City and Borough Assembly - Regular Meeting

All right, well, welcome everybody again for joining us on the regularly scheduled meeting of Tuesday, September 8th, 2026. Please join me for a flag salute. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The Assembly of the City and Borough of Sitka would like to respectfully acknowledge the traditional first people of Sitka. With gratitude, we proceed on Tlingit Ani. Sarah, roll call, please.

Mayor Eisenbeis?

Present.

Ms. Carlson? Here. Mr. Yestad?

Here.

Ms. Riley? Here. Mr. Christensen?

Here.

Mr. Mosher?

Here.

And Mr. Selene?

Here. Thank you. Any correspondence or agenda changes this evening? Seeing none, there are no ceremonial matters scheduled for this evening. We do have several scheduled special reports that we'll start with. Our department quarterly reports this evening will start with HR and Josh, please.

Good evening, Mayor and Assembly. I'm Josh Parentu, Assistant Municipal Administrator. I'm just gonna hit a couple of highlights since the last report that I gave. Looking at our HRIS system, we are almost completely, for all intents and purposes, it's up and running. We're doing training out of it. We're doing evaluations out of it. We've been doing our our job vacancy advertising and all that. There's a few growth areas that we're still working on where right now the staff is putting all the certifications in there which is allowing us to track CDLs and things like that that have expirations and it's gonna allow us to be a lot more efficient and overall more safe. Last time, we were just before the PSEA collective bargaining agreement, which has since been finalized. We've also, in July, finished up our annual open enrollment for healthcare. And then for our staffing status, we have 20 budgeted positions. It's been at 89% the last few times. I think we just eked above 90% in the last couple days. So we're continuing to fill there. This last quarter, we hired seven full-time permanent and one part-time permanent position. And there was an additional, this past quarter, 19 temp or seasonal hires. And we're moving into the end of the season, and a lot of those positions are gonna start start being vacant again until next summer. And again, QR code there, website for some of the vacancies that remain. Encourage anybody that is looking for some meaningful work to check us out. That's all I have. Thank you, questions for Josh? Perfect, thank you.

Moving on in department quarterly reports, IT and grant.

Hello, Grant Turner, IT Director. I'd like to give a brief update basically on our IT department staffing, current projects, and our budget performance so far this year. The IT department remains fully staffed with all five full-time positions filled. It gives us the capacity to continue to provide daily support while moving several longer-term modernization projects forward. In terms of the projects we're working on, a few of the highlights are first the upgrades to the library's public workstations are complete. The public computers have been replaced with the modern equipment along with improved network configurations and stronger security protections behind them. Been working with them to finalize a few little tweaks to make things just a little bit nicer, a little bit easier for folks to use. Just a few more things there, but that's pretty much all wrapped up at this point. We're also continuing evaluating options to expand the city's network infrastructure. The conduit work is involved along the seawall project there as well. So that'll help extend a little bit of a connection between City Hall and this complex here. Our core network is switch has been installed and configured and we're planning the full cut over for some time this fall trying to impact people as least as possible. We've also installed new firewalls at several locations to improve security and centralized management and are evaluating other locations for possible additional deployments. We're also continuing to improve the IT help desk by adding practical information for employees, including IT policies and a service status page. At the same time, we're also replacing aging systems across several key parts of our IT environment. In terms of the help desk, during this past quarter, we received about 185 tickets, completing 157 of them. Our first contact resolution rate was about 62%, which is about average for how much we've been doing for the last few years. Most requests were a low priority with 172 of them as low, 11 medium priority and two urgent tickets. Now in terms of the budget, There we go. The amended IT operating budget is approximately $2.8 million. As of September 1st, about $660,000 has been spent with another $93,000 or so encumbered. Together, that represents about a quarter of the annual budget used or committed. The largest areas used so far are repairs and maintenance, about halfway, and contracted services, also at about halfway through. This is pretty normal because these costs are annual and about half of our vendors charge in the beginning of the year and the other half charge at the end of the year. So that's pretty much as expected, but we'll be continuing to monitor those categories closely as the fiscal year moves along. So overall, the department is fully staffed, major infrastructure and security improvements are moving forward, and the budget remains on track and under active review. Any questions? Thank you, Grant, appreciate it. All right, thank you.

And finally, a clerk's department quarterly report. Sarah.

All right, thank you. This last quarter, our office, we implemented our public records request portal. Folks can now submit those requests online and they can also submit them by email or in person at our office. We have been working on continuing to digitize records right now brian's working on our vault files um the sick of general code legal review recodification project we've been working with the municipal attorney to review the legal announce analysis and answer questions before we respond to general code with with the answers for the next steps. Board commission and committee training, we met with several groups this last nine months and then for the remainder of this year, we will be meeting with chairs and staff liaisons on an as needed basis and then we'll start with a new plan in 2027. the work culture project, the culture club, they hosted the employee picnic in August, and they're working on some fun events for fall and winter. And then finally, it's election season, While the municipality doesn't administer the primary and the general election, we do offer a little bit of support. So we helped with equipment moving and whatnot in August for the primary. But then on this last quarter, specifically, we were working on the municipal election, which is just a few weeks away. We were processing candidate filings, preparing and programming the ballot, and then other election-related tasks. So that's what we've been up to. And then as far as budget, we have expensed 27%.

Questions for the clerks? Man, everybody got off easy this time. Good reports. So moving on tonight in special reports, is there anyone else here for government to government, municipal boards, commissions, committees, municipal departments, or school district? Seeing none, that'll bring us to persons to be heard. This is public participation for any item off of tonight's agenda, not to exceed three minutes for any individual.

Hello, my name is Claudia Lacesse, and I'm speaking as president of Small Town Seoul. In 2026, Sitka faced high levels of downtown congestion, making it difficult for locals to access medical care, the airport, and all else over across the bridge, particularly since urgent care and all medical appointments are now on Japonski Island. This much congestion throughout town is a serious public health issue and adds safety concerns. We recently learned that a record number of cruise visitors are being scheduled for 2027, 34,161 more visitors than Sitka had in 2026. In 2027, there are 22 days with over 7,000 visitors, including three days above 8,000 and two over 9,000. This is too many visitors for our small town. We hope to reopen community discussion and to collaborate on what level of cruise tourism to have in Sitka. It behooves us to get a grip on the situation. This is critical to start now because the cruise industry schedules two years out. First on the 2027 and 2026 schedules are already being sold. The memorandum of understanding for Sitka was negotiated and signed in 2024 with 2027 to be the first fully effective year increases like what is scheduled for 2027 tells us that MOU has no teeth and is not working. It also means the city has taken a financial hit by reducing lighter into our harbors to try to meet that daily limit. The tourism task force concluded, based on the results of the community survey, it appears that a daily limit between 5 to 7,000 cruise passengers is most agreeable. But in saying that, the task force had not yet analyzed the survey questions data. Their numbers showed that 57% wanted 5,000 or less, 66% wanted 6,000 or less. Small town so believes that the Assembly and Tourism Commission should set by ordinance a daily limit for cruise visitors at the low end of five to 7000 range. We think this regulatory approach is necessary. This discussion needs to include our Community Tourism Commission and Assembly deliberation. The idea of revisiting the MOU was discussed when it was voted on, given it passed on a 4-3 vote, so we hope that you're willing to consider returning to that topic. We found in a recent meeting with Juneau's Visitor Industry Task Force, their municipal attorney said she is said she determined, based on outcomes of the Bar Harbor litigation, that a home rule municipality, Juneau has constitutional authority to set limiting regulations. Sitka, also being a home rule municipality, thus should also have the authority to pursue direct regulation of cruise season intensity. So we really hope that we can have a good, nice discussion in the community and collaborate together with the Tourism Commission and all of you to try to come up with some numbers that actually we can put some teeth into and have work for Sitka. Thank you so much for your time.

Good evening, I'm Larry Edwards. I'm the secretary of a small town, Seoul. The approach of the tourism task force, the administration and assembly of using a volunteer MOU has failed. A few facts from the time of the task force to now shows why this is so. They indicate a need for a regulatory approach instead of a voluntary MOU. In January 2024, three months before the task force made its recommendations to the assembly, Chris McGraw publicly issued a berthing policy for the cruise terminal. He said the policy would be effective through 2027. It limited the terminal to just one ship of over 4,000 passengers per day, along with a smaller ship. At the task force's April 8th, 2024 work session, one member asked McGraw, who was also a task force member, what his policy translates into for maximum total daily passengers. McGraw replied, quote, with my birthing policy, it's about 6,200. That's what I'm accepting. In the 2027 schedule at the cruise terminal, there is one day of just over 8,000 and two days of over 9,000 that stand out. All of these have two mega-ships, contrary to McGraw's berthing policy. Additionally, nine of the 17 days when Sitka will have 7,000 to 8,000 passengers, some of those might have more than 6,200 at the cruise terminal as well. but I cannot as yet, because the 2027 schedule's not yet populated, tell which births might be occupied out there or which might be lighter. So I don't know about those seven to 9,000 days yet. Altogether, to the detriment of Sitka's residents who feel the tremendous impacts of cruise tourism, this information shows that the dock company, otherwise known as Sitka Sound Cruise Terminal, has not faithfully executed its commitments to the city administration, the people of Sitka, and Mr. McGraw's fellow tourism task force members, nor the spirit of the process from 2023 up to now. The 2027 cruise schedule exposes unreliability and lack of good faith. What I've said here is difficult to say, but I think it's best to be frank. And I'll be making some further remarks under persons to be heard at the end of the meeting, so thank you.

Good evening, Barbara Bingham. I served on the tourism task force in the sustainability seat and was one of a minority of voices that felt the 5,000 passenger limit would most fairly represent the high end desired by the public. The majority voices having significant investment in the industry and an undeniable conflict of interest. To see the 5,000 number stretch to a range of five to 7,000 was disheartening at the time. Reading through the documents in the current packet posted on the tourism page on the city website left no doubt that the 7,000 number now is considered a guideline at best, especially with projected numbers of days over 8,000 and even 9,000 next year. It confirmed the MOU is ineffective, that any agreement the city enters into needs to be with Cruise Line Agencies of Alaska and Cruise Lines International Association, and it has to be enforceable. The scope and detail covered in the documents in the packet are such that I won't even begin in my three minutes to try and address the issues and concerns raised there, especially when you include records of the proceedings at the time. Fortunately, small town sole members have covered some of that territory. I do want to encourage community members to read through the packet for themselves, be re-familiarized with the process, and the absolutely imperfect outcome of an unenforceable MOU with the wrong parties. then hopefully we can effectively begin to act to protect the long-term, year-round economy and well-being of Sitka and resolve the threats of cruise tourism overexpansion. Finally, I want to confirm that as a city with home rule charter, we can control and limit harmful impacts to the community, including from private businesses. by ordinance. Courts around the country are increasingly recognizing the rights of citizens adversely affected by rampant business growth and that can ultimately do more harm than good, especially in an environmentally sensitive and vulnerable place like Sitka. Thank you.

Anyone else this evening? Thank you.

My name's Peter Hagan, I'm a Sitka resident. I'm upset and I feel deceived by the MOU and the numbers and the projections that are coming. It amounts to nothing more than a pinky promise with no real obligation. We should revisit that. The other issue I have is the industrialization of downtown through buses. I know there's been a lot of work done to mitigate that. It's far from being fixed. I still see some of the trailways coaches, number 187 and number 189, It's very obvious, you can hear them three blocks away. Sound like a Pratt & Whitney engine, jet going down the road. Not necessary. Thank you very much.

Anyone else this evening under persons to be heard? Any item not on tonight's agenda? Thank you. I will move on to consent agenda this evening.

I move to approve item A, approve the minutes for August 21st and 25th assembly meetings.

Second.

That's been moved and seconded to approve the consent agenda. Is there any public comment? Sarah?

All right, on the motion to approve the consent agenda, Mayor Eisenbeis?

Yes.

Mr. Christensen? Yes. Ms. Riley? Yes. Mr. Moser? Yes. Mr. Salin? Yes. Ms. Carlson? Yes. And Mr. Yesdad? Yes. The motion passes 7-0 on the consent agenda.

Thank you. Item B, please.

I move to reappoint Ben Huey to a three-year term on the Parks and Recreation Committee and Callie Simmons to a three-year term on the Library Commission and appoint Alicia Guthrie to an unexpired term on the Tourism Commission. Second.

That's been moved and seconded to reappoint and appoint the previously said names. Is there any public comment? Assembly deliberation. Kevin?

As always, thank you for serving.

Appreciate it.

Sarah?

All right. On the motion to approve the reappointments and appointment, Ms. Riley? Yes. Mayor Eisenbeis?

Yes.

Ms. Carlson? Yes. Mr. Moser? Yes. Mr. Yesdad? Yes. Mr. Christensen? Yes. And Mr. Saleen? Yes. The motion passes 7-0 on item B.

Madam C, please.

I move to approve ordinance 2026-21 on first reading, amending title 15, public utilities of the Sitka General Code by amending chapter 15.15, solid waste treatment and refuse collection. Second.

It's been moved and seconded to approve ordinance 26-21. John, I understand you have an introduction for this one.

Yes, I do. Thank you, Mayor. Fortunately, Brooke's in the room too, so she doesn't know this, but I might be calling her for backup at some point. I'll try to summarize this as quickly as I can because there's a lot of information in the memo. But essentially, over the years, we've had increased desire to have what we call roll-off containers for our municipal solid waste. There are some places that have them already other places that want them But we don't have a rate in our code that establishes a rate for roll-off Containers the way it was working previously is if people wanted them They had just been calling Alaska waste directly and getting them and in those cases We lose out on on some revenue because we would only collect the the revenue from the weight of the actual garbage when it was dropped off at the transfer station. And knowing that more folks want these, we needed to establish a rate in code to make it happen. So what this ordinance does is it establishes that rate, and in determining what that rate was, it is even across the state. what you pay now. For example, um, a 15 yard roll off container has 3000 gallons in it. So we took the rate of a 300 gallon container and said, how many of those fit inside of this roll off and charge the exact same rate. So between a 48 and 96 and the 300 it's, it's, uh, and the 15 yard roll off, it's relatively the same. This also establishes three criteria or three kind of programs that you could fall under. Um, one of them is a, um, a standard commercial one. So there might be some businesses because of what they do or the volume of business that they do. They might have to have 10, 300 gallon containers out front, or maybe one that gets picked up too many times. Uh, and they'd rather have one there. Uh, so there is a standard commercial rate and that's kind of that straight line. Like I explained, you'd get charged the same amount as if you had 10 300 gallons out there. Um, the other one is a, um, sorry, I don't even remember it now.

Um, public good.

The public good, yeah, the public good rate. So we have places like the Trooper Academy that already has one. They're another government agency. So under the public good, this would apply to places, like I said, of other government agencies, state, federal agencies, and... Grocery stores, so people that turn over a lot of food waste regularly, this is to help with bears in those locations. And then the third group is this neighborhood cost share. So think of it as kind of like an HOA. And this is also in response to the bear issue. So if a neighborhood says they have a bear concern and they would rather have the garbage in a centralized location away from their home, to keep the costs equal, there's a minimum number of households in that neighborhood that would have to agree to that, and they would lose the service in front of their home. We would place a roll-off there, and then they would put their garbage into the roll-off container. There would have to be one designated account holder for that, which can be I would say onerous maybe on the account holder, but there's a lot of administrative burdens if we were to take on that ourselves and say who's in it, who's not, does the rate change, depend on how many people are in there, so we're trying to establish that flat rate. I've said too much for right now. We can get into the details as we get into the deliberation on it, but the bottom line is a rate is now in code. It's equal to the other rates are there, and there are three different programs you can fall into, the public good, the neighborhood cost share, or a standard commercial rate.

Thank you, John, for that introduction. I'm sure we'll have some more questions coming your way, but is there any public comment on Ordinance 26-21? Back to the assembly for deliberation. Kevin?

John, just for public knowledge, for those who are not familiar with that, can you describe what a roll-off container is?

A roll-off container is just imagine the giant green metal container that maybe it has doors that slide open or a top that comes open, and it has a larger vehicle that comes and picks up the entire container and then goes and dumps it.

Thank you. Scotty? Good work, John. This is exactly what the troopers wanted. Good work. JJ?

Question about this public good. I can see some organizations thinking, oh, we're a nonprofit. Do we fit into this category? And listed here is public schools, grocery stores, and government entities who are on the list of the qualifying entities on the finance director's list. Is that something that there'll be specific criteria for or at the discretion of the finance director? Or is this going to become in 15 years the whole other nonprofit giveaway and who qualifies for this or that?

Well, when you ask the question about nonprofit, I guess the question back would be, would that nonprofit be... needing it for their own nonprofit work or that location? Or would it be the nonprofit is trying to grab other utility accounts and serve those other utility accounts under the nonprofit umbrella? I guess what I'm getting at is garbage is garbage and every location has a garbage pickup. And I think that would be in my opinion, abuse of the system if we said, all right, I'm going to grab all these people under this nonprofit that is not necessarily generating garbage for that nonprofit and then trying to get a nonprofit discount or exemption.

I was thinking like our local secondhand stores. They have to hand sort and produce a lot of waste because of the quality of the items aren't necessarily there for resale. Or, you know... for saying grocery stores because of food waste, there's animal rescue organizations in town that may have food waste and they're also concerned for bears. So that's like how big is that public good and is that something the assembly really wants to put on the finance director to maintain the list of? What has that been thought about in this?

Not necessarily because right now there are no existing exemptions for nonprofits. And still, as what's listed in the memo, there has to be a determination of need. You know, you would have to, outline to Brooke why the standard 96 gallon can or why the standard 300 gallon can was not working for you previously or show that you have such a volume of garbage that you're requiring extra pickups. Yes, the burden would be on the finance director. The burden has always been on the finance director and you can nod your head yes or no. I think this actually makes things a whole lot easier for the finance director.

Excellent. Thank you, Brooke. That's always of value when making decisions at this table is what does it do to staff and administrative time? John, thank you for this. It makes a lot of sense. You know, it's been kind of on the to do list for a while. So I appreciate you in your last months here kind of really crossing off things as you have have your have your time coming coming to an end. Yeah, the The depth here is great. Is there anything that you wish to share about the background of the neighborhood cost share category?

I'll be very transparent here. I think the neighborhood cost share one is going to be the most difficult. We don't actually get a lot of neighborhoods that want this, but I do want to have the option available. As we've had bare discussions over the years, Indian River seems to be the area that gets focused on the most. We did that pilot program there last year. It cost us, I want to say, to the tune of about 47,000-ish, somewhere around there. I don't remember the exact number, but we took that on as part of the pilot program. I know it was one year, one year isn't really, one data point isn't really a trend, but it's something that might be of interest there. And knowing that BHA has a lot of interest in that area, this could be an opportunity for BHA to be that account holder and those households forego their curbside garbage and get it to that centralized location. But in terms of other neighborhoods, like I said, it kind of acts like an HOA without being an HOA. Good luck on trying to get 40 people to agree on something and one person to take responsibility for the accounting. But that would be a huge administrative burden in the finance department if we had all these parsed out locations and you're getting pick up but you're not because you're in the agreement or you're out of the agreement. So we're trying to put it on the neighborhoods. If you want it, this is how it works and it would be an even cost for them.

And it would be year-round, no winter individual cans, summer, because that's bear time?

Ideally. I mean, we already have something now that I think if you have a 96 and want to switch to a 48, I think you can do it once. I forgot the time frame from switching to one to the other, but I would imagine it would operate the same way. It can't be a seasonal back and forth.

Yes, because that would be onerous of the finance team. And that's not what I want to see this contribute to. It's to streamline and to make it more beneficial for everyone. So if that's how we're going to operate it, thank you. Thank you.

Katie? Yeah, I do have a question about the public good versus the neighborhood cost share, just because we have been having this conversation primarily in terms of Indian River and the bear issues that have been happening there. I'm noticing that government entities does not include the Sika Tribe of Alaska, which is a sovereign government entity. And so I'm wondering, since BHA falls under that purview, I believe, of being a government entity, because it's the housing authority for the Sika Tribe of Alaska, what would they fall under? Not to get too in the weeds of a specific case, but that is the kind of only case that we're thinking about when we put a name to that neighborhood rate. So can you explain that a little bit more how that would work?

I think I tried to touch on it earlier. I probably didn't explain it well, but it was kind of like the nonprofit question and yes, I agree. They are a governmental entity, but when we're talking the garbage issue, we're talking about the garbage generated from that actual business and an operation of their business. Now, um, in that case, beehive might be the housing authority that helped those individuals get into those houses, but those individuals in those houses still have their own utility accounts. Um, So it would not fit within the boundaries of this to, in my opinion, it would not fit in the boundaries of this to say it's a public good rate, so we're going to waive all the utility receptacle rentals of everybody under this agreement, and then we'll not charge the rental rate for the receptacle either to the nonprofit and only collect the weight of the garbage. So if it were you know, the government entity itself at their location and what they generate there, that's much different than you are the government entity that helped get individuals into these facilities. They still have to have their own utility accounts. As it works right now, they still have their own utility accounts.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I'm just wondering for the administration of a program that would kind of as it's written only makes sense to run through an entity like BHA as the managing entity. Like I get where you're coming from, but that might be a, somewhere where this policy could benefit from further clarification given that that's how I would see that Like, I don't think an individual on Indian River, unless, bless them, they are highly motivated, is going to be managing this. It would take someone like a broader entity. And so that might get a little confusing, but I think you've laid it out well here tonight. Like, I understand how it's intended to be used, but given that... as time goes on, how that policy is interpreted, it could benefit from a little more clarity. Thank you.

And thank you for that. If you read through the policy, there is a lot of discretion. Well, I shouldn't say a lot of discretion. There is some discretion that the finance director has in evaluating those sort of things, and there is an appeal process like we have with most things. If something was denied by the finance director, it can be appealed to me to consider those sort of things. But Yeah, hopefully that outlines it a little better.

Scotty? John, on your satellite experiment up there at Indian River, did your, the placement of that dumpster, was that, were you listening to Bihar guy that picks up all the garbage regardless of Bihar having anything to do with the mortgage up there? You know, like somebody, did you place it where Bihar suggested you place it or was it a distance away so like the kids that gotta bring garbage out, didn't utilize it, you know, I mean, and then the other thing, well, just.

I actually don't, I don't know the answer to that one, if whether or not the location was, what they had suggested, I don't know.

Because when Thor and I were trying to do the bear thing last year, because of tribals, like number one concern is people's front door being pushed on by bears on Thursdays and stuff. And you know, like the placement of that one experiment and then it's Beehaw's guy anyway, that goes around and picks up all the trash and you know, and they, when people were talking about trying to get the special Kodiak-style bear cans, and then Beehaw had to come forward and say, we don't have anything to do with 100% of the people there. We don't have anything to do with it. And so, but... maybe that'll be at the government to government or we could go forward and then make a den mother for that or something and make it into handle what's coming up the next couple of months. Cause it's the same thing again, but at least you did something and I'm, I'm digging on it because we tried to do something with those 300 cans and then we're locked into that seven year deal with the garbage company. So thanks again, John.

John, I just had one question on this and I probably just skipped over it, but the monthly rate for this, is that weekly pickup just like a normal can or is that once a month pickup? And the reason I asked the question is I think this could be extremely useful for say restaurants that have bear problems, but I'd hate to see restaurant garbage sitting in there for a month.

Yeah, everything is weekly pickup. So everything should be a weekly pickup. And I'm hoping that if you get a roll off, you already generate enough waste where you need the roll off and a weekly pickup should be sufficient. But I'm not anticipating a monthly pickup of this.

Sounds good, thank you. JJ?

Do we anticipate other city departments utilizing this service?

This is a preview of an RP that might be coming your way. Harbors is getting destroyed by the costs on municipal solid waste. The cans are there for harbor users, but everybody uses the harbor cans, and they fill up very quickly, and they have to have extra pickups. And I think, I shouldn't say I think, the Harbors Department pays more in municipal solid waste than they actually pay in wages to the employees over in the Harbors Department. So with part of this, if we were to get the harbor's department roll offs, it can save them money if it's controlled correctly and the pickups are on a more of a routine cycle. But when I say you might see an RP, that's something that needs to get controlled, whether we have to secure them somehow, open them up at certain hours, provide access to certified harbor users. There's some ideas being generated right now on how to control that better.

Yeah, that was always a staggering statistic. As part of Lee Anson to Ports and Harbors Commission, garbage comes up quite a bit in those discussions. So thank you for this and seeing how it can help or or cause more need for for discussion on other topics, but not necessarily the airport or electric or anything like that. Okay, thank you.

Anything else on the roll off containers here? Sarah?

All right. On the motion to approve ordinance 2026 dash 21 on first reading. Mr. Christensen. Yes. Ms. Carlson. Yes. Mr. Selene. Yes. Mr. Yes. Dad. Yes. Ms. Riley. Yes. Mr. Moser.

Yes.

And mayor Eisenberg. Yes. Motion passes seven zero. Uh, first reading item C.

Item D, please. I move to approve Ordinance 2026-22 on first reading, making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2026 and 2027, supplemental appropriations and reappropriations. Second.

That's been moved and seconded to approve Ordinance 26-22 on first reading. Brooke, you have the pleasure of introducing this one.

Brooke Falskang, Finance Director. So this ordinance is largely a housekeeping ordinance. We're right in the process of finalizing year-end results for FY26 and moving on to our audit step. part of what I do is go back through and take a closer look at all of the budget pieces. So there's a couple of things addressed by this. The first is a reappropriation of the $50,000 that was budgeted in FY26 for athletic field and track revitalization, but it wasn't spent. So we talked about this during the FY27 budget process. I think it should be largely familiar, but we're asking to carry forward that $50,000 into FY27 to be combined with the $30,000 that was already budgeted there. Providing a total of $80,000 for that athletic field and track revitalization, which we also just called a lot of field sand. And the second piece of it is some supplemental appropriations for budget overages in some of the more restrictive areas. So that's personnel and travel and training. So the largest piece of this is 96,000 $339 for the fire department, which was driven largely by retirements, leave cash outs, higher overtime, and some health insurance costs. There are some smaller adjustments for other departments as well in personnel, and then a couple of travel overages. None of these directly affect fund balance. There's savings elsewhere in the budget to offset these overages. And then the last piece of it was I included a copy showing all of the outstanding FY26 contracts and purchase orders that'll be carried forward into FY2027. Thank you.

Is there any public comment on 26-22? Assembly deliberation? Sarah? JJ?

I just had a quick question to make sure we had enough money to cover this. Okay, thank you.

Well, it's already spent, so we don't really have a choice at this point. I was actually thinking about that. What if we vote no? It's already spent. Sarah?

All right, on the motion to approve ordinance 2026-22 on first reading, Ms. Carlson? Yes. Ms. Riley? Yes. Mr. Saleen? Yes. Mr. Mosier? Yes. Mayor Eisenbeiss? Yes. Mr. Yesdad? Yes. And Mr. Christensen? Yes. The motion passes 7-0, first reading, item D.

uh item e we should take a break before we jump into that one okay i don't want to ants in our pants halfway through this uh discussion so uh assembly take a brief recess please be seated when you're ready to continue All right, the assembly is seated. We'll move on to a larger discussion that the assembly has been having for a little while. Tonight's agenda item is a discussion direction decision on a funding source to support local childcare and implementation model. I don't want to take away too much thunder from the sponsors tour, Kevin and Katie, but this is just the next step in the process, which we said we would bring back for assembly and public consideration. A long process, a lot of work has gone into. Thank you to the sponsors for that. And yeah, I don't know who wants to start tonight's discussion out, but Kevin, please.

I'll just start and then leave it to Tora and Katie. I just wanted to clarify at the last work session that when we decided to do this and put this agenda item on for tonight, we had only discussed the funding scenario or a tax that we would choose to put on a ballot. And that is still the case, and I wanted to clarify that nothing has changed as far as that's concerned or as what we talked about in the past. It's just that when the Chamber put on the funding outreach, Katie and I were able to attend, and they came up with some ideas. And one of them was the public-private partnership concept. And so I think Katie should probably explain that. This was kind of her idea. Well, it was. And so I also wanted to clarify that if we do this, it would be separate technically from a vote. The idea would be the tax would go primarily to stabilization. ACCORDING TO THE OPTION 3 FROM THE AEYC'S REPORT, AS WELL AS WHICH INCLUDES THE HEARTS AWARDS, OPERATING GRANTS, FAMILY SCHOLARSHIPS, AND CONTINUING ED. BUT THIS NEW PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WOULD BE, LIKE I SAID, VOLUNTARY, AND IF WE Don't know how long this discussion will take but if it takes Too long we can always you know discuss the the PPP briefly and then schedule a work session or something at another time That's all I have Real quick I'm not gonna go into the PPP in much because I figure Katie will do heavy lifting on that one But that you know in reality what we're not it's not

doesn't change what we've been talking about ad nauseum because the way I see it is the city's, I guess, responsibility in this and we talked about is gonna be stabilizing the situation. And I know we've got a small amount in there comparatively for scholarships, but we never were gonna be able to really lower the cost much, at least not for very many people with what we were practicing. It was much more just to have the ability to have childcare. And so they're not, they're not like a, it's not like a different plan, it's more of an add-on, which will allow us to, and again, Katie's gonna go much more into detail on that, allow us to go for lowering the price some, and I'm sure she'll, but the attractive thing to me about that is that the scholarship program is pretty resistant to changes from year to year in the amount that's in there, whereas the stabilization that we're talking about, the option three is not. That needs steady funding in order to work. So I think this, adding the public-private partnership is more of a, is an add-on, not a replacement of this to be. So I think it, will work fine and then of course we do need to talk about which funding source we want for our side still. Katie?

Yeah, so basically, we've been having these conversations, really appreciated the opportunity to learn from some folks from the Bipartisan Policy Center about this model that they referenced from Iowa. I was doing some research on different models that different states have, and this one seemed pretty promising for bringing our business community into the fold here. Where that came from is that I really want to see this community support childcare solutions. I think it's really important for retaining young working families. It's often been cited as an economic development issue. This is reported in on the state of SICA's economy every year. I'm sure we're gonna hear about it here in a couple weeks when they have their presentation as one of the main impediments to business growth and workforce retention. thinking about it like that uh you know my question is really like okay how is the business community showing up to help us solve this problem because i don't want the burden of this to fall on um you know sick as year year-round residents vulnerable um folks uh you know people who are already having trouble making ends meet. And so how can we bring as many people into this and create as much buy-in as possible? That's where the idea came from. Why this is on tonight's agenda as well, in addition to the discussion about the sales tax, is because it is part of the implementation of that. So if we were to put forward an ordinance, this would be kind of part of the implementation memo that would go with it, kind of like John prepared for the taxi regulations, right? You've got the ordinance and then you've got how it's implemented. And so the concept is essentially that there is a fixed annual city contribution that is generated by a sales tax, some manner of dedicated funds that citizens get to vote on. This fixed contribution from the city is held in a special revenue fund. And then separately from that, there is a 501c3 nonprofit organization that is able to receive tax-deductible contributions from businesses. And what that voluntary business contribution looks like could fluctuate. In Iowa, they did $150 per employee annually. We could change that ask based on tiers or something. But basically, that money would be held in a 501c3. And ideally, that same 501c3, whether it's like the Sitka Legacy Fund or the Southeast Child Care Collective, if it's like the contractor that we would like to distribute the funds to the child care centers, that would be best because then they are able to hold all of our funds, right? So they've got the business contributions in a set-aside pot. And then they've got, we would create a mechanism to transfer the proceeds from our sales tax revenue to join with that, which would be the collective Sitka child care funding mechanism. And then as Kevin and Tor mentioned, the hope is for those business contributions to go towards scholarship needs so that we can help families access the child care spots that we will hopefully be creating through the stabilization method. So the intent behind this is essentially to bring our broader community on board and create buy-in from a lot more sectors. This isn't just something that people with young kids should care about, but rather something that is an investment in our future as a community and an investment in our workforce, current and future. is going to have returns for local businesses in town that are able to do this. This is a voluntary program. So is the tourism best management practices, right? And we've seen local businesses sign up for that. So I think that this idea was very well received at the funding summit. There was a lot of excitement behind it. And what would follow from this, if the Assembly is like, yes, that's a good idea, we would like to see that pursued, is I would work with Chamber and CETA and local businesses to kind of assess interests and gather some data on needs and then work towards doing that engagement and pledge campaign for how to engage that community in the solutions. So happy to answer any questions about the public-private partnership. if desired.

So what I thought you were saying was the company that somebody works for is gonna donate to your PPP, but you're saying like the love boat industry could donate to Sitka's PPP and put a huge dole in there and then deduct it or? Anybody could.

Yeah, yeah, that's absolutely right. That's actually what happened in Seward. They got that million dollars from Norwegian and they used $500,000 of it to go towards supporting local childcare efforts. And so if a cruise company wants to make a donation, if an individual wants to make a donation, anyone can make a donation to support these childcare efforts. And that would be a tax deductible donation to this entity. So the city wouldn't be responsible for administering any of those funds, to be clear. Both our proceeds and also private contributions would be held by the entity that is administering that and then distributing that, and then collecting data on what that money is used for and how that's improving our childcare system.

Kevin? Never mind, it looked like you had a question. I was just gonna say, if there's no questions on that, we could maybe talk about the, temporarily, to talk about the sales tax that people have an idea of. I'll just go ahead and put it out there. I know we've been talking about several options. Again, for the public, we're looking at something to bring in roughly $1 million annually. I've been kind of going back and forth all over the place on this. Originally, I was in favor of the plus 1% in the summer, minus one in the winter. However, after hearing back from some people in the public, they mentioned that 1% in the summer, locals have to pay that too. So I'm leaning more towards not doing the plus minus and just doing a single change, which would be a half percent increase in the summer. That's where I'm at, although I'd be interested to see what people think.

I found myself slightly on the other side of that where I actually like the 4-7 idea because it gives relief when people need it the most, when heating oil is high, when electricity use is high. but it's like 55, 45. I mean, I understand the argument. I guess I like the idea that we are capturing more of the tourist dollar then versus the Sitka dollar. I mean, it's still, we all know everybody buys stuff in the summer. There's no question about that, but at least a good percentage of it is not Sitka's. But again, I don't, If the will of the body is no, go for the half percent, like I said, I don't have any real problem with that. I mean, if it's more the case of which would I personally rather pay, it'd be the 4.7. But that's, I understand why, if others disagree with me and I'm not really tied to it.

Chris?

So... All these options, there's, well, except for option three or scenario three, I'm not really a fan of, period. But I've seen some good and some bad in the options. And I personally haven't really made a decision on what I want to see. I guess my personal isn't even here. And it's just going 6% year round. Kind of realize I'm in the minority on that due to my personal opinions and feelings, and that's fine. But I do want to put something out to the public that is the best package that we can for this childcare topic. I do, I think, like scenario two slightly more, though in my business, it will cost me more in the summertime because I do spend a lot of money in the summer to operate fuel groceries, machinery, everything that breaks down. I will get some reprieve in the winter, personally and business wise. So it's kind of a toss up for me. I will say the one thing I do not like about scenario one, other than it does hit our goal pretty close to what we're looking for financially, is a half a percent, I feel like leaves the door open for another half a percent of a tax increase in the future for some other project. Not saying that that other project might be a bad reason to increase that sales tax, that second half a percent to bring it up to seven, but in general, I would like to not open that door for more tax increase. And, That was just kind of one of my feelings on scenario one. And I already know how tax adverse this community is. So again, like I said, I'm just trying to put the best package together to give to the public. But that was a concern of mine through scenario one. But I may be totally off based on that as well.

for me on this one this is kind of about a is our community willing to pony up through taxing themselves and b which is the most agreeable to them and i've heard a lot of talk about the need i think we've articulated that well but the thing that hasn't come through to me personally in this discussion is which one is most reasonable for our citizens so i'm kind of left up here juggling what I think I would like the best and how I could implement it the best. But I don't have the community buy-in on it yet. So my opinions are mine, not necessarily where I think this should be going of. The broader community has said, well, if you're going to, I prefer this. A summer tax grab is easy. Obviously it hits more than just us. There will be transient people in and out. Businesses are using more power, more electricity. There's a lot more economy flowing through Sitka in the summertime than there is the winter. So I've always been a fan of Lowering it in the winter when there's less cash flow in most all businesses, most all households in Sitka, and then raising it a little bit in the summer to make up for that. A half a percent in the summer I think is probably not noticeable for most. So there's something to that too, where you may see your grocery bill go up a little bit in the summer that you can notice. I don't know that the half a percent makes that big of an impact. And can it be articulated that a half a percent is more important than up and down, right? Is that an easier message for people? I think messaging is gonna be needed either way on this, and you're gonna have to have a strong education. I can get behind number one and number two. I, for a long time, have been leaning more towards scenario number two. That's just been a personal thought of mine. So I'd put a little bit more weight on scenario two, which, for people who don't have it in front of them, is a 4% in the winter, 6% in the summer, to be, summer, yes, thank you. 4% in the winter, 7% in the summer. And of course, this is being submitted to the voters for their approval, not to this table for our approval. So I'm slightly more on that one, but again, listening to consensus of the body. Georgia?

Got a question for the sponsors. Do you have a possible timeline of a special election that we're looking at here? So is there a time to ask the community in advance of these three scenarios?

February 2nd, right?

I'm sorry?

February 2nd or 3rd, what was it?

February 2nd.

Yeah, would be the actual vote. When we have the ordinance, it could be any time before then. No, not any time. We have to have 60 days to advertise.

We would need to bring it for first reading at the second meeting in October.

Right, because it has to have... to be able to set up for publicizing it and early voting and all that good stuff. And if we did it, and again, correct me if I'm wrong, if we do it in the second meeting in October, we have room for a third meeting, right? Because if we waited the meeting after that, we would have to pass it one after the other or have a special meeting. So if we do it, first meeting in October and we have a strong public support against what we put out, saying we like the other one, we have time to change it and still make the vote. And Sarah did a very nice job of explaining what dates were open because of various conflicts and pretty much the latest we can do is February 2nd. So if we have a split group tonight, we could easily put one forward and then if a whole bunch of people, or if we get a bunch of feedback saying, we know we don't like that idea, we like the other one, we will have time to swap it. Because I don't think there's anybody wedded to option one or option two strongly. I mean, I'm kind of like Steven. I prefer option two slightly, but I understand the other one.

Thank you. That helps me organize my thoughts a bit more on the We're making a decision tonight here guys. Uh, so how would it be written? Because it's not just a 1% to this extra fund because the summer increase we're talking about scenario two is 2.3 million.

It's about the same, either the half percent or the three, because of the offset.

With the offset, yeah. But that's how would the ordinance be written, because it wouldn't be a 1% to this special fund.

Rachel had a draft of that. I don't know if you have it with you, but it's fairly complex and probably would need a little bit more but essentially it basically lays out the 7.3 or 7.4 with the half of the percent, half of the summer tax going to offset the winter tax. And the numbers work out within, they're almost exactly the same between a half percent and the 7.4 as far as how much is raised.

With our current world situation. And we've seen in the last five years that world situations change and our tax rate decrease in our base in the winter for the general fund. That could be concerning. Rachel did you have some language there that you could share on how that ordinance be written if we went forward with scenario two.

It's a rough draft right now and I don't know that I'm comfortable sharing the language because I think it does need tweaking still. But it is a complete rough draft that I've been working on with the sponsors.

Thank you. So it's a half a percentage, similar to what we see in one. Okay. That's valuable insight there. I wouldn't want to see there be some unintended negative consequences if our summer tourism shifts. because we heard in the public comment that we're seeing more and more, and that's not what we wanted. And if that temperament changes or hits another boiling point, and we're now fully invested in increased numbers in the summer based on our tax, then we're not committing to our strategic plan on balancing tourism with quality of life. We're really putting a lot of eggs in one particular trajectory. But it does look really appealing, 4% winter, 7% summer. Perhaps something a bit more, something maybe more like scenario one, where it's just this 0.5, because that's what's needed.

and it's not complex.

I'd be leaning towards scenario one, but I understand the value of 4% in the winter.

JJ raises what I think is an extremely good point here, and that is with scenario two, how do you tell people what is being dedicated to that? because you're not telling them 1% is being dedicated to it. You're not telling them that a half a percent is. So how do you tell the voters what amount of money is going to be dedicated to that? So it's a really good point. I think both Katie and Tor have a solution for that, because you can't base it off of, 1.3 million, that's gonna fluctuate, so.

The way the rough draft was written was half a percent in the summer goes to the fund. That's the way the rough, and then.

So that adds another number to a four and a seven and then a half, and I think you've just lost your voters right there.

Yeah, that's why I prefer option one. I've talked to a lot of people, and I actually hear a lot of support for the 4-7, but I think the administrative difficulty, because it's not just the messaging to the voters, it's also how that is figured out and how long it takes to figure to figure that out. The amount of time, I don't know if Brooke is willing to come explain this to us better, but she wrote well in the considerations portion of her memo about what scenario two would do. given, yeah, and like the things for me that I was thinking about is like, okay, how much time does it take to determine that difference in revenue? Because you have to do it over a full year rather than saying, okay, you know, the summer season has ended. We've settled our books. Three months later, we know how much money we earned. We know how much money is going towards childcare. From the way that Brooke so expertly explained it, it was more difficult to determine. I'm wondering if you can lend any insight or just, you know, you laid it out well here, but perhaps for the listening, you're looking at me like you don't want to do it. But I think you could do it really well. I don't like it is a good answer too. Yeah. Honestly, it's just like it sounds administratively quite complicated and burdensome and I'm getting a head nod for the public. That was the part that uh makes that one difficult for me to support i think that you know this has the best chance of success if it is yeah if it's able to be communicated if we have an idea of how much funding we're going to generate we know when we're going to know that number by it's about three months after uh i think sales tax revenue is after the quarter ends um i just think that those concepts will make this easier to communicate and therefore support and so uh that's why i'm leaning towards a half a percent and also in the summer and then also it's um i do think that it just seems like a little bit less it's a little bit easier to swallow but i do hear chris's concerns about you know what that opens the door to and i'll say that yeah i mean like the rising costs of goods and services opens the door to, you know, tax increases. That's like the unfortunate reality that we live in. I would very much prefer that we were able to talk about a progressive tax structure where we're looking at property taxes or, you know, Being more inclusive of our entire community that's being taxed, but that's not what we're talking about tonight we've got these scenarios scenarios in front of us and given the Considerations I think that we've discussed. I think that the point five percent in the increase in the summer is where I'm leaning towards I'm jumping on board with that one, too So do you want us to bring back something

for the half a percent? I know we can't do a vote, but.

Yeah, is anyone opposed to that one? Yeah. Does anyone have strong opinions on, it sounds like number one or number two scenarios, this is number one. I think we've laid out pretty well the reasons behind our backing of scenario number one this evening. Okay.

I would just like to say that we do have some community members here tonight. I don't know if the body or if the mayor is amenable to hearing from the public on this, but if we wanted to get an early sense of feedback from how folks are feeling about that, there are people here, but your decision.

Yeah, just be a motion to relax the rules to allow for public comment.

I make a motion to relax the rules to allow for public comment. Second.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. At this point we will open up public comment on our discussion direction decision on a funding source to support local childcare and implementation model. If there's any public comment within those guidelines.

Good evening, guys. Sherry Blankenship. I wanted to comment on the private public partnership idea. I was sitting in on the child care summit with Katie and Kevin and a few others. And as a business here in town, I can say that I would most I would be willing definitely to to volunteer $150 or whatever that fee is per employee and I think that we should set it up as something similar to a TBMP. I also think that it's probably time to invite to the bigger users of our childcare needs to the table and it's something that we're not talking about and I feel that it's time to have that conversation with them and invite them to this very much needed conversation because they're using a large amount of that and that asking them to voluntarily give an amount, come up with an amount that they'd be willing to do, I think that would be pretty substantial and so something that we should probably talk about. Another thing is have we talked about with the cruise ships lifting the sales tax on them, is that something that we could specifically use towards a childcare fund? I don't know if that's something that's been talked about, but it would add to the pot as another thing. And then another idea is if we do this half a percent in the summertime, What if there, or we did 1%, what if there was a lift specifically on groceries and for sales tax in the wintertime for three months during the hardest months? Heating fuel and groceries, those are hard-hitting things for people. And if we just said three months, we specifically target our citizens, and then in the winter, in the summertime, we lift it 1%, and then I don't know what that variance would be. But It's something that we could think about. But I think there's more talks to have with the private business and public business community and bring them to the table. And I think a town hall maybe would be something important to think about. But that's my two cents. Thank you.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the assembly. My name is Joel Marcus. I'm a foster parent and community member, but I'm also the board president of Betty Eliason Early Learning Center and have children in childcare. So first of all, I just wanna thank you guys for taking up this issue and continuing to work on childcare. I think it's important. impacts a lot of people in this community, and I think that the timing is really strategic. The couple of things that I wanna point out, or at least I wanna mention, are one, the timing is really critical. I think we have a pretty cautionary tale of a childcare center in Haines that recently closed. facing some of the same struggles that the childcare centers here in Sitka are facing. And so we've got this kind of cautionary tale on the horizon and we're having this very timely discussion and I am encouraged that we are bringing this forward to the public for public input. But I'm also reminded of one of the other hats where I teach fisheries classes over at the university. And one of the stories or one of the essays that I have my students read is called Tragedy of the Commons. And it's an essay by Garrett Harding where it talks about people grazing livestock on a public good. And so, one of the things that um i think is really important about the conversation we're having is the diversity of ways we're trying to approach this and the thing that i'm cautious of is some of the conversations that we've talked about or that you guys have talked about on how to approach this with the public and i'm a little bit concerned that even as much of an issue as this is and as well as we package it and put it forward to the public What happens if the public says we don't want to tax ourselves more because we're tax adverse. That's just the nature of people and it's the moral of the essay that I mentioned is the common good, it's really hard for people to give forward and help solve that common good or that common problem. especially something like childcare that has a short timeframe in which families are impacted by it. Once your kids are six or seven, you forget the challenges that you faced in wondering if you're going to have childcare for your kids so that you can go to work and make a living or contribute to the workforce in this community. I would urge you to continue having some of those conversations about the diversity of ways that you can fund childcare. And then I would just mention that the timing is really important. We are in a critical phase currently, the childcare centers in Sitka, we're facing increased inflationary costs, just like we are at the city and everyone is in their daily lives. And those burdens are taking its toll. And some of the financial resources that we've had to buoy us through some of these hard times are running really thin now. And so the big message is thank you for taking this up. And please continue to be diligent in how we approach it and the diversity of ways that we try and seek funding to support childcare in this community. So thank you all.

I did not come here intending to talk about this, but I just got back from three weeks in Nome, taking care of five grandchildren ages nine and under. And I think the challenge with childcare in Sitka has been ongoing since my children were young. And it's very important that you guys do continue to carry on this discussion and bring it forth. A lot of us older adults do realize how challenging it is. When COVID was happening, we cared for grandchildren here, and in Nome and did the whole nine yards so to speak and they had no other choices and they still don't most of the time these days. It was hard enough 35 years ago, 30 years ago when we were raising our children. So I do believe that what you guys are doing is really important and that you should really move forward to get the sense of the community on this matter and I think the idea of the town hall might be really worthwhile So maybe contemplate scheduling something like that, maybe even before the election so we can hear what people have to say about it. Thank you so much.

Anyone else on our funding source for childcare and implementation model? Thank you.

Hi, Jackie Foss speaking for myself. So my kids have aged out of the childcare here and those were incredibly stressful times in our lives where our childcare bill frequently exceeded our mortgage. And this was more than five years ago. So I know that the costs have just increased as they have for all of us. So what I really appreciate about this plan is looking for a number of ways of funding this, public private partnerships, increases in sales tax, And I just wanna remind this body that in addition to tourist season, summer is also salmon season. And it seems like we're really focused on the tourist part of it, but not the livelihood that keeps Sitka going no matter what. And as a fisherman, it's hard to spend more money in a season that's intended to keep us going for the rest of the year. And what's most amenable to me as a person is the half percent in the summer to keep it going. It's gonna be hard with the cost of everything else, especially since sales tax is on our utilities, it's on our groceries, it's on our fuel, it's on our heating, it's on everything. And so it's really hard. um katie you put it very well be more inclusive of where this money can come from and so looking at that is really good so if you're looking for a person with an opinion i do think the half percent is most amenable and i do appreciate the deliberation that you all had thanks anyone else this evening

Thank you bringing back to the body for continued discussion or yeah, just a couple of quick notes It sounds like most people are agreeing with your half percent.

So that's fine In X I don't never had super strong feelings about that I will say that we have had multiple town meetings about this and conferences and things and we probably have more but I think one of the things that I know I've said and other people have said is that once we assuming we pass an ordinance to put it on the ballot, to a certain extent, we're handing it out to the people in the Early Childhood Development Coalition and think people like that to bear it across the finish line. We're fairly limited. What we can do as an assembly to support something, individuals can, of course, but it's gonna be up to the people who've been urging us to attack this problem to help because I think that any time these, if the only people calling for this are the Assembly, it's not gonna pass. So I think we are all convinced that this is an economic development, it's equity, I mean it's just all kinds of reasons why this is necessary for population support, for attracting new businesses, and then just for trying to do the right thing for folks in town. I mean, all of us who've had kids know what this is like. So I think we really worked hard as a body to include everybody and everything in this. And so I'm hoping that we've done it right. And hopefully we can bring you back something in October, I think, yeah, for that to have, and of course, receive more public testimony on as well.

Well, I'm glad a sponsor summarized that so that they can continue the good work on that. Kevin?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, one thing that I think we haven't discussed, we've touched on it briefly, but is the sunset. I think there was a general agreement about there being a sunset. And we've thrown out some numbers. Katie, do you remember what number we were thinking?

I think it was five to seven years at least before we'd be able to tell if there was.

Yeah, that was the general what we were talking about, but we'd be interested in hearing from the rest of the assembly to find out what your thoughts are as far as a sunset date where the voters would have another chance to re-up if they want, so it shows. Chris?

Well, I guess your last comment there kind of maybe changes my immediate reaction. If the voters get another chance to re-up the tax, then that's a little more. acceptable to me, but the one thing I see with this industry is this needs to be consistent, a revenue source for them. They've had a lot of COVID money that they're just now running out on, and it's definitely giving the industry bit of heartburn at the moment. So it's showing me that they need something that is consistent there every year. And just knowing that it's gonna run out in seven years potentially is slightly troublesome. This tax I feel like needs to be in kind of forever, honestly, unless something drastically changes within our world that they can raise their tuitions to charge more, but that's been the argument forever and we haven't seen that change. So I think this is gonna have to be something that just runs in perpetuity. So that's my only concern with the sunset at this point. Juju?

If we're talking about sunset, I think we also need to talk about effective date. If we vote for this in February, when would it start to be collected? When would the PPP be up and running? That's a lot of administrative time to get this going. It would take a year and a half probably to see it come to fruition, and then we're saying within five years we're stopping it. I'd say 10 years. But the question still stands, when's the effective date?

Katie?

I think if we're doing a 0.5% increase in the summer, the effective date is that summer, three months after is when we have that value calculated. And then there's the, I think the work that takes the most time there is like, Procurement, you know, the mechanism for how you get the funds out to the contractor, which can be worked on now if we have an idea of what we want to do. Regarding the public-private partnership, like, my sense was the business engagement campaign, you know, if the body is... thinking that's a good idea i'm not hearing not hearing much for a voluntary business engagement campaign not hearing much against it uh so if that's true then we'll proceed um with kind of starting that now that would be uh up until because as mentioned it's it's more of a way um as well to engage the broader community in this as a solution right and really um have people understand like the impact is going to have on their business or on their workforce or on the reliability of employees, things like that. And so I think there's a lot of value in doing that as quick as possible ahead of the election. In terms of sunset, like I'm inclined to agree with Chris. I like the idea of WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME IS ANNUAL REPORTING ON THE IMPACT THAT THIS IS HAVING. SO NUMBER OF SPOTS CREATED, EMPLOYEE RETENTION RATES, THINGS LIKE THAT AT THE CHILDCARE CENTERS. SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED INTO WHATEVER CONTRACTOR WE USE OR PARTNER WE USE TO DISTRIBUTE THESE FUNDS. I'M MORE CONCERNED WITH HOW WE'RE RECEIVING DATA ON THE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING RATHER THAN IT SUNSETTING. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO THE COMMUNITY.

Tor? Yeah, I was gonna say, if we're gonna have a sunset, which I think would increase its chances of passing, which is the only reason to do it, initially I was thinking seven because it gives it basically two years to get up and running, then we get five years of data. But I'm thinking more 10 is probably a better term because you really need some time for it to work and to show that it's working. I mean, it'll start working fairly quickly, but to be able to say, okay, this has made a difference, and we should start to see in that 10 years more employee retention, some of the other auxiliary benefits that we've been talking about, if we're gonna have one. I'd be inclined, again, I'm kinda thinking out loud here, is that just to put 10 years in, and again, we have a spot for an extra meeting if that's not gonna go. But, again, I'm not super wedded to that.

Kevin? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, after hearing comment, I'm okay with, I think 10 years is a good idea. I do think it is important to have a sunset date of that because, you know, I think voters will feel more comfortable with that and not feel locked in. I think people might say, okay, I'm willing to give it a try. Let's see. And then in 10 years, there was plenty of time to get that historical data. And as Tor said, if we put in 10 years and we have a meeting extra scheduled so we can change that at the time.

Got a question for Brooke, if you don't mind. If we vote on something in February, is it at all possible to start it for your department April 1st? Like you're sending out letters, you're notifying people of a tax increase that seems effortful.

I don't know exactly how to answer that. I think probably the more challenging piece, because from our side of things, we'd need to change the PACS return, change some of the instructions on the form, but it actually might be a lot more complicated for businesses. Actually, it's likely much more complicated for the businesses that would be impacted that collect. than it would be for my department or staff. I don't know exactly what software every single business uses, but some of them, it's easier to make that kind of change than others. So I don't know if that's like a, I mean, maybe Steven would be able to have a perspective on that. for his business what it's like, but I don't know if the two and a half for three months is enough time to easily change that.

Okay, thank you. John, do you have anything to add on staff impact there? Okay, thank you.

For perspective, my business, changing it from five to six is just as easy to go from five to six and a half. I think the point that we have not talked about goes back to our bed tax discussion, I think it was, or it was involving the charters, right? And we delayed implementation of raising a tax on the charter fleet because they had already had prepaid bookings, they had already had people coming up that had already paid. So we gave them a year to be able to adjust that and go out in the future. So anybody with prepaid stuff, as this vote passes, and I would argue that charter lodges are probably gonna be pretty booked out by the passing of this in February. are now gonna have to pony up an extra half percent out of their pocket or go back to their clients. So historically, in the past, the Assembly has waited a year for something like this. I don't know if that's a consideration as we go forward.

I don't think it would be a huge lift to put in there that if something is prepaid and the tax was paid in the prepay, you don't have to add to it in the first year. I mean, that's... I don't think that would be a huge, I'm not even sure that actually has to be in the ordinance. If it does, it does. But in my mind, once it's been paid, it's paid. And so, and they paid the tax that was applicable at the time. So you don't have to go back and buy it again. I mean, that'd be like, I buy a outboarded, March I don't have to you know I mean that's not a good analogy but I'm just saying that once it's already been paid that's paid and so it's not an issue it would only be an issue if they booked it but hadn't paid for it yes Brooke please continue the answer for my previous question

sitting there trying to visualize how it would work because when people fill out those sales tax returns, it just lists your taxable sales less your exemptions and that's what you use to calculate the rate. So at the very least we'd probably have to provide some sort of guidance to people on how to account for that because the form itself doesn't allow for that kind of complexity. Whether that's listed as some sort of separate temporary exemption, like I'm not sure how that would look, but for reporting purposes there isn't currently a mechanism in the existing form to account for that.

So yeah, I mainly throw that out as a point of discussion. It's another thing that's going to have to be worked through on this that hadn't been considered before.

Kevin? I was going to say, we could maybe proceed with the 1% and then consult with staff in the next couple weeks to talk about scenarios and difficulties. Sounds like there might be a need to extend the implementation date out a couple months to be more realistic, as much as I don't want to. I don't want to put staff in a bind so much that they're not able to prepare that or employers aren't able to prepare I do, I'm thinking, and Rachel, correct me if I'm wrong, that TOR is correct as far as someone's sold a ticket a year ago that they won't have to retroactively add. I mean, what Steven said is completely valid and concerned. I just wanna make sure that, and get your opinion on that, see if that's not an issue.

Where I see the difficulty is not if the full tour combo package was prepaid, but if there was like a 50% deposit and then 50% due 30 days ahead of time, is the point of sale when the deposit comes through, or is it when it's paid in full, or does each transaction get taxed separately based on the time, even though it's one thing you're buying, you're making two payments?

As far as I would believe, of course, I'm not an expert, but I would imagine that the sales tax amount will be determined at the point of sale regardless of when the funds are paid because sometimes there's payment plans. I don't know how that...

It's a policy decision for you?

Okay.

I'm sure we can make sure that there's something in the guidance when we're putting it together before October 10th. at least somewhat meet that concern.

Chris? So a couple things. Maybe we already have some precedent on that just because we currently have a 5%, 6% thing going on. So for those who maybe made their deposit during the 6% time and then paid in full at the 5% time, maybe there's a little bit of precedent. I'm okay with the 10-year sunset thing. I think that does give plenty of time, plenty of data. I'm okay with that. And then since I've kind of already, haven't really had a chance to talk about it too much, Katie, a bit of a question with the private-public partnership. Is that gonna be something that's kind of running in tandem with this ordinance or separate? Because are the voters also voting on that?

No, they're not voting on that. And it's a separate thing that runs in tandem. I think the sticking point or the relation to this ordinance is, where is that fund housed? And then is that to avoid further subcontracting and administrative costs? It's like, ideally, we can identify who we want to partner with for the funds distribution, like our funds distribution, so that that entity can hold everything. Because then you don't have to subcontract out And so it's really more of the implementation regulations, I think, for how the tax is distributed. I don't know that it would be in the ordinance itself. I think we decided no, it doesn't need to, but rather how the money is dispersed, that would be a part of it.

Okay, yeah, no, that makes sense. Okay, thanks for that.

Do the sponsors need anything else at this point?

No, I think we're good.

We'll get with staff and start working on this. Anything else the assembly would like to relay to the sponsors?

Scotty? I just got one comment. Remember when we used to have a boat tax and then they had to quit taking the boat tax even though they made 100 grand from it because it cost staff 100 grand to get the 100 grand?

I do. I was part of that assembly. I'm getting long in the tooth. All right, next item, item F. JJ, I would ask for recusal on this one as a tax-free day would have a direct benefit to me and my business.

All right, yes. I see how that would... Would need me to run this meeting. Do you wanna sit here or join the audience?

I'll sit here, thank you.

Okay, thank you. So the next item, an additional new business, is item F. We're discussing tax-free days for the Friday and Saturday of that holiday weekend. It's in code that we discuss it at this meeting each year, the first meeting in September. So do we have any interest, Assembly, in continuing that?

We have a motion.

Yep, if there's no discussion in advance, we can do the motion.

Do you want to talk about it first? I move to authorize Friday, November 27th and Saturday, November 28th as tax-free days for the 2026, noting that sales tax-free days will not be applicable to any sale of fuel, alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, and marijuana, nor affect any sale which is part of a continuing obligation of the buyer to pay the sale over time. Second.

Great, with that motion and that second, open to public comment on tax-free days on November of Thanksgiving holiday weekend. All right, seeing none, assembly?

Tori. We've been doing this for a really long time now, and not this year. But at some point, we need to just make it not vote on it every year, just saying that the two days after Thanksgiving are tax-free and call it good. Because every time it comes up, we pass it. It's very popular. I think it might be time to do that. But that's not on the table today, but just a side comment.

Once we get everybody in town as to how bad a shape we're in and the nonprofits are gonna have to go away, so is this tax day, because we're losing teachers. It's coming and people want their cake and wanna eat it too, man.

Yeah, I'd be inclined to agree with Scotty there. There is a reason that we vote on this every year, and that's because this is a benefit that we're able to offer, something that we're accounting for and want to extend this. I think it's extremely important for citizens. I've heard of businesses doing over $150,000 in business on that day alone. um that's a single business so very meaningful and especially as we consider tax increases i think that these days become more meaningful for our community so i'm grateful that we have the ability to make this decision but um know that it comes with with trade-offs you know for how we uh budget for things as a city so i'm happy to support this given that we still can kevin

Thank you. I'm just grateful that we're able to do that. I don't think we're going to get any person in the entire public who's going to come up here and say they're not in favor of it. Appropriately so. I enjoy it. I like to go down there and get a few things when I can. And so I'm 100% in favor of this.

Any additional comments from the assembly?

All right, Sarah, on the motion to not have tax ever.

All right, on the motion to authorize November 27th and 28th as sales tax-free days, Mr. Mosier?

Yes.

Mr. Yesdad?

Yes.

Ms. Riley? Yes. Mr. Christensen? Yes. Mr. Saleen? Yes. And Ms. Carlson? Yes. The motion passes 6-0.

Thank you, appreciate that. That'll bring us two persons to be heard. This is public participation on any item on or off tonight's agenda, not to exceed three minutes for any individual.

Good evening. I'll make it short so you can go home. Larry Edwards again, secretary for small town Seoul. I spoke earlier on how the dog company's 2027 bookings break the assurances Chris McGraw gave to the citizenry, the city government, and his tourism task force co-members in 2024 about the scheduling for 2027. The city also bears responsibility for the excessive record-setting 2027 cruise schedule. On first reading on October 22nd, 2024, Mr. Leach answered to JJ, quote, Mr. McGraw has his own birthing policy for his facility. I didn't put it in this packet. I didn't want to attach it to make it seem like a birthing policy as part of our memorandum of understanding. He works with the industry throughout the years to kind of guide them on what kind of load he wants at his facility. JJ then asked, is this MOU, in essence, our lightering policy? And Mr. Leach replied, that's actually how I would have used this document if it were to move forward. I would be providing this to CLAA I'd give it to our harbor master and have them use this as guidance. Constant communication with the Sitka Sound Cruise Terminal and we would flex as the schedule is coming together to make sure we meet the numbers that are in here. So that was the 7,000 that he was working on in the MOU. My observation is that coordination promised by the administration did not happen as the 2027 schedule now makes clear. Later in the meeting, Kevin Mosier said, getting this locked in helps us. They're already booked a lot of 2026, so this can help us control 2027. If we just start sending this out for review and this and that, we miss a deadline to get that. I think it's really important that we not really waste time on overanalyzing and just go for it. And my observation there is that not only did the MOU need deep analysis, the MOU concept needed to be scrapped. And we, small town Seoul, thank the three assembly members who did vote no on that for at least analyzing it further, and that was JJ and Tor and Scotty. So we've got two years of lost time with the 2027 and 2028 schedules slipping through. So the conclusion is that it's time to regulate directly through an ordinance. I hope you'll consider that, thank you.

Anyone else this evening for persons to be heard on or off the agenda? Thank you. That'll bring us to reports. A couple of reports from myself. Had the opportunity to go up to Alaska Municipal League, their summer conference in Fairbanks. That started with a board meeting, of which I do sit on the board. A couple takeaways from that is that Alaska Municipal League is working hard on their five-year strategic plan, and really the overarching goal there is to provide services for local governments that they cannot provide themselves. So they're increasing capacity in meaningful ways that will reduce the burdens on especially governments smaller than ours, but they can help supplement ours. A perfect example is the grant writing capacity. We've utilized them quite extensively to help us write grants and I know a lot of the smaller communities are going to take more advantage of that. So look forward to that coming up in the next several years where We don't intend to replace the capacities of local governments, but in some cases they don't even exist, right? And we wanna be able to help that. Oh, and the other thing in the strategic plan, it was calling for growth of the Alaska Municipal League organization, but it didn't specifically call out tribes as a partner in that growth. I think not putting tribes in federally recognized sovereign tribal governments in is a short-sighted opinion and it seemed that the board agreed with me on that and so there will be some more outreach to try and get them as a holistic part of the growth of Alaska Municipal League. At the conference, I think the one thing that I heard quite a bit about was data centers. Right now, the state of Alaska is leaving regulation up to the municipalities. There was a lot of encouragement for communities to get ahead of data centers because there wasn't a single presenter that didn't say they're coming, right? I don't think that we necessarily have excess electrical capacity here for those right now, but they were encouraging municipalities who were interested in getting ahead on regulations as opposed to behind. So the sooner that local governments can start that conversation, the sooner something can get on the books, whether they allow it or disallow it, right? It's not negative or positive. Anchorage, it does have an example if people are interested in looking at what potential data center municipal regulation could look like. And that is all I have. Thank you, JJ, for running the meeting in my absence. Appreciate it. John?

Thank you, Mayor. As you already stated, I was also at Alaska Municipal League. I'll just speak about the parts in the AMMA, the Alaska Municipal Managers Association. We had a short afternoon training session and just kind of a catch-up with all the city managers that were there. I think one part of the session that was interesting and something that I know our clerks are interested in is something called a Citizens Academy session. The city of Fairbanks offered up their template, but basically a citizen's academy is a way that residents can sign up to be part of this academy hosted by the city. It could be a 12 to 14 week long process where citizens who want to learn more about their municipal government come to these evening sessions and some of them are two to two and a half hours long and they go department by department. So it might be one week you learn about the electric department, you get a tour of the facility. After they go through the entire program, it ends with the citizens that made it all the way through to host a mock assembly meeting so they see what it's like sitting at the table and working through some of the issues. And then afterwards, they have a graduation in front of the assembly. but it's a way to teach your local residents and citizens kind of how our local government works and get some exposure to things that are going on. I've not heard a bad thing about it in a single city that's done it, so something that I'm interested in looking into more here. Thanks. Oh, and it's my 25th wedding anniversary today, and I'm spending it with you all tonight, so...

I'm sure your wife would actually prefer you to spend it with us after that amount of time. So we're doing her a favor.

She's welcome. John, can I bug you on that one a little bit? So like if somebody, we had a citizens academy here and somebody wanted to learn about the scope of service in the electric department and how the enterprise fund has morphed into what we have now by alleviation of different terms of service over the years, would that be something that you could learn the writing of that of how, specifically of how our electric department has changed in the scope of service since 2012 to see where we're going projected with all the costs for having to absorb heat from air to air heat pumps and not having enough power for a data center. Do you understand what I'm asking?

Yeah, potentially. I mean, it's a curriculum we would put together with whatever we would want to see. And you would go department by department. I mean, it might be the finance department talks about just enterprise funds in general and what they mean and how they work. And then when you visit the specific, if the electric department had a different day, they could and build that into their presentation.

But it's really up to us for whatever we wanna make. Because how Brooke has taught me that that alleviation of the scope of service is a moot point, but it's an education of what's gonna be projected of where the city's gonna go because we're still hurting on infrastructure from decisions that were made 10 years ago to alleviate the level of service back then to be in the black and make it an enterprise fund where like it's left Catley Inn and where it's at now for electrical infrastructure.

Rachel, attorney's report.

We've been moving along with getting the leasing and contracts management software up and running. We've been doing a bunch of trainings, both internally to legal, but then with the finance department and with contract managers from various departments as well. to get an understanding of that software because it's really structurable for what your needs are. So we've been working kind of across departments to start getting that implemented and figure out what we want our have fields and structure to be. So that's moving forward really nicely. We've held off on hiring the temp for that because the company has some ability to import our leases and contracts from our other software systems. And we want to see how well that import goes to see if we've kind of hit the right target for how many hours we need from a temp before we start paying somebody for that. And then the clerk's already addressed the public record stuff and the recodification projects moving along. Yeah, just dealing with the day-to-day and keeping some of those bigger structural projects moving.

Thank you, liaison representatives. Katie?

A very exciting update from the Planning Commission, as per usual. They discussed the land suitability study. It was our first look at phase two, I believe, that the contractors put together at P&D Engineering, and so they went over A COUPLE DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENTS FOR LAYOUTS OF THE OSPREY AND CHARLES STREET SUBDIVISIONS OR THE SICA HIGH SCHOOL SUBDIVISIONS. AND THEN ALSO GAVE SOME UPDATES ON THE LANDSLIDE ANALYSIS OF THE BENCH LENS AND GAVIN AND HARBOR. SO THEY'RE DOING SOME MORE MODELING FOR THOSE. like i don't know it's surprising to me harbor mountain road um the parcels there have the lowest debris slope risk and then gavin is better than the bench lens and then the bench lens is worth but they're doing some more planning there um the discussion focused on the desired density of development at um osprey and uh sicka high school and the commission voiced a desire for higher density at Osprey because it's walkable and expensive to develop given the depth of the site. And there was support for dedicated workforce housing that is a significant concern of local businesses, buy up houses to house their summer workforce and then take those houses off the market. So if we can consolidate that in one place, and then they also discussed how to, ensure that the way that they set up lots for higher density are actually utilized for that purpose rather than being underutilized as we've seen some lots in town. So I believe the engineers have some more work to do and they'll be reporting out again, but a great meeting and I believe it's available to watch online if you're very interested.

Your Honor, I just had one interesting one this week. We'll go to other reports at the end of this. Perfect.

Thank you. Kevin Liaison.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Attended two commissions recently. Well, one was a school board last week, but unfortunately I had notes typed up, but they are not with me, so I apologize. So I'm going to move on to the Parks and Rec Committee. That happened today. There was a couple things discussed, but I wanted to point out that there's something in that packet that there is currently underway a commercial recreation land use 2026 survey. I'm just going to read the advertisement. It says, share your thoughts on the 2026 commercial use of city trails and recreation areas. Guided hiking, biking tours, and kayak rentals allowed. E-bike use and limits on remote special areas. The survey closes September 30th. If you have any questions or want to find out more about this, you can call the city at 907-747-4031 or email at recreation at cityofsicca.org. Also, Barb Morse with Sitka Recreation Foundation gave a little bit of an update on the master plan that they're working on, currently working on that. There's going to be, if things are on schedule, the first public meeting on October, around October 21st. They're going to be putting out a community survey mid-October to mid-November, and They plan, there won't just be one public outreach, but several. And they have planned to have the community, the master plan ready by hopefully by late March to early April. But of course, that can all shift depending on how things are going. Also at the Parks and Rec Committee, they discussed, a presentation was given to discuss possibility of installing a semi-permanent disc golf setup in the lower molar. So that's something that they talked about. They recommended moving forward with that, but kind of monitoring to see how that goes.

Great, thank you. Any other liaison reports? Sarah, clerk's report.

I just wanted to read through our list of current and upcoming vacancies on our boards and commissions. The Animal Hearing Board, Building Department Appeals Board, the Gary Paxton Industrial Park Board, Health Needs and Human Services, Investment Committee, Library Commission, Parks and Rec Committee, Police and Fire, Sustainability Commission, Tourism Commission and the Tree and Landscape Committee. So those are available online. That list on the applications are available online and if folks have any questions they can contact our office and we'll help them through that process. The Board Commission meeting schedule for this week, Parks and Rec met today, Port and Harbors and Historic Preservation meet tomorrow night, Library Commission, also meets tomorrow night. And then the Tourism Commission meets Thursday night. The LEPC meeting that was scheduled for Thursday was rescheduled to September 24th. And then the Sustainability Commission meeting that was scheduled for yesterday or last night was rescheduled to September 14th at 6 p.m. And then just a few reminders for the upcoming municipal election on October 6th. We have a few different options for folks to vote. They can choose from early voting that begins on September 21st here at Harrigan Hall in meeting rooms two and three, which you can access from the outside of the building. The hours are 8.30 to 4.30, Monday through Friday, and then Saturdays from 9 to noon, and that will run through October 5th. And then the polls, of course, are open on October 6th from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. We also have absentee voting by mail, fax or email, personal representative, so lots of options for those that are registered. We have election resources available at cityofsicca.com backslash elections, or you can contact our office. That's all I got.

Thank you. Scotty, other reports this evening?

Had two different couples, disembarkees off the love boats down in the village eating fish and they're from the I-80 corridor and within days of each other talked about their elected officials in their neighborhoods signing non-disclosure agreements with Capital Ventures that changed their whole, they got a data center and they're saying animals are being killed by it and then another thing with the big warehouse, like a big Amazon warehouse with zoning that took place without public process. And it was just an eye-opener for me as far as somebody projecting something and then having an elected official sign something they got no business signing on. And then a little blurb on hippie radio about Pennsylvania's coming unglued with different elected official. Anyway, it's up and coming, gonna be coming for us soon the way I figured it.

Any other reports this evening? Further other reports? Other other reports? All right, that would bring us to our executive this evening.

I move to go into executive session with Municipal Attorney Rachel Jones on communications concerning legal matters affecting the municipality. In addition, I move to exclude the municipal administrator and municipal clerk. Second.

it's been moved and seconded to enter executive session is there any public comment on entering executive session assembly uh sarah all right on the motion to go into executive session mayor eisenbeiss yes mr christensen yes ms riley yes mr mosher yes mr selene yes ms carlson yes and mr yestad yes Motion passes 7-0. And you'll be meeting in room 4, the small one down there.

Thank you.

A motion to reconvene in regular session.

So moved. Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you. We are reconvened as the assembly in regular session. That concludes our business tonight. Bring us to adjournment.

Motion to adjourn.

Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you, assembly. We are adjourned.