under New Business. 1 City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page Terry added the rescheduling of the Maple Street Water and Sewer Project Work Session under Other New Business Items. Terry added Resolution 2015-084 to the consent agenda with no objection from council. Bardarson added a Certificate of Appreciation for Debra Bond to Proclamations and Awards. Motion Passed Unanimous The clerk read the following approved consent agenda items: Appoint Mark Kansteiner,Patty Linville,Tom Osborne,Sue Faust,and Kerry Martin to the Election Board for October 6, 2015 City Election. Appoint Dorothy Osenga,Susie Urbach,Jennifer Carr,Kristi Larson,and Sharyl Seese(Back- Up) to the Canvass Board for the October 6, 2015 City Election. Resolution 2015-084, Authorizing The City Manager To Accept The 2014 Assistance To Firefighters Regional Grant Award#EMW-2014-FR-00166 For Live Fire Training Simulator In The Amount Of $284,286, Matching Funds From Other Fire Departments Of $11,214, Authorizing A City Match Of$3,000 And Appropriating Funds In The Amount Of$298,500. SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS Proclamations & Awards Certificate of Appreciation for Rebecca Lasell, Superintendent for National Park Services in Seward. Certificate of Appreciation for Debra Bond. Borough Assembly Report. Sue McClure said she was nearly done giving assembly reports, as she would soon be termed out of office. There were a lot of things happening on the assembly,but mostly affecting the other side of the Kenai Peninsula. The borough website had a lot of information including the entire election brochure. Also available on the borough website were agendas for the Marijuana Task Force and the Healthcare Task Force. McClure would soon be attending the annual community meetings in six different outlying communities to discuss how to use revenue sharing monies for services.The city and borough election was on October 6,2015.Her seat would be up for election on the borough ballot. She encouraged the public to read up on the candidates and the borough-wide Proposition 1,which would repeal the authorization of general rule cities to levy and collect sales tax year round on non-prepared food. These cities were originally allowed to opt out of the exemption, but if this citizen initiative passed, that decision would be reversed. The cities of Seward and Kenai were actually exempt from this as they were home rule cities, but the entire borough would be able to vote on this proposition. The assembly's annual meeting in Homer was September 15, 2015. n ' 1 14 City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page City Manager's Report.Jim Hunt reported four purchases between$10,000 and$50,000 had been approved since the last council meeting:$10,000 to the Financial Engineering Company for the Electric Department,$25,151 to Quality Equipment Sales for the purchase of a utility box with a crane for the Public Works Department, $12,000 to Cline and Associates for plat services for the Community Development Depart ment,and$12,774 to Aberdeen for a new Accufund server for the Finance Department.Hunt stated the city was continuing to prepare for the Seward Marine Industrial Center(SMIC) breakwater project. The Electric Department planned to start work on replacing the downtown decorative lights next week. The Finance Department welcomed two new employees: Sarka Polcarova and Kelley Sefton. Hunt thanked outgoing finance employee Marsha Vincent for her many years of service to the City of Seward. The city continued to advertise for the Assistant Finance Director position as well as the Project Manager position. Hunt thanked every department and employee that helped make President Obama's visit so successful.He gave special thanks to Police Chief Tom Clemons.Hunt noted the city received many compliments on how smooth this visit went. Bardarson also thanked Chief Clemons and the rest of the city staff for their work in hosting the President. Squires noticed Moose Pass had a cross walk across the Seward Highway,and asked Hunt to talk to the State Department of Transportation again on getting two crosswalks installed on the highway: one south of Napa Auto Parts and one by Sea Lion Drive for school traffic. Terry was happy to see finance getting up to a full staff. She asked if the department still had an employee that lived out of state full time; Hunt confirmed they did and they were a contracted employee. Terry thought,for livable wage jobs, it was important for those people to live in the city and contribute to the city economy. Keil expressed displeasure in the audit not being prepared timely. Hunt said they'd received some applicants for the Project Manager position. It was an important position for the city, so they hoped to fill it soon. Bardarson wanted to know when the council would receive a financial wrap up of the sewage lagoon project. Terry wanted to see an update on the next manager's report. City Attorney's Report. Will Earnhart said he worked with the Police Chief on Title 11 revisions to the City Code. He was working with staff on revising Title 14 of the City Code, regarding utilities. Earnhart said he had some materials from this summer's training to release to boards and commissions, which he would ask the clerk to distribute for him. Other Reports, Announcements and Presentations Sister City Student Exchange Presentation by Mary Elena Ramirez, Billy Wolfe, and Elena Hamner. City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page PUBLIC HEARINGS Resolutions Requiring A Public Hearing Resolution 2015-081, Amending Previously Adopted City Council Resolution 2015-046, Striking The Term "Non-Income Based" As Used Throughout In Reference To The Senior Housing Facility. Motion (Terry/Keil) Approve Resolution 2015-081 Hunt said this resolution regarding a senior housing project in Seward was brought back due to the fact that funding allotment for this project became extremely limited for non-income based housing.Kenai Peninsula Housing Initiative(KPHI)found they could not be as competitive in this project and was considering still applying for a six plex facility,but with two units being income based.There was funding potentially available for this plan.Administration did not have a recommendation on this. Notice of the public hearing being posted and published as required by law was noted and the public hearing was opened. Brandy McGee was the Program Manager of the KPHI. She stated grant funding was tied to construction for projects like this. If the project proposal remained completely non-income based, KPHI was looking at $400,000 less in grant funding opportunities. Margaret Anderson urged the council to pass this resolution because it was the closest the city was to getting senior housing. She thanked the city for allocating the property. Funding would need to come from several different entities and potentially a term loan. With federal funding cut backs, it made it difficult to think about funding for this type of housing down the road. Kelly Hartz reminded everyone that everyone who spoke earlier in the year on this issue was in favor of senior housing. Senior housing was something that was needed in Seward as there was a lack of housing for its elders. She urged council to change the wording and pass this resolution. No one else appeared to address the Council and the public hearing was closed. Terry asked where administration was in coming up with new policy and procedure on the distribution of city land. Hunt said they needed to reissue the energy behind it. She recalled administration was going to come up with some guidelines to bring back to council for consideration.Hunt said they could bring something forward;Terry recollected that at the last work session on this topic it was fairly clear direction to bring something back to council. She supported this resolution, but wondered if it should go to the Planning and Zoning Commission first. Casagranda felt that everyone was in favor of senior housing and this was the right opportunity to make the change requested by K(P�HI. 1� City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page Darling said this bothered her a great deal as nearly everything in Seward was subsidized or income based and thought perhaps sending this resolution to Planning and Zoning was a good thought. Hunt reminded council this was an opportunity for one time funding. Keil thought that Hartz had a good point that everyone supported senior housing. It was important to keep seniors in the community. By unanimous consent, council suspended rules to allow McGee to answer questions. In response to council,McGee said income restrictions were set forth by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and published annually. She noted all of the senior units through KPHI were filled. Squires asked if the restricted units would apply to Phase Two, McGee was unaware of what would happen specifically with Phase Two In response to Terry, McGee said grant applications needed to be in by November and emphasized that if this amendment couldn't be made, KPHI likely couldn't move forward on the project. Darling asked if HUD had participation in management. McGee said they did have participation, and KPHI was required to perform HUD certifications. Keil thought when council originally passed Resolution 2015-046, there was more money available and then budget cuts occurred. She noted the new plan was to still have two-thirds of the units be non-income based and therefore intended to support the change. Council went back on the rules and continued discussion. Squires had concerns as well.He wanted this project to go through but was concerned about having an income restricted facility. Squires would support this change to make this project go through, but come Phase Two,he would have more questions. Terry was worried about making this change without vetting it through the Planning and Zoning Commission, but would support it due to the time restrictions. She emphasized the importance of having adequate public input with these land transactions. Darling still had a problem with controlling rent and subsidizing this project. They didn't need more income based property in Seward. Motion Passed Yes: Keil, Terry, Squires, Casagranda, Bardarson No: Darling UNFINISHED BUSINESS—None NEW BUSINESS 1. 1 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page Resolution 2015-083,Authorizing The City Manager To Enter Into A Contract With Dryden & LaRue, Inc. For Certification Of The Public Rights Of Way, In Conjunction With The Seward Road Improvement Project, In The Amount Of $99,566 And Approving A Contingency Not To Exceed 15% Or$14,935,And Appropriating Funds. Motion (Keil/Casagranda) Approve Resolution 2015-083 Public Works Director W.C. Casey said this was the final piece to move forward with the Seward paving project. He explained that Seward was lucky vendors bid on this job this late in the year, as the state was inundated with survey work. Luckily,a responsible and responsive quote was received. In response to Squires, Casey stated they would assist with traffic control and road closures as needed. Casey said this certification was for all the streets listed in the state project that were already agreed upon. Motion Passed Unanimous Resolution 2015-082, Authorizing The City Manager To Amend The Contract With R&M Consultants Inc.For Engineering Support Services During Construction For The Replacement Of A, B, C, S And G-Floats At The Seward Boat Harbor,And Appropriating Funds Not To Exceed $134,653. Motion (KeiUSquires) Approve Resolution 2015-082 Hunt said this was to allow for engineering support services for the float replacement project. Motion to Amend (Keil/Squires) Amend Resolution 2015-082 by substituting the laydown of the contract amendment. City Clerk Johanna Kinney clarified the laydown version of the contract amendment before council added,the letter"A" to the"A, B, C, S-Float replacement" of the project title. Motion to Amend Passed Unanimous Harbormaster.Norm Regis said some of the services had to be done by an engineer.R&M Consultants had worked on this project for a long time and this would help get the project finished. Motion Passed Unanimous Other New Business Items Reschedule a work session to discuss the Maple Street Sewer and Water Project. Council rescheduled this work session for Friday, October 9,2015 at 5:00 p.m. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS ri City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page Bi-Annual Report from the Seward Planning and Zoning Commission. Letter to President Barack Obama thanking him for visiting Seward. Letter of Appreciation for Local Support of Student Exchange Program. COUNCIL COMMENTS Keil was happy to see the Senior Housing resolution pass tonight. There was a lot of dedication on this. She praised administration and its employees for their work on the presidential visit. Casagranda hoped they would receive the budget work books in advance of the work sessions. Squires passed his congratulations along to Fire Chief Eddie Athey and his staff on the grant acceptance tonight for the live fire training simulator.He thanked Harbormaster Norm Regis for his indulgence today on the R&M resolution they approved tonight. Squires stated he appreciated Erchinger,Hunt,Long and Earnhart's work on the garbage work session tonight.Their presentations tonight helped better explain the process.He appreciated their work on this as it was important to the community to know these things. Darling thanked the three Seward-Obihiro exchange students for the presentation tonight and stated they were great representatives of Seward. Bardarson thanked staff for putting together a?great visit for the president.She knew it was a lot of work. She welcomed new finance employees and thanked Marsha Vincent for her years of service to the city. She thanked the,exchange students as well and noted next year's applications were out. CITIZEN COMMENTS Tim McDonald brought a contract between the city and the former operator of the city's shipyard.He distributed copies to the press and the public.McDonald referenced article three of the agreement,which stated the"operator shall have the right to collect and retain all revenue received from the Shiplift Facility"McDonald felt this was very one-sided and not in the city's best interest. Earnhart requested the clerk stop time for McDonald's comments and said there was no malfeasance occurring with this agreement. He offered to arrange a time to discuss this with McDonald further and stated McDonald was inaccurately accusing people of things. McDonald continued to say this was a 2012 contract that had been passed along to the new operator. The city was leasing the land which had little value and gave the operator the facility to earn a profit off of He felt the city was giving away their assets. McDonald didn't think this was an inappropriate issue to bring up. He agreed the city's finances were complex. c1G City of Seward,Alaska City Council Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS Squires responded that citizens had the right to bring forward comments in the public interest. He disagreed with McDonald's assertion and stated the city did get income from lease revenues. The lease and operating agreement was a public-vetted decision. The city agreed to rent this land for a certain price. Everyone was meeting their requirements. Hunt noted the city received approximately$64,000 a year in lease profits. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Johanna Kinney, CMC Jean B.1 ® = on City Clerk ��d (City Seal) _ 4• City of Seward, Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page CALL TO ORDER The September 14, 2015 special meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 8:50 p.m. by Mayor Jean Bardarson. OPENING CEREMONY Police Chief Tom Clemons led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL There were present: Jean Bardarson presiding and Marianna Keil Ristine Casagranda Christy Terry David Squires Iris Darling comprising a quorum of the Council; and Jim Hunt, City Manager Will Earnhart, City Attorney Johanna Kinney, City Clerk Absent—Dale Butts CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING—None APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion(Keil/Terry) Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda There were no consent agenda items. Motion Passed Unanimous NEW BUSINESS Other New Business Items EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion (Terry/Darling) Go Into Executive Session To Discuss Matters Pertaining To Threatened Or Pending Litigation With Orion Marine Contractors, Inc. ` City of Seward,Alaska City Council Special Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Volume 39, Page Council invited the City Manager, City Attorney, Harbormaster and City Clerk to stay. Motion Passed Unanimous Council went into executive session at 8:50 p.m. Council came out of executive session at 9:33 p.m. COUNCIL COMMENTS—None CITIZEN COMMENTS—None COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS—None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:33 p.m. Johanna Kinney, CMC Jean Bardarson City Clerk Mayor (City Seal) \vi Agenda Statement Meeting Date: October 12, 2015 '-�°f sett. •� From: Johanna Kinney, City Clerk Agenda Item: Certification of the October 6, 201 Regular City • Election BACKGROUND &JUSTIFICATION: The City conducted its annual election on Tuesday, October 6, 2015. The Canvass of the election was conducted on Thursday, October 8, 2015. A report stating the final results of the election including votes cast by absentee and questioned voters are attached for your certification. The newly elected council members will be sworn and seated as the first item of business at the October 26, 2015 regular meeting. RECOMMENDATION: The Council certify the October 6, 2015 regular city election and declare the results final. REPORT OF ELECTION CANVASS BOARD Certification of City Clerk's Recording We, the undersigned, duly appointed at the City Council Regular Meeting on September 14, 2015 as the Canvass Board for the City of Seward, do hereby certify that we have examined in detail all absentee, special needs and questioned ballots, original and duplicate tally sheets, and questioned and special needs registers from the City of Seward precinct. Upon completion of the canvass, it is our opinion that the attached summary of election returns, as compiled by the Canvass Board and recorded by the City Clerk, accurately reflects the totals shown on the Certificate of Election Returns (ballot statement) by the election board of the voting precinct for the October 6, 2015 Election. Dated this 8th day of October, 2015. 1 A r (Attach Final Certificate of Results) FINAL CERTIFICATE OF RESULTS FOR THE CITY OF SEWARD REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD OCTOBER 6, 2015 The City Canvass Board has canvassed the absentee and questioned ballots of the Regular Municipal Election held October 6, 2015. The canvass took place on Thursday, October 8, 2015. Their totals are: Report of Absentee and Questioned Ballots Absentee ballots voted 53 Questioned ballots voted 1 Special Needs ballots voted 0 Total Voted 54 Rejected Not registered, registered too late or registered out of city limits 1 Form not completed properly 0 Signed/witnessed after election day 0 Total Rejected 1 Counted Absentee 53 Questioned 0 Special Needs 0 Total Counted 53 October 6,2015 City of Seward Regular Election Final Certificate of Results Page 1 of 2 FINAL CERTIFICATE OF RESULTS FOR THE CITY OF SEWARD REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD OCTOBER 6, 2015 City of Seward October 6, 2015 Election Day results, after canvassing, are as follows: Three City Council Seats Available (Two-Year Terms) Election Day Votes After Canvass Votes Total Votes Dave Squires 238 48 286 Sue McClure 246 42 288 Deborah Altermatt 193 40 233 Write-Ins 29 1 30 One Mayor Seat Available (Two-Year Term) Election Day Votes After Canvass Votes Total Votes Jean Bardarson 240 48 288 Tim McDonald 44 4 48 Write-Ins 8 0 8 Summary A total of 302 people voted at this election. There were 53 absentee in-person and by-mail ballots. There were 0 special needs ballots. There were 1 questioned ballots. Therefore, 356 voters turned out. Upon completion of the canvass, it is our opinion that the results compiled above accurately reflect the final totals for the Regular City Election held October 6, 2015 in the City of Seward, Alaska. Dated this 8th day of October, 2015. '°■.k..,_urit_ to. October 6,2015 City of Seward Regular Election Final Certificate of Results �� Page 2 of 2 October 2 015 October 2015 November 2015 SuMo TuWe Th Fr Sa SuMo TuWe Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Sep 28 29 30 Oct 1 2 N V O Co N a. a) N 5 6 7 8 9 ii 1 ELECTION DAY 12:00pm PACAB Mtg 6:00pm CC WS-Budgi 5:00pm CCWS;Maple' 7:00pm P&Z Mtg 6:00pm CC WS-Budgi 6:00pm CC WS-Budgi a.'in U V 0 12 13 14 15 16 5:30pm CC WS;Audit I 6:30pm HP Work Sessi 7:00pm Fish&Game P 7:00pm CC Mtg LID N ,-I V 0 20 21 22 23 LI( HOLIDAY;Alaska Day ' 6:00pm P&Z WS 12:00pm PACAB Work S M N OFD t ces c,I.OSEi) 2 27 28 29 30 7:00pm CC Mtg 6:30pm HP Mtg,follcm 0 m N V 0 Nanci Richey 1 10/9/2015 12:15 PM November 2 015 SuM o November December 2015 o TuWe Th h Fr Sa SuMo TuWe Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Nov 2 3 4 5 6 7:00pm P&Z Mtg 12:00pm PACAB Mtg N O z 9 10 11 12 13 7:00pm CC Mtg HOLIDAY;Veteran's Di 0C-c\ 5 CLosg\) 16 17 18 19 20 6:00pm P&Z WS 12:00pm PACAB Work S O N 0 > 0 z 24 25 26 27 7:00pm CC Mt� q0 L—%D 1240l b ry f(A CC5 30 Dec 1 2 3 4 V O M > O z Nanci Richey 1 10/9/2015 12:15 PM